Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40440289›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Behavior classification: Introducing machine learning approaches for classification of sign-tracking, goal-tracking and beyond.

Camille Godin, Frédéric Huppé-Gourgues

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Camille GodinÉcole de Psychologie, Université de Moncton, Moncton, New-Brunswick, Canada.
Frédéric Huppé-GourguesÉcole de Psychologie, Université de Moncton, Moncton, New-Brunswick, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7904-2198

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Classifying behaviors in research often relies on predetermined or subjective cutoff values, which can introduce inconsistencies and reduce objectivity. For example, in Pavlovian conditioning studies, rodents display diverse behaviors which can be quantified using the Pavlovian Conditioning Approach (PavCA) Index score. This score is used to categorize subjects as sign-trackers (ST), goal-trackers (GT), or intermediate (IN) groups, but the cutoff values used to distinguish these categories are often arbitrary and inconsistent. The inconsistencies stem from variability in the skewness and kurtosis of score distributions across laboratories, influenced by a range of biological and environmental factors. To address this issue, we explored two approaches to PavCA Index score classification: the k-Means classification and the derivative method. These methods determine cutoff values based on the distribution of PavCA Index scores in the sample, allowing for broader applicability to various types of behavioral data. Our results suggest that these methods, particularly the derivative method based on mean scores from the final days of conditioning, are effective tools for identifying sign-trackers and goal-trackers, especially in relatively small samples. In contrast to existing methods, our approaches provide a standardized classification framework that reflects unique distributions. Furthermore, these methods are adaptable to a researcher's specific needs, accommodating different models and sample sizes. To facilitate implementation, we provide MATLAB code for classifying subjects using both the k-Means classifier and the derivative method.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalConditioning, ClassicalMachine LearningAnimalsGoalsMaleRats

Identifiers

PMID40440289
PMCPMC12121781

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.