Literature DB >> 20175592

Are birds smarter than mathematicians? Pigeons (Columba livia) perform optimally on a version of the Monty Hall Dilemma.

Walter T Herbranson1, Julia Schroeder.   

Abstract

The "Monty Hall Dilemma" (MHD) is a well known probability puzzle in which a player tries to guess which of three doors conceals a desirable prize. After an initial choice is made, one of the remaining doors is opened, revealing no prize. The player is then given the option of staying with their initial guess or switching to the other unopened door. Most people opt to stay with their initial guess, despite the fact that switching doubles the probability of winning. A series of experiments investigated whether pigeons (Columba livia), like most humans, would fail to maximize their expected winnings in a version of the MHD. Birds completed multiple trials of a standard MHD, with the three response keys in an operant chamber serving as the three doors and access to mixed grain as the prize. Across experiments, the probability of gaining reinforcement for switching and staying was manipulated, and birds adjusted their probability of switching and staying to approximate the optimal strategy. Replication of the procedure with human participants showed that humans failed to adopt optimal strategies, even with extensive training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20175592      PMCID: PMC3086893          DOI: 10.1037/a0017703

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Psychol        ISSN: 0021-9940            Impact factor:   2.231


  20 in total

1.  Probability matching: encouraging optimal responding in humans.

Authors:  Edmund Fantino; Ali Esfandiari
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2002-03

2.  Probability-matching in the pigeon.

Authors:  D H BULLOCK; M E BITTERMAN
Journal:  Am J Psychol       Date:  1962-12

3.  Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement.

Authors:  R J HERRNSTEIN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1961-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Probability matching, accuracy maximization, and a test of the optimal classifier's independence assumption in perceptual categorization.

Authors:  W Todd Maddox; Corey J Bohil
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2004-01

5.  On the law of effect.

Authors:  R J Herrnstein
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1970-03       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Choice As A Function Of Reinforcement Ratios In Delayed Matching-to-sample.

Authors:  J Hartl; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Learning to commit or avoid the base-rate error.

Authors:  A S Goodie; E Fantino
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1996-03-21       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Auto-shaping of the pigeon's key-peck.

Authors:  P L Brown; H M Jenkins
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1968-01       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  The randomization procedure in the study of categorization of multidimensional stimuli by pigeons.

Authors:  W T Herbranson; T Fremouw; C P Shimp
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1999-01

10.  The collider principle in causal reasoning: why the Monty Hall dilemma is so hard.

Authors:  Bruce D Burns; Mareike Wieth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2004-09
View more
  13 in total

1.  The Monty Hall dilemma in pigeons: effect of investment in initial choice.

Authors:  Jessica P Stagner; Rebecca Rayburn-Reeves; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-10

2.  Zeno's paradox in decision-making.

Authors:  James M Yearsley; Emmanuel M Pothos
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Suboptimal choice in nonhuman animals: rats commit the sunk cost error.

Authors:  Paula Magalhães; K Geoffrey White; Tessa Stewart; Emma Beeby; William van der Vliet
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  The Monty Hall dilemma with pigeons: No, you choose for me.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Jacob P Case; Tiffany L Collins
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.986

5.  Decision making by humans in a behavioral task: do humans, like pigeons, show suboptimal choice?

Authors:  Mikael Molet; Holly C Miller; Jennifer R Laude; Chelsea Kirk; Brandon Manning; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.986

6.  Learning how to "make a deal": human (Homo sapiens) and monkey (Macaca mulatta) performance when repeatedly faced with the Monty Hall Dilemma.

Authors:  Emily D Klein; Theodore A Evans; Natasha B Schultz; Michael J Beran
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 2.231

7.  Choice behavior of pigeons (Columba livia), college students, and preschool children (Homo sapiens) in the Monty Hall dilemma.

Authors:  James E Mazur; Patricia E Kahlbaugh
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2012-05-14       Impact factor: 2.231

Review 8.  Reasoning and choice in the Monty Hall Dilemma (MHD): implications for improving Bayesian reasoning.

Authors:  Elisabet Tubau; David Aguilar-Lleyda; Eric D Johnson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-03-31

9.  Testing the limits of optimality: the effect of base rates in the Monty Hall dilemma.

Authors:  Walter T Herbranson; Shanglun Wang
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.926

10.  Large-scale network organization in the avian forebrain: a connectivity matrix and theoretical analysis.

Authors:  Murray Shanahan; Verner P Bingman; Toru Shimizu; Martin Wild; Onur Güntürkün
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 2.380

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.