Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
When Given The Opportunity, Chimpanzees Maximize Personal Gain Rather Than "Level The Playing Field", Lydia M. Hopper, Susan P. Lambeth, Steven J. Schapiro, Sarah F. Brosnan
When Given The Opportunity, Chimpanzees Maximize Personal Gain Rather Than "Level The Playing Field", Lydia M. Hopper, Susan P. Lambeth, Steven J. Schapiro, Sarah F. Brosnan
Psychology Faculty Publications
We provided chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) with the ability to improve the quality of food rewards they received in a dyadic test of inequity.We were interested to see if this provision influenced their responses and, if so, whether it was mediated by a social partner’s outcomes. We tested eight dyads using an exchange paradigm in which, depending on the condition, the chimpanzees were rewarded with either high-value (a grape) or low-value (a piece of celery) food rewards for each completed exchange. We included four conditions. In the first, “Different” condition, the subject received different, less-preferred, rewards than their partner for each …
When Given The Opportunity, Chimpanzees Maximize Personal Gain Rather Than “Level The Playing Field”, Lydia M. Hopper, Susan P. Lambeth, Steven J. Schapiro, Sarah F. Brosnan
When Given The Opportunity, Chimpanzees Maximize Personal Gain Rather Than “Level The Playing Field”, Lydia M. Hopper, Susan P. Lambeth, Steven J. Schapiro, Sarah F. Brosnan
Psychology Faculty Publications
We provided chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) with the ability to improve the quality of food rewards they received in a dyadic test of inequity.We were interested to see if this provision influenced their responses and, if so, whether it was mediated by a social partner’s outcomes. We tested eight dyads using an exchange paradigm in which, depending on the condition, the chimpanzees were rewarded with either high-value (a grape) or low-value (a piece of celery) food rewards for each completed exchange. We included four conditions. In the first, “Different” condition, the subject received different, less-preferred, rewards than their partner …