↓ Skip to main content

Trait “pessimism” is associated with increased sensitivity to negative feedback in rats

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Trait “pessimism” is associated with increased sensitivity to negative feedback in rats
Published in
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, February 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13415-016-0410-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rafal Rygula, Piotr Popik

Abstract

Several cognitive theories of depression have proposed that cognitive judgment bias determines individual vulnerability to this disorder. Indeed, we have recently demonstrated a relationship between pessimistic judgment bias and vulnerability of rats to the stress-induced anhedonia, and a negative correlation between the level of pessimism and motivation. To further characterize the effects of trait pessimism on cognitive processes associated with depression, in the present study we compared the sensitivity of rats displaying optimistic and pessimistic traits to positive and negative feedback. The animals were initially trained and tested in the rat version of the probabilistic reversal-learning (PRL) task, which allowed for the assessment of feedback sensitivity in individual animals. Subsequently, the rats were re-trained and tested in a series of ambiguous-cue interpretation (ACI) tests, which allowed for the classification of animals displaying "optimistic" and "pessimistic" traits. The "pessimistic" rats were significantly more sensitive to negative feedback than their "optimistic" conspecifics, as indicated by an increased proportion of lose-shift behaviors. The results of our study demonstrate the interrelation and co-existence of two cognitive biases that may predict vulnerability to depressive disorder.

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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 26%
Student > Master 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 28%
Neuroscience 9 18%
Psychology 5 10%
Unspecified 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 13 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 30 June 2016.
All research outputs
#2,655,821
of 24,024,220 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#128
of 975 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,354
of 303,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,024,220 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 975 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
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 303,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.