ArticlePhysiology & behavior2016
Age differences in appetitive Pavlovian conditioning and extinction in rats.
Article in Physiology & behavior, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adolescent and adult age differences in palatable food learning and consumption.Physiology & behavior · 2025Article
- Article
- The beautiful adolescent brain: An evolutionary developmental perspective.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- Fractionating impulsivity and reward-related phenotypes in adolescent mice.Behavioural brain research · 2025Article
- Associative learning via eyeblink conditioning differs by age from infancy to adulthood.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- Reward-motivated memories influence new learning across development.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Reinforcement learning and Bayesian inference provide complementary models for the unique advantage of adolescents in stochastic reversal.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2022Article
- A Role for Serotonin in Modulating Opposing Drive and Brake Circuits of Impulsivity.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Review
- Adolescent but not adult Sprague-Dawley rats display goal-directed responding after reward devaluation.Developmental psychobiology · 2020Article
- Translations in Stimulus-Stimulus Pairing: Autoshaping of Learner Vocalizations.Perspectives on behavior science · 2020Article
- Translating Developmental Neuroscience to Understand Risk for Psychiatric Disorders.The American journal of psychiatry · 2019Review
- Increased Goal Tracking in Adolescent Rats Is Goal-Directed and Not Habit-Like.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2019Article
- Increased sign-tracking behavior in adolescent rats.Developmental psychobiology · 2017Article
- Setting the occasion for adolescent inhibitory control.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2017Review
- Consequences of Adolescent Exposure to the Cannabinoid Receptor Agonist WIN55,212-2 on Working Memory in Female Rats.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2017Article
- Article
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
Abstract
Mounting evidence indicates that adolescents exhibit heightened sensitivity to rewards and reward-related cues compared to adults, and that adolescents are often unable to exert behavioral control in the face of such cues. Moreover, differences in reward processing during adolescence have been linked to heightened risk taking and impulsivity. However, little is known about the processes by which adolescents learn about the appetitive properties of environmental stimuli that signal reward. To address this, Pavlovian conditioning procedures were used to test for differences in excitatory conditioning between adult and adolescent rats using various schedules of reinforcement. Specifically, separate cohorts of adult and adolescent rats were trained under conditions of consistent (continuous) or intermittent (partial) reinforcement. We found that the acquisition of anticipatory responding to a continuously-reinforced cue proceeded similarly in adolescents and adults. In contrast, responding increased at a greater rate in adolescents compared to adults during presentations of a partially-reinforced cue. We subsequently compared the ability of adolescent and adult rats to dynamically adjust the representation of a reward-predictive cue during extinction trials, in which a secondary inhibitory representation is acquired for the previously-reinforced stimulus. We observed significant age differences in the ability to flexibly update cue representations during extinction, in that the appetitive properties of cues with a history of either continuous or partial reinforcement persisted to a greater extent in adolescents relative to adults.
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.