ArticleAnimal cognition2024
Cognitive asymmetry in rats in response to emergent vs. disappearing affordances.
Article in Animal cognition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
This study examines the effects of novel environmental changes on the behavior of rats in an experimental chamber. We hypothesized that newly discovered opportunities, detected by the animal's cognitive system, would motivate greater investigation of environmental changes than comparable changes that prevent a given behavior. Three experiments differed in the emergence vs. elimination of affordances represented by open or closed tunnels. In Experiment 1, rats were habituated to a chamber with all four tunnels closed, and then two tunnels were opened. In Experiment 2, rats were habituated to a chamber where all four tunnels were open, and then two tunnels were closed. In Experiment 3, rats were habituated to a chamber with two open tunnels on one side, and two closed tunnels on the other. Then, the arrangement of open and closed tunnels was swapped. Results of the Exp. 1 show that the rats responded by spending more time near the newly opened tunnels and less time near the closed tunnels, the central zone, and the transporter. This suggests that rats are more motivated to investigate the environmental change combined with the emergent affordance (opening of the tunnels) than the environmental change alone. In Exp. 2, the rats responded by spending more time near the open tunnels and less time in the central zone. This suggests that the rats are more triggered by the available affordances (open tunnels) than by the environmental change (closed tunnels). Finally, in Exp. 3, the rats responded by spending more time near the newly opened tunnels and less near the central zone. However, they did not spend less time near the newly closed tunnels. These results suggest that rats process both the novelty itself and the emergence/disappearance of available affordances. The results are discussed regarding the cognitive asymmetry in the perception of emergent vs. disappearing affordances. It is proposed that the rat's cognitive system is specialized for detecting newly emergent environmental opportunities/affordances rather than novelty in general.
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.