How fairness and dominance guide young children’s bargaining decisions

Reaching agreements in conf licts is an important developmental challenge. Here, German 5- year- olds (N= 284, 49% female, mostly White, mixed socioeconomic backgrounds; data collection: June 2016–November 2017) faced repeated face- to-face bargaining problems in which they chose between fair and unfair reward divisions. Across three studies, children mostly settled on fair divisions. However, dominant children tended to benefit more from bargaining outcomes (in Study 1 and 2 but not Study 3) and children mostly failed to use leverage to enforce fairness. Communication analyses revealed that children giving orders to their partner had a bargaining advantage and that children provided and responded to fairness reasons. These findings indicate that fairness concerns and dominance are both key factors that shape young children's bargaining decision

Reduced risk-seeking in chimpanzees in a zero-outcome game

A key component of economic decisions is the integration of information about reward outcomes and probabilities in selecting between competing options. In many species, risky choice is influenced by the magnitude of available outcomes, probability of success and the possibility of extreme outcomes. Chimpanzees are generally regarded to be risk-seeking. In this study, we examined two aspects of chimpanzees' risk preferences: first, whether setting the value of the non-preferred outcome of a risky option to zero changes chimpanzees’ risk preferences, and second, whether individual risk preferences are stable across two different measures. Across two experiments, we found chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes, n = 23) as a group to be risk-neutral to risk-avoidant with highly stable individual risk preferences. We discuss how the possibility of going empty-handed might reduce chimpanzees' risk-seeking relative to previous studies. This malleability in risk preferences as a function of experimental parameters and individual differences raises interesting questions about whether it is appropriate or helpful to categorize a species as a whole as risk-seeking or risk-avoidant. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Existence and prevalence of economic behaviours among non-human primates’

Treatment of HIV-related primary central nervous system lymphoma with azt high dose, HAART, interleukin-2 and foscarnet in three patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>Combined immunomodulatory and antiviral treatment was administered to three patients with newly diagnosed HIV-associated primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) in an attempt to improve outcomes.</p> <p>Patients and methods</p> <p>Three patients from our institution who were recently diagnosed with HIV-associated PCNSL received intravenous azidothymidine (AZT) 1.6 gr. bid for two weeks, followed by oral AZT 250 mg bid from day 15. In addition, complementary highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) with a second nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) plus one protease inhibitor (PI) and interleukin 2 (IL-2) subcutaneously 2 million units twice daily (bid) plus foscarnet 90 mg/kg bid were administered on days 1-14. One patient received anti-EpsteinBarr virus (EBV)-maintenance therapy with ganciclovir, followed by cidofovir <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B1">1</abbr></abbrgrp>.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All patients experienced progressive disease while on induction therapy, and switched early to whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) as second linetreatment. No grade 3 or 4 toxicities were observed. Two patients died on days 50 and 166 respectively due to progressive disease. The third patient with histologically proven lymphoproliferation and only suspected PCNSL remained alive at 53 months. He was on HAART and remained clinically and neurologically stable.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although IL-2, HAART, high-dose AZT and foscarnet are used for other HIV-related conditions, they did not demonstrate benefit in lymphoma remission for 2 HIVassociated PCNSL patients. The third patient went into delayed remission after additional radiotherapy and was in good clinical and neurological health status over 53 months after diagnosis.</p

Children coordinate in a recurrent social dilemma by taking turns and along dominance asymmetries

Humans constantly have to coordinate their decisions with others even when their interests are conflicting (e.g., when 2 drivers have to decide who yields at an intersection). So far, however, little is known about the development of these abilities. Here, we present dyads of 5-year-olds (N = 40) with a repeated chicken game using a novel methodology: Two children each steered an automated toy train carrying a reward. The trains simultaneously moved toward each other so that in order to avoid a crash-which left both children empty-handed-1 train had to swerve. By swerving, however, the trains lost a portion of the rewards so that it was in each child's interest to go straight. Children coordinated their decisions successfully over multiple rounds, and they mostly did so by taking turns at swerving. In dyads in which turn-taking was rare, dominant children obtained significantly higher payoffs than their partners. Moreover, the coordination process was more efficient in turn-taking dyads as indicated by a significant reduction in conflicts and verbal protest. These findings indicate that already by the late preschool years children can independently coordinate decisions with peers in recurrent conflicts of interest. (PsycINFO Database Recor

Chimpanzees return favors at a personal cost

Humans regularly provide others with resources at a personal cost to themselves. Chimpanzees engage in some cooperative behaviors in the wild as well, but their motivational underpinnings are unclear. In three experiments, chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) always chose between an option delivering food both to themselves and a partner and one delivering food only to themselves. In one condition, a conspecific partner had just previously taken a personal risk to make this choice available. In another condition, no assistance from the partner preceded the subject’s decision. Chimpanzees made significantly more prosocial choices after receiving their partner’s assistance than when no assistance was given (experiment 1) and, crucially, this was the case even when choosing the prosocial option was materially costly for the subject (experiment 2). Moreover, subjects appeared sensitive to the risk of their partner’s assistance and chose prosocially more often when their partner risked losing food by helping (experiment 3). These findings demonstrate experimentally that chimpanzees are willing to incur a material cost to deliver rewards to a conspecific, but only if that conspecific previously assisted them, and particularly when this assistance was risky. Some key motivations involved in human cooperation thus may have deeper phylogenetic roots than previously suspected