David's score: a more appropriate dominance ranking method than Clutton-Brock et al.'s index

By M. Gammell, H. Vries, D. Jennings, Caitríona Carlin, T. Hayden. 2003

391 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5a58ae244a67742b97281de7ebe843c18889e938

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Social play in captive wolves (Canis lupus): not only an immature affair (2009, methodology): “Since David’s score has been found to be a very appropriate dominance ranking index (Gammell et al., 2003), I used the absolute value of the differences of individual scores to evaluate rank distance.”
Measuring and testing the steepness of dominance hierarchies (2006, methodology): “Two broad types of methods can be used to produce a linear hierarchy (reviewed in de Vries 1998; also Jameson et al. 1999; de Vries & Appleby 2000; Albers & de Vries 2001; Gammell et al. 2003).”
The construction of dominance order: comparing performance of five methods using an individual-based model (2005, methodology): “Note that we did not include other methods of individual overall success, such as the fighting index of Clutton-Brock et al. (1979), because Gammell et al. (2003) show that the David’s score is more appropriate.”
Vocal signalling of male southern elephant seals is honest but imprecise (2007, methodology): “Therefore, we used success in competition, as measured from David’s dominance score (DDS; Gammell et al. 2003), as a proxy for the suite of latent, often not measurable, traits that globally constitute RHP.”
Choosing an appropriate index to construct dominance hierarchies in animal societies: a comparison of three indices (2010, methodology): “CBI, DS and FDI because we wished to (1) examine the claim by Gammell et al. (2003) that DS is superior to CBI and (2) evaluate FDI as routinely used by us, in relation to CBI and DS.”
Long-term dominance relationships in female mountain gorillas: strength, stability and determinants of rank (2005, background): “This assumption is not valid if some individuals interact preferentially with others, or if the outcome of one interaction affects the probability for future interactions (e.g., de Vries, 1998; Gammell et al., 2003).”
The relation between social rank, neophobia and individual learning in starlings (2006, neutral): “agonistic ranks, while taking the relative strengths of the opponents into account (Gammell et al. 2003): the proportion of wins by individual i in his interactions with another individual j (Pij) is the number of times that i defeats j (aij) divided by the total number of interactions between i and”