Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • 10 - Mechanisms Underlying Absolute and Relative Reward Value in Vertebrates

  • from Part I - Evolution of Learning Processes
  • Edited by Mark A. Krause, Southern Oregon University, Karen L. Hollis, Mount Holyoke College, Massachusetts, Mauricio R. Papini, Texas Christian University
  • Book:
    Evolution of Learning and Memory Mechanisms
    Published online:
    26 May 2022
    Print publication:
    19 May 2022, pp 176-192

  • Summary

    In his Nichomachean ethics, Aristotle suggested that absolute judgments precede relative judgments. This chapter places this notion in an evolutionary context by centering on comparative research on successive negative contrast (SNC). SNC occurs when a downshift from a more preferred to a less preferred reward deteriorates behavior. SNC is observed in experiments with mammals, but not in experiments with goldfish (bony fish), toads (amphibian), or turtles (reptile). Pigeons and starlings (birds) have produced a mixed set of results. Since E. L. Thorndike, an understanding of animal learning has been influenced by the notion that rewards strengthen behavior and nonrewards weaken behavior — the strengthening/weakening principle.Outcomes fitting this principle provide evidence of control by absolute reward value, whereas results that violate this principle, like SNC, suggest control by relative reward value. Comparative research suggests that absolute reward effects are more general than relative reward effects.

  • Devaluation of low-quality food during early experience by sheep

  • F. Catanese, E. Freidin, M. I. Cuello, R. A. Distel
  • Journal:
    animal / Volume 5 / Issue 6 / June 2011
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    14 January 2011, pp. 938-942
    Print publication:
    June 2011

  • A ruminant's early experience with low-quality food (LQF) is expected to increase its acceptance and preference in adulthood. Contrarily, we found that experienced sheep (ES) exposed to mature oat hay early in life ate less of this LQF than inexperienced sheep (IS). A possibility is that ES might have devaluated the LQF through continuous comparisons against high-quality food (HQF) supplements (sunflower meal and ground corn) that were simultaneously available during early experience. In this study, we tested the devaluation hypothesis with a successive negative contrast (SNC) procedure. In a consummatory SNC procedure, ‘shift’ subjects are unexpectedly changed from HQF to LQF, and their consumption is then compared against the consumption of ‘unshift’ subjects that receive LQF all throughout the SNC procedure. The magnitude of the difference in consumption between preshift and postshift is regarded as a measure of the degree to which both foods (HQF and LQF) are perceived to differ hedonically. When sheep from our previous study were 300 days old, both ES and IS were randomly assigned to either shift (ES-S and IS-S) or unshift conditions (ES-U and IS-U; n = 6 in each group). Groups ES-S and IS-S were fed HQF (alfalfa hay) during the preshift phase, and then suddenly changed to LQF (oat hay) in the postshift phase. Groups ES-U and IS-U (controls) were fed only LQF throughout the SNC procedure. Subjects in ES-S showed a significantly lower intake of LQF than those in ES-U in the first postshift session (i.e. they showed an SNC effect), which was not observed in IS. These results agree with ES subjects having devalued LQF during early experience. We discuss the possibility that high levels of nutrient supplementation can result in devaluation of LQF (i.e. decrease in preference and acceptance), whereas restricted levels of supplementation may promote a positive experience with LQF.