Phantom decoys alter perceived missed opportunity costs and increase risky foraging decisions - Dataset
| Field | Value | Language |
| dc.contributor.author | Parker, Finn Cameron Gillies | |
| dc.coverage.spatial | Walpeup, Victoria, Australia | en_AU |
| dc.coverage.temporal | 2022-2023 | en_AU |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-06-30T03:57:35Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-06-30T03:57:35Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2026 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2123/35472 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Foraging decisions about risk and reward are driven by an option’s perceived value relative to foregone alternatives, i.e. missed opportunity costs (MOCs). Information that alters perceptions about alternatives (i.e. perceived MOCs) should therefore influence animal behaviour, yet perceived MOCs are overlooked in wildlife management and rarely manipulated. Phantom decoys are attractive but inaccessible options (i.e. missed opportunities) that change decision-making, seemingly by altering perceptions of MOCs. Using phantom decoys, we conducted two experiments to: a) test if misinformation about MOCs alters risk versus reward foraging decisions; and b) assess whether decoys can increase trapping rates by changing how animals trade off trap danger for rewards inside. Firstly, we conducted a giving-up density (GUD) experiment on wild house mice (Mus musculus) in large natural enclosures, creating patches comprising safe and risky trays of high- and low-quality foods, with decoys at half the patches. Where decoys were present, mice foraged longer in risky trays, accepting greater risk at these patches compared to otherwise identical patches without decoys. Secondly, in a field trapping experiment, we positioned decoys beside trap entrances, and compared capture rates to controls. More mice were captured in traps with decoys outside them. Our results demonstrate how information alone can shape perceptions of MOCs to increase risky behaviour. Behavioural responses to ‘irrelevant’ alternatives (i.e. phantom decoys) have traditionally been considered irrational. Our findings suggest that attractive resources provide valuable information about the environment, even if inaccessible, highlighting the potential for decoy information to alter decision-making to improve wildlife management outcomes. | en_AU |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_AU |
| dc.rights | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 | en_AU |
| dc.subject | Context-dependent decision-making | en_AU |
| dc.subject | risk-sensitive foraging | en_AU |
| dc.subject | ecological rationality | en_AU |
| dc.subject | pest management | en_AU |
| dc.subject | information use | en_AU |
| dc.subject | missed opportunity cost | en_AU |
| dc.title | Phantom decoys alter perceived missed opportunity costs and increase risky foraging decisions - Dataset | en_AU |
| dc.type | Dataset | en_AU |
| dc.subject.asrc | ANZSRC FoR code::31 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES::3103 Ecology::310301 Behavioural ecology | en_AU |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.25910/sdve-w105 | |
| dc.relation.arc | DP200103148 | |
| dc.relation.arc | DE220101316 | |
| dc.relation.arc | DP190101441 | |
| dc.description.method | This data was collected across two experiments over the course of two years (2022-2023). Experiment 1 (foraging experiment) - Wild house mice (Mus musculus) were studied in nine large outdoor field enclosures in Walpeup, Victoria, Australia. We used a repeated-measures experimental design to test whether inaccessible but highly attractive food odours (phantom decoys) influenced foraging decisions. Each enclosure contained four foraging patches, each comprising paired safe and risky food trays offering either high-quality (sunflower) or lower-quality (barley) food. Half of the enclosures initially received phantom decoys positioned adjacent to designated patches, while the remaining enclosures served as controls before treatments were reversed. Giving-up density (GUD; the amount of food remaining after overnight foraging) was recorded daily to quantify foraging effort. Prior to experimentation, mouse densities were standardised across enclosures and animals were allowed to acclimatise to the experimental setup. The dataset includes GUD measurements together with treatment, patch, food quality, risk level, enclosure and sampling information. Full experimental procedures are described in the associated publication. Experiment 2 (Field trapping experiment) - Field trapping was conducted in cereal crops near Walpeup, Victoria, Australia during 2022 and 2023 to test whether phantom decoys increased live-trap capture success. Elliott traps were assigned to one of three treatments: standard wheat bait (control), a phantom decoy positioned outside the trap, or a decoy placed inside the trap as a procedural control. Traps were operated for up to six consecutive nights and checked each morning, with captured mice individually shave-marked to identify recaptures. In 2022, a subset of traps was monitored using motion-triggered cameras to quantify trap visitation independently of captures. The dataset contains capture histories, treatment assignments, trap identifiers, sampling night, recapture information and, where applicable, camera visitation records. Complete details of the trapping design, experimental procedures and statistical analyses are provided in the associated publication. | en_AU |
| usyd.faculty | SeS faculties schools::Faculty of Science::School of Life and Environmental Sciences | en_AU |
| usyd.department | Behavioural Ecology and Conservation Research Group | en_AU |
| workflow.metadata.only | No | en_AU |
Associated file/s
Associated collections