Suppr超能文献

在花卉市场中的经济觅食:熊蜂中不对称主导的诱饵效应。

Economic foraging in a floral marketplace: asymmetrically dominated decoy effects in bumblebees.

机构信息

Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Dabney Hall, 1416 Circle Drive , Knoxville, TN 37996, USA.

Department of Psychology, University of Tennessee, Austin Peay, 1404 Circle Drive , Knoxville, TN 37996, USA.

出版信息

Proc Biol Sci. 2024 Sep;291(2031):20240843. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2024.0843. Epub 2024 Sep 18.

Abstract

While most models of decision-making assume that individuals assign options absolute values, animals often assess options comparatively, violating principles of economic rationality. Such 'irrational' preferences are especially common when two rewards vary along multiple dimensions of quality and a third, 'decoy' option is available. Bumblebees are models of decision-making, yet whether they are subject to decoy effects is unknown. We addressed this question using bumblebees () choosing between flowers that varied in their nectar concentration and reward rate. We first gave bees a choice between two flower types, one higher in concentration and the other higher in reward rate. Bees were then given a choice between these flowers and either a 'concentration' or 'rate' decoy, designed to be asymmetrically dominated on each axis. The rate decoy increased bees' preference in the expected direction, while the concentration decoy did not. In a second experiment, we manipulated choices along two single reward dimensions to test whether this discrepancy was explained by differences in how concentration versus reward rate were evaluated. We found that low-concentration decoys increased bees' preference for the medium option as predicted, whereas low-rate decoys had no effect. Our results suggest that both low- and high-value flowers can influence pollinator preferences in ways previously unconsidered.

摘要

虽然大多数决策模型都假设个体为选项分配绝对值,但动物通常会进行相对评估,从而违反了经济理性原则。当两个奖励在多个质量维度上有所不同,并且有第三个“诱饵”选项可用时,这种“非理性”偏好尤其常见。大黄蜂是决策模型的典范,但它们是否受到诱饵效应的影响尚不清楚。我们使用大黄蜂在花蜜浓度和奖励率不同的花朵之间进行选择,来解决这个问题。我们首先让蜜蜂在两种花型之间做出选择,一种花蜜浓度较高,另一种奖励率较高。然后,蜜蜂在这些花和“浓度”或“速度”诱饵之间进行选择,诱饵在每个轴上都是不对称主导的。速度诱饵增加了蜜蜂预期方向的偏好,而浓度诱饵则没有。在第二个实验中,我们沿着两个单一奖励维度进行选择,以测试这种差异是否可以通过对浓度与奖励率的不同评估来解释。我们发现,低浓度诱饵如预测的那样增加了蜜蜂对中等选项的偏好,而低速率诱饵则没有影响。我们的研究结果表明,低价值和高价值的花朵都可以以以前未被考虑过的方式影响传粉者的偏好。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

1
Pollinator cognition and the function of complex rewards.传粉者认知与复杂报酬的功能。
Trends Ecol Evol. 2024 Nov;39(11):1047-1058. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2024.06.008. Epub 2024 Jul 16.
2
Sweet solutions: nectar chemistry and quality.甜蜜的解答:花蜜的化学组成和质量。
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2022 Jun 20;377(1853):20210163. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2021.0163. Epub 2022 May 2.
5
The elusiveness of context effects in decision making.决策中情境效应的难以捉摸性。
Trends Cogn Sci. 2021 Oct;25(10):843-854. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.011. Epub 2021 Aug 20.
10
The Decoy Effect Within Alcohol Purchasing Decisions.酒精购买决策中的诱饵效应。
Subst Use Misuse. 2016 Aug 23;51(10):1353-62. doi: 10.3109/10826084.2016.1168449. Epub 2016 May 31.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验