Furthermore, orthodox consumer economics assumes buyers make compensatory trade-offs between different product characteristics; this approach ignores problems caused by bounded rationality that, in complex choice environments, leads buyers to formulate simplifying heuristics such as hierarchical (non-compensatory) preferences over characteristics.
Interestingly, such patterns in compensatory trade-offs are usually species specific, and therefore are often not considered in studies of the ecological immunology of non-model organisms (Norris and Evans, 2000; Matson et al., 2006; Salvante, 2006).
Limits on the optimality of the evolutionary process may be imposed by founder effects, linkage disequilibrium, allometry, pleiotropy, the archetype (the genetic prototype, i.e., the genetic material available at a site that fuels the evolutionary process), and compensatory trade-offs among traits (Harper 1982).
Experimental studies testing correlated evolution of all leaf traits should be further performed to analyse compensatory effects (trade-off).
Polarity therefore results in stabilizing, compensatory mutations not trading off, but instead promoting the acquisition of new activities.
In this manner, a compensatory process of trading off probability against payoff was performed.
Mainstream theories of decision-making under risk, from expected utility theory [1] to prospect theory [2], [3], [4], assume that the problem of decision conflict can be solved by a compensatory process that trades probability for payoff.
The difference between the two tasks was that the judgment-based choice task required participants to perform a compensatory process of trading off probability against payoff by using the certainty equivalent method [40], [41], but the preferential choice task did not explicitly require participants to perform a compensatory or non-compensatory process.
In the judgment-based choice task, on the other hand, increased proportion selecting difference was associated with an increase in the unidimensional difference (estimated using cumulative prospect theory), implying that the conflict pattern in the judgment-based choice was induced by the use of a compensatory process of trading off probability against payoff.
For this reason, ecophysiological adaptations have long been proposed for explaining differences in brain size among primate species [ 17– 19] and a number of researchers have suggested compensatory mechanisms for trading-off the high metabolic costs derived from an increase in encephalization, including changes in dietary quality and body composition [ 1, 8, 20– 30].
