Table 1 Results for the rate of acquisition of the manipulation of the seesaw to access a food reward, the intermediate steps prior to the acquisition of the novel trait, the rate of performance of the manipulation of the seesaw once acquired, and innovation. “F vs M” refers to full sibling and mixed sibling relatedness compositions. “N vs M” refers to no sibling and mixed sibling relatedness compositions. The comparisons for the number of experienced rats are represented as “2 vs 0” and “4 vs 0”. “Seesaw change” refers to the change in the seesaw’s location from the initial location (I) and the location after the change (C). “HR” refers to the hazard ratio effect size. The min and max refer to the min and max values of the difference in each parameter estimate with and without each data point and represents model stability. We do not report the p value for the intercepts, because these values are meaningless. Significant results are printed in bold. A p-value reported with “*” represents a result that is likely a type I error.
From: Experimental evidence for social learning in semi-natural, wild-type Norway rats
Models | Response | Variables | Estimate (95% CI) | SE | Min | Max | HR (95% CI) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rate to acquire a novel trait | Latency to first success | F vs. M | 0.90 (−0.82–2.63) | 0.88 | 0.48 | 1.09 | HR: 2.47 (0.44–13.84) | 0.30 |
N vs. M | 3.88 (0.52–7.25) | 1.72 | 2.77 | 4.53 | HR: 48.56 (1.68–1401.77) | 0.024 | ||
2 vs. 0 | −2.22 (−5.96–1.52) | 1.91 | −2.86 | −1.17 | HR: 0.11 (0.003–4.57) | 0.24 | ||
4 vs. 0 | 2.35 (0.29–4.40) | 1.05 | 1.72 | 2.81 | HR: 10.44 (1.33–81.67) | 0.025 | ||
Seesaw position: C vs. I | 6.03 (0.95–11.11) | 2.59 | 4.07 | 6.65 | HR: 414.14 (2.57–66647.90) | 0.02 | ||
Intermediate steps prior to acquisition of novel trait | Attending the platform | Intercept | −8.16 (−10.19 – −6.13) | 1.04 | −28.34 | −6.56 | ||
F vs. M | −0.90 (−2.19–0.40) | 0.66 | −1.36 | 20.63 | 0.17 | |||
N vs. M | 0.22 (−0.85–1.29) | 0.55 | 0.00 | 20.92 | 0.69 | |||
2 vs. 0 | 7.33 (5.17–9.49) | 1.10 | 6.00 | 27.78 | < 0.001 | |||
4 vs. 0 | 7.61 (5.52–9.69) | 1.06 | 6.12 | 27.89 | < 0.001 | |||
Witnessing conspecifics | Intercept | −4.88 (−5.57 – −4.31) | 0.31 | −5.11 | −4.74 | |||
F vs. M | 0.51 (−0.31–1.26) | 0.37 | 0.24 | 0.70 | 0.17 | |||
N vs. M | 0.21 (−0.70–1.05) | 0.41 | 0.03 | 0.37 | 0.61 | |||
2 vs. 0 | 4.10 (3.41–4.99) | 0.38 | 3.89 | 4.36 | < 0.001 | |||
4 vs. 0 | 5.07 (4.29–6.02) | 0.41 | 4.90 | 5.25 | < 0.001 | |||
Eating food rewards | Intercept | −8.18 (−11.10 – −6.56) | 1.05 | −28.31 | −6.40 | |||
F vs. M | −0.98 (−2.51–0.78) | 0.77 | −1.55 | 19.55 | 0.21 | |||
N vs. M | −0.12 (−1.38–1.36) | 0.64 | −0.46 | 19.82 | 0.85 | |||
2 vs. 0 | 7.84 (5.96–10.85) | 1.14 | 6.44 | 28.34 | < 0.001 | |||
4 vs. 0 | 8.27 (6.50–11.22) | 1.09 | 6.64 | 28.54 | < 0.001 | |||
Rate of performing the trait | Intervals between successes | F vs. M | 1.31 (−0.29–2.87) | 0.79 | HR: 3.72 (0.78–17.62) | 0.10 | ||
N vs. M | 1.53 (−0.17–3.24) | 0.87 | HR: 4.64 (0.84–25.46) | 0.08 | ||||
2 vs. 0 | 0.10 (−1.27–1.49) | 0.71 | HR: 1.11 (0.28–4.44) | 0.88 | ||||
4 vs. 0 | −1.92 (3.51 – −0.19) | 0.89 | HR: 0.15 (0.03–0.83) | 0.03* | ||||
Seesaw change: C vs. I | −0.04 (−0.26–0.19) | 0.12 | HR: 0.96 (0.77–1.21) | 0.73 | ||||
Innovation | Likelihood of successful manipulations by using innovated manipulations | Intercept | −11.69 (−25.86 – −6.65) | 3.20 | −14.03 | −10.02 | ||
Naïve vs. experienced | −1.66 (−17.76–58.32) | 5.39 | −2.69 | 25.58 | 0.76 |
