↓ Skip to main content

Mice and rats achieve similar levels of performance in an adaptive decision-making task

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#23 of 1,407)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
24 X users
googleplus
6 Google+ users

Readers on

mendeley
281 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
Mice and rats achieve similar levels of performance in an adaptive decision-making task
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00173
Pubmed ID
Authors

Santiago Jaramillo, Anthony M. Zador

Abstract

Two opposing constraints exist when choosing a model organism for studying the neural basis of adaptive decision-making: (1) experimental access and (2) behavioral complexity. Available molecular and genetic approaches for studying neural circuits in the mouse fulfill the first requirement. In contrast, it is still under debate if mice can perform cognitive tasks of sufficient complexity. Here we compare learning and performance of mice and rats, the preferred behavioral rodent model, during an acoustic flexible categorization two-alternative choice task. The task required animals to switch between two categorization definitions several times within a behavioral session. We found that both species achieved similarly high performance levels. On average, rats learned the task faster than mice, although some mice were as fast as the average rat. No major differences in subjective categorization boundaries or the speed of adaptation between the two species were found. Our results demonstrate that mice are an appropriate model for the study of the neural mechanisms underlying adaptive decision-making, and suggest they might be suitable for other cognitive tasks as well.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 281 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
France 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 268 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 73 26%
Researcher 64 23%
Student > Master 36 13%
Student > Bachelor 30 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 5%
Other 33 12%
Unknown 32 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 95 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 88 31%
Psychology 19 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 4%
Engineering 6 2%
Other 18 6%
Unknown 43 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 120. 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 14 October 2019.
All research outputs
#348,719
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#23
of 1,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,227
of 260,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#2
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,407 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 260,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.