Question

Why do you suppose it took so long for ethologists and psychologists to recognize the larger literature on foraging behaviors that exists in each other's field? What do you think were the biggest differences in the way foraging was studied in these two disciplines?

Answer 1

• Why do you suppose it took so long for ethologists and psychologists to recognize the larger literature on foraging behaviors that exist in each other's field?

• In ethology, human behaviour is studied from an evolutionary point-of-view. An ethologist studies the primal behaviour of our ancestors. This study includes the analysis of how biological factors influenced the behaviour of the lesser developed humans. Even if an ethologist studies human behaviour is a social construct, it would be a very objective approach.

Psychology, on the other hand, is mostly subjective. Each individual patient has their emotions and behaviour dissected in order to be diagnosed. Even if it is organizational behaviour, psychologists do acknowledge that each individual reacts to a particular situation in very different ways. Psychology is a study that calculates how one human can behave differently to another based on their individual personality.

Both studies not only deal with a different perspective of human behaviour but, also a different time when such behaviour has evolved. This is probably why psychologists and ethologists have not collaborated in their studies and observations.

• What do you think were the biggest differences in the way foraging was studied in these two disciplines?

• In psychology, Maslow’s need hierarchy theory states that food is one of the basic necessities. Therefore, in psychological applications, food has been looked at as a mechanical need for a long time.

Whereas in ethology, food is more of a functional need. The search for food makes an animal smarter and improves its memory as the animal will have to use the knowledge from experience in order to forage for the next time it is hungry.

These are two very different perspectives. But the Optimal Foraging Theory actually combines the teachings of the psychological and ethological connotations. This theory suggests that when a basic human need like food is not available for a long duration, it affects human behaviour. This effect is seen on a functional and mechanical level. Not only will the individual be hungry (mechanical need) but, also look for food and try to gain the maximum energy (from food) by spending the least amount of remaining energy (functional need).

When both fields combine studies, it can both objectively and subjectively analyse how an individual’s behaviour can change on a biological and psychological level when they are hungry and in pursuit of a meal.