Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations

Starlings help explain irrational preferences

December 22, 2011
University of Oxford
Research into decision-making by European starlings may help explain why many animals, including humans, sometimes exhibit irrational preferences.

Research into decision-making by European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) may help to explain why many animals, including humans, sometimes exhibit irrational preferences.
Credit: Wouter Tolenaars / Fotolia

Research into decision-making by European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) may help explain why many animals, including humans, sometimes exhibit irrational preferences.

Related Articles

A study by Oxford University scientists in which starlings pecked on different coloured keys to gain a food reward shows that the birds pay too much attention to context: this makes them vulnerable to the sort of tricks that marketing specialists use to try to make human shoppers choose one product over another.

A report of the research was recently published in Science.

The researchers use a supermarket metaphor to explain irrational preferences:

  • Budget supermarket Starbuy sells a range of tomatoes that includes Redgold as its highest quality option. Its rival Poshchoice sells a superior range that includes Goldquest, a variety superior to Redgold but at the bottom of Poshchoice's upmarket range.
  • Because other tomato alternatives are available in each supermarket, on regular shopping trips shoppers experience a positive feeling when they see Redgold ("I'll take it, it's the best around") and a negative one towards Goldquest ("I'll see if there's a better one").
  • On rare occasions where both varieties are presented side by side, shoppers' choices will be influenced by these emotional memories, upping the preference for the manifestly inferior Redgold, because it is remembered as a winner.

'Such examples of irrational behaviour are often quoted in studies of human behavioural economics, but the reasons why people may be designed to make such irrational choices are rarely addressed,' said Dr Esteban Freidin, from whose DPhil dissertation this study originates.

We are evolutionary-minded scientists, and for us the consequences of behaviour must play a role in the evolution (and design) of the underlying psychology. If decision-makers make systematically bad decisions, we want to understand why,' said Professor Alex Kacelnik, Freidin's supervisor and head of the Behavioural Ecology Research Group in Oxford University's Department of Zoology.

In an experiment involving eight European starlings Freidin and Kacelnik tested whether giving these decision-makers additional, truthful, information about the typical context of each alternative could harm choice performance (a phenomenon sometimes called the "less is more" effect, because ignorance seems to improve results).

They manipulated the presence or absence of reminders of the normal context of each item, and wondered whether such reminders would improve or harm the rationality of the starlings' choices: In their shopping metaphor, this experimental manipulation would be equivalent to adding to every box of tomatoes the supermarkets' logos (for example a label reading: 'Products of Starbuy/Poshchoice').

They reasoned that context information is irrelevant to the choice between two simultaneous alternatives, but may influence preferences because it brings up the memory for the emotional impact of meeting each option in its normal context.

This is exactly what they found: the starlings (which were pecking at coloured keys for food rather than buying tomatoes) were trained with two options in different contexts. In each context one option was better and the other worse than another alternative present at the time.

To implement the logos manipulation, they divided the birds in two groups. In one group ('context signalled') a signal identified in which context each presentation took place. In the other ('context unsignalled') the birds could only infer the context from the options encountered. When the birds were presented with the two target options simultaneously, the context-signalled group made more wrong choices than the context-unsignalled one, confirming that the addition of truthful information can, ironically, make decision-makers perform worse.

The results were reversed, however, when the starlings were presented with only one option at a time, and had to decide whether to take it or leave it to search for better alternatives. In the supermarket metaphor, this would mean that enhanced context information is good for shoppers' usual circumstances (if you find the best tomato this shop sells, take it; if you find the worst search for an alternative).

However, being reminded of these context-dependent circumstances brings to the fore feelings that can be harmful in the unusual cases where the two target options are simultaneously available: here all that matters are the differences between the two options. By responding to the context the starlings might have been economically irrational, but they were 'ecologically rational', because they did well in frequently occurring situations while paying a cost in rare ones.

The authors argue that decision processes reflect organisms' adaptations to their circumstances, and that for most animals this probably involves maximising their performance in sequential encounters (of the take-it-or-skip-it kind) rather than side-by-side simultaneous ones (of the take-either-of-these kind). In the former, being influenced by the context helps to make better decisions, while in the latter, the additional information adds confusing and irrelevant noise.

Dr Freidin said: 'We use theory developed to understand foraging behaviour of animals to expose general principles of choice.' Professor Kacelnik added: 'A successful science of decision-making cannot be based exclusively on the psychology of decisions or on the evolution of this psychology: it needs both. We illustrate this by combining animal behaviour experiments with economic analyses of human behaviour.'

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by University of Oxford. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:

  1. E. Freidin, A. Kacelnik. Rational Choice, Context Dependence, and the Value of Information in European Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Science, 2011; 334 (6058): 1000 DOI: 10.1126/science.1209626

Cite This Page:

University of Oxford. "Starlings help explain irrational preferences." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 22 December 2011. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111220203136.htm>.
University of Oxford. (2011, December 22). Starlings help explain irrational preferences. ScienceDaily. Retrieved March 4, 2015 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111220203136.htm
University of Oxford. "Starlings help explain irrational preferences." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111220203136.htm (accessed March 4, 2015).

Share This

More From ScienceDaily

More Mind & Brain News

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations

Featured Videos

from AP, Reuters, AFP, and other news services

This Nasal Treatment Could Help Ease Migraine Pain

This Nasal Treatment Could Help Ease Migraine Pain

Newsy (Mar. 2, 2015) Researchers gave lidocaine to 112 patients, and about 88 percent of the subjects said they needed less migraine-relief medicine the next day. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
How Facebook Use Can Lead To Depression

How Facebook Use Can Lead To Depression

Newsy (Mar. 1, 2015) Margaret Duffy of the University of Missouri talks about her study on the social network and the envy and depression that Facebook use can cause. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
The Best Foods to Battle Stress

The Best Foods to Battle Stress

Buzz60 (Feb. 26, 2015) If you&apos;re dealing with anxiety, there are a few foods that can help. Krystin Goodwin (@krystingoodwin) has the best foods to tame stress. Video provided by Buzz60
Powered by NewsLook.com
Sleeping Too Much Or Too Little Might Increase Stroke Risk

Sleeping Too Much Or Too Little Might Increase Stroke Risk

Newsy (Feb. 26, 2015) People who sleep more than eight hours per night are 45 percent more likely to have a stroke, according to a University of Cambridge study. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com

Search ScienceDaily

Number of stories in archives: 140,361

Find with keyword(s):
Enter a keyword or phrase to search ScienceDaily for related topics and research stories.


Breaking News:

Strange & Offbeat Stories

Health & Medicine

Mind & Brain

Living & Well

In Other News

... from NewsDaily.com

Science News

Health News

Environment News

Technology News


Free Subscriptions

Get the latest science news with ScienceDaily's free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:

Get Social & Mobile

Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks and mobile apps:

Have Feedback?

Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
Mobile: iPhone Android Web
Follow: Facebook Twitter Google+
Subscribe: RSS Feeds Email Newsletters
Latest Headlines Health & Medicine Mind & Brain Space & Time Matter & Energy Computers & Math Plants & Animals Earth & Climate Fossils & Ruins