Abstract
Observed animal impulsiveness challenges ideas from foraging theory about the fitness value of food rewards, and may play a role in important behavioural phenomena such as cooperation and addiction. Behavioural ecologists usually invoke temporal discounting to explain the evolution of animal impulsiveness. According to the discounting hypothesis, delay reduces the fitness value of the delayed food. We develop an alternative model for the evolution of impulsiveness that does not require discounting. We show that impulsive or short-sighted rules can maximize long-term rates of food intake. The advantages of impulsive rules come from two sources. First, naturally occurring choices have a foreground-background structure that reduces the long-term cost of impulsiveness. Second, impulsive rules have a discrimination advantage because they tend to compare smaller quantities. Discounting contributes little to this result. Although we find that impulsive rules are optimal in a simple foreground-background choice situation in the absence of discounting, in contrast we do not find comparable impulsiveness in binary choice situations even when there is strong discounting.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (155.8 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Ainslie G. W. Impulse control in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):485–489. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fantino E. Choice and rate of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Sep;12(5):723–730. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-723. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fantino E., Davison M. Choice: Some quantitative relations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jul;40(1):1–13. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E. Hyperbolic value addition and general models of animal choice. Psychol Rev. 2001 Jan;108(1):96–112. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.108.1.96. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E., Logue A. W. Choice in a "self-control" paradigm: effects of a fading procedure. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Jul;30(1):11–17. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McNamara J. M., Houston A. I. A general framework for understanding the effects of variability and interruptions on foraging behaviour. Acta Biotheor. 1987;36(1):3–22. doi: 10.1007/BF00159228. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0534. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
- Rachlin H., Green L. Commitment, choice and self-control. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Jan;17(1):15–22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sozou Peter D., Seymour Robert M. Augmented discounting: interaction between ageing and time-preference behaviour. Proc Biol Sci. 2003 May 22;270(1519):1047–1053. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2344. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stephens David W. Discrimination, discounting and impulsivity: a role for an informational constraint. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2002 Nov 29;357(1427):1527–1537. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2002.1062. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Todd P. M., Gigerenzer G. Précis of Simple heuristics that make us smart. Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Oct;23(5):727–780. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x00003447. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.