Differences in paradoxical choice between pigeons (Columba livia) and rats (Rattus norvegicus): The problem of cue trackability.

Abstract

Organisms are believed to attempt to maximize their net energy intake while foraging. The paradoxical choice task shows that they may instead prefer to obtain information rather than primary reward when the outcome is uncertain. That is, they prefer stimuli that consistently predict food or no food (informative option), to stimuli that inconsistently predict both food and no food in larger amounts (noninformative option). This task also seems to indicate that some species (like pigeons, Columba livia, and starlings, Sturnus vulgaris) are more prone to choose the informative option, while other species (like rats, Rattus norvegicus, and humans, Homo sapiens) tend to favor reward procurement through the noninformative option. There is empirical evidence for and against this view. However, an analysis of the literature suggests that species differences in paradoxical choice might be less pronounced than often believed. We argue that pigeons and rats are usually not tested under conditions that are motivationally equivalent for both species-in particular, the opportunities to track consistent stimulus-food pairings are less often met in the rat studies than in the pigeon studies.