Animal 's Ability Foraging Theory

1663 Words7 Pages
Within certain environments such as casinos or betting houses, it is not uncommon to see individuals choose sub-optimally, meaning individuals will often choose options that offer a high reinforcement outcome but with a lower probability of it occurring than a safer choice that would offer less reinforcement but more reliably. In animals, it would be expected not to see this behaviour, for instance, optimal foraging theory (Pyke, 1984) argues that an animal 's ability forage ultimately effects there overall evolutionary fitness in terms of ability to survive and the ability for the genes to be passed on. Therefore, choosing risky behaviour would ultimately be a deficit to their survival. However rather Paradoxically, animals do indulge in very similar gambling behaviours to that seen in humans (Stagner & Zentall, 2010).
Gipson, Alessandri, Miller, and Zentall (2009)was able to show this phenomenon to which they provided pigeons with two alternative keys a 50% discriminative chain, meaning it had two light that represented reinforcement or no reinforcement. A secondly a key that provided food 75% reinforcement on a non-discriminatory chain, meaning that it had a single contingency. what they found was that pigeons would choose the 50% alternative as opposed to the 75% chain despite it providing far more food Stagner and Zentall (2010) at a better rate. Implying that gambling behaviours are visible in animals. The Procedure is where pigeons are provided with the
Open Document