ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2021
Time elapsed between choices in a probabilistic task correlates with repeating the same decision.
Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reinforcement sensitivity phenotype modulates the impact of chronic stress on hedonic capacity in rats, but not the response to fluoxetine.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Non-motor symptoms associated with progressive loss of dopaminergic neurons in a mouse model of Parkinson's disease.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Time elapsed between choices in a probabilistic task correlates with repeating the same decision.The European journal of neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reinforcement learning causes an action that yields a positive outcome more likely to be taken in the future. Here, we investigate how the time elapsed from an action affects subsequent decisions. Groups of C57BL6/J mice were housed in IntelliCages with access to water and chow ad libitum; they also had access to bottles with a reward: saccharin solution, alcohol, or a mixture of the two. The probability of receiving a reward in two of the cage corners changed between 0.9 and 0.3 every 48 hr over a period of ~33 days. As expected, in most animals, the odds of repeating a corner choice were increased if that choice was previously rewarded. Interestingly, the time elapsed from the previous choice also influenced the probability of repeating the choice, and this effect was independent of previous outcome. Behavioral data were fitted to a series of reinforcement learning models. Best fits were achieved when the reward prediction update was coupled with separate learning rates from positive and negative outcomes and additionally a "fictitious" update of the expected value of the nonselected choice. Additional inclusion of a time-dependent decay of the expected values improved the fit marginally in some cases.
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.