Literature DB >> 16776053

Autoshaped head poking in the mouse: a quantitative analysis of the learning curve.

Efstathios B Papachristos1, C R Gallistel.   

Abstract

In autoshaping experiments, we quantified the acquisition of anticipatory head poking in individual mice, using an algorithm that finds changes in the slope of a cumulative record. In most mice, upward changes in the amount of anticipatory poking per trial were abrupt, and tended to occur at session boundaries, suggesting that the session is as significant a unit of experience as the trial. There were large individual differences in the latency to the onset of vigorous responding. "Asymptotic" performance was unstable; large, bidirectional, and relatively enduring changes were common. Given the characteristics of the individual learning curves, it is unlikely that physiologically meaningful estimates of rate of learning can be extracted from group-average learning curves.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16776053      PMCID: PMC1459847          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2006.71-05

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  24 in total

1.  Theoretical mechanisms underlying the trial-spacing effect in Pavlovian fear conditioning.

Authors:  P B Barela
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1999-04

2.  Comparison of the rates of associative change during acquisition and extinction.

Authors:  Robert A Rescorla
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2002-10

3.  Farewell, My LOVELY!

Authors:  B F Skinner
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Mice lacking metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 show impaired learning and reduced CA1 long-term potentiation (LTP) but normal CA3 LTP.

Authors:  Y M Lu; Z Jia; C Janus; J T Henderson; R Gerlai; J M Wojtowicz; J C Roder
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-07-01       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Significance of all-or-none learning.

Authors:  F Restle
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1965-11       Impact factor: 17.737

6.  Place navigation impaired in rats with hippocampal lesions.

Authors:  R G Morris; P Garrud; J N Rawlins; J O'Keefe
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1982-06-24       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Learning as accumulation: a reexamination of the learning curve.

Authors:  J E Mazur; R Hastie
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 17.737

8.  The essential role of hippocampal CA1 NMDA receptor-dependent synaptic plasticity in spatial memory.

Authors:  J Z Tsien; P T Huerta; S Tonegawa
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1996-12-27       Impact factor: 41.582

9.  Genetic enhancement of learning and memory in mice.

Authors:  Y P Tang; E Shimizu; G R Dube; C Rampon; G A Kerchner; M Zhuo; G Liu; J Z Tsien
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-09-02       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Impairment of spatial but not contextual memory in CaMKII mutant mice with a selective loss of hippocampal LTP in the range of the theta frequency.

Authors:  M E Bach; R D Hawkins; M Osman; E R Kandel; M Mayford
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1995-06-16       Impact factor: 41.582

View more
  16 in total

1.  Screening for Learning and Memory Mutations: A New Approach.

Authors:  C R Gallistel; A P King; A M Daniel; D Freestone; E B Papachristos; F Balci; A Kheifets; J Zhang; X Su; G Schiff; H Kourtev
Journal:  Xin Li Xue Bao       Date:  2010-01-30

2.  Is matching innate?

Authors:  C R Gallistel; Adam Philip King; Daniel Gottlieb; Fuat Balci; Efstathios B Papachristos; Matthew Szalecki; Kimberly S Carbone
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.468

Review 3.  The importance of proving the null.

Authors:  C R Gallistel
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Translations in Stimulus-Stimulus Pairing: Autoshaping of Learner Vocalizations.

Authors:  Stephanie P da Silva; April Michele Williams
Journal:  Perspect Behav Sci       Date:  2019-11-25

5.  Sex and strain influence attribution of incentive salience to reward cues in mice.

Authors:  Price E Dickson; Kathryn A McNaughton; Lingfeng Hou; Laura C Anderson; Katie H Long; Elissa J Chesler
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2015-06-20       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Stimulus-food pairings produce stimulus-directed touch-screen responding in cynomolgus monkeys (macaca fascicularis) with or without a positive response contingency.

Authors:  Christopher E Bullock; Todd M Myers
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Time and Associative Learning.

Authors:  Peter D Balsam; Michael R Drew; C R Gallistel
Journal:  Comp Cogn Behav Rev       Date:  2010

8.  Acquisition of peak responding: what is learned?

Authors:  Fuat Balci; Charles R Gallistel; Brian D Allen; Krystal M Frank; Jacqueline M Gibson; Daniela Brunner
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2008-10-04       Impact factor: 1.777

9.  Female rats learn trace memories better than male rats and consequently retain a greater proportion of new neurons in their hippocampi.

Authors:  Christina Dalla; Efstathios B Papachristos; Abigail S Whetstone; Tracey J Shors
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-02-02       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  What is learned during simultaneous temporal acquisition? An individual-trials analysis.

Authors:  Marcelo Bussotti Reyes; Catalin V Buhusi
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2013-10-05       Impact factor: 1.777

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.