↓ Skip to main content

Instrumental conditioning for food reinforcement in the spontaneously hypertensive rat model of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Instrumental conditioning for food reinforcement in the spontaneously hypertensive rat model of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
Published in
BMC Research Notes, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2857-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claire L. Rostron, Victoria Gaeta, Louise R. Brace, Eleanor J. Dommett

Abstract

The spontaneously hypertensive rat is thought to show good validity as a model of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, in part because of impaired delayed reinforcement behaviour, corresponding to the dynamic developmental theory of the disorder. However, some previous studies may have been confounded use of fluid reward. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the spontaneously hypertensive rat and two comparison strains (Wistar and Wistar Kyoto) using a non-delayed food reinforcement paradigm in an attempt to advance knowledge of basic learnt behaviour in this strain, without potentially confounding reward sensitivity, which could impact on motivation to learn. Rats were trained on a fixed ratio 1 two choice discrimination schedule, extinction, reacquisition and reversal. We also tested non-reinforced spontaneous alternation to facilitate data interpretation. The spontaneously hypertensive rat displayed slower shaping and reduced on task activity during task acquisition, contrasting with previous results which indicate either enhanced responding and an impairment only when a delay is used; we suggest several reasons for this. In line with previous work, the same strain exhibited poor extinguishing of behaviour but were not impaired to the same extent on reversal of the discrimination. Finally, non-reinforced alternations on a Y-maze were also reduced in the spontaneously hypertensive rat. In sum, the spontaneously hypertensive rat appear to show poor response inhibition in reinforced and non-reinforced contexts. However, impaired response inhibition was reduced during reversal when an opposite response produced food reward alongside presentation of the conditioned stimulus. We discuss the possibility of enhanced attribution of incentive salience to cues in this strain and highlight several points of caution for researchers conducting behavioural assessments using the spontaneously hypertensive rat and their associated comparison strains.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Master 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 12 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Psychology 2 7%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 14 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,959,635
of 12,109,122 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,139
of 2,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,033
of 284,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#75
of 274 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,109,122 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,685 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 284,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 274 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 67% of its contemporaries.