Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although evolutionary models of cooperation build on the intuition that costs of the donor and benefits to the receiver are the most general fundamental parameters, it is largely unknown how they affect the decision of animals to coo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Schneeberger Karin, Dietz Melanie, Taborsky Michael
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2012-03-01
Series:BMC Evolutionary Biology
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/12/41
_version_ 1818379330240118784
author Schneeberger Karin
Dietz Melanie
Taborsky Michael
author_facet Schneeberger Karin
Dietz Melanie
Taborsky Michael
author_sort Schneeberger Karin
collection DOAJ
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although evolutionary models of cooperation build on the intuition that costs of the donor and benefits to the receiver are the most general fundamental parameters, it is largely unknown how they affect the decision of animals to cooperate with an unrelated social partner. Here we test experimentally whether costs to the donor and need of the receiver decide about the amount of help provided by unrelated rats in an iterated prisoner's dilemma game.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fourteen unrelated Norway rats were alternately presented to a cooperative or defective partner for whom they could provide food via a mechanical apparatus. Direct costs for this task and the need of the receiver were manipulated in two separate experiments. Rats provided more food to cooperative partners than to defectors (direct reciprocity). The propensity to discriminate between helpful and non-helpful social partners was contingent on costs: An experimentally increased resistance in one Newton steps to pull food for the social partner reduced the help provided to defectors more strongly than the help returned to cooperators. Furthermore, test rats provided more help to hungry receivers that were light or in poor condition, which might suggest empathy, whereas this relationship was inverse when experimental partners were satiated.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In a prisoner's dilemma situation rats seem to take effect of own costs and potential benefits to a receiver when deciding about helping a social partner, which confirms the predictions of reciprocal cooperation. Thus, factors that had been believed to be largely confined to human social behaviour apparently influence the behaviour of other social animals as well, despite widespread scepticism. Therefore our results shed new light on the biological basis of reciprocity.</p>
first_indexed 2024-12-14T02:01:04Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b6a88edb84ce4e178cb75174c08b1482
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1471-2148
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-14T02:01:04Z
publishDate 2012-03-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Evolutionary Biology
spelling doaj.art-b6a88edb84ce4e178cb75174c08b14822022-12-21T23:21:01ZengBMCBMC Evolutionary Biology1471-21482012-03-011214110.1186/1471-2148-12-41Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipientSchneeberger KarinDietz MelanieTaborsky Michael<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although evolutionary models of cooperation build on the intuition that costs of the donor and benefits to the receiver are the most general fundamental parameters, it is largely unknown how they affect the decision of animals to cooperate with an unrelated social partner. Here we test experimentally whether costs to the donor and need of the receiver decide about the amount of help provided by unrelated rats in an iterated prisoner's dilemma game.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fourteen unrelated Norway rats were alternately presented to a cooperative or defective partner for whom they could provide food via a mechanical apparatus. Direct costs for this task and the need of the receiver were manipulated in two separate experiments. Rats provided more food to cooperative partners than to defectors (direct reciprocity). The propensity to discriminate between helpful and non-helpful social partners was contingent on costs: An experimentally increased resistance in one Newton steps to pull food for the social partner reduced the help provided to defectors more strongly than the help returned to cooperators. Furthermore, test rats provided more help to hungry receivers that were light or in poor condition, which might suggest empathy, whereas this relationship was inverse when experimental partners were satiated.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In a prisoner's dilemma situation rats seem to take effect of own costs and potential benefits to a receiver when deciding about helping a social partner, which confirms the predictions of reciprocal cooperation. Thus, factors that had been believed to be largely confined to human social behaviour apparently influence the behaviour of other social animals as well, despite widespread scepticism. Therefore our results shed new light on the biological basis of reciprocity.</p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/12/41
spellingShingle Schneeberger Karin
Dietz Melanie
Taborsky Michael
Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient
BMC Evolutionary Biology
title Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient
title_full Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient
title_fullStr Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient
title_full_unstemmed Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient
title_short Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient
title_sort reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/12/41
work_keys_str_mv AT schneebergerkarin reciprocalcooperationbetweenunrelatedratsdependsoncosttodonorandbenefittorecipient
AT dietzmelanie reciprocalcooperationbetweenunrelatedratsdependsoncosttodonorandbenefittorecipient
AT taborskymichael reciprocalcooperationbetweenunrelatedratsdependsoncosttodonorandbenefittorecipient