Skip to main content
Log in

Subjective value of risky foods for individual domestic chicks: a hierarchical Bayesian model

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Animal Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For animals to decide which prey to attack, the gain and delay of the food item must be integrated in a value function. However, the subjective value is not obtained by expected profitability when it is accompanied by risk. To estimate the subjective value, we examined choices in a cross-shaped maze with two colored feeders in domestic chicks. When tested by a reversal in food amount or delay, chicks changed choices similarly in both conditions (experiment 1). We therefore examined risk sensitivity for amount and delay (experiment 2) by supplying one feeder with food of fixed profitability and the alternative feeder with high- or low-profitability food at equal probability. Profitability varied in amount (groups 1 and 2 at high and low variance) or in delay (group 3). To find the equilibrium, the amount (groups 1 and 2) or delay (group 3) of the food in the fixed feeder was adjusted in a total of 18 blocks. The Markov chain Monte Carlo method was applied to a hierarchical Bayesian model to estimate the subjective value. Chicks undervalued the variable feeder in group 1 and were indifferent in group 2 but overvalued the variable feeder in group 3 at a population level. Re-examination without the titration procedure (experiment 3) suggested that the subjective value was not absolute for each option. When the delay was varied, the variable option was often given a paradoxically high value depending on fixed alternative. Therefore, the basic assumption of the uniquely determined value function might be questioned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aoki N, Csillag A, Matsushima T (2006) Localized lesions of arcopallium intermedium of the lateral forebrain caused a handling-cost aversion in the domestic chick performing a binary choice task. Eur J Neurosci 24:2314–2326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard CJ, Brown CAJ (1985) Risk-sensitive foraging in common shrews (Sorex araneus L.). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:161–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson M, Kacelnik A (1995) Preferences for fixed and variable food sources: variability in amount and delay. J Exp Anal Behav 63:313–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson M, Kacelnik A (1996) Rate currencies and the foraging starling: the fallacy of the averages revisited. Behav Ecol 7:341–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caraco T, Martindale S, Whittam TS (1980) An empirical demonstration of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Anim Behav 28:820–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caraco T, Blanckenhorn WU, Gregory GM, Newman JA, Recer GM, Zwicker SM (1990) Risk-sensitivity: ambient temperature affects foraging choice. Anim Behav 39:338–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbon J (1977) Scalar expectancy theory and Weber’s law in animal timing. Psychol Rev 84:279–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamm SL, Shettleworth SJ (1987) Risk aversion in pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 13:376–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurly TA, Oseen MD (1999) Context-dependent, risk-sensitive foraging preferences in wild rufous hummingbirds. Anim Behav 58:59–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ichikawa Y, Izawa E-I, Matsushima T (2004) Exitotoxic lesions of the medial striatum delay extinction of a reinforcement color discrimination operant task in domestic chicks; a functional role of reward anticipation. Cog Brain Res 22:76–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izawa E-I, Zachar G, Yanagihara S, Matsushima T (2003) Localized lesion of caudal part of lobus parolfactorius caused impulsive choice in the domestic chick: evolutionarily conserved function of ventral striatum. J Neurosci 23:1894–1902

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Izawa E-I, Aoki N, Matsushima T (2005) Neural correlates of the proximity and quantity of anticipated food rewards in the ventral striatum of domestic chicks. Eur J Neurosci 22:1502–1512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kacelnik A, Abreu FB (1998) Risky choice and Weber’s law. J Theor Biol 194:289–298

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kacelnik A, Bateson M (1996) Risky theories—the effects of variance on foraging decisions. Amer Zool 36:402–434

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacelnik A, Brunner D (2002) Timing and foraging: Gibbon’s scalar expectancy theory and optimal patch exploitation. Lean Motiv 33:177–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalenscher T, Pennartz CMA (2008) Is a bird in the hand worth two in the future? The neuroeconomics of intertemporal decision-making. Prog Neurobiol 84:284–315

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kass RE, Carlin BP, Gelman A, Neal RM (1998) Markov Chain Monte Carlo in practice: a roundtable discussion. Amer Statist 52:93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koops MA, Giraldeau LA (1996) Producer–scrounger foraging games in starlings: a test of rate-maximizing and risk-sensitive models. Anim Behav 51:773–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D (2000) WinBUGS – a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput 10: 325–337 (also refer to http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/bugs/welcome.shtml)

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsushima T, Kawamori A, Bem-Sojka T (2008) Neuro-economics in chicks: foraging choices based on amount, delay and cost. Brain Res Bull 76:245–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mazur JE (1984) Tests of an equivalence rule for fixed and variable reinforcer delays. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 10:426–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazur JE (1986) Fixed and variable ratios and delays: further tests of an equivalence rule. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 12:116–124

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy MA (2007) Bayesian methods for ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara JM, Houston AI (1987) A general framework for understanding the effects of variability and interruptions on foraging behaviour. Acta Biotheor 36:3–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reboreda JC, Kacelnik A (1991) Risk sensitivity in starlings: variability in food amount and food delay. Behav Ecol 2:301–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savory JC, Maros K (1993) Influence of degree of food restriction, age and time of day on behaviour of broiler breeder chickens. Behav Proc 29:179–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafir S (1994) Intransitivity of preferences in honey bees: support for ‘comparative’ evaluation of foraging options. Anim Behav 48:55–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens DW (1981) The logic of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Anim Behav 29:628–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens DW, Anderson D (2001) The adaptive value of preference for immediacy: when shortsighted rules have farsighted consequences. Behav Ecol 12:330–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens DW, Paton SR (1986) How constant is the constant of risk-aversion? Anim Behav 34:1659–1667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waser NM, McRobert JA (1998) Hummingbird foraging at experimental patches of flowers: evidence for weak risk-aversion. J Avian Biol 29:305–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We express our sincere gratitude to Dr. Takuya Kubo (Hokkaido University) for his generous guidance and instruction on statistical computations, and Dr. Michael Colombo (University of Otago, New Zealand), Dr. Giorgio Vallortigara (University of Trento, Italy), and Dr. Tiaza Bem (Polish Academy of Science, Poland) for their critical comments on the manuscript. We would also thank anonymous referees for their critical reading, generous comments, and instructive suggestions, which were valuable in revising the paper. This study was supported by grants from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS; grant-in-aid for scientific research (C), #19500260) and the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT; grant-in-aid for scientific research on priority areas—Mobiligence #20033001) to T.M. Experiments were conducted under the guidelines and approval of the Committee on Animal Experiments of Hokkaido University. The guidelines are based on the national regulations for animal welfare in Japan (Law for the Humane Treatment and Management of Animals; after partial amendment No. 68, 2005).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Toshiya Matsushima.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kawamori, A., Matsushima, T. Subjective value of risky foods for individual domestic chicks: a hierarchical Bayesian model. Anim Cogn 13, 431–441 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0293-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0293-1

Keywords

Navigation