Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34561853›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2022

Individual differences in proactive interference in rats (Rattus Norvegicus).

Elias Tsakanikos, Phil Reed

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 55% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elias TsakanikosRoehampton University, London, UK.
Phil ReedDepartment of Psychology, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK. p.reed@swansea.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8157-0747
Swansea University · GBUniversity of Roehampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual differences in behaviors are seen across many species, and investigations have focused on traits linked to aggression, risk taking, emotionality, coping styles, and differences in cognitive systems. The current study investigated whether there were individual differences in proactive interference tasks in rats (Rattus Norvegicus), and tested hypotheses suggesting that these tasks should load onto a single factor and there should be clusters of rats who perform well or poorly on these tasks. The performance of 39 rats was tested across three learning tasks that all involved disengagement from an irrelevant previously learned stimulus to a relevant stimulus: latent inhibition (LI), partial reinforcement extinction effect (PREE), and reversal learning (RL). An exploratory factor analysis revealed the existence of one factor underlying performance. A cluster analysis revealed the existence of sets of rats displaying either weak LI and strong PREE and RL effects, or vice versa. These findings suggest that proactive interference may be based on a single underlying psychological system in rats.

Indexed as

Extinction, PsychologicalIndividualityAnimalsProactive InhibitionRatsReinforcement, PsychologyReversal LearningBehavioral typesIndividual differencesLatent inhibitionProactive interference

Identifiers

PMID34561853
PMCPMC8858310
OpenAlexW3200067630

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.