Risk sensitivity in starlings: variability in food amount and food delay

Starlings' preferences for constant versus variable food sourceswere studied in the laboratory. The constant alternative gavea fixed amount of food after a fixed delay. The variable alternativeoffered either a varying amount of food after a fixed delay(treatment A) or a fixed amount of food after a variable delay(treatment B). In both treatments the ratio of amount of foodover trial length (the sum of intertrial interval plus delayand handling times) of the constant alternative equaled theaverage of the two ratios of the variable alternative. The variableratios were 30% higher and 30% smaller than the fixed ratio.In free-choice trials (both options available in each trial),the subjects were risk-averse or indifferent in treatment Aand indifferent or riskprone in treatment B. In no-choice trials(only one source available per trial), the latency to respondwas longer in the variable than in the constant source in treatmentA and the opposite in treatment B. The greater preference forvariability in time than for variability in reward amount isnot consistent with either maximizing the ratio of expectedenergy over expected time or the expected ratio of energy overtime for individual trials. There was a negative correlationbetween individual intake rate and degree of risk pronenessfor both kinds of variability. We present a model of choicebased on an information-processing theory for temporal memorythat accounts for the different effects of variability in delayand in amount but cannot explain the effects of intake rate.[Behav Ecol 1991;2:301–308]