Suppr超能文献

大鼠在Go/No-Go和二选一气味辨别任务中的行为:差异与相似性

Rat behavior in go/no-go and two-alternative choice odor discrimination: differences and similarities.

作者信息

Frederick Donald E, Rojas-Líbano Daniel, Scott Meagen, Kay Leslie M

机构信息

Department of Psychology and Institute for Mind& Biology, The University of Chicago, 940 East 57th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.

出版信息

Behav Neurosci. 2011 Aug;125(4):588-603. doi: 10.1037/a0024371.

Abstract

To elucidate the cognitive structures of animals, neuroscientists use several behavioral tasks. Therefore, it is imperative to have a firm understanding of each task's behavioral parameters in order to parse out possible task effects. We compare two operant discrimination tasks (Go/No-Go: GNG; Two-Alternative Choice: TAC) that are commonly used in olfactory research. Past research has suggested that solving the two tasks requires divergent cognitive strategies. One hypothesis is that the two tasks differ in how an animal optimizes reward rate by means of a speed-accuracy trade-off (SAT). If this is true, then changing tasks could give researchers an additional tool to understand animal cognition. However, no study has systematically analyzed the two tasks in parallel using odor stimuli. Using standardized training protocols, we test GNG and TAC in parallel. Our protocols allow us to isolate the stimulus sampling period from a general reaction time period. We find that the two tasks do not differ with regard to the stimulus sampling period and conclude that the two tasks do not differ in the amount of time it takes an animal to perform a discrimination. Instead, tasks differ in the time it takes to make an overt behavioral response, with GNG showing shorter periods than TAC. We also find no evidence of rats using either task-specific or intertrial interval-dependent SAT schema in order to optimize reward rate. We show that similarities between dependent variables, with the possible exception of response delay, appear to be under experimenter control.

摘要

为了阐明动物的认知结构,神经科学家使用了多种行为任务。因此,为了剖析可能的任务效应,必须对每个任务的行为参数有深入的理解。我们比较了嗅觉研究中常用的两种操作性辨别任务(Go/No-Go:GNG;二选一:TAC)。过去的研究表明,解决这两个任务需要不同的认知策略。一种假设是,这两个任务在动物如何通过速度-准确性权衡(SAT)来优化奖励率方面存在差异。如果这是真的,那么改变任务可以为研究人员提供一个额外的工具来理解动物认知。然而,尚无研究使用气味刺激对这两个任务进行并行系统分析。我们使用标准化训练方案并行测试GNG和TAC。我们的方案使我们能够将刺激采样期与一般反应期区分开来。我们发现,在刺激采样期方面,这两个任务没有差异,并得出结论,动物进行辨别所需的时间在这两个任务中没有差异。相反,任务在做出明显行为反应所需的时间上存在差异,GNG的反应时间比TAC短。我们也没有发现大鼠使用特定任务或试验间隔依赖的SAT模式来优化奖励率的证据。我们表明,除了反应延迟外,因变量之间的相似性似乎受实验者控制。

相似文献

6
Speed and accuracy of visual image discrimination by rats.大鼠视觉图像辨别速度和准确性。
Front Neural Circuits. 2013 Dec 18;7:200. doi: 10.3389/fncir.2013.00200. eCollection 2013.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

2
Olfactory oscillations: the what, how and what for.嗅觉振荡:是什么、如何产生以及有何作用。
Trends Neurosci. 2009 Apr;32(4):207-14. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2008.11.008. Epub 2009 Feb 23.
8
A model of the go/no-go task.一种停止信号任务模型。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2007 Aug;136(3):389-413. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.389.
9
Olfactory bulb gamma oscillations are enhanced with task demands.嗅球γ振荡会随着任务需求而增强。
J Neurosci. 2007 Aug 1;27(31):8358-65. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1199-07.2007.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验