Skip Navigation

American Zoologist 1996 36(4):392-401; doi:10.1093/icb/36.4.392
© 1996 by The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SMALLWOOD, P. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

An Introduction to Risk Sensitivity: The Use of Jensen's Inequality to Clarify Evolutionary Arguments of Adaptation and Constraint1

PETER D. SMALLWOOD
Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104

I review the basic rationale for risk-sensitive foraging, and present a few of the most common expressions of risk-sensitivity theory. A simple heuristic, the energy-budget rule, and the z-score model are explained. These functional models of risk sensitivity assume or explicitly model fitness as a nonlinear function of an animal's energy state. For such nonlinear relationships, Jensen's inequality predicts that the fitness realized by an animal with a more constant energy state may be higher or lower than the fitness resulting from a variable energy state with the same mean, depending on the shape of the fitness function. Predictive functional models of behavior, like the energy-budget rule and the z-score model, depend on specific features of the function relating energy state to fitness, which may or may not be general features for most organisms. While behavioral ecologist have studied the functional significance of animal responses to variation in foraging rewards, psychologists have long studied the psychological mechanisms by which preferences for variable or constant rewards are expressed. Jensen's inequality is applied here too; psychologists propose nonlinearities in the perception and processing of information. The growing number of different relationships that might account for risk-sensitive behavior is a potential source of confusion. I advocate "returning to the basics," i.e., that hypotheses to explain risksensitive behavior should specify precisely the assumed nonlinear relationships.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.