The evolution of prudent choice

117 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Mate choice for cognitive traits: a review of the evidence in nonhuman vertebrates (2011, background): “In fact, this need not be the case: theoretical (McNamara et al. 1999; Todd and Miller 1999; Fawcett and Johnstone 2003; Härdling and Kokko 2005; Cotar et al. 2008; Fawcett and Bleay 2009; Venner et al. 2010) and empirical (Little et al.”
Taking the sensory approach: how individual differences in sensory perception can influence mate choice (2012, unknown): “Choosiness is influenced by the assessment cost (Fawcett & Johnstone 2003; Härdling & Kokko 2005) and the receiver’s motivation (Dukas 2004).”
Male mate choice: why sequential choice can make its evolution difficult (2010, background): “…competition) can have the opposite effect of favouring choice ifmales ‘specialize’ in targeting different sets of females depending on their own competitiveness or other traits (Fawcett & Johnstone 2003; Härdling & Kokko 2005; Bel-Venner et al. 2008; Härdling et al. 2008; Rowell & Servedio 2009).”