4.5 Article

The effects of unequal reward distributions on cooperative problem solving by cottontop tamarins, Saguinus oedipus

期刊

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
卷 75, 期 -, 页码 245-257

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.04.032

关键词

cognition; competition; cooperation; cottontop tamarin; mutualism; reciprocal altruism; reciprocity; Saguinus oedipus

资金

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [R01MH029775] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH029775-25, R01 MH029775] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cooperation among nonhuman animals has been the topic of much theoretical and empirical research, but few studies have examined systematically the effects of various reward payoffs on cooperative behaviour. Here, we presented heterosexual pairs of cooperatively breeding cottontop tamarins with a cooperative problem-solving task. In a series of four experiments, we examined how the tamarins' cooperative performance changed under conditions in which (1) both actors were mutually rewarded, (2) both actors were rewarded reciprocally across days, (3) both actors competed for a monopolizable reward and (4) one actor repeatedly delivered a single reward to the other actor. The tamarins showed sensitivity to the reward structure, showing the greatest percentage of trials solved and shortest latency to solve the task in the mutual reward experiment and the lowest percentage of trials solved and longest latency to solve the task in the experiment in which one actor was repeatedly rewarded. However, even in the experiment in which the fewest trials were solved, the tamarins still solved 46 +/- 12% of trials and little to no aggression was observed among partners following inequitable reward distributions. The tamarins did, however, show selfish motivation in each of the experiments. Nevertheless, in all experiments, unrewarded individuals continued to cooperate and procure rewards for their social partners. (C) 2007 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据