Rusty Saber: Monkeys go ape over unequal pay experiment

Joe McAdoo is former chairman of the communication department at Drury University.

To send a worker into a rage, casually suggest that a co-worker doing the same job receives a higher salary. Recent research suggests such demand for equal pay for equal work may actually be an inborn trait, at least one shared by humans and monkeys.

In the primate research project conducted at Emory University in Atlanta, Capuchin monkeys cooperated with researchers as long as they were equally rewarded. When some received better rewards than others, the slighted monkeys took offense. If you believe monkey behavior gives insight into human behavior, this indicates that getting bent out of shape over unequal pay is genetic.

This phenomenon is called _inequity aversion._ Here are the details. Pairs of monkeys were encouraged to hand researchers small rocks in exchange for cucumber slices, which more than 95 percent were happy to do.

After several rounds of rocks-for-cucumbers trades, one partner received the cucumber, the other, a grape, which is more highly prized than a cucumber. (A personal note: I dislike cucumbers. I won_t eat one nor do I want to be in the same room with one. I can understand why many shortchanged monkeys would be highly offended). The rate of exchange of the cucumber- paid monkeys fell to only 60 percent.

This behavior I understand _ some insulted monkeys who refused to hand over the rocks actually threw the once suitable cucumbers out of the test area. I would have done the same. The degree of cooperation among cucumber-paid monkeys was the lowest when their partners received a grape without handing over the rock. Are these monkeys human counterparts or what? It might be infuriating to be paid less for doing the same work, but a co-worker doing no work and getting paid more! Well, that might cause humans to throw the cucumber, the co-worker and the boss out of the area.

What does this all mean? It seems obvious to me: Monkey around with their paychecks and workers will go ape. I know, I know. That_s a cheap shot; I couldn_t resist.

It may be true that primates and humans share certain traits. However, some events we humans believe important enough to be considered news leads me to wonder if monkeys may be intelligent enough to ignore such drivel. For instance, Madonna made headlines when she and Britney Spears temporarily traded tongues in a melodramatic kiss on the MTV Music Awards.

Fortunately, I missed the show, but I learned about the gushy smooch from media. The principals in this uplifting story featured Madonna, noted for constantly pushing the music good-taste envelope, kissing Britney Spears, who looks like a Barbie Doll and dresses like a stripper. I assume there was interest in the event or it wouldn_t have received mass coverage.

Just a few days later, Madonna made big news again with the release of a children_s book she has written, _The English Roses._ Surely I_m not the only one who sees something wrong with this picture. Shouldn_t _children_s book__ and _Madonna__ be an oxymoron? I bet that none of the monkeys in the research project is the least bit interested in Madonna_s book. Lots of humans must be interested. The book is available in 100 countries, printed in 30 languages and is a best seller.

I rest my case. No. Before resting my case, one more item.

Sports Illustrated recently reported the inaugural _Lingerie Bowl_ tackle football game between two teams of female models will occur at halftime of Super Bowl XXXVIII. No word on how much of the models will be covered up by their football uniforms. Interestingly enough, the magazine reports the story as _This Week_s Sign of the Apocalypse._ About the monkey vs. human IQ, I now rest my case.