ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2024
Refining the study of decision-making in animals: differential effects of d-amphetamine and haloperidol in a novel touchscreen-automated Rearing-Effort Discounting (RED) task and the Fixed-Ratio Effort Discounting (FRED) task.
Article in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2024. 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.
- Sub-chronic stress exerts partially distinct behavioral and epigenetic effects in male and female mice.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Cross-species translational paradigms for assessing positive valence system as defined by the RDoC matrix.Journal of neurochemistry · 2025Review
- Electrophysiological recording during touchscreen-based behavioral assays in rodents: A platform for improving early-stage neuroscience drug discovery.Journal of neurochemistry · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Effort-based decision-making is impaired in multiple psychopathologies leading to significant impacts on the daily life of patients. Preclinical studies of this important transdiagnostic symptom in rodents are hampered, however, by limitations present in currently available decision-making tests, including the presence of delayed reinforcement and off-target cognitive demands. Such possible confounding factors can complicate the interpretation of results in terms of decision-making per se. In this study we addressed this problem using a novel touchscreen Rearing-Effort Discounting (RED) task in which mice choose between two single-touch responses: rearing up to touch an increasingly higher positioned stimulus to obtain a High Reward (HR) or touching a lower stimulus to obtain a Low Reward (LR). To explore the putative advantages of this new approach, RED was compared with a touchscreen version of the well-studied Fixed Ratio-based Effort Discounting (FRED) task, in which multiple touches are required to obtain an HR, and a single response is required to obtain an LR. Results from dopaminergic (haloperidol and d-amphetamine), behavioral (changes in the order of effort demand; fixed-ratio schedule in FRED or response height in RED), and dietary manipulations (reward devaluation by pre-feeding) were consistent with the presence of variables that may complicate interpretation of conventional decision-making tasks, and demonstrate how RED appears to minimize such variables.
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.