Incentive salience attribution is not the sole determinant of suboptimal choice in rats: Conditioned inhibition matters.

Previous research has identified clear differences between pigeons and rats in the suboptimal choice procedure. Pigeons behave suboptimally, preferring an alternative with discriminative stimuli and a smaller probability of reinforcement, over another with a higher probability of reinforcement, but without discriminative stimuli. In contrast, rats behave optimally showing the opposite preference. It has been proposed that these dissimilarities are consequence of a higher sensitivity to conditioned inhibition in rats than in pigeons. Alternatively, recent research suggests that differences in optimality can be accounted for by a differential incentive salience of the stimuli employed as discriminative stimuli, and that both species are suboptimal when such stimuli have high incentive salience; specifically, rats were found to be suboptimal when levers were used as discriminative stimuli. However, in the evaluation of this hypothesis, a conditioned inhibitor was not employed. In the present report, eight rats were exposed to a choice procedure that integrated both variables discussed above: a conditioned inhibitor was associated with the discriminative alternative and the stimuli had high incentive salience. A clear preference for the optimal alternative was found, suggesting that the conditioned inhibitor had a considerable impact on rats' preference, and that species-differences remain even in procedures in which the discriminative stimuli have incentive salience.