Housing conditions affect rat responses to two types of ambiguity in a reward-reward discrimination cognitive bias task.
Housing conditions affect rat responses to two types of ambiguity in a reward-reward discrimination cognitive bias task.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.bbr.2014.07.048
复制
发表时间：
2014-11-01
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Mendl, Michael
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Parker, Richard M. A.;Paul, Elizabeth S.;Burman, Oliver H. P.;Browne, William J.;Mendl, Michael
我们调查了不可预测的住房处理（UHT）如何影响大鼠的影响措施。对照组大鼠在旷场和高架十字迷宫试验中表现出比UHT大鼠更多的焦虑样行为。在自动认知偏见任务中，控制组也做出了更“悲观”的决定。我们的go/go奖励-奖励任务比以前的自动go/go任务学习得更快。我们开发了一种新的歧义测试，可以探测注意过程中的偏见。在认知偏差任务中，模糊决策是一种很有前途的新的情感效价指标。对老鼠的研究支持这样一个假设，即处于消极情感状态的动物对模棱两可的线索的评价是消极的。先前的自动操作去/去判断偏见任务涉及训练大鼠，一个频率的听觉线索预测奖励和不同频率的线索预测惩罚者（RP任务），然后测量是否模糊的中频线索被判断为预测奖励（“乐观”）或惩罚（“悲观”）。我们调查了自动化的奖励-奖励（RR）任务是否产生了与RP任务相似的结果，并且比RP任务更快地训练。我们还引入了一个新的歧义测试（同时呈现两个训练线索），以及标准的单一歧义线索测试。一半的大鼠经历了一个不可预测的住房治疗（UHT），旨在诱导一个消极的状态。对照组大鼠相对“悲观”，而UHT大鼠在RR测试中的反应更快，但准确性不低，并且在独立测试中表现出较少的焦虑样行为。这些发现的一个可能的原因是，大鼠适应并受到UHT的刺激，而在可预测的环境中的对照组大鼠对新奇和变化更敏感。新的歧义测试中的反应与单一歧义线索测试中的反应呈正相关，并可能提供一个衡量注意力偏差的指标。RR任务比以前的自动RP任务更快地训练。总之，它们可以用来解开奖励和惩罚过程是如何支撑情感诱导的认知偏见的。
We investigated how an unpredictable housing treatment (UHT) influenced measures of rat affect. Control rats showed more anxiety-like behaviour in open-field and elevated plus maze tests than UHT rats. Controls also made more ‘pessimistic’ decisions in an automated cognitive bias task. Our go/go reward–reward task was learnt faster than previous automated go/go tasks. We developed a new ambiguity test that may probe biases in attentional processes. Decision-making under ambiguity in cognitive bias tasks is a promising new indicator of affective valence in animals. Rat studies support the hypothesis that animals in a negative affective state evaluate ambiguous cues negatively. Prior automated operant go/go judgement bias tasks have involved training rats that an auditory cue of one frequency predicts a Reward and a cue of a different frequency predicts a Punisher (RP task), and then measuring whether ambiguous cues of intermediate frequency are judged as predicting reward (‘optimism’) or punishment (‘pessimism’). We investigated whether an automated Reward–Reward (RR) task yielded similar results to, and was faster to train than, RP tasks. We also introduced a new ambiguity test (simultaneous presentation of the two training cues) alongside the standard single ambiguous cue test. Half of the rats experienced an unpredictable housing treatment (UHT) designed to induce a negative state. Control rats were relatively ‘pessimistic’, whilst UHT rats were quicker, but no less accurate, in their responses in the RR test, and showed less anxiety-like behaviour in independent tests. A possible reason for these findings is that rats adapted to and were stimulated by UHT, whilst control rats in a predictable environment were more sensitive to novelty and change. Responses in the new ambiguity test correlated positively with those in single ambiguous cue tests, and may provide a measure of attention bias. The RR task was quicker to train than previous automated RP tasks. Together, they could be used to disentangle how reward and punishment processes underpin affect-induced cognitive biases.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
Enkel, Thomas;Gholizadeh, Donya;Vollmayr, Barbara
通讯作者：
Vollmayr, Barbara
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Burman, Oliver H. P.;Parker, Richard M. A.;Mendl, Michael T.
通讯作者：
Mendl, Michael T.
影响因子：
6.9
作者：
Den Hartog, HM;Derix, MMA;Jolles, J
通讯作者：
Jolles, J
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Brydges, Nichola M.;Leach, Matthew;Bateson, Melissa
通讯作者：
Bateson, Melissa
青少年压力对成年期焦虑、认知偏差和决策的影响：大鼠模型。
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Brydges NM;Hall L;Nicolson R;Holmes MC;Hall J
通讯作者：
Hall J