LIVIVO - Search results -

Search results

Result 1 - 10 of total 18

Search options

Article: Collective animal decisions: preference conflict and decision accuracy.

Conradt, Larissa

Interface focus

2014 Volume 3, Issue 6, Page(s) 20130029

Abstract: Social animals frequently share decisions that involve uncertainty and conflict. It has been suggested that conflict can enhance decision accuracy. In order to judge the practical relevance of such a suggestion, it is necessary to explore how general ... ...

Abstract	Social animals frequently share decisions that involve uncertainty and conflict. It has been suggested that conflict can enhance decision accuracy. In order to judge the practical relevance of such a suggestion, it is necessary to explore how general such findings are. Using a model, I examine whether conflicts between animals in a group with respect to preferences for avoiding false positives versus avoiding false negatives could, in principle, enhance the accuracy of collective decisions. I found that decision accuracy nearly always peaked when there was maximum conflict in groups in which individuals had different preferences. However, groups with no preferences were usually even more accurate. Furthermore, a relatively slight skew towards more animals with a preference for avoiding false negatives decreased the rate of expected false negatives versus false positives considerably (and vice versa), while resulting in only a small loss of decision accuracy. I conclude that in ecological situations in which decision accuracy is crucial for fitness and survival, animals cannot 'afford' preferences with respect to avoiding false positives versus false negatives. When decision accuracy is less crucial, animals might have such preferences. A slight skew in the number of animals with different preferences will result in the group avoiding that type of error more that the majority of group members prefers to avoid. The model also indicated that knowing the average success rate ('base rate') of a decision option can be very misleading, and that animals should ignore such base rates unless further information is available.
Language	English
Publishing date	2014-02-07
Publishing country	England
Document type	Journal Article
ISSN	2042-8898
ISSN	2042-8898
DOI	10.1098/rsfs.2013.0029
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

Order via subito

This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Article ; Online: Collective behaviour: When it pays to share decisions.

Conradt, Larissa

Nature

2011 Volume 471, Issue 7336, Page(s) 40–41

MeSH term(s)	Animals ; Choice Behavior ; Decision Making/physiology ; Fishes/physiology ; Group Processes ; Humans ; Locomotion/physiology ; Mass Behavior ; Predatory Behavior
Language	English
Publishing date	2011-03-03
Publishing country	England
Document type	News
ZDB-ID	120714-3
ISSN	1476-4687 ; 0028-0836
ISSN (online)	1476-4687
ISSN	0028-0836
DOI	10.1038/471040a
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Zs.A 26: Show issues			Location: Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand) bis Jg. 1994: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular Jg. 1995 - 2021: Lesesall (1.OG) ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG)
Zs.MG 9: Show issues
Zs.MO 244: Show issues

Order via subito

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article ; Online: Models in animal collective decision-making: information uncertainty and conflicting preferences.

Conradt, Larissa

Interface focus

2011 Volume 2, Issue 2, Page(s) 226–240

Abstract: Collective decision-making plays a central part in the lives of many social animals. Two important factors that influence collective decision-making are information uncertainty and conflicting preferences. Here, I bring together, and briefly review, ... ...

Abstract	Collective decision-making plays a central part in the lives of many social animals. Two important factors that influence collective decision-making are information uncertainty and conflicting preferences. Here, I bring together, and briefly review, basic models relating to animal collective decision-making in situations with information uncertainty and in situations with conflicting preferences between group members. The intention is to give an overview about the different types of modelling approaches that have been employed and the questions that they address and raise. Despite the use of a wide range of different modelling techniques, results show a coherent picture, as follows. Relatively simple cognitive mechanisms can lead to effective information pooling. Groups often face a trade-off between decision accuracy and speed, but appropriate fine-tuning of behavioural parameters could achieve high accuracy while maintaining reasonable speed. The right balance of interdependence and independence between animals is crucial for maintaining group cohesion and achieving high decision accuracy. In conflict situations, a high degree of decision-sharing between individuals is predicted, as well as transient leadership and leadership according to needs and physiological status. Animals often face crucial trade-offs between maintaining group cohesion and influencing the decision outcome in their own favour. Despite the great progress that has been made, there remains one big gap in our knowledge: how do animals make collective decisions in situations when information uncertainty and conflict of interest operate simultaneously?
Language	English
Publishing date	2011-12-14
Publishing country	England
Document type	Journal Article
ISSN	2042-8901
ISSN (online)	2042-8901
DOI	10.1098/rsfs.2011.0090
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Article ; Online: The ecology of competition: A theory of risk-reward environments in adaptive decision making.

Pleskac, Timothy J / Conradt, Larissa / Leuker, Christina / Hertwig, Ralph

Psychological review

2020 Volume 128, Issue 2, Page(s) 315–335

Abstract: In many choice environments, risks and rewards-or probabilities and payoffs-seem tightly coupled such that high payoffs only occur with low probabilities. An adaptive mind can exploit this association by, for instance, using a potential reward's size to ... ...

Abstract	In many choice environments, risks and rewards-or probabilities and payoffs-seem tightly coupled such that high payoffs only occur with low probabilities. An adaptive mind can exploit this association by, for instance, using a potential reward's size to infer the probability of obtaining it. However, a mind can only adapt to and exploit an environmental structure if it is ecologically reliable, that is if it is frequent and recurrent. We develop the competitive risk-reward ecology theory (CET) that establishes how the ecology of competition can make the association of high rewards with low probabilities ubiquitous. This association occurs because of what is known as the ideal free distribution (IFD) principle. The IFD states that competitors in a landscape of resource patches distribute themselves proportionally to the gross total amount of resources in the patches. CET shows how this principle implies a risk-reward structure: an inverse relationship between probabilities and payoffs. It also identifies boundary conditions for the risk-reward structure, including heterogeneity of resources, computational limits of competitors, and scarcity of resources. Finally, a set of empirical studies (
MeSH term(s)	Competitive Behavior ; Decision Making ; Humans ; Probability ; Reward ; Risk Assessment
Language	English
Publishing date	2020-09-28
Publishing country	United States
Document type	Journal Article
ZDB-ID	209907-x
ISSN	1939-1471 ; 0033-295X
ISSN (online)	1939-1471
ISSN	0033-295X
DOI	10.1037/rev0000261
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Zs.A 1710: Show issues

Location:
Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand)
bis Jg. 1994: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular
Jg. 1995 - 2021: Lesesall (1.OG)
ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG)

Order via subito

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article ; Online: Group decisions: how (not) to choose a restaurant with friends.

Conradt, Larissa

Current biology : CB

2008 Volume 18, Issue 24, Page(s) R1139–40

Abstract: Subordinate baboons voluntarily follow the dominant group member to foraging patches where they themselves starve. One-sided preservation of social ties seems to prevail over fair decision sharing, contradicting recent theory. ...

Abstract	Subordinate baboons voluntarily follow the dominant group member to foraging patches where they themselves starve. One-sided preservation of social ties seems to prevail over fair decision sharing, contradicting recent theory.
MeSH term(s)	Animals ; Behavior, Animal ; Decision Making ; Humans ; Papio/psychology ; Social Behavior
Language	English
Publishing date	2008-12-23
Publishing country	England
Document type	Journal Article
ZDB-ID	1071731-6
ISSN	1879-0445 ; 0960-9822
ISSN (online)	1879-0445
ISSN	0960-9822
DOI	10.1016/j.cub.2008.10.036
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Zs.A 3208: Show issues

Location:
Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand)
bis Jg. 1994: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular
Jg. 1995 - 2021: Lesesall (2.OG)
ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG)

Order via subito

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Book: Group decision making in humans and animals

Conradt, Larissa / List, Christian

papers of a theme issue

(Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society. B. Biological sciences, ; v. 364, no. 1518)

2009

Institution	Royal Society (Great Britain)
Author's details	compiled and edited by Larissa Conradt and Christian List
Series title	Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society. B. Biological sciences, ; v. 364, no. 1518
MeSH term(s)	Decision Making ; Group Processes ; Psychology, Comparative
Language	English
Size	p. 717-852 :, ill. ;, 30 cm.
Publisher	Royal Society
Publishing place	London
Document type	Book
Note	Title from cover.
ISBN	9780854037360 ; 0854037365
Database	Catalogue of the US National Library of Medicine (NLM)

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Article ; Online: Deciding group movements: where and when to go.

Conradt, Larissa / Roper, Timothy J

Behavioural processes

2010 Volume 84, Issue 3, Page(s) 675–677

Abstract: A group of animals can only move cohesively, if group members "somehow" reach a consensus about the timing (e.g., start) and the spatial direction/destination of the collective movement. Timing and spatial decisions usually differ with respect to the ... ...

Abstract	A group of animals can only move cohesively, if group members "somehow" reach a consensus about the timing (e.g., start) and the spatial direction/destination of the collective movement. Timing and spatial decisions usually differ with respect to the continuity of their cost/benefit distribution in such a way that, in principle, compromises are much more feasible in timing decision (e.g., median preferred time) than they are in spatial decisions. The consequence is that consensus costs connected to collective timing decisions are usually less skewed amongst group members than are consensus costs connected to spatial decisions. This, in turn, influences the evolution of decision sharing: sharing in timing decisions is most likely to evolve when conflicts are high relative to group cohesion benefits, while sharing in spatial decisions is most likely to evolve in the opposite situation. We discuss the implications of these differences for the study of collective movement decisions.
MeSH term(s)	Animals ; Biological Evolution ; Consensus ; Decision Making/physiology ; Group Processes ; Movement/physiology
Language	English
Publishing date	2010-07
Publishing country	Netherlands
Document type	Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't ; Review
ZDB-ID	196999-7
ISSN	1872-8308 ; 0376-6357
ISSN (online)	1872-8308
ISSN	0376-6357
DOI	10.1016/j.beproc.2010.03.005
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Zs.A 4104: Show issues

Location:
Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand)
bis Jg. 1994: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular
Jg. 1995 - 2021: Lesesall (2.OG)
ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG)

Order via subito

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article ; Online: Swarm intelligence: when uncertainty meets conflict.

Conradt, Larissa / List, Christian / Roper, Timothy J

The American naturalist

2013 Volume 182, Issue 5, Page(s) 592–610

Abstract: Good decision making is important for the survival and fitness of stakeholders, but decisions usually involve uncertainty and conflict. We know surprisingly little about profitable decision-making strategies in conflict situations. On the one hand, ... ...

Abstract	Good decision making is important for the survival and fitness of stakeholders, but decisions usually involve uncertainty and conflict. We know surprisingly little about profitable decision-making strategies in conflict situations. On the one hand, sharing decisions with others can pool information and decrease uncertainty (swarm intelligence). On the other hand, sharing decisions can hand influence to individuals whose goals conflict. Thus, when should an animal share decisions with others? Using a theoretical model, we show that, contrary to intuition, decision sharing by animals with conflicting goals often increases individual gains as well as decision accuracy. Thus, conflict-far from hampering effective decision making-can improve decision outcomes for all stakeholders, as long as they share large-scale goals. In contrast, decisions shared by animals without conflict were often surprisingly poor. The underlying mechanism is that animals with conflicting goals are less correlated in individual choice errors. These results provide a strong argument in the interest of all stakeholders for not excluding other (e.g., minority) factions from collective decisions. The observed benefits of including diverse factions among the decision makers could also be relevant to human collective decision making.
MeSH term(s)	Animals ; Choice Behavior ; Conflict (Psychology) ; Decision Making ; Models, Theoretical ; Social Behavior ; Uncertainty
Language	English
Publishing date	2013-11
Publishing country	United States
Document type	Journal Article
ZDB-ID	207092-3
ISSN	1537-5323 ; 0003-0147
ISSN (online)	1537-5323
ISSN	0003-0147
DOI	10.1086/673253
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Z 71/723: Show issues

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article ; Online: Group decisions in humans and animals: a survey.

Conradt, Larissa / List, Christian

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences

2008 Volume 364, Issue 1518, Page(s) 719–742

Abstract: Humans routinely make many decisions collectively, whether they choose a restaurant with friends, elect political leaders or decide actions to tackle international problems, such as climate change, that affect the future of the whole planet. We might be ... ...

Abstract	Humans routinely make many decisions collectively, whether they choose a restaurant with friends, elect political leaders or decide actions to tackle international problems, such as climate change, that affect the future of the whole planet. We might be less aware of it, but group decisions are just as important to social animals as they are for us. Animal groups have to collectively decide about communal movements, activities, nesting sites and enterprises, such as cooperative breeding or hunting, that crucially affect their survival and reproduction. While human group decisions have been studied for millennia, the study of animal group decisions is relatively young, but is now expanding rapidly. It emerges that group decisions in animals pose many similar questions to those in humans. The purpose of the present issue is to integrate and combine approaches in the social and natural sciences in an area in which theoretical challenges and research questions are often similar, and to introduce each discipline to the other's key ideas, findings and successful methods. In order to make such an introduction as effective as possible, here, we briefly review conceptual similarities and differences between the sciences, and provide a guide to the present issue.
MeSH term(s)	Animals ; Decision Making/physiology ; Humans ; Interpersonal Relations
Language	English
Publishing date	2008-11-12
Publishing country	England
Document type	Introductory Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
ZDB-ID	208382-6
ISSN	1471-2970 ; 0080-4622 ; 0264-3839 ; 0962-8436
ISSN (online)	1471-2970
ISSN	0080-4622 ; 0264-3839 ; 0962-8436
DOI	10.1098/rstb.2008.0276
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Einzelsignatur: Show issues

Order via subito

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article ; Online: Conflicts of interest and the evolution of decision sharing.

Conradt, Larissa / Roper, Timothy J

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences

2008 Volume 364, Issue 1518, Page(s) 807–819

Abstract: Social animals regularly face consensus decisions whereby they choose, collectively, between mutually exclusive actions. Such decisions often involve conflicts of interest between group members with respect to preferred action. Conflicts could, in ... ...

Abstract	Social animals regularly face consensus decisions whereby they choose, collectively, between mutually exclusive actions. Such decisions often involve conflicts of interest between group members with respect to preferred action. Conflicts could, in principle, be resolved, either by sharing decisions between members ('shared decisions') or by one 'dominant' member making decisions on behalf of the whole group ('unshared decisions'). Both, shared and unshared decisions, have been observed. However, it is unclear as to what favours the evolution of either decision type. Here, after a brief literature review, we present a novel method, involving a combination of self-organizing system and game theory modelling, of investigating the evolution of shared and unshared decisions. We apply the method to decisions on movement direction. We find that both, shared and unshared, decisions can evolve without individuals having a global overview of the group's behaviour or any knowledge about other members' preferences or intentions. Selection favours unshared over shared decisions when conflicts are high relative to grouping benefits, and vice versa. These results differ from those of group decision models relating to activity timings. We attribute this to fundamental differences between collective decisions about modalities that are disjunct (here, space) or continuous (here, time) with respect to costs/benefits.
MeSH term(s)	Animals ; Biological Evolution ; Conflict, Psychological ; Consensus ; Decision Making ; Game Theory ; Models, Theoretical
Language	English
Publishing date	2008-11-12
Publishing country	England
Document type	Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
ZDB-ID	208382-6
ISSN	1471-2970 ; 0080-4622 ; 0264-3839 ; 0962-8436
ISSN (online)	1471-2970
ISSN	0080-4622 ; 0264-3839 ; 0962-8436
DOI	10.1098/rstb.2008.0257
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Einzelsignatur: Show issues

Order via subito

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

To top

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Order via subito