ArticleBehavioural processes2017
A test of the reward-contrast hypothesis.
Article in Behavioural processes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of reward magnitude on rats' long-term spatial memory retention in the radial-arm maze.Learning & behavior · 2026Article
- Validation of a rodent model of episodic memory replay.Learning & behavior · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Source memory, a facet of episodic memory, is the memory of the origin of information. Whereas source memory in rats is sustained for at least a week, spatial memory degraded after approximately a day. Different forgetting functions may suggest that two memory systems (source memory and spatial memory) are dissociated. However, in previous work, the two tasks used baiting conditions consisting of chocolate and chow flavors; notably, the source memory task used the relatively better flavor. Thus, according to the reward-contrast hypothesis, when chocolate and chow were presented within the same context (i.e., within a single radial maze trial), the chocolate location was more memorable than the chow location because of contrast. We tested the reward-contrast hypothesis using baiting configurations designed to produce reward-contrast. The reward-contrast hypothesis predicts that under these conditions, spatial memory will survive a 24-h retention interval. We documented elimination of spatial memory performance after a 24-h retention interval using a reward-contrast baiting pattern. These data suggest that reward contrast does not explain our earlier findings that source memory survives unusually long retention intervals.
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.