In 2014, two researchers looked at the number of papers on 10,064 bird species in the Zoological Record database from 1978 to 2008. While the results have to be taken with some caution—for example, there were name changes, and species frequently kept in captivity may have been overcounted—they probably still give a good general idea of which birds ornithologists focus on.

And the Top Ten (by number of papers) were

• European Starling — 2,226
• Barn Owl — 2,210
• Mallard — 2,197
• Peregrine Falcon — 2,092
• Great Tit — 2,088
• House Sparrow — 1,966
• Red Junglefowl — 1,936
• European Herring Gull — 1,781
• Great Cormorant — 1,684
• White Stork — 1,526

Obviously, scientists have favorites. This becomes even clearer when comparing species in the same genus:

Indeed, 2,217 species (22%) had a research-effort count of zero.

So, what determines which species ornithologists choose to study? The results of the analysis show that

• Migratory species averaged 98.8 publications, versus only 10.9 for resident species.
• Mainland species averaged 33.3 publications, compared with 6.3 for island species.
• Least Concern species averaged 31.4 publications, more than twice the 14.5 for threatened species.
• European and North American birds were studied far more heavily than birds from other regions.

To me, this seems to indicate that research is much more driven by practical concerns (are the birds easy to find, are they conveniently located) than by actual research need – which I think should be higher for threatened species, not lower.

For a bird hoping to attract the attention of science, being conveniently located apparently helps more than being threatened. I find that somewhat depressing.