| Abstract |
Attempts to include psychological constraints in models of foraging behaviour differ in their assumptions concerning the accuracy of estimation of environmental parameters. Psychologists model estimation error as increasing linearly with the magnitude of a stimulus (Weber's Law), whereas behavioural ecologists either ignore error or assume it to be independent of stimulus magnitude. Studies on the estimation of time intervals have confirmed Weber's Law, but there are few data on the accuracy of estimation of amounts of food. Since the currency of most foraging models is the amount of food acquired per unit of time spent foraging, information on estimation of amount is required. Here, a titration method was used in which starlings chose between two cues. One colour signalled a standard food reward, and the other a reward that adjusted in magnitude according to the birds' choices: it increased when the standard was preferred and decreased when the adjusting option was preferred. There were two standards of 3 and 9 units of food, each of which was delivered at two rates to control for possible effects of rate of reinforcement on discrimination. The observed value of the adjusting option oscillated around a mean value slightly larger than that of the standard. The amplitude and period of these oscillations were larger when the standard was larger, independent of the rate of reinforcement. Also, molecular analysis showed that the probability of choosing the currently larger alternative increased as the relative difference between the adjusting option and standard increased. These results are consistent with Weber's Law applying to starlings' memories for amounts of food. |
