IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0034578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Glass is Half-Full: Overestimating the Quality of a Novel Environment is Advantageous

Author

Listed:
  • Oded Berger-Tal
  • Tal Avgar

Abstract

According to optimal foraging theory, foraging decisions are based on the forager's current estimate of the quality of its environment. However, in a novel environment, a forager does not possess information regarding the quality of the environment, and may make a decision based on a biased estimate. We show, using a simple simulation model, that when facing uncertainty in heterogeneous environments it is better to overestimate the quality of the environment (to be an “optimist”) than underestimate it, as optimistic animals learn the true value of the environment faster due to higher exploration rate. Moreover, we show that when the animal has the capacity to remember the location and quality of resource patches, having a positively biased estimate of the environment leads to higher fitness gains than having an unbiased estimate, due to the benefits of exploration. Our study demonstrates how a simple model of foraging with incomplete information, derived directly from optimal foraging theory, can produce well documented complex space-use patterns of exploring animals.

Suggested Citation

  • Oded Berger-Tal & Tal Avgar, 2012. "The Glass is Half-Full: Overestimating the Quality of a Novel Environment is Advantageous," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(4), pages 1-10, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0034578
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0034578
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0034578&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0034578?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dominic D. P. Johnson & James H. Fowler, 2011. "The evolution of overconfidence," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7364), pages 317-320, September.
    2. Kazuharu Ohashi & James D. Thomson, 2005. "Efficient harvesting of renewing resources," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(3), pages 592-605, May.
    3. Catherine E. Burns, 2005. "Behavioral ecology of disturbed landscapes: the response of territorial animals to relocation," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(5), pages 898-905, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sweldens, Steven & Puntoni, Stefano & Paolacci, Gabriele & Vissers, Maarten, 2014. "The bias in the bias: Comparative optimism as a function of event social undesirability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 229-244.
    2. Quitterie Roquebert & Jonathan Sicsic & Thomas Rapp, 2021. "Health measures and long-term care use in the European frail population," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(3), pages 405-423, April.
    3. Robin Maximilian Stetzka & Stefan Winter, 2023. "How rational is gambling?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1432-1488, September.
    4. Spitzer, Sonja & Shaikh, Mujaheed, 2022. "Health misperception and healthcare utilisation among older Europeans," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 22(C).
    5. Neyse, Levent & Bosworth, Steven & Ring, Patrick & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2016. "Overconfidence, Incentives and Digit Ratio," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 130145, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    6. Ray Saadaoui Mallek & Mohamed Albaity, 2019. "Individual differences and cognitive reflection across gender and nationality the case of the United Arab Emirates," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 1567965-156, January.
    7. Michael Muthukrishna & Joseph Henrich & Wataru Toyokawa & Takeshi Hamamura & Tatsuya Kameda & Steven J Heine, 2018. "Overconfidence is universal? Elicitation of Genuine Overconfidence (EGO) procedure reveals systematic differences across domain, task knowledge, and incentives in four populations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-30, August.
    8. Kai Barron, 2021. "Belief updating: does the ‘good-news, bad-news’ asymmetry extend to purely financial domains?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 31-58, March.
    9. W. Ahmed & D. Önkal & R. Das & S. Krishnan & F. Olan & M. Mariann Hardey & A. Alex Fenton, 2023. "Developing Techniques to Support Technological Solutions to Disinformation by Analysing Four Conspiracy Networks During COVID-19," Post-Print hal-04693779, HAL.
    10. Belayet Hossain & Panagiotis Tsigaris, 2015. "Are grade expectations rational? A classroom experiment," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 199-212, April.
    11. Lu, Xin & Shang, Jennifer & Wu, Shin-yi & Hegde, Gajanan G. & Vargas, Luis & Zhao, Daozhi, 2015. "Impacts of supplier hubris on inventory decisions and green manufacturing endeavors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(1), pages 121-132.
    12. Kazuharu Ohashi & Alison Leslie & James D. Thomson, 2013. "Trapline foraging by bumble bees: VII. Adjustments for foraging success following competitor removal," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(3), pages 768-778.
    13. Liu, Zhongyi & Li, Mengyu & Lei, Ying & Zhai, Xin, 2022. "A joint strategy based on ordering and insurance for mitigating the effects of supply chain disruption on risk-averse firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    14. Anushka Sandanam & Amy Diedrich & Georgina G. Gurney & Tristam D. Richardson, 2018. "Perceptions of Cyclone Preparedness: Assessing the Role of Individual Adaptive Capacity and Social Capital in the Wet Tropics, Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.
    15. Maxime MENUET, 2016. "Does Overconfidence Drag Out War?," LEO Working Papers / DR LEO 2394, Orleans Economics Laboratory / Laboratoire d'Economie d'Orleans (LEO), University of Orleans.
    16. Louis Lévy-Garboua & Muniza Askari & Marco Gazel, 2018. "Confidence biases and learning among intuitive Bayesians," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 453-482, May.
    17. Roee Teper, 2014. "The Endowment Effect as a Blessing," Working Paper 5862, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    18. Dan Bang & Rani Moran & Nathaniel D. Daw & Stephen M. Fleming, 2022. "Neurocomputational mechanisms of confidence in self and others," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Alice Soldà & Changxia Ke & Lionel Page & William von Hippel, 2020. "Strategically delusional," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(3), pages 604-631, September.
    20. Claus, Edda & Nguyen, Viet Hoang, 2023. "Biased expectations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0034578. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.