ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
A progressive ratio task with costly resets reveals adaptive effort-delay tradeoffs.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Progressive Ratio (PR) schedule is a popular test for measuring the motivational value of a reinforcer, in which subjects must exert an increasing amount of work to obtain each successive reward. Despite its popularity, the PR task hinges on a low-dimensional behavioral readout-breakpoint, or the maximum work requirement subjects are willing to complete before abandoning the task. Here, we show that with a simple modification, the PR task can be transformed into an optimization problem reminiscent of the patch-leaving foraging scenario, which has been analyzed extensively by behavioral ecologists, psychologists, and neuroscientists. In the Progressive Ratio with Reset (PRR) task, rats perform the PR task on one lever, but can press a second lever to reset the current ratio requirement back to its lowest value at the cost of enduring a reset delay, during which both levers are retracted. Rats used the reset lever adaptively on the PRR task, and their ratio reset decisions were sensitive to the cost of the reset delay. We derived an approach for computing the optimal bout length-the number of rewards to earn before pressing the reset lever that produces the greatest long-term rate of reward-and found that rats flexibly changed their behavior to approximate the optimal strategy. However, rats showed a systematic bias for bout lengths that exceeded the optimal length, an effect reminiscent of "overharvesting" in patch-leaving tasks. The PRR task thus represents a novel means of testing whether and how rats adapt their behavior to the cost-benefit structure of the environment in a way that connects deeply to the broader literature on associative learning and optimal foraging theory.
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.