100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: The Rats of NIMH | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I'll post an article or two on this in the next few days, if no one gets to it first, but I read recently that they let some rats play a variation of the Prisoners Dilemma.
The rats were placed in these chambers, where they could see what the other rat did (and what course of action they chose). Instead of 'snitch or keep quiet' they used 'enter the same chamber or enter different chambers'. Instead of 'years spent in prison' they used shocks and food (I think there were four cases: food no shocks, shocks no food, food and shocks, neither food nor shocks) as If I understood correctly, the rats learned to apply an optimal strategy, together. If I understood correctly, this implied a greater capacity for various cognitive skills than had been previously thought possible for rats. Did anyone read about this? Do you have a link to share? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the 'NIMH' in the title a reference to the 'National Institute of Mental Health' or something else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's "The Secret of NIMH"
 
-Jonathon |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the 'NIMH' in the title a reference to the 'National Institute of Mental Health' or something else? Yes, in fact it is, but that is unrelated to the actual rats in these experiments. Apparently, the rats in these experiments are smarter than we thought, which reminded me of a work of fiction, featuring rats as smart as humans - my title was a playful reference to this work. I figured there would be others in this forum who loved the same book as a child. In short: NIMH has nothing to do with these experiments, but everything to do with my childhood associations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Frisby_and_the_Rats_of_NIMH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And it all boils down to our ASSumptions on how rats (and other creatures) think. Rats are smart little buggers and I say that with fondness as I've had them as pets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JaneStar1
on
Tue 04/13/10 11:33 PM
|
|
In short: NIMH has nothing to do with these experiments, but everything to do with my childhood associations
Apparently, he's a very complex individual!!! -- beyond the mere mortals' understanding...   
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In short: NIMH has nothing to do with these experiments, but everything to do with my childhood associations
Apparently, he's a very complex individual!!! -- beyond the mere mortals' understanding...
Since NIMH is an organization, I'm left assuming that by 'he' you mean me. For clarity, the main association was: "Smart Rats = Rats of NIMH". Not very complex, many children had the same thoughts when they read that book. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finally I have a moment to google, skim, cut'n'paste, etc:
from http://blog.the-scientist.com/2010/03/25/amazing-rats/ I find it really interesting that other studies tried to measure the intelligence of food-deprived rats. I mean, really? Look at how humans behave/think when they are food-deprived - did we expect better from rats? .....
The study adapted the Prisoner’s Dilemma for rats by giving food rewards when either both animals cooperated or one rat defected. When both rats defected, their tails were pinched. The “sucker” rat also had his tail pinched. The experiment used two T-mazes, stacked back-to-back and separated by mesh screens so that the animals could see and smell each other. The researchers fixed one rat’s strategy (the “stooge”) to either a tit-for-tat or pseudorandom approach, by forcing him to go into either the left or right side of one of the T-mazes on each trial. The experimental rat could then decide whether to cooperate with the stooge rat, or go for the largest food payout by defecting. The results showed that the rats quickly figured out their opponent’s strategy. For example, if the experimental rat defected, the stooge playing a tit-for-tat strategy would defect on the next trial. Rather than continually going after the high food reward, the experimental rat fell in line and quickly started cooperating again, avoiding a continuous cycle of defection. In fact, when competing against a tit-for-tat opponent, the rats cooperated about 60% of the time. When playing against pseudorandom opponent, where there’s no clear advantage to cooperating, the cooperation rate dropped to ~20%. Studies conducted in other labs previously concluded that rats didn’t grasp how to succeed in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. The authors of the PLoS study noted that when experimenters observed low cooperation rates, the animals had been food deprived. Fully satiated rats, on the other hand, freely cooperated and easily solved the Prisoner’s Dilemma. These results show that the primordial drive for food in a hungry animal simply clouds judgement. ..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
who gives the rat's tail???  
|
|
|
|
|
