Measuring personality in the field: An in situ comparison of personality quantification methods in wild Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus)
Three popular approaches exist for quantifying personality in animals: behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings and trait assessment. Both behavioral coding in an unconstrained setting and trait assessment aim to identify an overview of personality structure by reducing the behav...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983) Jg. 133; H. 3; S. 313 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
United States
01.08.2019
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| ISSN: | 1939-2087, 1939-2087 |
| Online-Zugang: | Weitere Angaben |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Abstract | Three popular approaches exist for quantifying personality in animals: behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings and trait assessment. Both behavioral coding in an unconstrained setting and trait assessment aim to identify an overview of personality structure by reducing the behavioral repertoire of a species into broad personality dimensions, whereas experimental assays quantify personality as reactive tendencies to particular stimuli. Criticisms of these methods include that they generate personality dimensions with low levels of cross-study or cross-species comparability (behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings) or that the personality dimensions generated are not ecologically valid, that is, not reflecting naturally occurring behavior (trait assessment and experimental assays). Which method is best for comparative research is currently debated, and there is presently a paucity of personality research conducted in wild subjects. In our study, all three described methods are used to quantify personality in a wild animal subject, the Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus). Our results show that the structures generated by unconstrained behavioral coding and trait assessment were not equivalent. Personality dimensions derived from both trait assessments and experimental assays demonstrated low levels of ecological validity, with very limited correlation with behaviors observed in nonmanipulated circumstances. Our results reflect the methodological differences between these quantification methods. Based on these findings and the practical considerations of wild animal research, we suggest future comparative studies of quantification methods within similar methodological frameworks to best identify methods viable for future comparisons of personality structures in wild animals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved). |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Three popular approaches exist for quantifying personality in animals: behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings and trait assessment. Both behavioral coding in an unconstrained setting and trait assessment aim to identify an overview of personality structure by reducing the behavioral repertoire of a species into broad personality dimensions, whereas experimental assays quantify personality as reactive tendencies to particular stimuli. Criticisms of these methods include that they generate personality dimensions with low levels of cross-study or cross-species comparability (behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings) or that the personality dimensions generated are not ecologically valid, that is, not reflecting naturally occurring behavior (trait assessment and experimental assays). Which method is best for comparative research is currently debated, and there is presently a paucity of personality research conducted in wild subjects. In our study, all three described methods are used to quantify personality in a wild animal subject, the Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus). Our results show that the structures generated by unconstrained behavioral coding and trait assessment were not equivalent. Personality dimensions derived from both trait assessments and experimental assays demonstrated low levels of ecological validity, with very limited correlation with behaviors observed in nonmanipulated circumstances. Our results reflect the methodological differences between these quantification methods. Based on these findings and the practical considerations of wild animal research, we suggest future comparative studies of quantification methods within similar methodological frameworks to best identify methods viable for future comparisons of personality structures in wild animals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).Three popular approaches exist for quantifying personality in animals: behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings and trait assessment. Both behavioral coding in an unconstrained setting and trait assessment aim to identify an overview of personality structure by reducing the behavioral repertoire of a species into broad personality dimensions, whereas experimental assays quantify personality as reactive tendencies to particular stimuli. Criticisms of these methods include that they generate personality dimensions with low levels of cross-study or cross-species comparability (behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings) or that the personality dimensions generated are not ecologically valid, that is, not reflecting naturally occurring behavior (trait assessment and experimental assays). Which method is best for comparative research is currently debated, and there is presently a paucity of personality research conducted in wild subjects. In our study, all three described methods are used to quantify personality in a wild animal subject, the Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus). Our results show that the structures generated by unconstrained behavioral coding and trait assessment were not equivalent. Personality dimensions derived from both trait assessments and experimental assays demonstrated low levels of ecological validity, with very limited correlation with behaviors observed in nonmanipulated circumstances. Our results reflect the methodological differences between these quantification methods. Based on these findings and the practical considerations of wild animal research, we suggest future comparative studies of quantification methods within similar methodological frameworks to best identify methods viable for future comparisons of personality structures in wild animals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved). Three popular approaches exist for quantifying personality in animals: behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings and trait assessment. Both behavioral coding in an unconstrained setting and trait assessment aim to identify an overview of personality structure by reducing the behavioral repertoire of a species into broad personality dimensions, whereas experimental assays quantify personality as reactive tendencies to particular stimuli. Criticisms of these methods include that they generate personality dimensions with low levels of cross-study or cross-species comparability (behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings) or that the personality dimensions generated are not ecologically valid, that is, not reflecting naturally occurring behavior (trait assessment and experimental assays). Which method is best for comparative research is currently debated, and there is presently a paucity of personality research conducted in wild subjects. In our study, all three described methods are used to quantify personality in a wild animal subject, the Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus). Our results show that the structures generated by unconstrained behavioral coding and trait assessment were not equivalent. Personality dimensions derived from both trait assessments and experimental assays demonstrated low levels of ecological validity, with very limited correlation with behaviors observed in nonmanipulated circumstances. Our results reflect the methodological differences between these quantification methods. Based on these findings and the practical considerations of wild animal research, we suggest future comparative studies of quantification methods within similar methodological frameworks to best identify methods viable for future comparisons of personality structures in wild animals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved). |
| Author | MacLarnon, Ann Majolo, Bonaventura Lehmann, Julia Ross, Caroline Tkaczynski, Patrick J Mouna, Mohamed |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Patrick J surname: Tkaczynski fullname: Tkaczynski, Patrick J organization: Centre for Research in Evolutionary, Social and Inter-Disciplinary Anthropology, University of Roehampton – sequence: 2 givenname: Caroline orcidid: 0000-0002-2366-143X surname: Ross fullname: Ross, Caroline organization: Centre for Research in Evolutionary, Social and Inter-Disciplinary Anthropology, University of Roehampton – sequence: 3 givenname: Ann orcidid: 0000-0003-2722-4998 surname: MacLarnon fullname: MacLarnon, Ann organization: Centre for Research in Evolutionary, Social and Inter-Disciplinary Anthropology, University of Roehampton – sequence: 4 givenname: Mohamed surname: Mouna fullname: Mouna, Mohamed organization: Institut Scientifique, Mohammed V University – sequence: 5 givenname: Bonaventura surname: Majolo fullname: Majolo, Bonaventura organization: School of Psychology, University of Lincoln – sequence: 6 givenname: Julia orcidid: 0000-0001-7278-1705 surname: Lehmann fullname: Lehmann, Julia organization: Centre for Research in Evolutionary, Social and Inter-Disciplinary Anthropology, University of Roehampton |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30589296$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNpVUMlOwzAQtRCIltILH4B8LIeAl8S1uZWKTWrFBc7RxHaopcRp4wTUX-CrcUSRYKTRPM28N9sZOvaNtwhdUHJNCZ_f6KYm0ajgR2hMFVcJI3J-_AeP0DQEV0QOVSzaKRpxkknFlBijr7WF0LfOv-OtbUPjoXLdHjuPu43FpbOVucULPySC63ocx22hdZGIm_KfZNeD71zpNHQuVmvbbRoTBuGnqwy-g7aAdo9r0LDrbcCzdUQacNhXH-D7cHWOTkqogp0e4gS9Pdy_Lp-S1cvj83KxSoBL0iUUMi50CkZqplJaSsWJzeYFN1SWkqqMaCFEqhkwoEyBMkIqYo00cs5Y9Ama_fTdts2wSZfXLmhbVeBt04ecUUGJ4DIdqJcHal_U1uTb1tXxiPz3f-wbLbt1dQ |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_anbehav_2024_12_001 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyg_2020_00507 crossref_primary_10_1111_eth_13117 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_applanim_2022_105627 crossref_primary_10_1002_ajp_23451 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_anbehav_2022_05_012 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0309946 crossref_primary_10_1002_per_2254 crossref_primary_10_1002_ajp_23429 crossref_primary_10_1002_ajp_23229 crossref_primary_10_3390_ani12121495 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| DOI | 10.1037/com0000163 |
| DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
| EISSN | 1939-2087 |
| ExternalDocumentID | 30589296 |
| Genre | Journal Article |
| GroupedDBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-a380t-1a536c4ad8c2941f8930e57b3d18f81950c6664c2a2a129a9d6890ed8d8722872 |
| IEDL.DBID | 7X8 |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 18 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000478727600005&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1939-2087 |
| IngestDate | Thu Jul 10 22:25:51 EDT 2025 Thu Jan 02 22:58:07 EST 2025 |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 3 |
| Language | English |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-a380t-1a536c4ad8c2941f8930e57b3d18f81950c6664c2a2a129a9d6890ed8d8722872 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-2722-4998 0000-0002-2366-143X 0000-0001-7278-1705 |
| PMID | 30589296 |
| PQID | 2161063847 |
| PQPubID | 23479 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2161063847 pubmed_primary_30589296 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2019-08-00 20190801 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2019-08-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 08 year: 2019 text: 2019-08-00 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
| PublicationTitle | Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983) |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | J Comp Psychol |
| PublicationYear | 2019 |
| SSID | ssib001192222 |
| Score | 2.344733 |
| Snippet | Three popular approaches exist for quantifying personality in animals: behavioral coding in unconstrained and experimental settings and trait assessment. Both... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database |
| StartPage | 313 |
| SubjectTerms | Animals Animals, Wild Behavior, Animal Female Macaca - psychology Male Personality Social Behavior |
| Title | Measuring personality in the field: An in situ comparison of personality quantification methods in wild Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus) |
| URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30589296 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2161063847 |
| Volume | 133 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000478727600005&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpZ1NS8MwGMeDOg9efMG3-UYED3oo65K2SbzIEIeXjR0UditpksJA282uwr6Cn9onSef0IAheSikkhORp8nteyB-hK_CRVQa7XECYkEGUsTCQNImC3GRJVxEGRhY5sQk2HPLxWIyagFvVlFUu90S3UetS2Rh5hwCa2OM1YnfTWWBVo2x2tZHQWEctCihjS7rY-FsWCPDFJxIAUwQYBGfLG0op60DvLrZtbwD9jS7dKdPf-e_4dtF2w5e45w1iD62ZYh99DFwkEE4pPF3BN54UGPAPuyK2W9wr7AforsbqS5wQl_mPJrNa-uoit6DY609XtiEwt8Y-e7HAr1JJO3h8PYA3JXG1eAFkr6ubA_Tcf3i6fwwaEQZYMx7Og66MaaIiqbkiIurmwDehiVlGdZfnNgkXKvCAIkUkkcAOUuiEi9Borjkj4I6RQ7RRlIU5RjixESwNwJULcONiIQ34PiaKKYlzFmraRpfLqU3ByG3mQhamrKt0NbltdOTXJ5362zhSaoURiUhO_tD6FG0B8AhfwHeGWjn84uYcbar3-aR6u3DWA8_haPAJRSTPxA |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measuring+personality+in+the+field%3A+An+in+situ+comparison+of+personality+quantification+methods+in+wild+Barbary+macaques+%28Macaca+sylvanus%29&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+comparative+psychology+%28Washington%2C+D.C.+%3A+1983%29&rft.au=Tkaczynski%2C+Patrick+J&rft.au=Ross%2C+Caroline&rft.au=MacLarnon%2C+Ann&rft.au=Mouna%2C+Mohamed&rft.date=2019-08-01&rft.eissn=1939-2087&rft.volume=133&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=313&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037%2Fcom0000163&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F30589296&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F30589296&rft.externalDocID=30589296 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1939-2087&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1939-2087&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1939-2087&client=summon |