Cargando…

What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs

Cooperation is only beneficial if the outcome is equally shared between individuals involved in the cooperative interaction. A mechanism to limit the development of unequal cooperation is inequity aversion, the negative reaction to unequal treatment. While inequity aversion has been studied extensiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brucks, Désirée, Marshall-Pescini, Sarah, Essler, Jennifer L., McGetrick, Jim, Huber, Ludwig, Range, Friederike
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5329037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28293204
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00270
_version_ 1782510979613982720
author Brucks, Désirée
Marshall-Pescini, Sarah
Essler, Jennifer L.
McGetrick, Jim
Huber, Ludwig
Range, Friederike
author_facet Brucks, Désirée
Marshall-Pescini, Sarah
Essler, Jennifer L.
McGetrick, Jim
Huber, Ludwig
Range, Friederike
author_sort Brucks, Désirée
collection PubMed
description Cooperation is only beneficial if the outcome is equally shared between individuals involved in the cooperative interaction. A mechanism to limit the development of unequal cooperation is inequity aversion, the negative reaction to unequal treatment. While inequity aversion has been studied extensively across many animal species, it remains unclear whether inequity aversion elicited in experimental settings is directed to the cooperative partner animal or rather to the experimenter distributing the rewards unequally. In the current study we aimed to further investigate whether the presence of an experimenter distributing rewards is essential in order to elicit inequity aversion in dogs. We tested 22 dog dyads in an inequity task, requiring dyads to alternately press a buzzer in order to receive rewards of equal or unequal value. We manipulated the extent of the experimenter's involvement in the task: in the experimenter-present version an experimenter gave a command to the dogs to press the buzzer and delivered the rewards by pushing the bowls into the dogs' enclosure. In contrast, in the experimenter-absent version, no experimenter was visible and the buzzer and bowls were moved from behind a curtain. We found that dogs did not respond to the unequal treatment regardless of the experimenter's involvement in the task. Nonetheless, we found that dogs based their behavior on frustration and social facilitation in the experimenter-absent version of the task, suggesting that a social interaction with an experimenter may be one aspect necessary to elicit inequity aversion. One potential explanation for the absence of inequity aversion in the experimenter-present version of the task might be the reward delivery method. Using separate sets of reward bowls for each dog instead of a shared bowl could have removed a potentially important competitive aspect (i.e., shared resource) from the inequity paradigm. In addition, delivering the rewards via bowls, rather than directly handing the rewards to the dogs, might have caused dogs to perceive the task as less cooperative. These results suggest that both the presence of an experimenter causing inequity and the inclusion of a competitive or cooperative element in the task may be basic requirements for eliciting inequity aversion.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5329037
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53290372017-03-14 What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs Brucks, Désirée Marshall-Pescini, Sarah Essler, Jennifer L. McGetrick, Jim Huber, Ludwig Range, Friederike Front Psychol Psychology Cooperation is only beneficial if the outcome is equally shared between individuals involved in the cooperative interaction. A mechanism to limit the development of unequal cooperation is inequity aversion, the negative reaction to unequal treatment. While inequity aversion has been studied extensively across many animal species, it remains unclear whether inequity aversion elicited in experimental settings is directed to the cooperative partner animal or rather to the experimenter distributing the rewards unequally. In the current study we aimed to further investigate whether the presence of an experimenter distributing rewards is essential in order to elicit inequity aversion in dogs. We tested 22 dog dyads in an inequity task, requiring dyads to alternately press a buzzer in order to receive rewards of equal or unequal value. We manipulated the extent of the experimenter's involvement in the task: in the experimenter-present version an experimenter gave a command to the dogs to press the buzzer and delivered the rewards by pushing the bowls into the dogs' enclosure. In contrast, in the experimenter-absent version, no experimenter was visible and the buzzer and bowls were moved from behind a curtain. We found that dogs did not respond to the unequal treatment regardless of the experimenter's involvement in the task. Nonetheless, we found that dogs based their behavior on frustration and social facilitation in the experimenter-absent version of the task, suggesting that a social interaction with an experimenter may be one aspect necessary to elicit inequity aversion. One potential explanation for the absence of inequity aversion in the experimenter-present version of the task might be the reward delivery method. Using separate sets of reward bowls for each dog instead of a shared bowl could have removed a potentially important competitive aspect (i.e., shared resource) from the inequity paradigm. In addition, delivering the rewards via bowls, rather than directly handing the rewards to the dogs, might have caused dogs to perceive the task as less cooperative. These results suggest that both the presence of an experimenter causing inequity and the inclusion of a competitive or cooperative element in the task may be basic requirements for eliciting inequity aversion. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5329037/ /pubmed/28293204 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00270 Text en Copyright © 2017 Brucks, Marshall-Pescini, Essler, McGetrick, Huber and Range. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Brucks, Désirée
Marshall-Pescini, Sarah
Essler, Jennifer L.
McGetrick, Jim
Huber, Ludwig
Range, Friederike
What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs
title What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs
title_full What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs
title_fullStr What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs
title_full_unstemmed What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs
title_short What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs
title_sort what are the ingredients for an inequity paradigm? manipulating the experimenter's involvement in an inequity task with dogs
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5329037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28293204
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00270
work_keys_str_mv AT brucksdesiree whataretheingredientsforaninequityparadigmmanipulatingtheexperimentersinvolvementinaninequitytaskwithdogs
AT marshallpescinisarah whataretheingredientsforaninequityparadigmmanipulatingtheexperimentersinvolvementinaninequitytaskwithdogs
AT esslerjenniferl whataretheingredientsforaninequityparadigmmanipulatingtheexperimentersinvolvementinaninequitytaskwithdogs
AT mcgetrickjim whataretheingredientsforaninequityparadigmmanipulatingtheexperimentersinvolvementinaninequitytaskwithdogs
AT huberludwig whataretheingredientsforaninequityparadigmmanipulatingtheexperimentersinvolvementinaninequitytaskwithdogs
AT rangefriederike whataretheingredientsforaninequityparadigmmanipulatingtheexperimentersinvolvementinaninequitytaskwithdogs