Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31871918›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2019

Development of a control task for clarifying the neural mechanisms underlying tool-use behavior in rats (

Akane Nagano

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Akane NaganoOrganization for Research Initiatives and Development, Faculty of Psychology, Doshisha University, Japan.
Doshisha University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many studies on non-human animals have attempted to investigate the neural mechanisms underlying tool-use behavior. However, previous studies showed considerable non-tool-use-specific differences between tool-use and control tasks. The purpose of the present study was to develop a control training task for studies that investigate the neural mechanisms behind tool-use in rodents. Eight rats were subjected to control tasks which excluded tool-use-specific factors and consisted of training for hook-pulling and hook-choice tasks, as well as tool-choice tests which included tool-use specific factors and were similar to those in a previous study on rats. With the exception of one rat, the results of the hook-choice training showed that the previous study and the present study had similar difficulty levels. In the tool-choice tests of the present study, rats did not choose the functional tools over the non-functional tools when there was no contradiction between their appearance and functionality, which contrasted with the previous study on which this study was based on. These results suggest that the training task that excludes tool-use-specific factors can be appropriately utilized as a control task for studies investigating the neural mechanisms behind tool-use in animals and, potentially, in humans. •Hook-choice training without tool-use-specific factors can be performed as a control task.•Prior tool-use training improved rats' performance in experimental tests.•Control task for rodents allows investigation of the neural mechanisms of tool-use.

Indexed as

Control task of tool-use task for clarifying the neural mechanisms underlying tool-use behaviorRatsRodentsTool-use behavior

Identifiers

PMID31871918
PMCPMC6911953
OpenAlexW2990402614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.