Attending to the outcomes of others
Fletcher, Grace Elizabeth
MetadataShow full item record
In Brosnan and de Waal’s (2003) publication on inequity aversion in capuchins, they reported that the subjects responded negatively to unequal reward distributions. Independent research has shown that alternate hypotheses such as the “frustration effect” or the “food expectation hypothesis” provide more parsimonious explanations. Others have argued that these findings are not congruent with the Fehr-Schmidt inequity-aversion model cited by the authors. In the present study, an adaptation of the Cardinal Ultimatum game was used to investigate whether capuchins would be averse to disadvantageous inequity and whether it would be influenced by the presence of a conspecific. When presented with a choice between an equitable and a disadvantageouslyinequitable outcome, subjects chose the equitable outcome. Moreover, the subjects chose the equitable outcome significantly more when in the presence of a conspecific. The most plausible explanation for these results is disadvantageous inequity aversion and not the aforementioned alternate hypotheses.