↓ Skip to main content

ARENA 2.0: The next generation automated remote environmental navigation apparatus to facilitate cross-species comparisons in behavior and cognition

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
ARENA 2.0: The next generation automated remote environmental navigation apparatus to facilitate cross-species comparisons in behavior and cognition
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, June 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13428-017-0904-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Schroeder, Dennis Garlick, Aaron P. Blaisdell

Abstract

A series of experiments illustrated the effectiveness and flexibility of a newly developed Automated Remote Environmental Navigation Apparatus (ARENA) as an alternative to traditional operant and open-field procedures. This system improves the concept developed by Badelt and Blaisdell (Behavior Research Methods, 40, 613-621, 2008; see also Leising, Garlick, Parenteau, & Blaisdell in Behavioural Processes, 81, 105-113, 2009), with significant upgrades in flexibility and reliability, as well as a reduction in cost. ARENA is particularly well adapted for open-field studies and eliminates many confounding factors associated with traditional procedures, such as handling effects and physical cues left by the subject. The original system was based on wireless modules with a small stimulus-response well. Nosepokes or pecks within the aperture of the well could be detected and recorded by a computer. ARENA 2.0 increases the flexibility of this system by replacing the modules with stimulus presentation through a data projector mounted on the ceiling and response detection and recording through a video camera system. We report the specifics of this system as well as behavioral tests using rats and pigeons. We demonstrated the feasibility of ARENA 2.0 for the acquisition of conditional approach to a visual target, followed by tests showing generalization of performance to novel locations and visual properties of the target. These experiments support the use of this technology for automated tasks traditionally studied through open-field preparations or using touchscreen-equipped operant chambers. The advantages of ARENA 2.0 over the original system are a significant reduction in cost and increased reliability, ease of use, and flexibility in both stimulus configuration and subject response measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 3 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 13%
Unspecified 1 6%
Philosophy 1 6%
Other 4 25%
Unknown 3 19%
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 03 June 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,896
of 2,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,235
of 331,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#34
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 331,648 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.