User:Maria Dobbin/sandbox

Wiki Code Practice
is this working

SOS

Article Evaluation
This section is an evaluation of the Wikipedia article, Reinforcement.

All the information presented in the article is specific to the chosen topic. There were no unrelated topics or tangents described in the article that were not relevant to the concept of reinforcement in a psychological context. The article flows through topics in a logical progression and provides many examples of the different types of reinforcement techniques and their applications. Additionally, the information conveyed seems unbiased and there is some representation from other schools of thought. For example, the article has a section entitled "Criticisms " in which the author examines how the definition of the term "reinforcement" is a point of debate within the scientific community. However, the criticisms outlined are focused primarily on the vocabulary of the field and not of the practices themselves. I believe this section could be further expanded. Also, there are very few images used throughout the article. When considering how long the entry is there is a lot of opportunity to use figures and pictures to help convey ideas. The citations listed in the article are almost entirely from scientific journals. Many of the journal entries are accessible through the links provided on the wikipedia page. Although, some of the links were no longer functioning, the articles cited were still available through sources such as google scholar or Memorial University's online database. However, not all readers have access to same caliber of resources and some of the cited works may be unavailable to some individuals. According to the article's talk page, Reinforcement is within the scope of both WikiProject Psychology and WikiProject Neuroscience however, both projects give the article a C-Class on the quality scale but a high importance and mid importance designation, respectively, on the importance scale. A majority of the comments from the talk page express the need for the article to be simplified. Many of the commenters agree that the text is often too convoluted for readers to understand. Further, many of the editors were critical of the vocabulary used in the examples, stating that some explanations were oversimplified. The article explores the concepts and examples related to reinforcement in a similar way to what we explored in class. Namely, the childcare/ parent management and the gambling examples discussed in class are both used on the wikipedia page. However, the article does explore many of the ideas expressed during class in more detail.

Add to an Article
This section is a draft for amendments to group living section of the Ethology article.

For example, according to the Geometry of the Selfish Herd (GSH) theory, the fitness benefits associated with group living vary depending on the location of an individual within the group. GSH suggests that conspecifics positioned at the centre of a group will reduce the likelihood predations while those at the periphery will become more vulnerable to attack.

Choose possible topic
Sociality has been designated a start class article on WikiProjects Sociobiology, Animals and Evolutionary biology with mid-importance ratings for the Animals and Evolutionary biology projects but no importance rating yet for the Sociobiology. There are many aspects that have not yet been addressed in the article such as, the evolutions of sociality, the advantages and the cost. Additionally, the topic is widely investigates so there will be a lot of current and reliable secondary sources of information.
 * 1) Sociality

2. Allomothering

The allomothering article has been designated a start class on the WikiProject Mammals and rated mid-importance on the projects importance scale. There are no examples or substantial categories listed in the article. Allomaternal care is widely studied across various taxa and is related to animal behaviour.

Topic Feedback

Both of these topics appear to be fairly substantial. I think you will have a hard time making a significant contribution to these articles. I would consider looking at alternative topics. However, if you are passionate about one of these topics, be sure to look at the available literature to determine if there is enough support for the aspects you would like to expand upon. Jpethier (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2018 (UTC)jpethier

Finalize your topic / Find your sources
This section is an outline of the changes I plan on making to the Personality in animals wikipedia page.

Animal personality is consistent individual differences in behaviour across time and ecological contexts. Currently, the wikipedia article about animal personality focuses primarily on personality in a psychological context. Instead, I would like to improve the article by writing about animal personality using an ecological framework. Additionally, animal personality is often conflated with human personality although there are different ways of defining and quantifying both types and, I believe, the article does not effectively distinguish between the them. Some other changes include:
 * Expand on the heritability of behavioural traits in animals and explore the evolutionary implications of animal personality.

Here is my preliminary bibliography
 * Expand on the methodologies for determining animal personality; behavioural reaction norms, repeatability
 * Introduce the concept of sampling bias due to animal personality.
 * Restructure and expand on the examples section of the article. For example, discuss Wilson et al. (1993) bold fish experiment.
 * Discuss the relationship between behavioural plasticity and animal personality

Sih, A., Cote, J., Evans, M., Fogarty, S., & Pruitt, J. (2012). Ecological implications of behavioural syndromes. Ecology Letters, 15(3), 278–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01731.x

Dingemanse, N. J., Kazem, A. J. N., Réale, D., & Wright, J. (2010). Behavioural reaction norms: animal personality meets individual plasticity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 25(2), 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.07.013

Herbert-Read, J. E., Krause, S., Morrell, L. J., Schaerf, T. M., Krause, J., & Ward,  a J. W. (2013). The role of individuality in collective group movement. ''Proceedings. Biological Sciences / The Royal Society, 280'', 20122564. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.2564

Biro P. A., & Dingemanse N. J. (2009). Sampling bias resulting from animal personality. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24(2), 66-67. https://doiorg.qe2aproxy.mun.ca/10.1016/j.tree. 2008.11.001

Wolf, M., & Weissing, F. (2012). Animal personalities: Consequences for ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27(8), 452-461.

Leclerc, M., Vander Wal, E., Zedrosser, A., Swenson, J. E., Kindberg, J., & Pelletier, F. (2016). Quantifying consistent individual differences in habitat selection. Oecologia, 180(3), 697-705.

Draft your article
This section is a draft of the additions I plan to make to the Personality in animals article. There are still some sections that I plan to expand on. For example, the methods section still needs a lot of work. I plan on including write ups on repeatability analysis, behavioural reactions norms, behavioural indices and the use of molecular genetics. Also, the examples section needs to be expanded.

Introduction - Additional Information

Animal personality has been investigated across a variety of different scientific fields including; agricultural science, animal behavior, anthropology, psychology, veterinary medicine, and zoology (Gosling, 2001). Thus, the definition for animal personality may vary according to the context and scope of study. However, there is recent consensus in the literature for a broad definition that describes animal personality as individual differences in behaviour that are consistent across time and ecological context (Wolf and Weissing, 2012). In this case, consistency refers to the repeatability of behavioural differences between individuals and not that the trait will present itself the same way in varying environments (Reale, 2007).

Background  – reworked from paragraphs in the original article

The initial framework used to study animal personality was comparative psychology. The descriptive language used by comparative psychologists in the late nineteenth century often attributed disposition and behavioural tendencies to individual animals in the study. Many of these reports are the result of researchers anthropomorphizing their animal subjects and did not explicitly examine what is now considered animal personality. However, these studies do represent the some of the first instances of scientists reporting individual differences in animal behaviour (Whitham and Washburn, 2017).

The Russian physiologist, Ivan Pavlov, was one of the first researchers to integrate personality into his research of animal behaviours. In his seminal studies on conditional reflexes, he categorized the behaviour of dogs as Excitable, Lively, Quiet or Inhibited. He linked these personalities to learning ability. The Excitable type, for example, showed signs of strong excitatory conditioning, but a limited ability for the acquisition of inhibitory connections. The Lively type was the most balanced and displayed rapid associative learning, while the Quiet type exhibited consistent but slow learning.[4]

The first study that empirically examined animal personality was in 1938, Meredith Crawford quantified individual differences in the behaviour of young chimpanzee using a behaviour rating scale. Crawford conducted her research out of the Yale Laboratories of Primate Biology (Whitham and Washburn, 2017). Since then, psychologists have continued to investigate personality in animals across a wide range of taxa. Meanwhile, the incorporation of animal personality into the fields of ecology and evolution is a relatively new practice. Ecologist began to recognize the importance of individual differences in behaviour near the end of the twentieth century (Sih et al., 2012; Reale et al., 2007).

Animal Personality vs. Human Personality

The extent of personality phenomenon considered when examining animal personality is significantly reduced compared to those studied in humans. Concepts such as personal objects, identity, attitudes and life stories are not considered relevant in animals. Similarly, any approach that requires the subject to explain motives, beliefs or feelings is not applicable to the study of animal behaviour (Gosling, 2001).

The study of animal personality is largely based on the observation and investigation of behavioural traits. In an ecological context, traits or ‘characters’ are attributes of an organism that are shared by members of a species. Traits can be shared by all or only a portion of individuals in a population. For example, studies in animal personality often examine traits such as aggressiveness, avoidance of novelty, boldness, exploration and sociality (Reale, 2007).

Animal personality in ecology and evolution

There has been a surge of research in recent years dedicated to the implications of animal personality in ecosystem function and evolution. Variation among individuals in a population is one of the driving forces behind natural selection. Evolutionary biologists have posited that if there is variation in behavioural traits and if those traits have a genetic basis then they may be subject to selective pressures. For example, differences in behavioural types may result in more rapid evolution because of increase capacity to adapt to rapid changes in an ecosystem. Similarly, ecologists have focused on the effects of animal personality in interactions between conspecifics and other species and on the organization of ecological networks (Wolf and Weissing, 2012).

Criticisms

Many researchers are critical of the lack of consistency in the terminology surrounding animal personality. For example, temperament, behavioural syndrome, disposition and animal personality have been used interchangeably by some while others maintain that each term has a unique meaning (Reale, 2007). Additionally, there is some concern that researchers may be misinterpreting the relationship between personality and behavioural plasticity. Dingemanse et al. (2009) illustrates that one could erroneously determine that variation in behaviour between individuals exists if the subjects have not been examined across a gradient of ecological contexts.

Additional Bibliography

Gosling, S. (2001). From mice to men: What can we learn about personality from animal research? Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 45-86.

Réale, D., Reader, S., Sol, D., McDougall, P., & Dingemanse, N. (2007). Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biological Reviews, 82(2), 291-318.

Whitham W., Washburn D.A. (2017) A History of Animal Personality Research. In: Vonk J., Weiss A., Kuczaj S. (eds) Personality in Nonhuman Animals. Springer, Cham. ISBN: 978-3-319-59300-5