DISCUSSION 
1 . The Writer's Attitude Toward the Study 
of Behavior 
A proper perspective to the study reported in 
this publication requires an appreciation of the 
philosophic position I have in its formulation and 
pursuit. I hold that if one is to pose questions 
concerning social behavior or is to formulate mean- 
ingful hypothesis that are subject to experimental 
verification, one must first develop a broad under- 
standing of behaviors, their consequences, and the 
situations which elicit or modify them. This must 
be done for each species to be studied. Observa- 
tion and analysis form the first step. In this 
process one notes that under certain conditions 
behaviors become modified so that the conse- 
quences are inappropriate or that the individual 
or the group are deleteriously affected. On the 
basis of such miscarriages of behavior one then 
has a logical basis for the formulation of hypotheses, 
whose testing requires experimental manipulation 
of the animal’s physiology or of the situation 
which modifies the elicitation and expression of the 
behavior. This philosophical approach to the 
study of behavior has been elaborated by Lorenz 
(27). 
Most studies of physiology and behavior, in 
which the wild Norway rat or its various domesti- 
cated breeds have been used as subjects, have 
completely ignored this point of view. Experi- 
mentation has been based upon hypotheses pri- 
marily formulated on the basis of clinical studies 
on man. I am not implying that one cannot derive 
insight into biological problems which also has 
relevance to human problems from the study of 
rats. What I am saying is that without a knowledge 
of the biology of the experimental subject in its 
native haunts, one cannot hope to achieve maxi- 
mum effectiveness in experimental design or even 
to rephrase the hypothesis appropriate to the ex- 
perimental subject. Furthermore, familiarity with 
ecological approach to animal behavior engenders 
cognizance of the fact that one frequently is able to 
recognize a behavioral phenomenon in one species, 
which may be experimentally studied in a second 
species, even though conditions pertaining to the 
second species reduce the probability of initially 
recognizing it there. Thus, even when our interest 
in animal experimentation is to seek answers of 
relevance to human experience, we can expect to 
strike pay dirt as often from hypotheses derived 
from a knowledge of the experimental animal, as 
those derived from man. Utilization of both 
sources of hypotheses offers the most promising 
path to successful experimentation. 
The above serves as a background to my selection 
of material in the literature for comment. This 
selection will be devoted (1) to providing further 
understanding of the behavior and ecology of rats 
living in organized groups, and (2) to suggesting 
likely causes or implications of some of the observed 
phenomena. No attempt will be made to dupli- 
cate the reviews of various aspects of the biology of 
the Norway rat. The following are some of the 
major sources of material reviewed by others: 
Population ecology: Davis ( 28 ), Barnett ( 29 ). 
Rodent control: Storer ( 30 ), Chitty and South- 
ern ( 31 ). 
Epidemiology: Hirst ( 32 ). 
Domestication: Castle ( 33 ), Richter ( 34 , 35 ). 
Psychology: Munn ( 36 ). 
Sex Behavior and Physiology: Beach ( 37 ). 
Use in Laboratory Studies: Farris and Griffith 
( 38 ). 
Fighting: Scott and Fredericson ( 39 ). 
253 
