伞形凤头鹦鹉(Cacatua alba)的同类性行为:游戏假说的进一步评估。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Alana Carroll, Irene M Pepperberg
{"title":"伞形凤头鹦鹉(Cacatua alba)的同类性行为:游戏假说的进一步评估。","authors":"Alana Carroll, Irene M Pepperberg","doi":"10.1037/com0000395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Contrafreeloading is defined as choosing to perform work to obtain a reward, despite the presence of an identical, freely available alternative. According to standard learning and optimal foraging theories, it should not exist. Thus, any evidence of such behavior is noteworthy. We briefly review the recently introduced play hypothesis, which proposes that contrafreeloading is more likely if the action involved is viewed as play rather than work (i.e., agreeable rather than aversive). One might consequently expect species that are relatively more playful to be more likely to engage in contrafreeloading. We evaluated this possibility by testing purportedly playful umbrella cockatoos <i>(Cacatua alba</i>); we studied four residents of a bird sanctuary in upstate New York (Dudley, JJ, Poly, and Teddy Bear). The task involved choosing between shelled and deshelled almonds; the former choice constituting evidence of contrafreeloading. We documented contrafreeloading in a novel species and then compared our results with previously published data on the reportedly less playful Grey parrots (<i>Psittacus erithacus</i>). Individually, a higher percentage of cockatoos engaged in contrafreeloading on more than half the trials than did the Greys, with statistically similar levels of individual variation, but the overall amount of contrafreeloading was not statistically significantly different between the species at a group level. We discuss possible reasons for these findings. Additionally, we examine similarities in the behavioral expression of play and contrafreeloading. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":54861,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Comparative Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contrafreeloading in umbrella cockatoos (Cacatua alba): Further evaluation of the play hypothesis.\",\"authors\":\"Alana Carroll, Irene M Pepperberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/com0000395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Contrafreeloading is defined as choosing to perform work to obtain a reward, despite the presence of an identical, freely available alternative. According to standard learning and optimal foraging theories, it should not exist. Thus, any evidence of such behavior is noteworthy. We briefly review the recently introduced play hypothesis, which proposes that contrafreeloading is more likely if the action involved is viewed as play rather than work (i.e., agreeable rather than aversive). One might consequently expect species that are relatively more playful to be more likely to engage in contrafreeloading. We evaluated this possibility by testing purportedly playful umbrella cockatoos <i>(Cacatua alba</i>); we studied four residents of a bird sanctuary in upstate New York (Dudley, JJ, Poly, and Teddy Bear). The task involved choosing between shelled and deshelled almonds; the former choice constituting evidence of contrafreeloading. We documented contrafreeloading in a novel species and then compared our results with previously published data on the reportedly less playful Grey parrots (<i>Psittacus erithacus</i>). Individually, a higher percentage of cockatoos engaged in contrafreeloading on more than half the trials than did the Greys, with statistically similar levels of individual variation, but the overall amount of contrafreeloading was not statistically significantly different between the species at a group level. We discuss possible reasons for these findings. Additionally, we examine similarities in the behavioral expression of play and contrafreeloading. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Comparative Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Comparative Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000395\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Comparative Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000395","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

逆向觅食的定义是,尽管存在相同的、可自由选择的替代品,但为了获得奖励而选择工作。根据标准的学习和最佳觅食理论,这种行为是不应该存在的。因此,这种行为的任何证据都值得注意。我们简要回顾一下最近提出的 "游戏假说",该假说认为,如果所涉及的行为被视为游戏而非工作(即令人愉悦而非厌恶),则更有可能发生觅食反刍行为。因此,我们可能会认为,相对来说更喜欢玩耍的物种更有可能进行 "忌食"。我们通过测试据称贪玩的伞凤头鹦鹉(Cacatua alba)来评估这种可能性;我们研究了纽约州北部一个鸟类保护区的四只鹦鹉(Dudley、JJ、Poly 和泰迪熊)。任务包括在带壳杏仁和去壳杏仁之间做出选择;前者的选择构成了忌食的证据。我们记录了一种新物种的 "忌食 "行为,然后将我们的结果与之前发表的关于据报道不那么贪玩的灰鹦鹉(Psittacus erithacus)的数据进行了比较。就个体而言,在一半以上的试验中,凤头鹦鹉进行反食的比例高于灰鹦鹉,个体差异水平在统计学上相似,但在群体水平上,物种间反食的总体数量在统计学上没有显著差异。我们将讨论这些发现的可能原因。此外,我们还研究了玩耍和倒立的行为表现的相似性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contrafreeloading in umbrella cockatoos (Cacatua alba): Further evaluation of the play hypothesis.

Contrafreeloading is defined as choosing to perform work to obtain a reward, despite the presence of an identical, freely available alternative. According to standard learning and optimal foraging theories, it should not exist. Thus, any evidence of such behavior is noteworthy. We briefly review the recently introduced play hypothesis, which proposes that contrafreeloading is more likely if the action involved is viewed as play rather than work (i.e., agreeable rather than aversive). One might consequently expect species that are relatively more playful to be more likely to engage in contrafreeloading. We evaluated this possibility by testing purportedly playful umbrella cockatoos (Cacatua alba); we studied four residents of a bird sanctuary in upstate New York (Dudley, JJ, Poly, and Teddy Bear). The task involved choosing between shelled and deshelled almonds; the former choice constituting evidence of contrafreeloading. We documented contrafreeloading in a novel species and then compared our results with previously published data on the reportedly less playful Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus). Individually, a higher percentage of cockatoos engaged in contrafreeloading on more than half the trials than did the Greys, with statistically similar levels of individual variation, but the overall amount of contrafreeloading was not statistically significantly different between the species at a group level. We discuss possible reasons for these findings. Additionally, we examine similarities in the behavioral expression of play and contrafreeloading. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Comparative Psychology publishes original research from a comparative perspective on the behavior, cognition, perception, and social relationships of diverse species.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信