State-dependent learning and suboptimal choice: when starlings prefer long over short delays to food

Recent studies have used labels such as ‘work ethics’, ‘sunk costs’ and ‘state-dependent preferences’ for apparent anomalies in animals' choices. They suggest that preference between options relates to the options' history, rather than depending exclusively on the expected payoffs. For instance, European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris, trained to obtain identical food rewards from two sources while in two levels of hunger preferred the food source previously associated with higher hunger, regardless of the birds' state at the time of testing. We extended this experimentally and theoretically by studying starlings choosing between sources that differed not only in history but also in the objective properties (delay until reward) of the payoffs they delivered. Two options (PF and H) were initially presented in single-option sessions when subjects were, respectively, prefed or hungry. While option PF offered a delay until reward of 10 s in all treatments, option H delivered delays of 10, 12.5, 15 and 17.5 s in four treatments. When training was completed, we tested preference between the options. When delays in both options were equal (10 s), the birds strongly preferred H. When delay in H was 17.5 s, the birds were indifferent, with intermediate results for intermediate treatments. Preference was not mediated by disrupted knowledge of the delays. Thus, preferences were driven by past state-dependent gains, rather than by the joint effect of the birds' state at the time of choice and knowledge of the absolute properties of each alternative, as assumed in state-dependent, path-independent models of optimal choice.

[1]  J. Gibbon,et al.  Timing and time perception. , 1984, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[2]  Alex Kacelnik,et al.  Timing and Foraging: Gibbon's Scalar Expectancy Theory and Optimal Patch Exploitation , 2002 .

[3]  P. Bednekoff Models of Adaptive Behaviour: An Approach based on State , 2000, Animal Behaviour.

[4]  Alex Kacelnik,et al.  Energetic state during learning affects foraging choices in starlings , 2004 .

[5]  D J McFarland,et al.  The behavioural final common path. , 1975, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[6]  T. Zentall,et al.  “work ethic” in pigeons: Reward value is directly related to the effort or time required to obtain the reward , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[7]  D. Bernoulli Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis : translated into German and English , 1967 .

[8]  P R Killeen,et al.  Incentive Theory III: Adaptive Clocks , 1984, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[9]  D. Bernoulli Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk , 1954 .

[10]  K. Berridge,et al.  What is the role of dopamine in reward: hedonic impact, reward learning, or incentive salience? , 1998, Brain Research Reviews.

[11]  M. Cabanac Pleasure: the common currency. , 1992, Journal of theoretical biology.

[12]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Cost can increase preference in starlings , 2002, Animal Behaviour.

[13]  R. Lemberg,et al.  Reaction between Catalase and Hydrogen Peroxide , 1948, Nature.

[14]  R. Dawkins,et al.  Parental investment, mate desertion and a fallacy , 1976, Nature.

[15]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Framing effects and risky decisions in starlings , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  R. Thaler Toward a positive theory of consumer choice , 1980 .