Irrational choices in hummingbird foraging behaviour
By Melissa Bateson, S. Healy, Andrew, Hurly. 2002
143 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9eeec70575b73f4c27c843446662ee36d8488b0e
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Economics and Econometrics
In General Decision Sciences
In Safety Research
Citations in the corpus
- Context-dependent foraging choices in risk-sensitive starlings (2002, unknown): “…preference (as I report here) between binary and trinary contexts have been shown in both honeybees (Shafir et al. 2002) and rufous hummingbirds (Bateson et al. 2002) choosing between artificial flowers differing in two attributes (corolla length and volume of sucrose in the case of the bees;…”
- Female preference for male phenotypic traits in a fiddler crab: do females use absolute or comparative evaluation? (2009, background): “In grey jays, Perisoreus canadensis, and rufous hummingbirds, Selasphorus rufus, for example, both the absolute and relative preferences for two foraging options that differed along two dimensions changed after the addition of a third decoy option (Waite 2001; Bateson et al. 2002).”
- Mate choice rules in animals (2006, background): “Starting with work on honeybees (Shafir 1994), foraging studies have repeatedly demonstrated context-dependent choice behaviour that depends on the range of alternatives present (Hurly & Oseen 1999; Waite 2001; Bateson 2002a, b, 2004; Bateson et al. 2002; Shafir et al. 2002).”
- Flower Choice and Learning in Foraging Bumblebees: Effects of Variation in Nectar Volume and Concentration (2006, background): “Bateson et al. (2002, 2003) used such a design to study decision-making in hummingbirds, but their experiments were designed to test whether the birds assign an absolute or relative value to the alternative options, rather than to understand the learning process.”
- Emergence of group rationality from irrational individuals (2011, result): “For example, some earlier studies found no violation of regularity but only of the weaker constant ratio rule, which holds that the relative popularity of 2 options should not be changed by adding a third option (Bateson et al. 2002).”
- Loyalty pays: potential life history consequences of fidelity to marine foraging regions by southern elephant seals (2004, background): “Foraging animals are expected to make judicious choices with respect to maximizing net energy gain (Stephens & Krebs 1986; Perry & Pianka 1997; Bateson 2002), but apparently ‘irrational’ behaviours (Bateson et al. 2002) are common (Stephens & Krebs 1986; Perry & Pianka 1997).”
- Alief in Action (and Reaction) (2008, background): “A similar effect has been reported in hummingbirds ( Selasphorus rufus ) and starlings ( Sturnus vulgaris ) ( Bateson, 2002; Bateson et al. , 2002 ; Hurly and Oseen, 1999 .)”