↓ Skip to main content

OBAT: An open-source and low-cost operant box for auditory discriminative tasks

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
OBAT: An open-source and low-cost operant box for auditory discriminative tasks
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, May 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13428-017-0906-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mauricio Watanabe Ribeiro, José Firmino Rodrigues Neto, Edgard Morya, Fabrício Lima Brasil, Mariana Ferreira Pereira de Araújo

Abstract

Operant-conditioning boxes are widely used in animal training, allowing researchers to shape specific behaviors through reinforcements and/or punishments. Commercially available devices are expensive and run with proprietary software and hardware, hampering adaptations for the specific needs of an experiment. Therefore, many low-cost and open-source devices have recently been developed, but there are still few options for studying auditory behaviors. To overcome this problem, we developed a device based on a computer and an Arduino Mega 2560 board, named OBAT (Operant Box for Auditory Tasks), designed to present two different auditory stimuli to small primates. It has three modules: sound delivery, response bars, and reward system. We estimate that OBAT is at least 4-10 times cheaper than commercially available operant-conditioning boxes. Data from a behavioral pilot test ensured that the device can be used to train a marmoset in an auditory discrimination task. In addition, despite its low cost, accuracy tests showed that the OBAT operates with a high temporal precision. All schematics and software source code are available so that other groups can easily replicate the experiment or adapt the device to their own needs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 12 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 21%
Psychology 3 9%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,636
of 2,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,344
of 325,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#32
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,039 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.