Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40193518›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition2025

Impact of temporal uncertainty on sign-tracking behavior.

Rie Kaneko, Eleanor H Simpson, Peter D Balsam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition, 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

Rie KanekoColumbia University, Department of Psychiatry.ORCID 0009-0000-8627-9193
Eleanor H SimpsonColumbia University, Department of Psychiatry.
Peter D BalsamColumbia University, Department of Psychiatry.

Funding

Timing & Associative LearningR01MH068073 · NIMH · BARNARD COLLEGE · PI BALSAM, PETER D. · 2003 to 2024
$8.0M
NIH HHSNIMH NIH HHS R01 MH068073
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sign-tracking behavior, also known as "autoshaping," is defined as the approach and interaction with reward-predictive cues. It is associated with addiction-related phenotypes and compulsive behavior. Several previous studies have demonstrated that when there is uncertainty about reward properties (e.g., probability and magnitude), sign tracking is increased. However, the effect of cue uncertainty on sign-tracking behavior is not known. Here, using a Pavlovian conditioning paradigm, we held the duration of cues constant and manipulated the temporal uncertainty by implementing either fixed or variable intertrial intervals (ITIs) of different durations across groups of mice. Variable ITIs create temporal uncertainty about when the next cue will occur as well as uncertainty about the interval from the last reward until the next one. We found that temporal uncertainty during acquisition significantly enhances sign tracking, which persists during extinction, even when ITI variability was different in the extinction session than in the acquisition session. This suggests that the effects of temporal uncertainty are learned and retained rather than performance based. Our results demonstrate that sign-tracking behavior is not only modified by the characteristic of the reward, but it can also be modified by uncertainty regarding cues. These findings highlight how temporal predictability shapes cue-directed behaviors and has implications for understanding addiction and compulsive disorders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalConditioning, ClassicalExtinction, PsychologicalRewardAnimalsCuesMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLTime FactorsUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID40193518
PMCPMC12208561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.