ArticleJournal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983)2012
Evidence for individual differences in regulatory focus in rats, Rattus norvegicus.
Article in Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A "personality test" for rats reveals subtle but distinct effects of sex and early life inflammation on brain and behavior.Behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Toggling between food-seeking and self-preservation behaviors via hypothalamic response networks.Neuron · 2023Article
- Individual differences in rat sensitivity to CO2.PloS one · 2021Article
- The importance of burrowing, climbing and standing upright for laboratory rats.Royal Society open science · 2016Article
- Effects of Degree and Timing of Social Housing on Reversal Learning and Response to Novel Objects in Dairy Calves.PloS one · 2015Article
- Truth, control, and value motivations: the "what," "how," and "why" of approach and avoidance.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2014Review
- Article
- How enrichment affects exploration trade-offs in rats: implications for welfare and well-being.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Regulatory focus (Higgins, 1997) builds on the classic approach-avoidance distinction by identifying two important approach orientations: the promotion focus (approaching gains and attainment) and the prevention focus (approaching nonlosses and safety). Though individual differences in regulatory focus have been widely studied in human psychology, it is unknown if such differences exist in other species. To explore this possibility, we designed a series of tests for laboratory rats, paralleling human regulatory focus research on risk taking. In home-cage tests, rats (N = 23) were given an opportunity to prevent a loss by burying a noxious novel object. In solitary tests in a novel enclosure, the same rats had the opportunity to pursue gains (food rewards) and/or safety (darkness). Rats demonstrated stable individual differences on both tests (p's < .001). Complementing the human research, duration of time spent with the noxious novel object was predicted by an individual's tendency to pursue safety (p < .01) and not by the tendency to pursue gains (p > .8). Some aspects of these results were compatible with alternative approaches, such as the bold-shy axis and "if-then" personality profiles (Mischel & Shoda, 1995). Regulatory focus theory, however, was uniquely able to predict the overall pattern, which may be an indication that it could contribute to future research in animal personality, motivation, and welfare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.