Mice learn to avoid the rat race

Rennie, Scott M.; Platt, Michael. L.

doi:10.1038/d41586-017-08835-9

NEWS AND VIEWS
21 December 2017

Mice learn to avoid the rat race

Mice can learn to overcome their naturally aggressive approach to conflict resolution, instead adopting a cooperative strategy. This discovery provides a simple animal model in which to investigate a complex social behaviour.

Scott M. Rennie ⁰ &
Michael. L. Platt ¹

Scott M. Rennie
1. Scott M. Rennie is in the Champalimaud Neuroscience Programme, Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, 1400-038 Lisbon, Portugal.
View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Michael. L. Platt
1. Michael. L. Platt is in the Departments of Neuroscience, of Psychology and of Marketing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.
View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Access through your institution

Buy or subscribe

Social interactions are often complicated by conflicts of interest. Humans and other animals adopt diverse strategies to resolve such disputes. Stronger individuals can often secure their interests at the expense of weaker individuals, but this strategy can be costly if it requires aggression. Strategies that are more cooperative and egalitarian can also develop among kin¹ or individuals who reciprocate in repeated interactions². Theoretical and experimental studies suggest that cooperation depends on cognitive control processes that override the impulse to acquire tangible rewards³. This theory now finds support from Choe et al.⁴, writing in Nature Communications. The authors demonstrate that pairs of mice can learn to coordinate their behaviour to achieve an egalitarian distribution of rewards — but only when rewards are delivered directly to the brain, rather than through food.

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

Buy

All prices are NET prices.

Nature 553, 284-285 (2018)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-017-08835-9

References

Hamilton, W. D. Am. Nat. 97, 354–356 (1963).
Article Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. Q. Rev. Biol. 46, 35–57 (1971).
Article Google Scholar
Stevens, J. R. & Hauser, M. D. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8, 60–65 (2004).
PubMed Article Google Scholar
Choe, I.-H. et al. Nature Commun. 8, 1176 (2017).
PubMed Article Google Scholar
Wang, F., Kessels, H. W. & Hu, H. Trends Neurosci. 37, 674–682 (2014).
PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar
Zhou, T. et al. Science 357, 162–168 (2017).
PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar
Olds, J. & Milner, P. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 47, 419–427 (1954).
PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar
Viana, D. S., Gordo, I., Sucena, E. & Moita, M. A. P. PLoS ONE 5, e8483 (2010).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Stephens, D. W., McLinn, C. M. & Stevens, J. R. Science 298, 2216–2218 (2002).
PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar
Silberberg, A. & Fujita, K. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 66, 143–147 (1996).
PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar
Boysen, S. T. & Berntson, G. G. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Processes 21, 82–86 (1995).
PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar
Nishi, A., Shirado, H., Rand, D. G. & Christakis, N. A. Nature 526, 426–429 (2015).
PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar