I understand, but in this particular case it's a stylised experiment... I am just trying to understand the possible evolutionary rationale.In a sense that you need to risk it all and save yourself? The way the risk and payoff are defined in this particular case, it's chocolate-ness of milk (reward) and brightness of light (risk). Not sure the payoff would put the animal out of mortal danger in any way.
Come to think of it, we see that behavior in humans too. People coming from a more stressed environment (poverty is stressful) do have a tendency of taking more risk for bigger payoff. It's the whole "Get Rich or Die Tryin'" thing.
I suppose what I am trying to say is that I am having trouble with a concept of "chronic stress" for an animal. Isn't it possible that even short-term stress for, say, a rodent is most often associated with a bad outcome (e.g. getting eaten; a rodent's survival probability conditional on short-term stress is very low, I imagine)? Which might suggest that "chronic stress" is just stress, period. So the response which is being observed is actually just a generic 'panic"-style reaction?
Unfortunately, I can't access the full text of the article, so not sure whether they may have addressed this.
