Two's company? Solitary vixens’ motivations for seeking social contact

Social familiarity and reinforcement value: a behavioral-economic analysis of demand for social interaction with cagemate and non-cagemate female rats

Rats were studied in social reinforcement procedures in which lever presses opened a door separating two adjacent spaces, permitting access to social interaction with a partner rat. The number of lever presses required for social interaction was systematically increased across blocks of sessions according to fixed-ratio schedules, generating demand functions at three different social reinforcement durations: 10 s, 30 s, and 60 s. The social partner rats were cagemates in one phase, and non-cagemates in a second phase. The rate at which social interactions were produced declined with the fixed-ratio price, and was well described by an exponential model that has been successfully employed with a range of social and non-social reinforcers. None of the main parameters of the model varied systematically with social interaction duration or with the social familiarity of the partner rat. On the whole, the results provide further evidence of the reinforcing value of social interaction, and its functional parallels with non-social reinforcers.

Social preference in rats

Rats were given repeated choices between social and nonsocial outcomes, and between familiar and unfamiliar social outcomes. Lever presses on either of 2 levers in the middle chamber of a 3-chamber apparatus opened a door adjacent to the lever, permitting 45-s access to social interaction with the rat in the chosen side chamber. In Experiment 1, rats preferred (a) social over nonsocial options, choosing their cagemate rat over an empty chamber, and (b) an unfamiliar over a familiar rat, choosing a non-cagemate over their cagemate. These findings were replicated in Experiment 2 with 2 different non-cagemate rats. Rats preferred both non-cagemate rats to a similar degree when pitted against their cagemate, but were indifferent when the 2 non-cagemates were pitted against each other. Similar preference for social over nonsocial and non-cagemate over cagemate was seen in Experiment 3, with new non-cagemate rats introduced after every third session. Response rates (for both cagemate and non-cagemate rats) were elevated under conditions of nonsocial (isolated) housing compared to conditions of social (paired) housing, demonstrating a social deprivation effect. Together, the experiments contribute to an experimental analysis of social preference within a social reinforcement framework, drawing on methods with proven efficacy in the analysis of reinforcement more generally.

Single- or Pair-Housed: Which Is Better for Captive Southern Tamanduas?

The captive environment can limit some important behavioral options for nonhuman animals, which often results in decreased welfare. The companion of a conspecific can be a source of complexity in captivity, but this aspect has received little attention for solitary species. This study investigated the effects of two different housing conditions on the behavior of a solitary species, the Southern tamandua (Tamandua tetradactyla). Six individuals housed singly and four housed in pairs in two Brazilian zoological institutions were observed for 10 days from 09:00h to 17:00h during the rainy season. Each individual was observed for 26:40 hours. Compared with singly housed tamanduas, paired animals were less inactive (single = 74.62 ± 5.2%, paired = 28.51 ± 0.04% of the records), foraged and explored more (single = 11.07 ± 3.0%, paired 31.48 ± 0.01% of the records), and exhibited a diversity of behaviors 102.56% greater than single tamanduas. These results suggest that interactions with conspecifics in captivity, even for solitary animals, can promote the performance of desirable behaviors, which in several species has been correlated with improved welfare.

To free, or not to free: Social reinforcement effects in the social release paradigm with rats

The present research measured social reinforcement in rats, using a social-release procedure in which lever presses permitted 10-s access to a familiar social partner. The work requirements for reinforcement increased systematically according to progressive-ratio (PR) schedules. Social and food reinforcement value were compared across blocks of sessions (Experiment 1) and concurrently within the same sessions (Experiment 2). To assess motivational effects, response and reinforcer rates for both reinforcer types were studied under food restriction, social restriction, and combined food and social restriction. Responding was maintained by both reinforcers, albeit at substantially higher levels for food than for social access. Responding for social access decreased to low levels under extinction conditions, demonstrating functional control by the social-reinforcement contingency. Sensitivity to social restriction was seen in some conditions in Experiment 2, in which social reinforcers were earned earlier in the session (at lower food prices) under social restriction than under the other deprivation conditions. Altogether, results are consistent with a social reinforcement conceptualization, and demonstrate an important role for social contact in social release behavior. The study demonstrates a promising set of methods for analyzing and quantifying social reinforcement.