Bateson M, Kacelnik A
Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 May;63(3):313-29. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.63-313.
Much research has focused on the effects of environmental variability on foraging decisions. However, the general pattern of preference for variability in delay to reward and aversion to variability in amount of reward remains unexplained a either a mechanistic or a functional level. Starlings' preferences between a fixed and a variable option were studied in two treatments, A and D. The fixed option was the same in both treatments (20-s fixed-interval delay, five units food). In Treatment A the variable option gave two equiprobable amounts of food (20-s delay, three or seven units) and in D it gave two equiprobable delays to food (2.5-s or 60.5-s delays, five units). In both treatments the programmed ratio [amount/(intertrial interval+latency+delay)] in the fixed option equaled the arithmetic mean of the two possible ratios in the variable option (ITI = 40 s, latency = 1 s). The variable option was strongly preferred in Treatment D and was weakly avoided in Treatment A. These results are discussed in the light of two theoretical models, a form of constrained rate maximization and a version of scalar expectancy theory. The latter accommodates more of the data and is based on independently verifiable assumptions, including Weber's law.
许多研究都聚焦于环境变异性对觅食决策的影响。然而,对于奖励延迟变异性的偏好以及奖励数量变异性的厌恶这一普遍模式,在机械论或功能层面上仍未得到解释。在A和D两种处理方式下研究了椋鸟在固定选项和可变选项之间的偏好。两种处理方式中的固定选项相同(20秒固定间隔延迟,五个食物单位)。在处理方式A中,可变选项给出两种等概率的食物量(20秒延迟,三个或七个单位),在处理方式D中,它给出两种等概率的食物延迟时间(2.5秒或60.5秒延迟,五个单位)。在两种处理方式中,固定选项中的设定比率[数量/(试验间隔+潜伏期+延迟)]等于可变选项中两种可能比率的算术平均值(试验间隔=40秒,潜伏期=1秒)。在处理方式D中强烈偏好可变选项,而在处理方式A中则轻微回避。根据两种理论模型,即一种受约束的速率最大化形式和一种标量期望理论版本,对这些结果进行了讨论。后者能解释更多数据,并且基于包括韦伯定律在内的可独立验证的假设。