1
|
McGetrick J, Peters H, Korath ADJ, Feitsch R, Siegmann S, Range F. Perceived reward attainability may underlie dogs' responses in inequity paradigms. Sci Rep 2023; 13:12066. [PMID: 37495666 PMCID: PMC10372141 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-38836-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2023] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 07/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Dogs have repeatedly been shown to give their paw to an experimenter more times for no reward when a rewarded conspecific partner is absent than when a rewarded conspecific is present, thereby showing inequity aversion. However, rather than being inequity averse, dogs might give their paw more when a partner is absent due to the experimenter's procedure in which they move food in front of the subject to mimic feeding a partner. This action could increase subjects' perception of reward attainability. We tested this hypothesis by introducing an improved type of control condition in which subjects were unrewarded for giving the paw in the presence of a rewarded box, a condition that more closely resembles the inequity condition. Inequity averse subjects' performance did not differ based on whether the partner was another dog or a box. Moreover, these subjects gave the paw more times when no partner was present and the experimenter mimicked the feeding of a partner than when rewards were placed in the box. These results suggest that responses in the previous studies were inflated by subjects' increased perception of reward attainability when no partner was present and, therefore, over-exaggerated dogs' propensity to give up due to inequity aversion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jim McGetrick
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Dörfles 48, 2115, Ernstbrunn, Austria.
- Institute of Animal Welfare Science, University of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Hugo Peters
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Dörfles 48, 2115, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| | - Anna D J Korath
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Dörfles 48, 2115, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| | - Romana Feitsch
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Dörfles 48, 2115, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| | - Susanne Siegmann
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Dörfles 48, 2115, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| | - Friederike Range
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Dörfles 48, 2115, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Titchener R, Thiriau C, Hüser T, Scherberger H, Fischer J, Keupp S. Social disappointment and partner presence affect long-tailed macaque refusal behaviour in an 'inequity aversion' experiment. ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE 2023; 10:221225. [PMID: 36866079 PMCID: PMC9974291 DOI: 10.1098/rsos.221225] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2022] [Accepted: 02/07/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
Protest in response to unequal reward distribution is thought to have played a central role in the evolution of human cooperation. Some animals refuse food and become demotivated when rewarded more poorly than a conspecific, and this has been taken as evidence that non-human animals, like humans, protest in the face of inequity. An alternative explanation-social disappointment-shifts the cause of this discontent away from the unequal reward, to the human experimenter who could-but elects not to-treat the subject well. This study investigates whether social disappointment could explain frustration behaviour in long-tailed macaques, Macaca fascicularis. We tested 12 monkeys in a novel 'inequity aversion' paradigm. Subjects had to pull a lever and were rewarded with low-value food; in half of the trials, a partner worked alongside the subjects receiving high-value food. Rewards were distributed either by a human or a machine. In line with the social disappointment hypothesis, monkeys rewarded by the human refused food more often than monkeys rewarded by the machine. Our study extends previous findings in chimpanzees and suggests that social disappointment plus social facilitation or food competition effects drive food refusal patterns.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rowan Titchener
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, Deutsches Primatenzentrum GmbH, Kellnerweg 4, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
- Institute of Psychology, University of Goettingen, Waldweg 26, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
- Leibniz ScienceCampus Primate Cognition, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
| | - Constance Thiriau
- Université Paris Nord, 99 Avenue Jean Baptiste Clément, 93430 Villetaneuse, France
| | - Timo Hüser
- Neurobiology Laboratory, Deutsches Primatenzentrum GmbH, Kellnerweg 4, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
| | - Hansjörg Scherberger
- Neurobiology Laboratory, Deutsches Primatenzentrum GmbH, Kellnerweg 4, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
- Leibniz ScienceCampus Primate Cognition, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
- Faculty of Biology and Psychology, University of Goettingen, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
| | - Julia Fischer
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, Deutsches Primatenzentrum GmbH, Kellnerweg 4, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
- Leibniz ScienceCampus Primate Cognition, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
- Department for Primate Cognition, University of Goettingen, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
| | - Stefanie Keupp
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, Deutsches Primatenzentrum GmbH, Kellnerweg 4, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
- Leibniz ScienceCampus Primate Cognition, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
- Department for Primate Cognition, University of Goettingen, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
A comparative perspective on the human sense of justice. EVOL HUM BEHAV 2023. [DOI: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2022.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
|
4
|
Lu YT, Hwang WH, Hsieh YT, Ho TY, Da Zhu J, Yeh CI, Huang CY. Choices behind the veil of ignorance in Formosan macaques. PNAS NEXUS 2022; 1:pgac188. [PMID: 36714857 PMCID: PMC9802069 DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2021] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
An ongoing debate regarding the evolution of morality is whether other species show precursory moral behavior. The veil of ignorance (VOI) paradigm is often used to elicit human moral judgment but has never been tested in other primates. We study the division of resources behind the VOI in Formosan macaques. Monkeys choose the equal division more often when a conspecific is present than when it is absent, suggesting a degree of impartiality. To better understand this impartiality, we measure a monkey's reactions to two directions of inequity: one regarding inequity to its advantage and the other to its disadvantage. We find that disadvantageous inequity aversion correlates with the degree of impartiality behind the VOI. Therefore, seemingly impartial behavior could result from a primitive negative reaction to being disadvantaged. This suggests a mechanism to explain a tendency toward impartiality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Yi-Tsung Hsieh
- Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan
| | - Tsung-Yu Ho
- Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan
| | - Jian- Da Zhu
- Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan
| | - Chun-I Yeh
- To whom correspondence should be addressed:
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Agung Nugroho DA, Sajuthi D, Supraptini Mansjoer S, Iskandar E, Shalahudin Darusman H. Long-tailed macaques: an unfairness model for humans. Commun Integr Biol 2022; 15:137-149. [PMID: 35574157 PMCID: PMC9103353 DOI: 10.1080/19420889.2022.2070902] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
The current study was designed to predict why human primates often behave unfairly (equity aversion) by not exhibiting equity preference (the ability to equally distribute outcomes 1:1 among participants). Parallel to humans, besides inequity aversion, lab monkeys such as kin of long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) also demonstrate equity aversion depending on their preference for the outcome (food) type. During the pre-experiment phase, a food-preference test was conducted to determine the most preferred income per individual monkey. Red grapes were the most preferred outcome (100%) when compared to vanilla wafers (0%). The first set of experiments used a 1:1 ratio (equity condition) of grape distribution among six kin-pairs of female long-tailed macaques, and we compared their aversion (Av) versus acceptance (Ac). In the second experiment, we assessed the response to the 0:2 and 1:3 ratio distribution of grapes (inequity condition). A total of 60 trials were conducted for each condition with N = 6 pairs. Our results show aversion to the inequity conditions (1:3 ratios) in long-tailed macaques was not significantly different from aversion to the equity conditions (1:1 ratios). We suggest that the aversion observed in this species was associated with the degree of preference for the outcome (food type) offered rather than the distribution ratio. The subjective preferences for outcome types could bring this species into irrationality; they failed to share foods with an equal ratio of 1:1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dondin Sajuthi
- Primatology major, Graduate School Program, IPB University-Indonesia, Bogor City, Indonesia.,Primate Research Center, Institute of Research and Community Service (LPPM), IPB University-Indonesia, Bogor-Indonesia
| | | | - Entang Iskandar
- Primatology major, Graduate School Program, IPB University-Indonesia, Bogor City, Indonesia.,Primate Research Center, Institute of Research and Community Service (LPPM), IPB University-Indonesia, Bogor-Indonesia
| | - Huda Shalahudin Darusman
- Primate Research Center, Institute of Research and Community Service (LPPM), IPB University-Indonesia, Bogor-Indonesia.,Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, IPB University-Indonesia, Bogor-Indonesia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
McAuliffe K. A comparative test of inequity aversion in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and dingoes (Canis dingo). PLoS One 2021; 16:e0255885. [PMID: 34550973 PMCID: PMC8457503 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255885] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2020] [Accepted: 07/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite much recent empirical work on inequity aversion in nonhuman species, many questions remain about its distribution across taxa and the factors that shape its evolution and expression. Past work suggests that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and wolves (Canis lupus) are averse to inequitable resource distributions in contexts that call upon some degree of training such as 'give paw' and 'buzzer press' tasks. However, it is unclear whether inequity aversion appears in other canid species and in other experimental contexts. Using a novel inequity aversion task that does not require specific training, this study helps address these gaps by investigating inequity aversion in domestic dogs and a closely related but non-domesticated canid, the dingo (Canis dingo). Subjects were presented with equal and unequal reward distributions and given the opportunity to approach or refuse to approach allocations. Measures of interest were (1) subjects' refusal to approach when getting no food; (2) approach latency; and (3) social referencing. None of these measures differed systematically across the inequity condition and control conditions in either dogs or dingoes. These findings add to the growing literature on inequity aversion in canids, providing data from a new species and a new experimental context. Additionally, they raise questions about the experimental features that must be in place for inequity aversion to appear in canids.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine McAuliffe
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Yu H, Lu C, Gao X, Shen B, Liu K, Li W, Xiao Y, Yang B, Zhao X, Crockett MJ, Zhou X. Explaining Individual Differences in Advantageous Inequity Aversion by Social-Affective Trait Dimensions and Family Environment. SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PERSONALITY SCIENCE 2021. [DOI: 10.1177/19485506211027794] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
Humans are averse to both having less (i.e., disadvantageous inequity aversion [IA]) and having more than others (i.e., advantageous IA). However, the social-affective traits that drive individual differences in IA are not well understood. Here, by combining a modified dictator game and a computational model, we found in a sample of incarcerated adolescents ( N = 67) that callous-unemotional traits were specifically associated with low advantageous but not disadvantageous IA. We replicated and extended the finding in a large-scale university student sample ( N = 2,250) by adopting a dimensional approach to social-affective trait measures. We showed that advantageous IA was strongly and negatively associated with a trait dimension characterized by callousness and lack of social emotions (e.g., guilt and compassion). A supportive family environment negatively correlated with this trait dimension and positively with advantageous IA. These results identify a core set of social-affective dimensions specifically associated with advantageous IA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongbo Yu
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California Santa Barbara, CA, USA
| | - Chunlei Lu
- Institute of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, China
| | - Xiaoxue Gao
- School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Bo Shen
- Institute of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, China
| | - Kui Liu
- Institute of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, China
| | - Weijian Li
- Institute of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, China
| | - Yuqin Xiao
- School of Sociology, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing, China
| | - Bo Yang
- School of Sociology, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing, China
| | - Xudong Zhao
- Pudong Mental Health Centre, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
- Department of Psychology, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
| | | | - Xiaolin Zhou
- Institute of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, China
- School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China
- Department of Psychology, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
- Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
- PKU-IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Peking University, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
McGetrick J, Brucks D, Marshall-Pescini S, Range F. No evidence for a relationship between breed cooperativeness and inequity aversion in dogs. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0233067. [PMID: 32555709 PMCID: PMC7299310 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2019] [Accepted: 04/27/2020] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Inequity aversion, the resistance to inequitable outcomes, has been demonstrated in a wide variety of animal species. Inequity aversion was hypothesised to have co-evolved with cooperation but only limited evidence supports this. Dogs provide a suitable model species to test this hypothesis as dogs were previously shown to be inequity averse and dog breeds vary in the extent to which they were selected for cooperativeness. Here, we compared the response of 12 individuals of "cooperative worker" breeds with that of 12 individuals of "independent worker" breeds in the "paw task" previously used to demonstrate inequity aversion in dogs. We also compared the two breed groups' subsequent social behaviours in a food tolerance test and free interaction session. Although subjects in both breed groups were inequity averse, we found no considerable difference between the groups in the extent of the negative response to inequity or in the impact of the inequity on subsequent social behaviours. However, we found differences between the breed groups in the response to reward omission with cooperative breeds tending to work for longer than independent breeds. Additionally, in the free interaction session, individuals of cooperative breeds spent more time in proximity to their partner in the baseline condition than individuals of independent breeds. Overall, our results do not provide support for the hypothesis that inequity aversion and cooperation co-evolved. However, they illuminate potential differences in selection pressures experienced by cooperative worker and independent worker dog breeds throughout their evolutionary history.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jim McGetrick
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
- Comparative Cognition Unit, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Medical University of Vienna & University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Désirée Brucks
- Comparative Cognition Unit, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Medical University of Vienna & University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Institute for Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Sarah Marshall-Pescini
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
- Comparative Cognition Unit, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Medical University of Vienna & University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Friederike Range
- Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
- Comparative Cognition Unit, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Medical University of Vienna & University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Negative Behavioral Contrast in Capuchin Monkeys (Sapajus sp.). PSYCHOLOGICAL RECORD 2020. [DOI: 10.1007/s40732-020-00404-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|
10
|
Bucher B, Bourgeois M, Anderson JR, Kuroshima H, Fujita K. Investigating reactions of squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) towards unequal food distributions in a tray-pulling paradigm. Primates 2020; 61:717-727. [PMID: 32356092 DOI: 10.1007/s10329-020-00821-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2019] [Accepted: 04/13/2020] [Indexed: 01/16/2023]
Abstract
The fact that squirrel monkeys do not routinely cooperate in the wild has been proposed to explain their failure to show disadvantageous inequity aversion (i.e., negative reactions when receiving less than a partner) in an experimental exchange. Here we assessed whether the use of a tray-pulling paradigm, allowing for a larger variety of unequal testing situations, would bring additional insights into inequity aversion in this species. Squirrel monkeys were tested in pairs in which only the donor could pull a tray baited with food to within reach of itself and a recipient. Using pairs with different social relationships, we examined donors' frequencies of pulling both in the presence and absence of a recipient, as well as across three different food distributions: equal, qualitative inequity (higher-value reward for the recipient), and quantitative inequity (no food reward for the donor). Results showed that female donors pulled the tray less often in the quantitative inequity condition with an out-group female recipient than when alone. However, such discrimination was not observed when females were with female in-group and male out-group recipients. By contrast, male donors did not adjust their pull frequencies according to the recipient's presence or identity (female and male out-group recipients). These results point towards possible disadvantageous inequity aversion in female squirrel monkeys. However, alternative hypotheses such as increased arousal caused by out-group female recipients cannot be ruled out. We discuss the data in line with major theories of inequity aversion and cooperation in primates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benoit Bucher
- Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan. .,Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Chiyoda, Tokyo, 102-0083, Japan.
| | - Maxime Bourgeois
- Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan
| | - James R Anderson
- Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan
| | - Hika Kuroshima
- Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan
| | - Kazuo Fujita
- Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Children’s Sense of Fairness as Equal Respect. Trends Cogn Sci 2019; 23:454-463. [DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2018] [Revised: 02/26/2019] [Accepted: 03/03/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|
12
|
Abstract
The study of inequity aversion in animals debuted with a report of the behaviour in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). This report generated many debates following a number of criticisms. Ultimately, however, the finding stimulated widespread interest, and multiple studies have since attempted to demonstrate inequity aversion in various other non-human animal species, with many positive results in addition to many studies in which no response to inequity was found. Domestic dogs represent an interesting case as, unlike many primates, they do not respond negatively to inequity in reward quality but do, however, respond negatively to being unrewarded in the presence of a rewarded partner. Numerous studies have been published on inequity aversion in dogs in recent years. Combining three tasks and seven peer-reviewed publications, over 140 individual dogs have been tested in inequity experiments. Consequently, dogs are one of the best studied species in this field and could offer insights into inequity aversion in other non-human animal species. In this review, we summarise and critically evaluate the current evidence for inequity aversion in dogs. Additionally, we provide a comprehensive discussion of two understudied aspects of inequity aversion, the underlying mechanisms and the ultimate function, drawing on the latest findings on these topics in dogs while also placing these developments in the context of what is known, or thought to be the case, in other non-human animal species. Finally, we highlight gaps in our understanding of inequity aversion in dogs and thereby identify potential avenues for future research in this area.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jim McGetrick
- Comparative Cognition Unit, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna & University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.
- Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Savoyenstraße 1a, 1160, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Friederike Range
- Comparative Cognition Unit, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna & University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria
- Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Savoyenstraße 1a, 1160, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Anderson JR, Bucher B, Chijiiwa H, Kuroshima H, Takimoto A, Fujita K. Third-party social evaluations of humans by monkeys and dogs. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2017; 82:95-109. [DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2016] [Revised: 12/11/2016] [Accepted: 01/04/2017] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
14
|
It’s not fair: Folk intuitions about disadvantageous and advantageous inequity aversion. JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING 2017. [DOI: 10.1017/s1930297500005830] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
AbstractPeople often object to inequity; they react negatively to receiving less than others (disadvantageous inequity aversion), and more than others (advantageous inequity aversion). Here we study people’s folk intuitions about inequity aversion: what do people infer about others’ fairness concerns, when they observe their reactions to disadvantageous or advantageous inequity? We hypothesized that, people would not intuitively regard disadvantageous inequity aversion by itself as being rooted in fairness, but they would regard advantageous inequity aversion by itself as being rooted in fairness. In four studies, we used vignettes describing inequity aversion of a made up alien species to assess people’s folk intuitions about inequity aversion. The studies supported our main hypothesis that disadvantageous inequity aversion, without advantageous inequity aversion, does not fit people’s folk conception of fairness. Instead, participants reported it to be rooted in envy. According to these results, the claim that disadvantageous inequity aversion reveals a concern with fairness, does not readily accord with people’s intuitions. We connect these findings to other pieces of evidence in the literatures of behavioral economics, developmental psychology, and social psychology, indicating that lay people’s intuitions may be on the mark in this case. Specifically, unlike advantageous inequity aversion, disadvantageous inequity aversion need not be rooted in a sense of fairness.
Collapse
|
15
|
Ulber J, Hamann K, Tomasello M. Young children, but not chimpanzees, are averse to disadvantageous and advantageous inequities. J Exp Child Psychol 2017; 155:48-66. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.10.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2016] [Revised: 10/31/2016] [Accepted: 10/31/2016] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|
16
|
Heaney M, Gray RD, Taylor AH. Kea show no evidence of inequity aversion. ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE 2017; 4:160461. [PMID: 28405351 PMCID: PMC5383808 DOI: 10.1098/rsos.160461] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2016] [Accepted: 02/17/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
It has been suggested that inequity aversion is a mechanism that evolved in humans to maximize the pay-offs from engaging in cooperative tasks and to foster long-term cooperative relationships between unrelated individuals. In support of this, evidence of inequity aversion in nonhuman animals has typically been found in species that, like humans, live in complex social groups and demonstrate cooperative behaviours. We examined inequity aversion in the kea (Nestor notabilis), which lives in social groups but does not appear to demonstrate wild cooperative behaviours, using a classic token exchange paradigm. We compared the number of successful exchanges and the number of abandoned trials in each condition and found no evidence of an aversion to inequitable outcomes when there was a difference between reward quality or working effort required between actor and partner. We also found no evidence of inequity aversion when the subject received no reward while their partner received a low-value reward.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan Heaney
- School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Russell D. Gray
- School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
- Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena, Germany
- Research School of the Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| | - Alex H. Taylor
- School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Völter CJ, Rossano F, Call J. Social manipulation in nonhuman primates: Cognitive and motivational determinants. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2016; 82:76-94. [PMID: 27639446 DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2016] [Revised: 09/09/2016] [Accepted: 09/13/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
Social interactions are the result of individuals' cooperative and competitive tendencies expressed over an extended period of time. Although social manipulation, i.e., using another individual to achieve one's own goals, is a crucial aspect of social interactions, there has been no comprehensive attempt to differentiate its various types and to map its cognitive and motivational determinants. For this purpose, we survey in this article the experimental literature on social interactions in nonhuman primates. We take social manipulation, illustrated by a case study with orangutans (Pongo abelii), as our starting point and move in two directions. First, we will focus on a flexibility/sociality axis that includes technical problem solving, social tool-use and communication. Second, we will focus on a motivational/prosociality axis that includes exploitation, cooperation, and helping. Combined, the two axes offer a way to capture a broad range of social interactions performed by human and nonhuman primates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C J Völter
- School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK; Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.
| | - F Rossano
- Department of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, USA
| | - J Call
- School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK; Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Mustoe AC, Harnisch AM, Hochfelder B, Cavanaugh J, French JA. Inequity aversion strategies between marmosets are influenced by partner familiarity and sex but not oxytocin. Anim Behav 2016; 114:69-79. [PMID: 27019514 PMCID: PMC4802974 DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.01.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
Cooperation among individuals depends, in large part, on a sense of fairness. Many cooperating non-human primates (NHPs) show inequity aversion, (i.e., negative responses to unequal outcomes), and these responses toward inequity likely evolved as a means to preserve the advantages of cooperative relationships. However, marmosets (Callithrix spp.) tend to show little or no inequity aversion, despite the high occurrence of prosociality and cooperative-breeding in callitrichid monkeys. Oxytocin [OXT] has been implicated in a wide variety of social processes, but little is known about whether OXT modulates inequity aversion toward others. We used a tray pulling task to evaluate whether marmosets would donate superior rewards to their long-term pairmate or an opposite-sex stranger following OXT, OXT antagonist, and saline treatments. We found that marmosets show inequity aversion, and this inequity aversion is socially- and sex-specific. Male marmosets show inequity aversion toward their pairmates but not strangers, and female marmosets do not show inequity aversion. OXT treatments did not significantly influence inequity aversion in marmosets. While OXT may modulate prosocial preferences, the motivations underlying cooperative relationships, such as inequity aversion, are multifaceted. More research is needed to evaluate the evolutionary origins, biological processes, and social contexts that influence complex phenotypes like inequity aversion. Inequity aversion can differ within species in important and distinct ways including between individuals who do and do not share a cooperative relationship. Overall, these findings support the view that inequity aversion is an important behavioural strategy for the maintenance of cooperative relationships.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aaryn C. Mustoe
- Callitrichid Research Center, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
- Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - April M. Harnisch
- Callitrichid Research Center, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
| | | | - Jon Cavanaugh
- Callitrichid Research Center, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
- Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Jeffrey A French
- Callitrichid Research Center, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
- Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
- Department of Biology, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Scaling reward value with demand curves versus preference tests. Anim Cogn 2016; 19:631-41. [PMID: 26908005 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-016-0967-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2015] [Revised: 01/19/2016] [Accepted: 02/10/2016] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
In Experiment 1, six capuchins lifted a weight during a 10-min session to receive a food piece. Across conditions, the weight was increased across six different amounts for three different food types. The number of food pieces obtained as a function of the weight lifted was fitted by a demand equation that is hypothesized to quantify food value. For most subjects, this analysis showed that the three food types differed little in value. In Experiment 2, these monkeys were given pairwise choices among these food types. In 13 of 18 comparisons, preferences at least equaled a 3-to-1 ratio; in seven comparisons, preference was absolute. There was no relation between values based on degree of preference versus values based on the demand equation. When choices in the present report were compared to similar data with these subjects from another study, between-study lability in preference emerged. This outcome contrasts with the finding in demand analysis that test-retest reliability is high. We attribute the unreliability and extreme assignment of value based on preference tests to high substitutability between foods. We suggest use of demand analysis instead of preference tests for studies that compare the values of different foods. A better strategy might be to avoid manipulating value by using different foods. Where possible, value should be manipulated by varying amounts of a single food type because, over an appropriate range, more food is consistently more valuable than less. Such an approach would be immune to problems in between-food substitutability.
Collapse
|
20
|
Schmitt V, Federspiel I, Eckert J, Keupp S, Tschernek L, Faraut L, Schuster R, Michels C, Sennhenn-Reulen H, Bugnyar T, Mussweiler T, Fischer J. Do monkeys compare themselves to others? Anim Cogn 2015; 19:417-28. [PMID: 26615416 PMCID: PMC4751161 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-015-0943-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2015] [Revised: 11/16/2015] [Accepted: 11/17/2015] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Social comparisons are a fundamental characteristic of human behaviour, yet relatively little is known about their evolutionary foundations. Adapting the co-acting paradigm from human research (Seta in J Pers Soc Psychol 42:281–291, 1982. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.42.2.281), we examined how the performance of a partner influenced subjects’ performance in long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis). Using parallel testing in touch screen setups in which subjects had to discriminate familiar and novel photographs of men and women, we investigated whether accuracy and reaction time were influenced by partner performance and relationship quality (affiliate vs. non-affiliate). Auditory feedback about the alleged performance of the co-actor was provided via playback; partner performance was either moderately or extremely better or worse than subject performance. We predicted that subjects would assimilate to moderately different comparison standards as well as to affiliates and contrast away from extreme standards and non-affiliates. Subjects instantly generalized to novel pictures. While accuracy was not affected by any of the factors, long reaction times occurred more frequently when subjects were tested with a non-affiliate who was performing worse, compared to one who was doing better than them (80 % quantile worse: 5.1, better: 4.3 s). For affiliate co-actors, there was no marked effect (worse: 4.4, better: 4.6 s). In a control condition with no auditory feedback, subjects performed somewhat better in the presence of affiliates (M = 77.8 % correct) compared to non-affiliates (M = 71.1 %), while reaction time was not affected. Apparently, subjects were sensitive to partner identity and performance, yet variation in motivation rather than assimilation and contrast effects may account for the observed effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vanessa Schmitt
- Social Cognition Center Cologne, University of Cologne, Richard-Strauss-Str. 2, 50931, Cologne, Germany.,Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, German Primate Center, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Ira Federspiel
- Department of Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Johanna Eckert
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, German Primate Center, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Stefanie Keupp
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, German Primate Center, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany.,Leibniz ScienceCampus Primate Cognition, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Laura Tschernek
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, German Primate Center, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Lauriane Faraut
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, German Primate Center, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Richard Schuster
- Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada
| | - Corinna Michels
- Social Cognition Center Cologne, University of Cologne, Richard-Strauss-Str. 2, 50931, Cologne, Germany
| | | | - Thomas Bugnyar
- Department of Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Thomas Mussweiler
- Social Cognition Center Cologne, University of Cologne, Richard-Strauss-Str. 2, 50931, Cologne, Germany
| | - Julia Fischer
- Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, German Primate Center, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany. .,Leibniz ScienceCampus Primate Cognition, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, Göttingen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|