ArticleeLife2025
Sex-specific exploration accounts for differences in valence learning in male and female mice.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Valence, the quality by which something is perceived as good or bad, appetitive or aversive, is a fundamental building block of emotional experience and a primary driver of adaptive behavior. Pavlovian fear and reward learning paradigms are widely used in preclinical research to probe mechanisms of valence learning but with limited consideration of sex as a biological variable despite known sex differences in neuropsychiatric disorders associated with impaired valence. Here, we compare appetitive-only, aversive-only, and mixed-valence cue-outcome Pavlovian conditioning paradigms in male and female mice to dissociate effects of context, valence, and salience in a sex-specific manner. Using a data-driven approach to identify behaviors indicative of valence learning in an unbiased manner, we compare task performance between paradigms in male and female mice. We show that while male and female mice acquire appetitive and aversive associations in both single- and mixed-valence paradigms, sex differences emerge in single-valence paradigms. Ultimately, we show that these apparent sex differences in valence learning are driven by non-specific baseline differences in exploratory behavior. Males explore more at baseline, altering their trajectory of cue-reward association acquisition, whereas females explore less at baseline, increasing shock-facilitated freezing in aversive-only contexts, masking cue discrimination. Overall, our findings illustrate how task design differentially impacts behavioral expression in male and female mice and demonstrate that mixed-valence paradigms afford a more accurate assessment of valence learning in both sexes.
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.