↓ Skip to main content

Measuring Attention in Rodents: Comparison of a Modified Signal Detection Task and the 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time Task

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Measuring Attention in Rodents: Comparison of a Modified Signal Detection Task and the 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time Task
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00370
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karly M. Turner, James Peak, Thomas H. J. Burne

Abstract

Neuropsychiatric research has utilized cognitive testing in rodents to improve our understanding of cognitive deficits and for preclinical drug development. However, more sophisticated cognitive tasks have not been as widely exploited due to low throughput and the extensive training time required. We developed a modified signal detection task (SDT) based on the growing body of literature aimed at improving cognitive testing in rodents. This study directly compares performance on the modified SDT with a traditional test for measuring attention, the 5-choice serial reaction time task (5CSRTT). Adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were trained on either the 5CSRTT or the SDT. Briefly, the 5CSRTT required rodents to pay attention to a spatial array of five apertures and respond with a nose poke when an aperture was illuminated. The SDT required the rat to attend to a light panel and respond either left or right to indicate the presence of a signal. In addition, modifications were made to the reward delivery, timing, control of body positioning, and the self-initiation of trials. It was found that less training time was required for the SDT, with both sessions to criteria and daily session duration significantly reduced. Rats performed with a high level of accuracy (>87%) on both tasks, however omissions were far more frequent on the 5CSRTT. The signal duration was reduced on both tasks as a manipulation of task difficulty relevant to attention and a similar pattern of decreasing accuracy was observed on both tasks. These results demonstrate some of the advantages of the SDT over the traditional 5CSRTT as being higher throughput with reduced training time, fewer omission responses and their body position was controlled at stimulus onset. In addition, rats performing the SDT had comparable high levels of accuracy. These results highlight the differences and similarities between the 5CSRTT and a modified SDT as tools for assessing attention in preclinical animal models.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 91 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 20%
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 32 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 17%
Psychology 6 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 22 23%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 March 2016.
All research outputs
#13,759,606
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,717
of 3,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,655
of 395,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#48
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 395,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.