Context-dependent utility overrides absolute memory as a determinant of choice

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 107, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 508-512

  Pompilio, Lorena ^a,b   Kacelnik, Alex ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Decision making; Optimal foraging; Rationality; Starling; State dependent preferences

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; FITNESS; KNOWLEDGE; LEARNING; MEMORY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STARLING;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; HUMANS; LEARNING; MEMORY; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; STARLINGS;

STURNIDAE;

EID: 76249122583     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0907250107     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bernoulli D (1954) Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of Risk, 1738. Translation. Econometrica 22:23-36.
2. Capaldi E, Myers DE, Champbell DH, Sheffer JD (1983) Conditioned flavor preferences based on hunger level during original flavor exposure. Anim Learn Behav 11:107-115.
3. Kacelnik A, Marsh B (2002) Cost can increase preference in starlings. Anim Behav 63: 245-250.
4. Schuck-Paim C, Pompilio L, Kacelnik A (2004) State-dependent decisions cause apparent violations of rationality in animal choice. PLoS Biol 2:2305-2315.
5. Marsh B, Schuck-Paim C, Kacelnik A (2004) Energetic state during learning affects foraging choices in starlings. Behav Ecol 15:396-399.
6. Aw JM, Holbrook RI, Burt de Perera T, Kacelnik A (2009) State-dependent valuation learning in fish: Banded tetras prefer stimuli associated with greater past deprivation. Behav Processes 81:333-336.
7. Pompilio L, Kacelnik A, Behmer S (2006) State-dependent learned valuation drives choice in an invertebrate. Science 311:1613-1615.
8. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1986) Rational choice and the framing of decisions. J Bus 59: 251-278.
9. Slovic P (1995) The construction of preference. Am Psychol 50:364-371.
10. Pompilio L, Kacelnik A (2005) State-dependent learning and suboptimal choice: When starlings prefer long over short delays to food. Anim Behav 70:571-578.
11. Shafir EB, Osherson DN, Smith EE (1993) The advantage model: A comparative theory of evaluation and choice under risk. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 55:325-378.
12. Belke TW (1992) Stimulus preference and the transitivity of preference. Anim Learn Behav 20:401-406.
13. Gibbon J (1995) Dynamics of time matching: Arousal makes better seem worse. Psychon Bull Rev 2:208-215.
14. Gallistel CR, Gibbon J (2000) Time, rate and conditioning. Psychol Rev 107:289-344.
15. Wedell DH (1991) Distinguishing among models of contextually induced preference reversals. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 17:767-778.
16. Shapiro MS, Siller S, Kacelnik A (2008) Simultaneous and sequential choice as a function of reward delay and magnitude: Normative, descriptive and process-based models tested in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 34:75-93.
17. Bateson M (1993) Currencies for decision making: The foraging starling as a model animal. PhD dissertation (Univ of Oxford, Oxford).
18. Catania AC (1970) Reinforcement schedules and psychophysical judgments. Theory of reinforcement schedules, ed Schoenfeld WN (Appleton-Century- Crofts, New York), pp 1-42.
19. Roberts S (1981) Isolation of an internal clock. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 7: 242-268.