1
|
Rosati AG, Felsche E, Cole MF, Atencia R, Rukundo J. Flexible information-seeking in chimpanzees. Cognition 2024; 251:105898. [PMID: 39059117 PMCID: PMC11343684 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105898] [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: 01/05/2024] [Revised: 07/11/2024] [Accepted: 07/17/2024] [Indexed: 07/28/2024]
Abstract
Humans can flexibly use metacognition to monitor their own knowledge and strategically acquire new information when needed. While humans can deploy these skills across a variety of contexts, most evidence for metacognition in animals has focused on simple situations, such as seeking out information about the location of food. Here, we examine the flexibility, breadth, and limits of this skill in chimpanzees. We tested semi-free-ranging chimpanzees on a novel task where they could seek information by standing up to peer into different containers. In Study 1, we tested n = 47 chimpanzees to assess if chimpanzees would spontaneously engage in information-seeking without prior experience, as well as to characterize individual variation in this propensity. We found that many chimpanzees engaged in information-seeking with minimal experience, and that younger chimpanzees and females were more likely to do so. In two subsequent studies, we then further tested chimpanzees who initially showed robust information-seeking on new variations of this task, to disentangle the cognitive processing shaping their behaviors. In Study 2, we examined how a subset of n = 12 chimpanzees applied these skills to seek information about the location versus the identity of rewards, and found that chimpanzees were equally adept at seeking out location and identity information. In Study 3, we examined whether a subset of n = 6 chimpanzees could apply these skills to make more efficacious decisions when faced with uncertainty about reward payoffs. Chimpanzees were able to use information-seeking to resolve risk and choose more optimally when faced with uncertain payoffs, although they often also engaged in information-seeking when it was not strictly necessary. These results identify core features of flexible metacognition that chimpanzees share with humans, as well as constraints that may represent key evolutionary shifts in human cognition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra G Rosati
- Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| | - Elisa Felsche
- Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Megan F Cole
- Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | | | - Joshua Rukundo
- Ngamba Island Chimpanzee Sanctuary / Chimpanzee Trust, Entebbe, Uganda
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Houston AI, Rosenström TH. A critical review of risk-sensitive foraging. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2024; 99:478-495. [PMID: 37987237 DOI: 10.1111/brv.13031] [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: 02/28/2023] [Revised: 10/31/2023] [Accepted: 11/01/2023] [Indexed: 11/22/2023]
Abstract
Foraging is risk sensitive if choices depend on the variability of returns from the options as well as their mean return. Risk-sensitive foraging is important in behavioural ecology, psychology and neurophysiology. It has been explained both in terms of mechanisms and in terms of evolutionary advantage. We provide a critical review, evaluating both mechanistic and evolutionary accounts. Some derivations of risk sensitivity from mechanistic models based on psychophysics are not convincing because they depend on an inappropriate use of Jensen's inequality. Attempts have been made to link risk sensitivity to the ecology of a species, but again these are not convincing. The field of risk-sensitive foraging has provided a focus for theoretical and empirical work and has yielded important insights, but we lack a simple and empirically defendable general account of it in either mechanistic or evolutionary terms. However, empirical analysis of choice sequences under theoretically motivated experimental designs and environmental settings appears a promising avenue for mapping the scope and relative merits of existing theories. Simply put, the devil is in the sequence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alasdair I Houston
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TQ, UK
| | - Tom H Rosenström
- Department of Psychology and Logopedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, PL 21 (Haartmaninkatu 3), 00014, Helsinki, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Haux LM, Engelmann JM, Arslan RC, Hertwig R, Herrmann E. Chimpanzee and Human Risk Preferences Show Key Similarities. Psychol Sci 2023; 34:358-369. [PMID: 36595467 DOI: 10.1177/09567976221140326] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Risk preference impacts how people make key life decisions related to health, wealth, and well-being. Systematic variations in risk-taking behavior can be the result of differences in fitness expectations, as predicted by life-history theory. Yet the evolutionary roots of human risk-taking behavior remain poorly understood. Here, we studied risk preferences of chimpanzees (86 Pan troglodytes; 47 females; age = 2-40 years) using a multimethod approach that combined observer ratings with behavioral choice experiments. We found that chimpanzees' willingness to take risks shared structural similarities with that of humans. First, chimpanzees' risk preference manifested as a traitlike preference that was consistent across domains and measurements. Second, chimpanzees were ambiguity averse. Third, males were more risk prone than females. Fourth, the appetite for risk showed an inverted-U-shaped relation to age and peaked in young adulthood. Our findings suggest that key dimensions of risk preference appear to emerge independently of the influence of human cultural evolution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lou M Haux
- Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development
| | - Jan M Engelmann
- Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley
| | - Ruben C Arslan
- Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development
| | - Ralph Hertwig
- Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development
| | - Esther Herrmann
- Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rationality and cognitive bias in captive gorillas' and orang-utans' economic decision-making. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0278150. [PMID: 36516129 PMCID: PMC9749992 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2021] [Accepted: 11/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Human economic decision-making sometimes appears to be irrational. Partly, this is due to cognitive biases that can lead to suboptimal economic choices and context-dependent risk-preferences. A pertinent question is whether such biases are part of our evolutionary heritage or whether they are culturally acquired. To address this, we tested gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and orang-utans (Pongo abelii) with two risk-assessment experiments that differed in how risk was presented. For both experiments, we found that subjects increased their preferences for the risky options as their expected gains increased, showing basic understanding of reward contingencies and rational decision-making. However, we also found consistent differences in risk proneness between the two experiments, as subjects were risk-neutral in one experiment and risk-prone in the other. We concluded that gorillas and orang-utans are economically rational but that their decisions can interact with pre-existing cognitive biases which modulates their risk-preference in context-dependent ways, explaining the variability of their risk-preference in previous literature.
Collapse
|
5
|
Reward type influences adults’ rejections of inequality in a task designed for children. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0272710. [PMID: 35972978 PMCID: PMC9380955 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272710] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2021] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
In the context of economic games, adults sacrifice money to avoid unequal outcomes, showing so-called inequity aversion. Child-friendly adaptations of these games have shown that children, too, show inequity aversion. Moreover, inequity aversion shows a clear developmental trajectory, with young children rejecting only disadvantageously unequal distributions and older children rejecting both disadvantageously and advantageously unequal distributions. However, based on existing work, it is difficult to compare adult and child responses to inequity because (1) adapting economic games to make them child-friendly may importantly alter the dynamics of the fairness interaction and (2) adult work typically uses abstract rewards such as money while work with children typically uses more concrete rewards like candy, stickers or toys. Here we adapted the Inequity Game—a paradigm designed to study children’s responses to inequality in isolation from other concerns—to test inequity aversion in adults (N = 104 pairs). We manipulated whether participants made decisions about concrete rewards (candy) or abstract rewards (tokens that could be traded in for money). We found that, like children, adults rejected unequal payoffs in this task. Additionally, we found that reward type mattered: adults rejected disadvantageous—but not advantageous—monetary distributions, yet rejected both disadvantageous and advantageous candy distributions. These findings allow us to draw clearer comparisons across child and adult responses to unfairness and help paint a fuller picture of inequity aversion in humans.
Collapse
|
6
|
Discounting for Money, Food, and Sex, over the Menstrual Cycle. EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s40806-022-00334-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Sexual desire, physical activity, economic choices and other behaviours fluctuate over the menstrual cycle. However, we have an incomplete understanding of how preferences for smaller sooner or larger later rewards (known as delay discounting) change over the menstrual cycle. In this pre-registered, cross-sectional study, Bayesian linear and quadratic binomial regression analyses provide compelling evidence that delay discounting does change over the menstrual cycle. Data from 203 naturally cycling women show increased discounting (preference for more immediate rewards) mid-cycle, which is at least partially driven by changes in fertility. This study provides evidence for a robust and broad-spectrum increase in delay discounting (Cohen’s h ranging from 0.1 to 0.4) around the fertile point in the menstrual cycle across multiple commodities (money, food, and sex). We also show, for the first time, that discounting changes over the menstrual cycle in a pseudo-control group of 99 women on hormonal contraception. Interestingly, such women increase their discounting of sex toward the end of the menstrual phase — possibly reflecting a prioritisation of bonding-related sexual activity before menstrual onset.
Collapse
|
7
|
Human choices respond to added costs according to the energy budget rule. LEARNING AND MOTIVATION 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.lmot.2021.101745] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
|
8
|
Dopaminergic modulation of reward discounting in healthy rats: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2021; 238:711-723. [PMID: 33215269 DOI: 10.1007/s00213-020-05723-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2020] [Accepted: 11/13/2020] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE Although numerous studies have suggested that pharmacological alteration of the dopamine (DA) system modulates reward discounting, these studies have produced inconsistent findings. OBJECTIVES Here, we conducted a systematic review and pre-registered meta-analysis to evaluate DA drug-mediated effects on reward discounting of time, probability, and effort costs in studies of healthy rats. This produced a total of 1343 articles to screen for inclusion/exclusion. From the literature, we identified 117 effects from approximately 1549 individual rats. METHODS Using random effects with maximum-likelihood estimation, we meta-analyzed placebo-controlled drug effects for (1) DA D1-like receptor agonists and (2) antagonists, (3) D2-like agonists and (4) antagonists, and (5) DA transporter-modulating drugs. RESULTS Meta-analytic effects showed that DAT-modulating drugs decreased reward discounting. While D1-like and D2-like antagonists both increased discounting, agonist drugs for those receptors had no significant effect on discounting behavior. A number of these effects appear contingent on study design features like cost type, rat strain, and microinfusion location. CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest a nuanced relationship between DA and discounting behavior and urge caution when drawing generalizations about the effects of pharmacologically manipulating dopamine on reward-based decision-making.
Collapse
|
9
|
Haux LM, Engelmann JM, Herrmann E, Hertwig R. How chimpanzees decide in the face of social and nonsocial uncertainty. Anim Behav 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2021.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
|
10
|
De Petrillo F, Rosati AG. Variation in primate decision-making under uncertainty and the roots of human economic behaviour. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2021; 376:20190671. [PMID: 33423637 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Uncertainty is a ubiquitous component of human economic behaviour, yet people can vary in their preferences for risk across populations, individuals and different points in time. As uncertainty also characterizes many aspects of animal decision-making, comparative research can help evaluate different potential mechanisms that generate this variation, including the role of biological differences or maturational change versus cultural learning, as well as identify human-unique components of economic decision-making. Here, we examine decision-making under risk across non-human primates, our closest relatives. We first review theoretical approaches and current methods for understanding decision-making in animals. We then assess the current evidence for variation in animal preferences between species and populations, between individuals based on personality, sex and age, and finally, between different contexts and individual states. We then use these primate data to evaluate the processes that can shape human decision-making strategies and identify the primate foundations of human economic behaviour. This article is part of the theme issue 'Existence and prevalence of economic behaviours among non-human primates'.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca De Petrillo
- Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, Toulouse, Occitanie, France.,Unità di Primatologia Cognitiva e Centro Primati, Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Roma, Lazio, Italy.,Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Alexandra G Rosati
- Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.,Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
De Petrillo F, Paoletti M, Bellagamba F, Manzi G, Paglieri F, Addessi E. Contextual factors modulate risk preferences in adult humans. Behav Processes 2020; 176:104137. [PMID: 32417185 DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2020.104137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2019] [Revised: 04/30/2020] [Accepted: 05/05/2020] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
Humans have generally been considered risk averse for gains. Yet, growing evidence shows that risk preferences may change across reward currencies and depend on the type of tasks used to measure them. Here, we examined how context affects human risk preferences to shed light on the psychological mechanisms underlying human decision-making under risk. Participants were presented with a descriptive risky choice task involving repeated choices between real options and they were provided with trial-by-trial feedback. We manipulated the type of reward and, for the first time, the format of the choice stimuli. Options were either 2D computer-based images or concrete 3D objects, and participants received food or money as reward. First, we found that participants were more risk-seeking for food compared to money, suggesting that people treat money differently from consumable rewards. Second, we found that people were more risk-seeking when they made choices between concrete 3D objects than between 2D computer-based images. Our results strengthened the evidence that human choice patterns may change depending on the context and, for the first time, showed that the format of the choice stimuli does affect risk preferences, an important consideration for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca De Petrillo
- Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, France; CNR, Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione, Unità di Primatologia Cognitiva e Centro Primati, Rome, Italy; University of Michigan, Department of Psychology
| | - Melania Paoletti
- "Sapienza" Università di Roma, Dipartimento di Psicologia Dinamica e Clinica, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Bellagamba
- "Sapienza" Università di Roma, Dipartimento di Psicologia Dinamica e Clinica, Rome, Italy
| | - Giorgio Manzi
- "Sapienza" Università di Roma, Dipartimento di Biologia Ambientale, Rome, Italy
| | - Fabio Paglieri
- CNR, Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione, Goal-Oriented Agents Lab, Rome, Italy
| | - Elsa Addessi
- CNR, Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione, Unità di Primatologia Cognitiva e Centro Primati, Rome, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Helversen B, Coppin G, Scheibehenne B. Money does not stink: Using unpleasant odors as stimulus material changes risky decision making. JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING 2020. [DOI: 10.1002/bdm.2178] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Bettina Helversen
- Department of Psychology University of Bremen Bremen Germany
- Department of Psychology University of Zurich Zürich Switzerland
| | - Géraldine Coppin
- Department of Psychology University of Geneva Geneva Switzerland
- Swiss Center for Affective Sciences University of Geneva Geneva Switzerland
- Department of Psychology Distance Learning University, Switzerland (UniDistance) Sierre Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
De Petrillo F, Rosati AG. Ecological rationality: Convergent decision-making in apes and capuchins. Behav Processes 2019; 164:201-213. [DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2019.05.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2018] [Revised: 05/02/2019] [Accepted: 05/08/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
14
|
Madan CR. Motivated Cognition: Effects of Reward, Emotion, and Other Motivational Factors Across a Variety of Cognitive Domains. COLLABRA-PSYCHOLOGY 2017. [DOI: 10.1525/collabra.111] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
A growing body of literature has demonstrated that motivation influences cognitive processing. The breadth of these effects is extensive and span influences of reward, emotion, and other motivational processes across all cognitive domains. As examples, this scope includes studies of emotional memory, value-based attentional capture, emotion effects on semantic processing, reward-related biases in decision making, and the role of approach/avoidance motivation on cognitive scope. Additionally, other less common forms of motivation–cognition interactions, such as self-referential and motoric processing can also be considered instances of motivated cognition. Here I outline some of the evidence indicating the generality and pervasiveness of these motivation influences on cognition, and introduce the associated ‘research nexus’ at Collabra: Psychology.
Collapse
|
15
|
|
16
|
Stieglitz J, Gurven M, Kaplan H, Hopfensitz A. Why household inefficiency? An experimental approach to assess spousal resource distribution preferences in a subsistence population undergoing socioeconomic change. EVOL HUM BEHAV 2017. [DOI: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|