Specificity and flexibility of social influence on spatial choice

  • Michael F. Brown
  • Marie E. Saxon
  • Kelsey A. Heslin


Rats searched for food in a situation that allowed them to determine which locations contained food after searching a small number of them, but not which of the baited locations contained more-preferred food rather than a less-preferred food. During some experimental trials, the latter information was available from the choices of model rats making choices together with the subject rats, because some of the model rats tended to choose the locations baited with more-preferred food. On the surface, the results suggest that social influence specified the locations of more-preferred food to the subject rats. However, more detailed analysis and data from a second experiment indicate that the social influence can be explained by a general tendency to approach another rat making choices, acquired if rats are exposed to a contingency between social approach and increased foraging success.


Social influence Social cognition Spatial cognition 


  1. Bisbing, T. A., Saxon, M., Sayde, J. M., & Brown, M. F. (2015) Factors modulating social influence on spatial choice in rats, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 41, 286–300. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000063 Google Scholar
  2. Brown, M. F. (2011). Social influences on rat spatial choice. Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews, 6, 5–23. doi: https://doi.org/10.3819/ccbr.2011.60003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, M. F., Farley, R. F., & Lorek, E. J. (2007). Remembrance of places you passed: Social spatial working memory in rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33, 213–224. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.33.3.213 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, M. F., Knight-Green, M. B., Lorek, E. J., Packard, C., Shallcross, W., Wifall, T., & Schumann, E. (2008). Social working memory: Memory for the choices of another rat can increase or decrease spatial choice tendencies. Learning & Behavior, 36, 327–340. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/LB.36.4.327 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, M. F., Prince, T. M., & Doyle, K. E. (2009). Social effects on spatial choice in the radial arm maze. Learning & Behavior, 37, 269–280. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/LB.37.3.269 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, M. F., Saxon, M. E., Bisbing, T., Evans, J., Ruff, J., & Stokesbury, A. (2015). Five on one side: Personal and social information in spatial choice. Behavioural Processes, 112, 130–137. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2014.12.012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Danchin, E., Giraldeau, L., Valone, T. J., & Wagner, R. H. (2004). Public information: From nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science, 305, 487–491. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1098254 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Galef, B. G., Dudley, K. E., & Whiskin, E. E. (2008). Social learning of food preferences in ‘dissatisfied’ and ‘uncertain’ Norway rats. Animal Behaviour, 75, 631–637. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.06.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Galef, B. G., & Whiskin, E. E. (2008). ‘Conformity’ in Norway rats? Animal Behaviour, 75, 2035–2039. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.11.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Giraldeau, L. A., & Caraco, T. (2000). Social foraging theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Giraldeau, L. A., Valone, T. J., & Templeton, J. J. (2002). Potential disadvantages of using socially acquired information. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 357, 1559–1566. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2002.1065 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Keller, M. R., & Brown, M. F. (2011). Social effects on rat spatial choice in an open field task. Learning and Motivation, 42, 123–132. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2010.12.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Laland, K.N. & Plotkin, H.C.(1990) Social learning and social transmission of foraging information in Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus). Animal Learning & Behavior, 18, 246–251.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205282
  14. Rieucau, G., & Giraldeau, L. A. (2011). Exploring the costs and benefits of social information use: An appraisal of current experimental evidence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 366, 949–957. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0325 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Vickery, W. L., Giraldeau, L., Templeton, J. J., Kramer, D. L., & Chapman, C. A. (1991). Producers, scroungers, and group foraging. The American Naturalist, 137, 847–863. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/285197
  16. Ward, A., & Webster, M. (2016). Sociality: The behaviour of group-living animals. Basel, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael F. Brown
    • 1
  • Marie E. Saxon
    • 1
  • Kelsey A. Heslin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyVillanova UniversityVillanovaUSA

Personalised recommendations