Background and PurposePredicting the risk of drug‐induced adverse psychiatric effects is important but currently not possible in non‐human species. We investigated whether the affective bias test (ABT) could provide a preclinical method with translational and predictive validity.Experimental ApproachThe ABT is a bowl‐digging task, which quantifies biases associated with learning and memory. Rats encounter independent learning experiences, on separate days, under either acute manipulations (e.g. pro‐depressant vs. control) or different absolute reward values (e.g. high vs. low). A bias is observed during a preference test when an animal's choices reflect their prior experience. We investigated the effects of putative pro‐depressant drug treatments following acute or chronic administration on the formation of an affective bias or reward‐induced positive bias respectively.Key ResultsThe immunomodulators LPS (10 μg·kg−1), corticosterone (10 and 30 mg·kg−1) and IFN‐α (100 U·kg−1) induced a negative affective bias following acute treatment. Tetrabenazine (1 mg·kg−1) also induced a negative bias, but no effects were observed with varenicline, carbamazepine or montelukast. Chronic treatment with IFN‐α (100 U·kg−1) and retinoic acid (10 mg·kg−1) impaired the formation of a reward‐induced positive bias but did not alter sucrose preference test (SPT).Conclusions and ImplicationsThe ABT has the potential to provide a novel approach to predict pro‐depressant risk in a non‐human species. Negative biases induced by acute treatment in the standard version of the task may also predict longer‐term effects on reward processing as shown by the deficit in reward‐induced positive bias following chronic treatment, an effect distinct from anhedonia in the SPT.Linked ArticlesThis article is part of a themed section on Pharmacology of Cognition: a Panacea for Neuropsychiatric Disease? To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v174.19/issuetoc