Less means more for pigeons but not always

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 21, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1623-1628

  Zentall, Thomas R ^a   Laude, Jennifer R ^a   Case, Jacob P ^a   Daniels, Carter W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Affective heuristic; Less is more effect; Level ofmotivation; Paradoxical choice; Pigeons; Suboptimal choice

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; DECISION MAKING; FOOD; MOTIVATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PIGEONS AND DOVES;

ANIMALS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COLUMBIDAE; FOOD; MOTIVATION;

EID: 84912032597     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-014-0626-1     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Chernev, A. (2011). The dieter's paradox. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21, 178-183. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2010.08.002
2. Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). The affect heuristic in judgment of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 1-17.
3. Hsee, C. K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 247-257.
4. Hsee, C. K. (1998). Less is better: When low-value options are valued more highly than high-value options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 107-121.
5. Hsee, C. K., Loewenstein, G. F., Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. H. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 576-590.
6. Hsee, C. K., & Zhang, J. A. (2004). Distinction bias: Misprediction and mischoice due to joint evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 680-695.
7. Hsee, C. K., & Zhang, J. A. (2010). General evaluability theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 343-355.
8. Kralik, J.D., Xu, E. R., Knight, E. J., Khan, S.A.,&Levine, J.W. (2012). When less ismore: Evolutionary origins of the affect heuristic. PLoS ONE, 7, e46240. doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0046240
9. Laude, J. R., Pattison, K. F., & Zentall, T. R. (2012). Hungry pigeons make suboptimal choices, less hungry pigeons do not. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 884-891. doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0282-2
10. List, J. A. (2002). Reversals of a different kind: The "more is less" phenomenon. American Economic Review, 92, 1636-1643.
11. MacArthur, R. H.,& Pianka, E. R. (1966). On the optimal use of a patchy environment. American Naturalist, 100, 33-46.
12. Pattison, K. F., & Zentall, T. R. (in press). Suboptimal choice by dogs: When less is better than more. Animal Cognition. doi:10.1007/ s10071-014-0735-2
13. Pelham, B.W., & Neter, E. (1995). The effect of motivation of judgment depends on the difficulty of the judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 581-594.
14. Pelham, B. W., Sumarta, T. T., & Myaskovsky, L. (1994). The easy path from many to much: The numerosity heuristic. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 103-133. doi:10.1006/cogp.1994.1004
15. Poling, A., Nickel, M., & Alling, K. (1990). Free birds aren't fat:Weight gain in captured wild pigeons maintained under laboratory conditions. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 423- 424.
16. Rottenstreich, Y., & Hsee, C. K. (2001). Money, kisses, and electric shocks: On the affective psychology of risk. Psychological Science, 12, 185-190.
17. Shapiro, M. S., 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). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior, 34, 75-93. doi:10.1037/0097-7403. 34.1.75
18. Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). The affect heuristic. In T. Gilovich, D. W. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 397-420). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit- formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482.