ArticleScientific reports2022
The effect of unexpected rewards on decision making in cuttlefish.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stress produces negative judgement bias in cuttlefish.Biology letters · 2024Article
- Unexpected appetitive events promote positive affective state in juvenile European sea bass.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Listen to Us: Perceptions of Animal Voice and Agency.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Why it hurts: with freedom comes the biological need for pain.Animal cognition · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite numerous studies demonstrating the cognitive ability of cephalopods, there is currently no study showing an emotion-like behavior in this group of animals. To examine whether cuttlefish have different internal states, we developed a behavioral paradigm to assess if prior surprised events are able to alter the choice made by cuttlefish. By presenting unexpected food rewards to cuttlefish before the test, we investigated whether the reaction time of choosing between two shrimps, an intuitive response toward the prey without previous learning, at three different levels of discriminative tests (easy, difficult, and ambiguous), are different compared to the one without an unexpected reward. This behavioral paradigm serves to demonstrate whether cuttlefish are aware of ambiguous situations, and their choice outcome and reaction time are dependent of their internal states. The results show that the response latency was significantly shortened in the difficult and ambiguous tests when choosing from two shrimps that are either moderately different in size or similar sizes, respectively, when cuttlefish have received unexpected rewards before the test. These results were compared with tests during which the cuttlefish did not receive any reward in advance. Furthermore, this shortening of latency did not result in a difference in choice outcome during the difficult and ambiguous tests. Interestingly, even when cuttlefish have obtained the expected food rewards or simply made tentacular strike without prey capture each time before test, these prior experiences were sufficient to shorten the response latency in the difficult and ambiguous tests. However, different from the result of unexpected rewards, food consumption alone or prey capture failure did affect the choice outcome during the simple and difficult tests. Taken together, our findings suggest that pre-test treatments of unexpected and expected rewards or simply unsuccessful visual attack seem to induce cuttlefish to adopt different foraging behaviors. This context dependent decision making suggests that cuttlefish's foraging strategies are influenced by the previously surprised event and their internal states. It also shows a speed-accuracy tradeoff in difficult and ambiguous situations when foraging for prey. This observation may lead to a future investigation of the presence of emotional state in cephalopods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.