spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online August 17, 2007
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 3027-3035 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.007492
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JEB
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Van Dyk, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Evans, C. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Van Dyk, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Evans, C. S.

Assessment of repeated displays: a test of possible mechanisms

Daniel A. Van Dyk1,*, Alan J. Taylor2 and Christopher S. Evans1

1 Centre for the Integrative Study of Animal Behaviour, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia
2 Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia


Figure 1
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Display-time profile of stimulus sequences. (A) Constant, (B) initial, (C) spike, (D) pulsed, (E) block, (F) slow escalation, (G) fast escalation and (H) de-escalation.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. Experiment 1. Incidence-rate ratios (±95% confidence interval) of pair-wise comparisons between treatments. (A) Locomotion (critical P-value=0.005), (B) push-up/body-rocks (critical P-value=0.01) and (C) gular expansion (critical P-value=0.025). *Significant difference between the responses for the two treatments in each pair.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Experiment 2. Incidence-rate ratios (±95% confidence interval) of pair-wise comparisons between treatments. (A) Attack (critical P-value=0.008) and (B) gular expansion (critical P-value=0.017). *Significant difference between the responses for the two treatments in each pair.

 




© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2007