| Title |
Environmental enrichment affects suboptimal, risky, gambling-like choice by pigeons
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-012-0583-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kristina F. Pattison, Jennifer R. Laude, Thomas R. Zentall |
| Abstract |
Pigeons prefer a risky option with a low probability of a high payoff over a less risky option that results in more food. This finding is analogous to suboptimal human monetary gambling because in both cases there appears to be an overemphasis of the occurrence of the winning event and an underemphasis of the losing event. In the present research, we found that pigeons that were exposed to an enriched environment (a large cage with three other pigeons for 4 h a day) were less likely to show this suboptimal choice behavior compared with typically housed laboratory pigeons in a control group. These results have implications for the mechanisms underlying suboptimal choice by humans (e.g., problem gamblers), and they suggest that a enriched environment may allow for enhanced self-control. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ghana | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 20% |
| Professor | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 47% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 December 2015.
All research outputs
#15,258,711
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,220
of 1,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,412
of 277,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.5. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.