ArticleBehavioural brain research2023
The role of sex on sign-tracking acquisition and outcome devaluation sensitivity in Long Evans rats.
Article in Behavioural brain research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Female rats are more vulnerable to binge drinking behavior in an operant self-administration paradigm: implication for transition to alcohol use disorders.Biology of sex differences · 2026Article
- Dopamine receptor sensitivity, cocaine-induced behaviors, and Pavlovian conditioned approach in male rats.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Behavioral microanalyses refine sign-tracking characterization and uncover different response dynamics during omission and extinction learning.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Resting-state brain activation patterns and network topology distinguish human sign and goal trackers.Translational psychiatry · 2024Article
- Dorsomedial Striatum CB1R signaling is required for Pavlovian outcome devaluation in male Long Evans rats and reduces inhibitory synaptic transmission in both sexes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cues that predict rewards can trigger reward-seeking behaviors but also can, in some cases, become targets of motivation themselves. One behavioral phenomenon that captures this idea is sign-tracking in which animals, including humans, interact with reward-predictive cues even though it is not necessary to do so. Sign-tracking in rats has been studied in the domain of motivation and in how motivated behaviors can or cannot become excessive and habit-like over time. Many prior studies look at sign-tracking examine this behavior in male subjects, but there are few papers that look at this behavior in female subjects. Moreover, it is unknown where there might be sex-related variation in how flexible sign-tracking is when faced with changing reward values. Therefore, we asked if there were sex differences in the acquisition of sign-tracking behavior and if there were any sex differences in how sensitive animals were in their sign-tracking following reward devaluation. In contrast to previous reports, we found that males and females show no differences in how they acquire sign-tracking and in ultimate sign-tracking levels following training. Additionally, we found no difference in how quickly males and females learned to devalue the food reward, and we found no differences in sign-tracking levels by sex following outcome devaluation. We believe that this is primarily due to our experiment being performed in the Long Evans strain but also believe that there are many other factors contributing to differences between our study and previous work.
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.