Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
Osmoregulation in Fishes02:32

Osmoregulation in Fishes

When cells are placed in a hypotonic (low-salt) fluid, they can swell and burst. Meanwhile, cells in a hypertonic solution—with a higher salt concentration—can shrivel and die. How do fish cells avoid these gruesome fates in hypotonic freshwater or hypertonic seawater environments?
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can have a...
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Impact of staff-engagement campaigns in large healthcare organisations: a focus group study.

BMJ leader·2026
Same author

Air-breathing synchrony in juvenile Arapaima gigas reveals collective coordination under individual physiological constraints.

Communications biology·2026
Same author

You can read something that is delightful to you: a scoping review of reading interventions in neonatal and paediatric critical care settings.

Cardiology in the young·2026
Same author

Measuring gambling harm in self-reported questionnaires: a scoping review.

Harm reduction journal·2026
Same author

Strategic choices of attack location allow predators to counter a collective prey defence.

Proceedings. Biological sciences·2026
Same author

Author Correction: Reproductive individuality of clonal fish raised in near-identical environments and its link to early-life behavioral individuality.

Nature communications·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 27, 2026

The Three-Chamber Choice Behavioral Task using Zebrafish as a Model System
07:55

The Three-Chamber Choice Behavioral Task using Zebrafish as a Model System

Published on: April 14, 2021

Consensus decision making by fish.

David J T Sumpter1, Jens Krause, Richard James

  • 1Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University, Box 480, 751 06 Uppsala, Sweden. david@math.uu.se

Current Biology : CB
|November 18, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Group size enhances decision accuracy in sticklebacks. Larger groups improve consensus, enabling better discrimination of subtle differences, with a simple quorum rule explaining the phenomenon.

More Related Videos

Using the FishSim Animation Toolchain to Investigate Fish Behavior: A Case Study on Mate-Choice Copying In Sailfin Mollies
10:50

Using the FishSim Animation Toolchain to Investigate Fish Behavior: A Case Study on Mate-Choice Copying In Sailfin Mollies

Published on: November 8, 2018

A Standardized Protocol for Preference Testing to Assess Fish Welfare
07:29

A Standardized Protocol for Preference Testing to Assess Fish Welfare

Published on: February 22, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 27, 2026

The Three-Chamber Choice Behavioral Task using Zebrafish as a Model System
07:55

The Three-Chamber Choice Behavioral Task using Zebrafish as a Model System

Published on: April 14, 2021

Using the FishSim Animation Toolchain to Investigate Fish Behavior: A Case Study on Mate-Choice Copying In Sailfin Mollies
10:50

Using the FishSim Animation Toolchain to Investigate Fish Behavior: A Case Study on Mate-Choice Copying In Sailfin Mollies

Published on: November 8, 2018

A Standardized Protocol for Preference Testing to Assess Fish Welfare
07:29

A Standardized Protocol for Preference Testing to Assess Fish Welfare

Published on: February 22, 2020

Area of Science:

  • Animal behavior
  • Collective decision-making
  • Social information use

Background:

  • Consensus decisions leverage diverse information for accuracy.
  • Group size theoretically improves decision accuracy through consensus.
  • Animal social behavior is known, but consensus-driven accuracy is understudied.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Investigate if decision accuracy increases with group size in animals.
  • Determine how small groups of sticklebacks reach consensus.
  • Identify mechanisms underlying collective decision-making in fish.

Main Methods:

  • Observed sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) choosing between two replica fish.
  • Varied group sizes to assess impact on decision accuracy.
  • Analyzed decision-making using a quorum rule model.

Main Results:

  • Stickleback decision accuracy improved significantly with increasing group size.
  • Fish became better at discriminating subtle phenotypic differences between replicas.
  • A simple quorum rule accurately predicted group consensus and accuracy.

Conclusions:

  • Collective decision-making accuracy in animals can increase with group size.
  • Simple rules, like quorum sensing, can explain accurate consensus in animal groups.
  • Peer submission dynamics, while potentially leading to errors, are a byproduct of generally accurate consensus.