Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T18:44:55.874Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanistic models must link the field and the lab

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 March 2019

Alasdair I. Houston  and
Gaurav Malhotra
Alasdair I. Houston
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK. [email protected]://www.bristol.ac.uk/biology/people/alasdair-i-houston/index.html
Gaurav Malhotra
Affiliation:
School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TU, UK. [email protected]://www.bristol.ac.uk/expsych/people/gaurav-malhotra/index.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the theory outlined in the target article, an animal forages continuously, making sequential decisions in a world where the amount of food and its uncertainty are fixed, but delays are variable. These assumptions contrast with the risk-sensitive foraging theory and create a problem for comparing the predictions of this model with many laboratory experiments that do not make these assumptions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 42 , 2019 , e42
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abreu, B. F. & Kacelnik, A. (1999) Energy budgets and risk-sensitive foraging in starlings. Behavioral Ecology 10:338–45.Google Scholar
Bateson, M. & Kacelnik, A. (1997) Starlings’ preference for predictable and unpredictable delays to food. Animal Behaviour 53(6):1129–42. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0388.Google Scholar
Bednekoff, P. A. & Houston, A. I. (1994) Dynamic models of mass-dependent predation, risk-sensitive foraging, and premigratory fattening in birds. Ecology 75(4):1131–40.Google Scholar
Fawcett, T. W., Fallenstein, B., Higginson, A. D., Houston, A. I., Mallpress, D. E., Trimmer, P. C. & McNamara, J. M. (2014) The evolution of decision rules in complex environments. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 18(3):153–61.Google Scholar
Higginson, A. D., Fawcett, T. W., Trimmer, P. C., McNamara, J. M. & Houston, A. I. (2012) Generalized optimal risk allocation: Foraging and antipredator behavior in a fluctuating environment. The American Naturalist 180(5):589–603.Google Scholar
Houston, A. & McNamara, J. (1985) The choice of two prey types that minimises the probability of starvation. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 17(2):135–41.Google Scholar
Houston, A. I. (1991) Risk-sensitive foraging theory and operant psychology. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 56(3):585–89.Google Scholar
Houston, A. I. (2009) Flying in the face of nature. Behavioural Processes 80(3):295–305.Google Scholar
Houston, A. I. & McNamara, J. M. (1989) The value of food: Effects of open and closed economies. Animal Behaviour 37:546–62.Google Scholar
Houston, A. I. & McNamara, J. M. (1999) Models of adaptive behaviour: An approach based on state. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Houston, A. I., Welton, N. J. & McNamara, J. M. (1997) Acquisition and maintenance costs in the long-term regulation of avian fat reserves. Oikos 78:331–40.Google Scholar
Kacelnik, A. & Bateson, M. (1996) Risky theories: The effects of variance on foraging decisions. American Zoologist 36:402–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/36.4.402.Google Scholar
Kacelnik, A. & El Mouden, C. (2013) Triumphs and trials of the risk paradigm. Animal Behaviour 86(6):1117–29.Google Scholar
Mallpress, D. E., Fawcett, T. W., Houston, A. I. & McNamara, J. M. (2015) Risk attitudes in a changing environment: An evolutionary model of the fourfold pattern of risk preferences. Psychological Review 122(2):364.Google Scholar
McNamara, J. M. (1996) Risk-prone behaviour under rules which have evolved in a changing environment. American Zoologist 36(4):484–95.Google Scholar
McNamara, J. M. & Houston, A. I. (1992) Risk-sensitive foraging: A review of the theory. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 54(2–3):355–78.Google Scholar
Orduna, V. & Bouzas, A. (2004) Energy budget versus temporal discounting as determinants of preference in risky choice. Behavioural Processes 67:147–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2004.03.019.Google Scholar
Stephens, D. W. (1981) The logic of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Animal Behaviour 29(2):628–29.Google Scholar