Abstract
A capuchin monkey will accept a preferred food in exchange for tokens if a conspecific also exchanges tokens for the preferred food; but he will reject a less-preferred food if the conspecific exchanges tokens for preferred food. These rejections are usually interpreted as a case of an inequity aversion based on a precursor of a sense of justice. An alternative hypothesis proposes that it is the contrast between the types of food reinforcement experienced by the subject throughout the task that affects the reinforcing function of the less-preferred food. The present study tested this hypothesis with three conditions. Capuchin monkeys received cucumbers (the less-preferred food) as the reinforcer in a token-exchange task during the first and third conditions, and received grapes (the preferred food) in the second condition. The difference in the proportions of acceptances between the first and the third conditions provided evidence of negative contrast in this species, a type of contrast that can at least partially account for the rejections documented in the inequity-aversion literature.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
At first, the grapes had their seeds on, but once we noticed that one of the monkeys (Tico) took off the seeds before eating, we started removing all the seeds from the grapes before running the experimental sessions.
References
Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(5), 422–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040968.
Adams, J. S., & Rosenbaum, W. B. (1962). The relationship of worker productivity to cognitive dissonance about wage inequities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 46(3), 161–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047751.
Brosnan, S. F., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2003). Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature, 425(6955), 297–299. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01963.
Brosnan, S. F., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2006). Partial support from a nonreplication: Comment on Roma, Silberberg, Ruggiero, and Suomi (2006). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120(1), 74–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.120.1.74.
Capaldi, E. J. (1967). A sequential hypothesis of instrumental learning. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Crespi, L. P. (1942). Quantitative variation of incentive and performance in the white rat. American Journal of Psychology, 55(4), 467–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/1417120.
Dindo, M., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2007). Partner effects on food consumption in brown capuchin monkeys. American Journal of Primatology, 69(4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20362.
Dubreuil, D., Gentile, M. S., & Visalberghi, E. (2006). Are capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) inequity averse? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences (1591), 1223–1228. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2005.3433.
Elliott, M. H. (1928). The effect of change of reward on the maze performance of rats. University of California Publications in Psychology, 4, 19–30.
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817–868. https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-a-004372667.
Flaherty, C. F. (1982). Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward. Animal Learning & Behavior, 10(4), 409–440. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212282.
Flaherty, C. F., & Largen, J. (1975). Within-subjects positive and negative contrast effects in rats. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 88(2), 653–664. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076416.
Fletcher, G. E. (2008). Attending to the outcome of others: Disadvantageous inequity aversion in male capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). American Journal of Primatology, 70(9), 901–905. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20576.
Fontenot, M. B., Watson, S. L., Roberts, K. A., & Miller, R. W. (2007). Effects of food preferences on token exchange and behavioural responses to inequality in tufted capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella. Animal Behaviour, 74(3), 487–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.01.015.
Heinrich, J. (2004). Inequity aversion in capuchins? Nature, 428(6979), 139. https://doi.org/10.1038/428139a.
Leimgruber, K. L., Rosati, A. G., & Santos, L. R. (2016). Capuchin monkeys punish those who have more. Evolution & Human Behavior, 37(3), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.12.002.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1974). Contrast effects: Interactions between conditions of reinforcement. In N. J. Mackintosh (Ed.), The Psychology of animal learning (pp. 346–404). London, UK: Academic Press.
Mackintosh, N. J., Little, L., & Lord, J. (1972). Some determinants of behavioral contrast in pigeons and rats. Learning & Motivation, 3(2), 148–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/0023-9690(72)90035-5.
McAuliffe, K., Chang, L. W., Leimgruber, K. L., Spaulding, R., Blake, P. R., & Santos, L. R. (2015). Capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella, show no evidence for inequity aversion in a costly choice task. Animal Behaviour, 103, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.02.014.
Nevin, J. A., & Shettleworth, S. J. (1966). An analysis of contrast effects in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9(4), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1966.9-305.
Price, S. (2014). The effects of an experimenter on the response to inequity in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Masters’ dissertation. Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.
Reynolds, G. S. (1961). Behavioral contrast. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1961.4-57.
Roma, P. G., Silberberg, A., Ruggiero, A. M., & Suomi, S. J. (2006). Capuchin monkeys, inequity aversion and the frustration effect. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120(1), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.120.1.67.
Sheskin, M., Ashayeri, K., Skerry, A., & Santos, L. R. (2014). Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) fail to show inequality aversion in a no-cost situation. Evolution & Human Behavior, 35(2), 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.10.004.
Silberberg, A., Crescimbene, L., Addessi, E., Anderson, J. R., & Visalberghi, E. (2009). Does inequity aversion depend on a frustration effect? A test with capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Animal Cognition, 12(3), 505–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0211-6.
Takimoto, A., Kuroshima, H., & Fujita, K. (2010). Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) are sensitive to others’ reward: An experimental analysis of food-choice for conspecifics. Animal Cognition, 13(2), 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0262-8.
Talbot, C. F., Parrish, A. E., Watzek, J., Essler, J. L., Leverett, K. L., Paukner, A., & Brosnan, S. F. (2017). The influence of reward quality and quantity and spatial proximity on the responses to inequity and contrast in capuchin monkeys (Cebus [Sapajus] apella). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 132(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000088.
van Wolketen, M., Brosnan, S. F., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2007). Inequity responses of monkeys modified by effort. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(47), 18854–18859. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707182104.
Acknowledgements
We thank Edilson Pastana, Anna Carolina Damasceno and the members of the Primate Experimental School for their cooperation. APR and ST conducted the experiment under the supervision of MPC and were supported by master’s studentships from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) and the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), respectively.
Availability of Data and Materials
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Funding
The first author was supported by a master’s studentship from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) and the third author by a master’s studentship from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES). The authors declare that they have no other conflicts of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
All applicable national and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. The procedures performed in this study with capuchin monkeys (Sapajus sp.) were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Primate Experimental School and the Animal Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Pará, Brazil (CEPAE 040-2015).
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rocha, A.P., de Carvalho, M.P., Tavares, S. et al. Negative Behavioral Contrast in Capuchin Monkeys (Sapajus sp.). Psychol Rec 71, 133–141 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00404-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00404-3