Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorSchweinfurth, Manon Karin
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-10T08:30:09Z
dc.date.available2021-09-10T08:30:09Z
dc.date.issued2021-10
dc.identifier273021118
dc.identifierd9a0d261-78a2-40ab-acb9-50ff2a1e5813
dc.identifier000694606400012
dc.identifier85114673677
dc.identifier.citationSchweinfurth , M K 2021 , ' Cooperative intentions and their implications on reciprocal cooperation in Norway rats ' , Ethology , vol. 127 , no. 10 , pp. 865-871 . https://doi.org/10.1111/eth.13144en
dc.identifier.issn0179-1613
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0003-2066-7892/work/99804752
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/23931
dc.descriptionFunding: This study was financially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation, grant number 31003A_156152, which was awarded to Michael Taborsky.en
dc.description.abstractOne way to cooperate with others and avoid exploitation is reciprocal cooperation. Reciprocity is the selective helping of those who were cooperative before, which is commonly based on outcomes. Yet, outcomes may not reflect intentions, i.e., if an individual is unable but willing to help. Humans, including children, show such intention-based reciprocity. However, it is unclear whether other animals consider intentions in reciprocal settings. Here, I tested whether Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) reciprocate help based on intentions by manipulating the outcome while keeping the partner’s cooperative inten-tions the same. Subjects experienced a partner that was able to help by providing food via a movable platform. In another condition, the same partner was unable to help because the platform was blocked. When the roles were exchanged afterwards, subjects provided food more often to ‘able’ than ‘unable’ partners, even though the latter attempted to help. I compare these findings to data using ‘willing’ and ‘unwilling’ partners that were able to help. Again, rats based their cooperative behaviour on outcomes rather than the intention to help. This suggests that rats reciprocate primarily based on outcomes and seem to not consider cooperative intentions. Although, subjects provided consistently less food to partners that did not help, they provided them with some help. Potentially, rats use a cognitively less demanding strategy by helping defectors a bit to maintain cooperation. Thereby, cooperation might be resistant to situations in which an apparent defector was actually unable to help, but had cooperative intentions, and might be a good cooperation partner in the future.
dc.format.extent7
dc.format.extent341982
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofEthologyen
dc.subjectNorway ratsen
dc.subjectCooperationen
dc.subjectReciprocityen
dc.subjectAbilityen
dc.subjectIntentionen
dc.subjectOutcomeen
dc.subjectBF Psychologyen
dc.subjectNDASen
dc.subject.lccBFen
dc.titleCooperative intentions and their implications on reciprocal cooperation in Norway ratsen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Psychology and Neuroscienceen
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/eth.13144
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record