Search

COVID-19 has a substantial and unexpected impact on individuals' daily life around the world. Unprecedented public health restrictions such as lockdowns have the potential to affect multiple dimensions of individuals' well-being, while the severity of such restrictions varies across countries. However, a holistic perspective comparing differences in and drivers of the different dimensions of well-being across countries differentially affected by COVID-19 is missing to date. We address this gap in the literature by examining the mental, social, functional, and financial well-being of 2,100 individuals across Australia, France, Germany, and South Africa by means of a survey administered during May of 2021. Supporting our holistic approach, we find that the different dimensions of well-being are correlated, with survey respondents from France reporting the lowest and those from Australia reporting the highest overall level of well-being. Respondents' subjective and objective evaluations of their living conditions during lockdowns as well as positive health and financial behaviors are positively associated with their well-being during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In their natural environment, animals often make decisions crucial for survival, such as choosing the best patch or food, or the best partner to cooperate. The choice can be compared to a gamble with an outcome that is predictable but not certain, such as rolling a dice. In economics, such a situation is called a risky context. Several models show that although individuals can generally evaluate the odds of each potential outcome, they can be subject to errors of judgment or choose according to decision‐making heuristics (simple decision rules). In non‐human primates, similar errors of judgment have been reported and we have recently shown that they also use a decisional heuristics when confronted with a risky choice in an exchange task. This suggests a common evolutionary origin to the mechanisms underlying decision‐making under risk in primates. However, whether the same mechanisms are also present in more distantly related taxa needs to be further investigated. Other social species, like corvids, are renowned for their advanced cognitive skills and may show similar responses. Here, we analyse data on corvids (carrion crows, hooded crows, common ravens and rooks) tested in a risky exchange task comparable to the one used in non‐human primates. We investigated whether corvids could exchange according to the odds of success or, alternatively, whether they used a heuristic similar to the one used by non‐human primates. Instead, most corvids chose a course of action (either a low or high exchange rate) that remained constant throughout the study. In general, corvids' mean exchange rates were lower compared to non‐human primates, indicating that they were either risk‐adverse or that they do not possess the cognitive capabilities to evaluate odds. Further studies are required to evaluate the flexibility in exchange abilities of these birds in exchange abilities of these birds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many studies investigate the decisions made by animals by focusing on their attitudes toward risk, that is, risk-seeking, risk neutrality, or risk aversion. However, little attention has been paid to the extent to which individuals understand the different odds of outcomes. In a previous gambling task involving 18 different lotteries (Pelé, Broihanne, Thierry, Call, & Dufour, 2014), nonhuman primates used probabilities of gains and losses to make their decision. Although the use of complex mathematical calculation for decision-making seemed unlikely, we applied a gradual decrease in the chances to win throughout the experiment. This probably facilitated the extraction of information about odds. Here, we investigated whether individuals would still make efficient decisions if this facilitating factor was removed. To do so, we randomized the order of presentation of the 18 lotteries. Individuals from 4 ape and 2 monkey species were tested. Only capuchin monkeys differed from others, gambling even when there was nothing to win. Randomizing the lottery presentation order leads all species to predominantly use a maximax heuristic. Individuals gamble as soon as there is at least one chance to win more than they already possess, whatever the risk. Most species also gambled more as the frequency of larger rewards increased. These results suggest optimistic behavior. The maximax heuristic is sometimes observed in human managerial and financial decision-making, where risk is ignored for potential gains, however low they may be. This suggests a shared and strong propensity in primates to rely on heuristics whenever complexity in evaluation of outcome odds arises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In human adults, judgment errors are known to often lead to irrational decision-making in risky contexts. While these errors can affect the accuracy of profit evaluation, they may have once enhanced survival in dangerous contexts following a "better be safe than sorry" rule of thumb. Such a rule can be critical for children, and it could develop early on. Here, we investigated the rationality of choices and the possible occurrence of judgment errors in children aged 3 to 9 years when exposed to a risky trade. Children were allocated with a piece of cookie that they could either keep or risk in exchange of the content of one cup among 6, visible in front of them. In the cups, cookies could be of larger, equal or smaller sizes than the initial allocation. Chances of losing or winning were manipulated by presenting different combinations of cookie sizes in the cups (for example 3 large, 2 equal and 1 small cookie). We investigated the rationality of children's response using the theoretical models of Expected Utility Theory (EUT) and Cumulative Prospect Theory. Children aged 3 to 4 years old were unable to discriminate the profitability of exchanging in the different combinations. From 5 years, children were better at maximizing their benefit in each combination, their decisions were negatively induced by the probability of losing, and they exhibited a framing effect, a judgment error found in adults. Confronting data to the EUT indicated that children aged over 5 were risk-seekers but also revealed inconsistencies in their choices. According to a complementary model, the Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT), they exhibited loss aversion, a pattern also found in adults. These findings confirm that adult-like judgment errors occur in children, which suggests that they possess a survival value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animals commonly face fluctuations in their environment and resources. To maximize their benefits, they need to integrate the risks attached to potential pay-offs. We do not know, however, to what extent individuals account for irregularity in the latter. We tested the sensitivity of monkeys (Cebus apella, Macaca tonkeana, M. fascicularis) to the irregularity of pay-offs in two different tasks. In a first experiment, the subjects were given an exchange task where the reward probability varied between different conditions, but yielded the same average pay-off. There was no evidence of subjects favoring either condition, meaning that they behaved in accordance with the predictions of the classical decision theory (Expected Utility Theory). In a second experiment, we offered to subjects a choice between two options involving different pay-off regularity. In this case, a wide range of inter-individual variation was found in the choices of individuals. Whereas monkeys accepted irregular pay-off in a rational way, there were individual biases in their preferences. These results indicate that the preferences of animals in a risky situation were not unequivocally shaped by the environment in which species have evolved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animals can maximize benefits but it is not known if they adjust their investment according to expected pay-offs. We investigated whether monkeys can use different investment strategies in an exchange task. We tested eight capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and thirteen macaques (Macaca fascicularis, Macaca tonkeana) in an experiment where they could adapt their investment to the food amounts proposed by two different experimenters. One, the doubling partner, returned a reward that was twice the amount given by the subject, whereas the other, the fixed partner, always returned a constant amount regardless of the amount given. To maximize pay-offs, subjects should invest a maximal amount with the first partner and a minimal amount with the second. When tested with the fixed partner only, one third of monkeys learned to remove a maximal amount of food for immediate consumption before investing a minimal one. With both partners, most subjects failed to maximize pay-offs by using different decision rules with each partner' quality. A single Tonkean macaque succeeded in investing a maximal amount to one experimenter and a minimal amount to the other. The fact that only one of over 21 subjects learned to maximize benefits in adapting investment according to experimenters' quality indicates that such a task is difficult for monkeys, albeit not impossible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate the rise of economic abilities during development we studied children aged between 3 and 10 in an exchange situation requiring them to calculate their investment based on different offers. One experimenter gave back a reward twice the amount given by the children, and a second always gave back the same quantity regardless of the amount received. To maximize pay-offs children had to invest a maximal amount with the first, and a minimal amount with the second. About one third of the 5-year-olds and most 7- and 10-year-olds were able to adjust their investment according to the partner, while all 3-year-olds failed. Such performances should be related to the rise of cognitive and social skills after 4 years.