Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24834036›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2014

Touchscreen-paradigm for mice reveals cross-species evidence for an antagonistic relationship of cognitive flexibility and stability.

S Helene Richter, Anne S Vogel, Kai Ueltzhöffer, Chiara Muzzillo, Miriam A Vogt, Katja Lankisch, Diana J N Armbruster-Genç, Marco A Riva, Christian J Fiebach, Peter Gass and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Dysregulation ofLearning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

S Helene RichterAnimal Models in Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University Mannheim, Germany ; Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany.
Anne S VogelAnimal Models in Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University Mannheim, Germany ; Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany.
Kai UeltzhöfferBernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany ; Department of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Chiara MuzzilloDepartment of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Milan Milan, Italy.
Miriam A VogtAnimal Models in Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University Mannheim, Germany.
Katja LankischAnimal Models in Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University Mannheim, Germany ; Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany.
Diana J N Armbruster-GençBernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany ; Department of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Marco A RivaDepartment of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Milan Milan, Italy.
Christian J FiebachBernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany ; Department of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Germany ; Center for Individual Development and Adaptive Education Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Peter GassAnimal Models in Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University Mannheim, Germany ; Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany.
Barbara VollmayrAnimal Models in Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University Mannheim, Germany ; Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg/Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The abilities to either flexibly adjust behavior according to changing demands (cognitive flexibility) or to maintain it in the face of potential distractors (cognitive stability) are critical for adaptive behavior in many situations. Recently, a novel human paradigm has found individual differences of cognitive flexibility and stability to be related to common prefrontal networks. The aims of the present study were, first, to translate this paradigm from humans to mice and, second, to test conceptual predictions of a computational model of prefrontal working memory mechanisms, the Dual State Theory, which assumes an antagonistic relation between cognitive flexibility and stability. Mice were trained in a touchscreen-paradigm to discriminate visual cues. The task involved "ongoing" and cued "switch" trials. In addition distractor cues were interspersed to test the ability to resist distraction, and an ambiguous condition assessed the spontaneous switching between two possible responses without explicit cues. While response times did not differ substantially between conditions, error rates (ER) increased from the "ongoing" baseline condition to the most complex condition, where subjects were required to switch between two responses in the presence of a distracting cue. Importantly, subjects switching more often spontaneously were found to be more distractible by task irrelevant cues, but also more flexible in situations, where switching was required. These results support a dichotomy of cognitive flexibility and stability as predicted by the Dual State Theory. Furthermore, they replicate critical aspects of the human paradigm, which indicates the translational potential of the testing procedure and supports the use of touchscreen procedures in preclinical animal research.

Indexed as

cognitive flexibilitycognitive stabilityDual State Theoryexecutive functioningmiceneurocomputational modelstouchscreen chamberstranslation

Identifiers

PMID24834036
PMCPMC4017158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.