Abstract

Beran et al. (2012) reported that capuchin monkeys closely matched the performance of humans in a quantity judgment test in which information was incomplete but a judgment still had to be made. In each test session, subjects first made quantity judgments between two known options. Then, they made choices where only one option was visible. Both humans and capuchin monkeys were guided by past outcomes, as they shifted from selecting a known option to selecting an unknown option at the point at which the known option went from being more than the average rate of return to less than the average rate of return from earlier choices in the test session. Here, we expanded this assessment of what guides quantity judgment choice behavior in the face of incomplete information to include manipulations to the unselected quantity. We manipulated the unchosen set in two ways: first, we showed the monkeys what they did not get (the unchosen set), anticipating that “losses” would weigh heavily on subsequent trials in which the same known quantity was presented. Second, we sometimes gave the unchosen set to another monkey, anticipating that this social manipulation might influence the risk-taking responses of the focal monkey when faced with incomplete information. However, neither manipulation caused difficulty for the monkeys who instead continued to use the rational strategy of choosing known sets when they were as large as or larger than the average rate of return in the session, and choosing the unknown (riskier) set when the known set was not sufficiently large. As in past experiments, this was true across a variety of daily ranges of quantities, indicating that monkeys were not using some absolute quantity as a threshold for selecting (or not) the known set, but instead continued to use the daily average rate of return to determine when to choose the known versus the unknown quantity.

Highlights

  • Individuals from many species are commonly faced with making decisions between two or more mutually exclusive options, when it comes to foraging decisions and the attempt to maximize the amount of food one can get while minimizing the effort required and minimizing the risk that no food will be obtained

  • Recent work in our lab has shown a strong consistency across species in dealing very adaptively with uncertain or incomplete information in a quantity judgment task

  • All four focal monkeys performed in a similar manner, and replicated their performance in the earlier experiment on estimating uncertain outcomes in a quantity judgment task (Beran et al, 2012)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Individuals from many species are commonly faced with making decisions between two or more mutually exclusive options, when it comes to foraging decisions and the attempt to maximize the amount of food one can get while minimizing the effort required and minimizing the risk that no food will be obtained. Many species are quite adept at making such relative quantity judgments (for an overview, see Brannon and Roitman, 2003). The critical test occurred during the second block of 15 trials in each session, when only one set was revealed, whereas the other remained unknown at the point of choosing. If the known amount was smaller than the average, they took the risk of choosing the unknown set. This strategy occurred across a range of quantities tested across different days, and so the chimpanzees showed great flexibility in their application of this heuristic for dealing with incomplete information. In a second study Beran et al (2012) directly compared www.frontiersin.org

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.