Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27078079›Full record

ArticleJournal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983)2016

Fractionating choice: A study on reward discrimination, preference, and relative valuation in the rat (Rattus norvegicus).

Joshua M Ricker, Justin D Hatch, Daniel D Powers, Howard Casey Cromwell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Joshua M RickerJ.P. Scott Center for Neuroscience, Mind and Behavior, Bowling Green State University.
Justin D HatchJ.P. Scott Center for Neuroscience, Mind and Behavior, Bowling Green State University.
Daniel D PowersJ.P. Scott Center for Neuroscience, Mind and Behavior, Bowling Green State University.
Howard Casey CromwellJ.P. Scott Center for Neuroscience, Mind and Behavior, Bowling Green State University.ORCID 0000-0003-0464-7082

Funding

Basal ganglia and relative reward effectR15MH091016 · NIMH · BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY · PI CROMWELL, HOWARD CASEY · 2010 to 2010
$412k
NIMH NIH HHS R15 MH091016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Choice behavior combines discrimination between distinctive outcomes, preference for specific outcomes and relative valuation of comparable outcomes. Previous work has focused on 1 component (i.e., preference) disregarding other influential processes that might provide a more complete understanding. Animal models of choice have been explored primarily utilizing extensive training, limited freedom for multiple decisions and sparse behavioral measures constrained to a single phase of motivated action. The present study used a paradigm that combines different elements of previous methods with the goal to distinguish among components of choice and explore how well components match predictions based on risk-sensitive foraging strategies. In order to analyze discrimination and relative valuation, it was necessary to have an option that shifted and an option that remained constant. Shifting outcomes among weeks included a change in single-option outcome (0 to 1 to 2 pellets) or a change in mixed-option outcome (0 or 5 to 0 or 3 to 0 or 1 pellets). Constant outcomes among weeks were also mixed-option (0 or 3 pellets) or single-option (1 pellet). Shifting single-option outcomes among weeks led to better discrimination, more robust preference and significant incentive contrast effects for the alternative outcome. Shifting multioptions altered choice components and led to dissociations among discrimination, preference, and reduced contrast effects. During extinction, all components were impacted with the greatest deficits during the shifting mixed-option outcome sessions. Results suggest choice behavior can be optimized for 1 component but suboptimal for others depending upon the complexity of alterations in outcome value between options. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorMotivationRewardAnimalsDiscrimination, PsychologicalRatsRats, Sprague-Dawley

Identifiers

PMID27078079
PMCPMC4873358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.