Eduardo S A Santos, Aleksandra Milenović, Aneta Arct, Anna Lenz, Ayumi Mizuno, Cassidy Schneider, Christine Sosiak, Erick Lundgren, Hao Qin, Iwo Gross, Jimuel Celeste, Kyle Morrison, Mahi Zakir, Marija Purgar, Santiago Ortega, Sergio Hernandez, Shinichi Nakagawa, Malgorzata Lagisz
{"title":"Mate choice copying in non-human animals: an update of two meta-analyses.","authors":"Eduardo S A Santos, Aleksandra Milenović, Aneta Arct, Anna Lenz, Ayumi Mizuno, Cassidy Schneider, Christine Sosiak, Erick Lundgren, Hao Qin, Iwo Gross, Jimuel Celeste, Kyle Morrison, Mahi Zakir, Marija Purgar, Santiago Ortega, Sergio Hernandez, Shinichi Nakagawa, Malgorzata Lagisz","doi":"10.1242/bio.062878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mate choice copying, the use of social information from others' mating decisions, is a taxonomically widespread form of social learning that can shape sexual selection. Two meta-analyses concluded that social information has a moderate positive effect on mate choice; however, both are based on literature searches that are now at least 7 years old. We asked whether the overall average effect they reported remains supported. Using a multilingual, grey-literature-inclusive search across seven languages, we added 69 effect sizes from 29 studies and harmonised the two source metrics, giving 227 Hedges' g effect sizes from 87 studies and 172 log odds ratios from 69 studies across 33 species. Reanalysed with phylogenetically informed multilevel models, the overall effect remained positive and significant but was appreciably smaller [Hedges' g=0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25 to 0.66, versus 0.58; odds ratio=1.81, 95% CI: 1.34 to 2.45, versus 2.71]. Heterogeneity was high, located within studies and among species rather than across the phylogeny. Small-study effects were strong on both scales, and correcting for them drew the mean towards zero. In some species, individuals do copy conspecifics' mate choices, but the effect is smaller, more variable, and more sensitive to publication bias than previously estimated.</p>","PeriodicalId":9216,"journal":{"name":"Biology Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology Open","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1242/bio.062878","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Mate choice copying, the use of social information from others' mating decisions, is a taxonomically widespread form of social learning that can shape sexual selection. Two meta-analyses concluded that social information has a moderate positive effect on mate choice; however, both are based on literature searches that are now at least 7 years old. We asked whether the overall average effect they reported remains supported. Using a multilingual, grey-literature-inclusive search across seven languages, we added 69 effect sizes from 29 studies and harmonised the two source metrics, giving 227 Hedges' g effect sizes from 87 studies and 172 log odds ratios from 69 studies across 33 species. Reanalysed with phylogenetically informed multilevel models, the overall effect remained positive and significant but was appreciably smaller [Hedges' g=0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25 to 0.66, versus 0.58; odds ratio=1.81, 95% CI: 1.34 to 2.45, versus 2.71]. Heterogeneity was high, located within studies and among species rather than across the phylogeny. Small-study effects were strong on both scales, and correcting for them drew the mean towards zero. In some species, individuals do copy conspecifics' mate choices, but the effect is smaller, more variable, and more sensitive to publication bias than previously estimated.
期刊介绍:
Biology Open (BiO) is an online Open Access journal that publishes peer-reviewed original research across all aspects of the biological sciences. BiO aims to provide rapid publication for scientifically sound observations and valid conclusions, without a requirement for perceived impact.