Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27709367›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2017

A test of the reward-value hypothesis.

Alexandra E Smith, Stefan J Dalecki, Jonathon D Crystal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A test of the reward-contrast hypothesis.Behavioural processes · 2017
    Article
  7. 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

3 authors.

Alexandra E SmithDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 47405-7007, USA.
Stefan J DaleckiDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 47405-7007, USA.
Jonathon D CrystalDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 47405-7007, USA. jcrystal@indiana.edu.

Funding

A rodent model of prospective memoryR21AG044530 · NIA · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI CRYSTAL, JONATHON D · 2013 to 2014
$429k
A rodent model of episodic memoryR01MH098985 · NIMH · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI CRYSTAL, JONATHON D · 2013 to 2013
$387k
NIA NIH HHS R21 AG044530NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH098985
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rats retain source memory (memory for the origin of information) over a retention interval of at least 1 week, whereas their spatial working memory (radial maze locations) decays within approximately 1 day. We have argued that different forgetting functions dissociate memory systems. However, the two tasks, in our previous work, used different reward values. The source memory task used multiple pellets of a preferred food flavor (chocolate), whereas the spatial working memory task provided access to a single pellet of standard chow-flavored food at each location. Thus, according to the reward-value hypothesis, enhanced performance in the source memory task stems from enhanced encoding/memory of a preferred reward. We tested the reward-value hypothesis by using a standard 8-arm radial maze task to compare spatial working memory accuracy of rats rewarded with either multiple chocolate or chow pellets at each location using a between-subjects design. The reward-value hypothesis predicts superior accuracy for high-valued rewards. We documented equivalent spatial memory accuracy for high- and low-value rewards. Importantly, a 24-h retention interval produced equivalent spatial working memory accuracy for both flavors. These data are inconsistent with the reward-value hypothesis and suggest that reward value does not explain our earlier findings that source memory survives unusually long retention intervals.

Indexed as

Maze LearningRewardSpatial MemoryAnimalsMemory, Short-TermRatsEpisodic memoryRatsReward valueSource memorySpatial memory

Identifiers

PMID27709367
PMCPMC5303543

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.