ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2016
Mice can count and optimize count-based decisions.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Striatal Pathways for Action Counting and Steering.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Mice monitor their timing errors.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cingulate to septal circuitry facilitates the preference to affiliate with large peer groups.Current biology : CB · 2024Article
- Disparate processing of numerosity and associated continuous magnitudes in rats.Science advances · 2024Article
- Count-based decision-making in mice: numerosity vs. stimulus control.Animal cognition · 2022Article
- Absolute Numerosity Discrimination as a Case Study in Comparative Vertebrate Intelligence.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Review
- Evidence for a Mixed Timing and Counting Strategy in Mice Performing a Mechner Counting Task.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2019Article
- Numerical error monitoring.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2018Article
- An Accumulation-of-Evidence Task Using Visual Pulses for Mice Navigating in Virtual Reality.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies showed that rats and pigeons can count their responses, and the resultant count-based judgments exhibit the scalar property (also known as Weber's Law), a psychophysical property that also characterizes interval-timing behavior. Animals were found to take a nearly normative account of these well-established endogenous uncertainty characteristics in their time-based decision-making. On the other hand, no study has yet tested the implications of scalar property of numerosity representations for reward-rate maximization in count-based decision-making. The current study tested mice on a task that required them to press one lever for a minimum number of times before pressing the second lever to collect the armed reward (fixed consecutive number schedule, FCN). Fewer than necessary number of responses reset the response count without reinforcement, whereas emitting responses at least for the minimum number of times reset the response counter with reinforcement. Each mouse was tested with three different FCN schedules (FCN10, FCN20, FCN40). The number of responses emitted on the first lever before pressing the second lever constituted the main unit of analysis. Our findings for the first time showed that mice count their responses with scalar property. We then defined the reward-rate maximizing numerical decision strategies in this task based on the subject-based estimates of the endogenous counting uncertainty. Our results showed that mice learn to maximize the reward-rate by incorporating the uncertainty in their numerosity judgments into their count-based decisions. Our findings extend the scope of optimal temporal risk-assessment to the domain of count-based decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26463617What 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.