The time, the path, its length and strenuousness in maze learning

Kostic, Senka; Tošković, Oliver

doi:10.2298/psi210301005k

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The heatmap analysis suggests that the differences do lie in the learning process especially for the IL-12 Mo group—indeed both old groups learned to climb the wall during the learning stage. Kostić & Tošković (2022) designed an experiment to determine which factor among path, time and effort was the key determinant of rodent behavior in exploring a maze to reach food, and they found that the subject always chose paths requiring less effort. Their findings provided a clue for why the older rats had attempted to climb the wall to reach the food-box—this may be less arduous for them compared with young rats.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Integrative learning” promotes learning but not memory in older rats

Yin¹,

Wu²,

Lian³

2023

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background We had previously advanced the concept of “Integrative Learning”, that is, “under the role of ‘meta-learning self’, learners actively integrate learning materials to achieve rapid and in-depth understanding of knowledge”, and designed an animal behavioral model to compare the effects of “Integrative Learning” (IL) vs. “Progressive Learning” (PL) in young rats. It was found that IL is more advantageous than PL. Here, we aim to examine whether the same phenomenon persist in older rats. Methods Fifteen 12-month-old male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were selected as subjects and randomly divided into the IL group and the PL group, and a 14-unit integrative T-maze was constructed for the study. Training and testing procedures contained three stages: the learning stage, the memory retention test stage and the Gestalt transfer learning stage. Data on young rats (1-month-old) from the previous study were also drawn here for comparisons on learning performance. Results (1) The 12-session learning stage can be divided into three sub-stages as each sub-stage represented the new opening of one third of the whole path in the PL group. There were significant interactions in total errors made between groups and sessions: the PL group had significantly fewer errors during Sub-stage One due to a much shorter path to be learned, however, the IL group’s errors made sharply dropped as learning progressed into Sub-stage Two and Three, and were maintained at a significantly lower level than the PL group during Sub-stage Three. (2) When compared with young rats, age had a main effect on the number of errors made—the 1-month-old groups learned overall better and faster than the older groups, whereas the pattern of group differences between the IL and PL learning modes remained consistent across young and older groups. (3) Unlike young rats, during the memory retention test stage and the Gestalt transfer learning stage, the IL group did not perform better than the PL group in older rats. Conclusions (1) “Integrative Learning” promotes learning but not memory in older rats. (2) Higher-order cognitive abilities that support meta-cognition, long-term retention and knowledge transfer might be deteriorating in older rats.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Integrative learning” promotes learning but not memory in older rats

Yin¹,

Wu²,

Lian³

2023

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only accurate trials were used for the analysis of RT, ET, E, and TErr. Given that pilot results indicated a signi cant difference between performance of participants on the two mazes, and that the pilots reported feeling that one maze is harder than another, we included Group (group 1: trained on the hard maze, vs group 2: trained on the easy maze) as a factor in our analyses 94 for a parametrization of how a maze path can in uence navigation in mice). We further calculated Inverse E ciency scores (IE 95 ).…”

Section: Behavioural Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning and Navigating Digitally-Rendered Haptic Spatial Layouts

Murray

Tivadar

Franceschiello

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning spatial layouts and navigating through them rely not simply on sight, but rather on multisensory processes, including touch. Digital haptics are effective for creating and manipulating mental images of individual objects in sighted and visually impaired participants. Here, we tested if this extends to scenes and navigation within them. Using only digital haptics, sighted blindfolded participants first learned the basic layout of an apartment and then one of two pathways through it. While still blindfolded, participants successfully reconstructed the haptically learned 2D spaces and also navigated these spaces. Digital haptics were thus an effective means to learn and translate 2D images into 3D reconstructions of layouts and actions within real spaces. Digital haptics are thus an alternative learning tool for complex scenes as well as for successful navigation in previously unfamiliar layouts, which can likely be further applied in rehabilitation of spatial functions and mitigation of visual impairments.

show abstract

The time, the path, its length and strenuousness in maze learning

Cited by 2 publications

References 29 publications

“Integrative learning” promotes learning but not memory in older rats

“Integrative learning” promotes learning but not memory in older rats

Learning and Navigating Digitally-Rendered Haptic Spatial Layouts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About