ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2026
Female rats adopt a safety-first strategy in a high-conflict platform mediated avoidance task.
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Top-down corticostriatal control of adaptive restraint during motivational conflict.Science advances · 2026Article
- High-fat diet exposure, internal state, and reward value influence decision making during motivational conflict.Neurobiology of stress · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maladaptive avoidance is a central feature of many mental disorders, particularly stress- and anxiety-related disorders. Those disorders are more prevalent in women, suggesting that there may be sex differences in avoidance propensity. Sex differences have been documented in threat conditioning, but not in active avoidance paradigms, despite their potential clinical relevance. Preclinical research has historically focused on males, limiting our understanding of the neurobiological mechanisms underlying sex differences in threat responses. To address this gap, we investigated sex-specific strategies in adult Long Evans rats (10 female, 9 male) using a platform-mediated avoidance (PMA) task that created a high-conflict choice between reward-seeking and safety. Behavior was tracked over 25 days, with analyses focusing on a stable performance phase (days 20-25) objectively defined using change point analysis. Females consistently prioritized safety, spending significantly more time foregoing reward to avoid foot shock and retreating earlier to the safe zone. Males engaged in more persistent reward-seeking despite the risk of shock. This difference was not driven by differential reward motivation. Furthermore, female strategies were not significantly modulated by the estrous cycle. These results were consistent in a pre-registered replication study. Thus, male and female rats employ fundamentally different strategies to resolve approach-avoidance conflict: females adopt a robust, safety-first strategy, while males demonstrate a risk-prone, reward-oriented approach. Identifying the neural mechanisms underlying these differences may guide more targeted interventions for anxiety and trauma-related disorders.
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.