↓ Skip to main content

Rapid learning dynamics in individual honeybees during classical conditioning

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, September 2014
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Rapid learning dynamics in individual honeybees during classical conditioning
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00313
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evren Pamir, Paul Szyszka, Ricarda Scheiner, Martin P. Nawrot

Abstract

Associative learning in insects has been studied extensively by a multitude of classical conditioning protocols. However, so far little emphasis has been put on the dynamics of learning in individuals. The honeybee is a well-established animal model for learning and memory. We here studied associative learning as expressed in individual behavior based on a large collection of data on olfactory classical conditioning (25 datasets, 3298 animals). We show that the group-averaged learning curve and memory retention score confound three attributes of individual learning: the ability or inability to learn a given task, the generally fast acquisition of a conditioned response (CR) in learners, and the high stability of the CR during consecutive training and memory retention trials. We reassessed the prevailing view that more training results in better memory performance and found that 24 h memory retention can be indistinguishable after single-trial and multiple-trial conditioning in individuals. We explain how inter-individual differences in learning can be accommodated within the Rescorla-Wagner theory of associative learning. In both data-analysis and modeling we demonstrate how the conflict between population-level and single-animal perspectives on learning and memory can be disentangled.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
Unknown 88 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 24%
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Professor 4 4%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 44%
Neuroscience 19 21%
Psychology 6 7%
Computer Science 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 18 20%
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 01 October 2014.
All research outputs
#2,456,999
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#435
of 3,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,287
of 246,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#13
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 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 3,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. 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 246,448 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.