How likely are you to play it safe ? Choosing an unknown option might be reserve for those with money to burn on the Las Vegas strip – but the mechanisms behind choosing something potentially high risk - high-pitched advantage is a topic that ’s fascinated scientists . Human decision - making is often irrational and can lead to economically poor choices . Now , scientists are turn their attention to the animal kingdom to see ifapeshave the same cognitive bias when it come to risky decisions .
The team carry out two experiment onorangutansandgorillasat Basel Zoo in Switzerland . In the first experimentation , the brute was demonstrate with two cups . One cup contained a safe choice that was known to the animate being , or they could choose a second cup as a risky option which might contain a high payoff than the safe alternative , or no reinforcement at all .
This first experimentation succeeded the preparation period , where the animals had to learn from each experiment that the safe payoff was always present in the safe cup , whereas the risky reward could be present in the risky cup . The animals had to learn , through feedback , the probability and the possible gain from the greater payoff under the wild cup .
A: Experiment one design, chose between a safe reward or an unknown risk. B: Animals choose between the safe cup or one to four risky cups containing an unknown amount of reward.
In a second experiment , the dependable wages was deliver under a secure cup – however , the speculative payoff was always presented under one of several hazardous cups . This was designed to see if the beast could understand the relationship between the number of risky loving cup , and the chance of getting a payoff if the risky loving cup was chosen .
After analysis , the team found that the orangutans and gorillas acted rationally , making decisions based on what they could gain and how likely they were to have a gamey reward . The animals also were more probable to choose the risky choice as the potential reward increase .
The squad found that the orangutans were more likely than the gorilla to choose the risky cup in the first experiment . The investigator conclude that both the Gorilla gorilla and the Pongo pygmaeus are more jeopardy - prostrate in the second experiment , while they were risk of exposure - achromatic in the first . They advise that next oeuvre be carried on to excuse thecognitive biasesfor this modification between observational intent .
The paper is published inPLOS ONE .
