ArticleBehavioural processes2012
Pavlovian biconditional discrimination learning in the C57BL/6J mouse.
Article in Behavioural processes, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prelimbic and infralimbic cortical inactivations attenuate contextually driven discriminative responding for reward.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Pavlovian contextual and instrumental biconditional discrimination learning in mice.Behavioural brain research · 2013Article
- Temporal Averaging Across Stimuli Signaling the Same or Different Reinforcing Outcomes in the Peak Procedure.International journal of comparative psychologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Four experiments using mice examined acquisition of Pavlovian biconditional discriminations in which two stimulus compounds were paired with food (AX+ and BY+) and two were not (AY- and BX-). Temporally asynchronous compounds were generated by using contextual stimuli (Experiment 1) and 15-s discrete visual cues (Experiments 2A, 2B and 3) to disambiguate when embedded noise or tone stimuli would be paired with food. When food pellets followed both reinforced compounds, successful acquisition was obtained in Experiment 1 but not in Experiments 2A and 2B even though the order of trials was modeled after that used in Experiment 1. However, when differential outcomes followed the reinforced compounds in Experiment 3, acquisition was obtained with discrete cue stimulus compounds. The implications of these results for modulatory models of conditional discrimination learning in animals are discussed.
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.