No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
In classical optimal foraging models long-term rate of energy intake (the ratio of expected amount of food over expected time) is assumed to be the maximized currency, because doing this is consistent with minimizing the loss of alternative opportunities. Here this possibility and various alternatives are examined quantitatively using European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) in the laboratory The birds chose between two cues. One signaled an option that led to either a fixed delay to food (“single standard,” Experiment 1) or to one of two equally probable delays to food (“double standard,” Experiments 2 and 3). The other cue signaled an “adjusting option” consisting of a single delay to food. This option adjusted according to the previous choices made by the birds, improving when the standard had been preferred and worsening when the adjusting option had been preferred. Adjustments were made either by changing the delay to food or the amount of food. The rationale underlying this procedure was that the parameter values at which the adjusting option stabilizes should reflect the subjective value of the standard. This was validated in Experiment 1. In Experiments 2 and 3 the adjusting option fluctuated around parameter values that are interpreted as yielding subjective equivalents of the double standard. The results contradict the predictions based on minimizing the lost opportunity. First, the birds did not include all the time intervals in their assignment of value to the two options, and second, the birds used the expected ratio of amount over time rather than the ratio of expected amount over expected time as their rate currency.[Behav Ecol 7: 341–352 (1996)]
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 153 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.