Energy budget versus temporal discounting as determinants of preference in risky choice

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 67, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 147-156

  Orduña, Vladimir ^a   Bouzas, Arturo ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Choice; Delay reduction theory; Energy budget rule; Hyperbolic value added model; Pigeon; Reinforcer delay; Ring dove

Indexed keywords

ENERGY BUDGET; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; RISK FACTOR; TEMPORAL ANALYSIS;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DOVE; ENERGY CONSERVATION; FOOD AVAILABILITY; FORAGING; INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING; MODEL; NONHUMAN; PIGEON; PREDICTION; REINFORCEMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT; STIMULATION; THEORETICAL STUDY; TIME;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COLUMBIDAE; ENERGY METABOLISM; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); RISK-TAKING;

COLUMBA; COLUMBIFORMES;

EID: 3042710735     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2004.03.019     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Abarca N., Fantino E. Choice and foraging. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 38:1982;117-123
2. Abarca N., Fantino E., Ito M. Percentage reward in an operant analogue of foraging. Anim. Behav. 33:1985;1096-1101
3. Banschbach V.S., Waddington K.D. Risk-sensitivity in honey-bees - no consensus among individual and no effect of colony honey stores. Anim. Behav. 47:1994;933-941
4. Battalio R.C., Kagel J.H., MacDonald D.N. Animal's choices over uncertain outcomes: Some initial experimental results. Am. Econ. Rev. 75:1985;597-613
5. Bautista L.M., Martin B., Martínez L., Mayo C. Risk-sensitive foraging in coal tits. Behaviour. 138(1):2001;69-83
6. Barnard C.J., Brown C.A.J. Risk sensitive foraging in common shrews (Sorex araneous L.). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 16:1985;161-164
7. Brito e Abreu F., Kacelnik A. Energy budgets and risk-sensitive foraging in starlings. Behav. Ecol. 10:1999;338-345
8. Caraco T. On foraging time allocation in a stochastic environment. Ecology. 61:1980;119-128
9. Caraco T. Aspects of risk aversion in foraging white crowned sparrows. Anim. Behav. 30:1982;719-727
10. Caraco T. White crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophris) foraging preferences in a risky environment. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 12:1983;63-69
11. Caraco T., Blanckenhorn W.U., Gregory G.M., Newman J.A., Recer G.M., Zwicker S.M. Risk-sensitivity: ambient temperature affects foraging choice. Anim. Behav. 39:1990;338-345
12. Caraco T., Martindale S., Whittam T. An empirical demonstration of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Anim. Behav. 28:1980;820-830
13. Cartar R.W. A test of risk sensitive foraging in bumble bees. Ecology. 72:1991;888-895
14. Cartar R.W., Dill L.M. Why are bumble bees risk sensitive foragers? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 26:1990;121-127
15. Case D.A., Nichols P., Fantino E. Pigeon's preference for variable-interval water reinforcement under varied water budgets. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 64:1995;299-311
16. Croy M.I., Hughes R.N. Effects of food supply, hunger, danger and competition on choice of foraging location by the fifteen-spined stickleback, Spinachia spinachia L. Anim. Behav. 42:1991;131-139
17. Charnov E.L. Optimal foraging: attack strategy of a mantid. Am. Nat. 110:1976;141-151
18. Davison M.C. Preference for mixed interval versus fixed interval schedules. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 12:1969;247-252
19. Davison M.C. Preference for mixed interval versus fixed intervals: number of component intervals. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 17:1972;169-176
20. Fantino E. Preference for mixed-versus fixed-ratio schedules. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 10:1967;35-43
21. Fantino E. Choice and rate of reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 12:1969;723-730
22. Fantino E., Abarca N. Choice, optimal foraging and the delay-reduction hypothesis. Behav. Brain Sci. 8:1985;315-362
23. Goldshmidt J.N., Fantino E. Differences, not ratios, control choice in an experimental analogue to foraging. Psychol. Sci. 11(3):2000;229-233
24. Goldshmidt J.N., Fantino E. Economic context and pigeons' risk-taking: an integrative approach. Behav. Process. 65(2):2004;133-154
25. Ha J.C., Lehner P.N., Farley S.D. Risk-prone foraging behaviour in captive grey jays Perisoreus canadensis. Anim. Behav. 39:1990;91-96
26. Hastajarjo T., Silberberg A., Hursh S.R. Risky choice as a function of amount and variance in food supply. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 53:1990;155-161
27. Herrnstein R.J. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 4:1961;267-272
28. Herrnstein R.J. Secondary reinforcement and rate of primary reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 7:1964a;27-36
29. Herrnstein R.J. Aperiodicity as a factor in choice. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 7:1964b;179-182
30. Hursh S.R. Economic concepts for the analysis of behavior. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 34:1980;219-238
31. Ito M., Fantino E. Choice, foraging and reinforcer duration. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 46:1986;93-103
32. Kacelnik A., Bateson M. Risky theories - the effects of variance on foraging decisions. Am. Zool. 36:1996;402-434
33. Kagel J.H., MacDonald D.N., Battalio R.C., White S., Green L. Risk aversion in rats (Rattus norvegicus) under varying levels of resource availability. J. Comp. Psychol. 100:1986;95-110
34. Killeen P. On the measurement of reinforcement frequency in the study of preference. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 11:1968;263-269
35. Lawes M.J., Perrin M.R. Risk sensitive foraging behaviour of the round eared elephant shrew (Macroscelides proboscideus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 37:1995;31-37
36. Lea S.E.G. Foraging and reinforcement schedules in the pigeon: optimal and non-optimal aspects of choice. Anim. Behav. 27:1979;875-886
37. Logan F.A. Decision making by rats: uncertain outcome choices. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 59:1965;246-251
38. Mazur J.E. Test of an equivalence rule for fixed and variable reinforcer delays. J. Exp. Psychol.: Anim. Behev. Process. 10:1984;426-436
39. Mazur J.E. Fixed and variable ratios and delays: further tests of an equivalence rule. J. Exp. Psychol.: Anim. Behav. Process. 12:1986;116-124
40. Mazur, J.E., 1987. An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In: Commons, M.L., Mazur, J.E., Nevin, J.A., Rachlin H. (Eds.), Quantitative Analyses of Behavior: The Effect of Delay and of Intervening Events on Reinforcement Value. Erlbaum, New Jersey, pp. 55-73.
41. Mazur J.E. Hyperbolic value addition and general models of animal choice. Psychol. Rev. 108:2001;96-112
42. Mazur J.E. Effects of free-food deliveries and delays on choice under concurrent-chains schedules. Behav. Process. 64:2003;251-260
43. Myerson J., Green L. Discounting of delayed rewards: models of individual choice. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 64:1995;263-276
44. Perez S.M., Waddington K.D. Carpenter bee (Xilocopa micans) risk indifference and a review of nectarivore risk sensitivity studies. Am. Zool. 36:1996;435-446
45. Pietras C.J., Hackenberg T.D. Risk-sensitive choice in humans as a function of an earnings budget. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 76:2001;1-19
46. Pietras C.J., Locey M.L., Hackenberg T.D. Human risky choice under temporal constraints: tests on an energy-budget model. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 80:2003;59-74
47. Pubols B.H. Constant versus variable delay to reinforcement. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 55:1962;52-56
48. Rabin M., Thaler R.H. Risk aversion. J. Econ. Perspect. 15(1):2001;219-232
49. Rider P. Preference for mixed versus constant delays of reinforcement: effect of probability of the short, mixed delay. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 39:1983;257-266
50. Schoener, T.W., 1987. A brief history of optimal foraging ecology. In: Kamil, A.C., Krebs, J.R., Pulliam, H.R. (Eds.), Foraging Behavior. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 5-67.
51. Stephens, D.W., Krebs. J.R., 1986. Foraging Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
52. Zabludoff S.D., Wecker J., Caraco T. Foraging choice in laboratory rats: constant vs. variable delays. Behav. Process. 16:1988;95-110