2017
DOI: 10.1523/eneuro.0015-17.2017
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Brain Stimulation Reward Supports More Consistent and Accurate Rodent Decision-Making than Food Reward

Abstract: Animal models of decision-making rely on an animal’s motivation to decide and its ability to detect differences among various alternatives. Food reinforcement, although commonly used, is associated with problematic confounds, especially satiety. Here, we examined the use of brain stimulation reward (BSR) as an alternative reinforcer in rodent models of decision-making and compared it with the effectiveness of sugar pellets. The discriminability of various BSR frequencies was compared to differing numbers of su… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, it is plausible that the unpredictable order of sessions combined with the lack of a well-practiced behavior strategy that has not been seen before to produce different behavioral results. In addition, we used a reward ratio (1 v 3 sugar pellets) that we have found to be more accurately discriminated (McMurray, Conway, & Roitman, 2017) compared to the ratio used in prior studies (McMurray et al, 2015). Performance on this task may instead more resemble a series of reversal learning tasks, which first introduces probabilistic rewards and then switches the location of their availability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, it is plausible that the unpredictable order of sessions combined with the lack of a well-practiced behavior strategy that has not been seen before to produce different behavioral results. In addition, we used a reward ratio (1 v 3 sugar pellets) that we have found to be more accurately discriminated (McMurray, Conway, & Roitman, 2017) compared to the ratio used in prior studies (McMurray et al, 2015). Performance on this task may instead more resemble a series of reversal learning tasks, which first introduces probabilistic rewards and then switches the location of their availability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, these tasks are also complicated by the use of sugar pellet rewards, which not only require the use of food restriction, but may also be confounded by a comparatively small range of reward values. Our previous work has shown that rodents can most reliably discriminate between one and three sugar pellets, and cannot reliably discriminate between three and more than three pellets (McMurray et al, 2017). This lack of discriminability prevents the use of a wide range of values, which is necessary for precise assessment of an indifference point.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A common stimulation target for proof-of-concept behavior experiments is the medial forebrain bundle (MFB; Carlezon and Chartoff 2007, McMurray et al 2017). MFB is a pathway of fibers that allows dopaminergic inputs from the ventral tegmental area to reach forebrain targets such as the medial prefrontal cortex and striatum (Nieuwenhuys et al 1982).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%