| Title |
Validation and optimisation of a touchscreen progressive ratio test of motivation in male rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychopharmacology, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00213-018-4969-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathan M. Hailwood, Christopher J. Heath, Trevor W. Robbins, Lisa M. Saksida, Timothy J. Bussey |
| Abstract |
Across species, effort-related motivation can be assessed by testing behaviour under a progressive ratio (PR) schedule of reinforcement. However, to date, PR tasks for rodents have been available using traditional operant response systems only. Touchscreen operant response systems allow the assessment of behaviour in laboratory rodents, using tasks that share high face validity with the computerised assessments used in humans. Here, we sought to optimise a rat touchscreen variant of PR and validate it by assessing the effects of a number of manipulations known to affect PR performance in non-touchscreen paradigms. Separate groups of male Sprague-Dawley rats were trained on PR schedules with either linear (PR4) or exponential (PREXP) schedules of reinforcement. PR performance was assessed in response to manipulations in reward outcome. Animals were tested under conditions of increased reward magnitude and following reward devaluation through a prefeeding procedure. Subsequently, the effects of systemic administration of the dopamine D2/D3 receptor antagonist raclopride and the psychostimulant d-amphetamine were examined as traditional pharmacological methods for manipulating motivation. Rats reinforced under PR4 and PREXP schedules consistently showed differential patterns of response rates within sessions. Furthermore, both PR4 and PREXP schedules were sensitive to suppression by prefeeding or raclopride administration. Performance under both schedules was facilitated by increasing reward magnitude or d-amphetamine administration. Taken together, these findings mirror those observed in lever-based PR paradigms in rats. This study therefore demonstrates the successful validation of the rat touchscreen PR task. This will allow for the assessment of motivation in rats, within the same touchscreen apparatus used for the assessment of complex cognitive processes in this species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 50% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 24% |
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 13 | 24% |
| Psychology | 9 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 20 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 October 2022.
All research outputs
#14,350,775
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Psychopharmacology
#4,078
of 5,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,348
of 326,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychopharmacology
#32
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,364 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 326,905 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.