Adaptive Behavior

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register and gain free access

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roberts, M. E.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstone, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Adaptive Behavior, Vol. 14, No. 4, 291-313 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1059712306072336

EPICURE: Spatial and Knowledge Limitations in Group Foraging

Michael E. Roberts

Robert L. Goldstone

Department of Psychology, Indiana University, robertsm{at}indiana.edu

We propose an agent-based model of group foraging, EPICURE, for patchily distributed resources. Each agent makes probabilistic movement decisions in a gridworld through a linear combination of cur rent perceptual information and a reinforcement history. EPICURE captures the empirical results from several foraging conditions in previous works, and it leads to a reevaluation of findings from those papers. In particular, human foragers show contingent usage of information, initially using social infor mation to discover resource pools before private sampling information has been established. We describe a series of simulations that test the sources of resource undermatching often found in group foraging experiments. After testing the effects of foragers' starting locations, travel costs, the number of foragers, and the size of uniform food distributions, we discuss a novel hypothesis for undermatch ing. Spatial constraints lead to inadequate individual and group information sampling and cause group undermatching. The foraging group size, food rate, spatial distribution of food, and resulting forager reinforcement histories interact to produce undermatching, and occasionally overmatching, to resources.

Key Words: agent-based models • foraging • resource allocation • group behavior • social information • undermatching

References

  • Abrahams, M. V. (1986). Patch choice under perceptual constraints: a cause for departures from an ideal free distribution . Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 19, 409–415 .[CrossRef]
  • Arak, P. A. (1983). Sexual selection by male-to-male competition in natterjack toad choruses . Nature, 306, 261–262 .[CrossRef]
  • Bateson, M., & Kacelnik, A. (1998). Risk-sensitive foraging: Decision making in variable environments. In R. Dukas (Ed.), Cognitive Ecology, (pp. 297–337). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press .
  • Baum, W. M. (1974). On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching . Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 231–242 .[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Baum, W. M., & Kraft, J. R. (1998). Group choice: Competition, travel, and the ideal free distribution . Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 69, 227–245 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Bell, K. E., & Baum, W. M. (2002). Group foraging sensitivity to predictable and unpredictable changes in food distribution: Past experience or present circumstances? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 179–194 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Bernstein, C., Kacelnik, A., & Krebs, J. R. (1988). Individual decisions and the distribution of predators in a patchy environment . Journal of Animal Ecology, 57, 1007–1026 .[CrossRef]
  • Bond, A. B., & Kamil, A. C. (2002). Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual prey . Nature, 415, 609–613 .[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1988). An evolutionary model of social learning: the effects of spatial and temporal variation. In T. R. Zentall & B. G. Galef Jr (Eds.), Social learning: psychological and biological perspectives, (pp. 29–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum .
  • Charnov, E. L. (1976). Optimal foraging: The marginal value theorem . Theoretical Population Biology, 9, 129–136 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Clark, C. W., & Mangel, M. (1984). Foraging and flocking strategies: Information in an uncertain environment . American Naturalist, 123, 626–641 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Critchfield, T. S., & Attebery, T. (2003). Temporal discounting predicts individual competitive success in a human analogue of group foraging . Behavioural Processes, 64, 315–331 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Croze, H. (1970). Searching images in carrion crows . Zeitschriftfiir Tierpsychologie 5, 1–85 .
  • de Aguiar, M. A. M., Rauch, E. M., & Bar-Yam, Y. (2004). Invasion and extinction in the mean field approximation for a spatial host-pathogen model . Journal of Statistical Physics, 114, 1417–1451 .[CrossRef]
  • Dugatkin, L. A. (1992). Sexual selection and imitation: Females copy the mate choice of others . American Naturalist, 139, 1384–1389 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Earn, D. J. D., & Johnstone, R. A. (1997). A systematic error in tests of ideal free theory . Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 264, 1671–1675 .
  • Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2004). Social norms and human cooperation . Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 185–189 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Fernandez-Juricic, E., & Kacelnik, A. (2004). Information transfer and gain in flocks: The effects of quality and quantity of social information at different neighbor distances , Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 55, 502–511 .[CrossRef]
  • Flynn, R. E., & Giraldeau, L. A. (2001). Producer-scrounger games in a spatially explicit world: Tactic use influences flock geometry of spice finches . Ethology, 107, 249–257 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Fretwell, S. D., & Lucas, H. J. (1970). Ideal free distribution . Acta Biotheory, 19, 16–21 .
  • Gillis, D. M., & Kramer, D. L. (1987). Ideal interference distributions: Population density and patch use by zebrafish . Animal Behaviour, 35, 1875–1882 .[CrossRef]
  • Giraldeau, L. A., & Lefebvre, L. (1986). Exchangeable producer and scrounger roles in a captive flock of feral pigeons: A case for the skill pool effect . Animal Behaviour, 34, 797–803 .[CrossRef]
  • Godin, M. J., & Keenleyside, M. H. A. (1984). Foraging on patchily distributed prey by a cichlid fish (Teleosti, Chiclideae): A test of the ideal free distribution theory . Animal Behaviour, 32, 120–131 .[CrossRef]
  • Goldstone, R. L., & Ashpole, B. C. (2004). Human foraging behavior in a virtual environment . Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 508–514 .
  • Goldstone, R. L., Ashpole, B. C., & Roberts, M. E. (2005). Knowledge of resources and competitors in human foraging . Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 81–87 .
  • Grand, T. C. (1997). Foraging site selection in juvenile coho salmon: Ideal free distributions of unequal competitors . Animal Behaviour, 53, 185–196 .
  • Hakoyama, H. (2003). The ideal free distribution when the resource is variable . Behavioral Ecology, 14, 109–115 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Harley, C. B. (1981). Learning the evolutionarily stable strategy . Journal of Theoretical Biology, 89, 611–633 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Harper, D. G. C. (1982). Competitive foraging in mallards: Ideal free ducks . Animal Behaviour, 30, 575–584 .[CrossRef]
  • Hashimoto, C., Suzuki, S., Takenoshita, Y., Yamagiwa, J., Basabose, A. K., & Furuichi, T. (2003). How fruit abundance affects the chimpanzee party size: A comparison between four study sites . Primates, 44, 77–81 .[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hills, T. (2006). Animal foraging and the evolution of goaldirected cognition . Cognitive Science, 30, 3–41 .[ISI]
  • Kareiva, P., & Odell, G. (1987). Swarms of predators exhibit "preytaxis" if individual predators use area-restricted search . American Naturalist, 130, 233–270 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Kendal, R. L., Coolen, I., & Laland, K. N. (2004). The role of conformity in foraging when personal and social information conflict . Behavioral Ecology, 15, 269–277 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Kennedy, M., & Gray, R. D. (1993). Can ecological theory predict the distribution of foraging animals? A critical analysis of experiments on the ideal free distribution . Oikos, 68, 158–166 .
  • Kraft, J. R., & Baum, W. M. (2001). Group choice: The ideal free distribution of human social behavior . Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 76, 21–42 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Laland, K. N. (2004). Social learning strategies . Learning & Behavior, 32, 4–14 .
  • Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual Choice Behavior. New York: John Wiley .
  • Madden, G. J., Peden, B. F., & Yamaguchi, T. (2002). Human group choice: Discrete-trial and free-operant tests of the ideal free distribution . Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 1–15 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Milinski, M. (1987). Competition for non-depleting resources: The ideal free distribution in sticklebacks. In A. C. Kamil, J. R. Krebs, & H. R. Pulliam (Eds.), Foraging Behavior. New York: Plenum Press .
  • Nowak. M. A., & May, R. M. (1992). Evolutionary chaos and spatial games . Nature, 359, 826–829 .[CrossRef]
  • Parejo, D., Danchin, E., & Aviles, J. M. (2005). The heterospecific habitat copying hypothesis: Can competitors indicate habitat quality? Behavioral Ecology, 16, 96–105 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (1999). Information foraging . Psychological Review, 106, 643–675 .[CrossRef]
  • Pöysä, H., Elmberg, E., Sjöberg, K., & Nummi, P. (1998). Habitat selection rules in breeding mallards (Anas platyrhynchos): A test of two competing hypotheses . Oecologia, 114, 283–287 .[CrossRef]
  • Rauch, E. M., & Bar-Yam, Y. (2004). Theory predicts the uneven distribution of genetic diversity within species . Nature, 431, 449–452 .[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Regelmann, K. (1984). Competitive resource sharing: A simulation model . Animal Behaviour, 32, 226–232 .[CrossRef]
  • Rita, H., & Ranta, E. (1998). Competition in a group of equal foragers . American Naturalist, 152, 71–81 .[CrossRef]
  • Roberts, M. E., & Goldstone, R. L. (2005). Explaining resource undermatching with agent-based models. In Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum .
  • Sernland, E., Olsson, O., & Holmgren, N. M. A. (2003). Does information sharing promote group foraging? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 270, 1137–1141 .
  • Seth, A. K. (2001). Modeling group foraging: Individual suboptimality, interference, and a kind of matching . Adaptive Behavior, 9, 67–91 .[Abstract]
  • Seth, A. K. (2002). Competitive foraging, decision making, and the ecological rationality of the matching law. In J. Hallam, D. Floreano, B. Hallam, G. Hayes, & J.-A. Meyer (Eds.), From animals to animats 7: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, (pp. 359–368). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
  • Sokolowski, M. B. C., & Tonneau, F. (2004). Human-group behavior: The ideal free distribution in a three-patch situation . Behavioural Processes, 65, 269–272 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Sokolowski, M. B. C., Tonneau, F., & Freixa-Baque, E. (1999). The ideal free distribution in humans: An experimental test . Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 157–161 .
  • Stamps, J. A. (1988). Conspecific attraction and aggregation in territorial species . American Naturalist, 131, 329–347 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Sutherland, W. J. (1983). Aggregation and the ‘ideal free’ distribution , The Journal of Animal Ecology, 52, 821–828 .[CrossRef]
  • Templeton, J. J., & Giraldeau, L. A. (1996). Vicarious sampling: The use of personal and public information by starlings foraging in a simple patchy environment . Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 38, 105–114 .
  • Thomas, G. (1974). The influence of encountering a food object on the subsequent searching behavior in Gasterosteus aculeatus . Animal Behaviour, 22, 941–952 .[CrossRef]
  • Valone, T. J., & Giraldeau, L. A. (1993). Patch estimation by group foragers: What information is used? Animal Behaviour, 45, 721–728 .[CrossRef]
  • Zach, R., & Falls, J. B. (1976). Foraging behavior, learning, and exploration by captive ovenbirds . Canadian Journal of Zoology, 54, 1863–1879 .

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roberts, M. E.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstone, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?