The Experts below are selected from a list of 7884 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Alexandra L. Whittaker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Subordination in female rats impedes learning as determined by a Judgment Bias training protocol
Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2020Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Abstract Legislative direction has encouraged the standard laboratory practice of group-housing rats used for scientific purposes. It has been demonstrated that this type of housing causes the induction of anxiety-like behaviours in subordinate animals. Despite previous studies documenting the negative effects of stress on learning, there has been relatively little attention given to the effects of subordination on animal learning. The aim of this study therefore, was to assess the effects of social stress leading to subordination on rat learning aptitude. Twenty, female, Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed to three training trials of a commonly employed Judgment Bias test. The results showed that dominant animals took significantly fewer days (42.50 ± 5.15) to learn the training criteria than their subordinate-subdominant (68.60 ± 4.61) (p = 0.003) and subordinate cage-mates (64.60 ± 4.61) (p = 0.015). This implied that subordination, as imposed by standard group-housing could impede the ability of subordinate animals to learn. In conclusion, at least in group-housed female rats, researchers should modify experimental design to account for social status when learning parameters are a critical study outcome.
-
Oestrous phase cyclicity influences Judgment Biasing in rats.
Behavioural processes, 2018Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Karen L. Kind, Peta Danielle Groves, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:The identification of cognitive Bias has become an important measure of animal welfare. Negative cognitive Biases develop from a tendency for animals to process novel information pessimistically. Judgment-Bias testing is the commonplace methodology to detect cognitive Biases. However, concerns with these methods have been frequently-reported; one of which being the discrepancy between male and female cognitive expression. The current study assessed the factors of social status and oestrus, to investigate whether oestrous cycle rotation, or subordination stress encouraged an increase in pessimistic responses. Female Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 24) were trained on an active-choice Judgment Bias paradigm. Responses to the ambiguous probe were recorded as optimistic or pessimistic. Oestrous phase was determined by assessing vaginal cytology in stained vaginal cell smears. Rats in the dioestrous phase and those rats considered to be subordinate demonstrated an increased percentage of pessimistic responses. However, no interaction between these factors was observed. This suggests that oestrous cyclicity can influence the Judgment Biases of female animals; a previously unreported finding. On this basis, researchers should be encouraged to account for both oestrous phase cyclicity and social status as an additional fixed effect in study design.
-
Increased latencies to respond in a Judgment Bias test are not associated with pessimistic Biases in rats.
Behavioural processes, 2017Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Extinction of learning is a common, yet under-reported limitation of Judgment Bias testing methods Repeated exposure to the ambiguous probe of a Judgment Bias paradigm encourages the animal to cease display of the required behaviours. However, there remains a need to repeatedly test animals to achieve statistical power. A delicate balance therefore needs to be struck between over- and under-exposure of the animals to the test conditions. This study presents the data of rats, a common animal subject of Judgment Bias testing. Rats were exposed to the ambiguous probe of a common, active-choice Judgment Bias test for 11 consecutive days. There was a significant increase in the latency to respond to the ambiguous probe following day 8, with no significant increase experienced for either the positive or less-positive probes. Following day 8 there was a significant increase in both optimistic and pessimistic latencies in response to the ambiguous probe. Therefore, repeated exposure to the ambiguous probe caused an increased latency in response even though optimistic interpretations were recorded. This implies that the use of response latency alone as a measure in Judgment Bias testing can falsely identify pessimism. Researchers should modify experimental design to include both choice and latency measures.
-
assessment of housing density space allocation and social hierarchy of laboratory rats on behavioural measures of welfare
PLOS ONE, 2017Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Rebecca P George, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Minimum space allowances for laboratory rats are legislated based on weight and stocking rates, with the understanding that increased housing density encourages crowding stress. However, there is little evidence for these recommendations, especially when considering positive welfare outcomes. This study consisted of two experiments which investigated the effects of housing density (rats per cage), space allocation (surface area per rat) and social rank (dominance hierarchy) on the ability to perform simple behavioural tests. Male Sprague Dawley (SD) rats (n = 64) were allocated to either high-density (n = 8) or low-density (n = 8) cages. The second experiment investigated the effects of surface area. SD rats (n = 40) were housed in dyads in either the large (n = 10) or small (n = 10) cage. In both experiments, animals were tested on a Judgment Bias paradigm, with their responses to an ambiguous stimulus being ascribed as optimistic or pessimistic. Animals were also tested on open-field, novel-object recognition and social-interaction tests. Recordings were taken from 1700-2100h daily for rat observation and social rank establishment. Dominant animals responded with significantly more optimistic decisions compared to subordinates for both the housing density (p<0.001) and space allocation (p = 0.0015) experiment. Dominant animals responded with increased social affiliative behaviours in the social-interaction test, and spent more time in the centre of the open-field test for both experiments. No significance was detected between housing density or space allocation treatments. These findings suggest that social rank is a significantly greater modifier of affective state than either housing density or space allocation. This finding has not yet been reported and suggests that future drafts of housing guidelines should consider animal social status in addition to floor space requirements.
-
female rats display fewer optimistic responses in a Judgment Bias test in the absence of a physiological stress response
Physiology & Behavior, 2017Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Larisa Bobrovskaya, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Metabolic cages are a type of housing used in biomedical research. Metabolic cage housing has been demonstrated to elicit behavioural and physiological changes in rodents housed within them. The nature of this effect has been characterized as anxiogenic. However, few studies have evaluated positive affect in response to metabolic cage housing and the interaction between this, sex and traditional physiological measures of stress. Cognitive Biasing, as measured through a Judgment Bias paradigm has proven a reliable measure of animal affective state, particularly through its ability to measure positive affect. The current study investigated differences in cognitive Biasing between male and female rats when transferred from open-top, grouped housing to a metabolic cage. Rats (Rattus norvegicus) (n=60) were trained in a Judgment Bias paradigm previously validated for use in the rat model. Upon exposure to an intermediate, ambiguous probe rats responded with either an optimistic or pessimistic decision. The animals were also subjected to the sucrose preference test to identify the presence of anhedonia. Faecal corticosterone and changes in adrenal tyrosine hydroxylase were also measured to establish whether a stress-like state was experienced. There was a significant interaction between sex and metabolic cage housing on the number of optimistic decisions made F (1, 56)=7.461, p=0.008. Female rats that remained in control housing responded with a reduced number of days featuring an optimistic decision compared to males in control housing (p=0.036). However, both males and females responded with significantly fewer optimistic decisions in the metabolic cage compared to control (p<0.001). There was a significant negative correlation between treatment and sucrose consumption (rpb=-0.654, n=195, p<0.001). There was also a significant sex effect for faecal corticosterone concentrations F (1, 30)=6.305, p=0.018) with female rats (4.050±1.285), displaying greater corticosterone concentrations than males (2.291±0.495). No differences between treatment were observed for either corticosterone or tyrosine hydroxylase levels. This data demonstrates that movement into a metabolic cage resulted in rats displaying significantly greater pessimistic cognitive Biases as determined through the Judgment Bias test. Interestingly, male rats that remained in control housing demonstrated cognitive Biases that were not equivalent to female rats. Furthermore, despite a behavioural change being evident, a physiological change in corticosterone or tyrosine hydroxylase levels was not observed.
Rafal Rygula - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
lesions of the orbitofrontal but not medial prefrontal cortex affect cognitive Judgment Bias in rats
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2017Co-Authors: Joanna Golebiowska, Rafal RygulaAbstract:Neuroimaging studies in humans have recently shown that the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) mediate Bias in the judgement of forthcoming events. In the present study, we sought to determine whether cognitive judgement Bias (CJB) is also dependent on these prefrontal regions in non-human animals. For this, we trained a cohort of rats in the ambiguous-cue interpretation (ACI) paradigm, subjected them to excitotoxic lesions in the medial PFC (mPFC) and OFC, and tested the effects of neuronal loss within these regions on CJB. Comparison of the lesions’ behavioural effects in the ACI paradigm revealed that neuronal loss within the OFC but not within the mPFC influences the interpretation of ambiguous cues by animals. Our findings demonstrate the specific involvement of the OFC in CJB in rats.
-
Cognitive Judgment Bias Interacts with Risk Based Decision Making and Sensitivity to Dopaminergic Challenge in Male Rats
Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2016Co-Authors: Robert Drozd, P Cieslak, Michal Rychlik, Jan Rodriguez Parkitna, Rafal RygulaAbstract:Although cognitive theory has implicated judgement Bias in various psychopathologies, its role in decision making under risk remains relatively unexplored. In the present study we assessed the effects of cognitive Judgment Bias on risky choices in rats. First, we trained and tested the animals on the rat version of the probability-discounting task. During discrete trials, the rats chose between two levers; a press on the ‘small/certain’ lever always resulted in the delivery of one reward pellet, whereas a press on the ‘large/risky’ lever resulted in the delivery of four pellets. However, the probability of receiving a reward from the ‘large/risky’ lever gradually decreased over the four trial blocks. Subsequently, the rats were re-trained and evaluated on a series of ambiguous-cue interpretation tests, which permitted their classification according to the display of ‘optimistic’ or ‘pessimistic’ traits. Because dopamine has been implicated in both: risky choices and optimism, in the last experiment, we compared the reactivity of the dopaminergic system in the ‘optimistic’ and ‘pessimistic’ animals using the apomorphine (2mg/kg s.c.) sensitivity test. We demonstrated that as risk increased, the proportion of risky lever choices decreased significantly slower in ‘optimists’ compared with ‘pessimists’ and that these differences between the two groups of rats were associated with different levels of dopaminergic system reactivity. Our findings suggest that cognitive judgement Bias, risky decision-making and dopamine are linked, and they provide a foundation for further investigation of the behavioural traits and cognitive processes that influence risky choices in animal models.
-
dopamine induces an optimism Bias in rats pharmacological proof for the translational validity of the ambiguous cue interpretation test
Behavioural Brain Research, 2016Co-Authors: J. Kregiel, Joanna Golebiowska, Piotr Popik, Rafal RygulaAbstract:Recent findings have revealed that pharmacological enhancement of dopaminergic (DA) function by the administration of a dopaminergic precursor (dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine; l-DOPA) increases an optimism Bias in humans. This effect is due to l-DOPA's impairment of the ability to update beliefs in response to undesirable information about the future. To test whether an 'optimistic' Bias is also mediated by dopamine in animals, first, two groups of rats received either a dopaminergic precursor, l-DOPA, or a D2 receptor antagonist, haloperidol, and were subsequently tested using the ambiguous-cue interpretation (ACI) paradigm. To test whether similar effects might be observed when manipulating another neurotransmitter implicated in learning about reward and punishment, we administered the serotonin (5-HT) reuptake inhibitor escitalopram to a third group of animals and the selective and irreversible tryptophan hydroxylase inhibitor para-chlorophenylalanine (PCPA) to a fourth group. The results of our study demonstrated that prolonged (2 weeks), but not acute, l-DOPA administration induced optimistic Bias in rats. Neither acute nor chronic treatment with the other tested compounds had significant effects on the cognitive Judgment Bias of rats. The convergence of these results with human studies suggests the translational validity of the ambiguous-cue interpretation paradigm in testing the effects of pharmacological manipulations on cognitive Judgment Bias (optimism/pessimism) in rats.
-
Acute administration of lithium, but not valproate, modulates cognitive Judgment Bias in rats.
Psychopharmacology, 2014Co-Authors: Rafal Rygula, Joanna Golebiowska, J. Kregiel, Małgorzata Hołuj, Piotr PopikAbstract:Rationale and objectives Both valproic acid (VPA) and lithium (LI) are well-established treatments for therapy of intense and sustained mood shifts, which are characteristics of affective disorders, such as bipolar disorder (BP). As mood and cognitive Judgment Bias have been found to be strongly interrelated, the present study investigated, in an animal model, whether acute treatment with VPA or LI could affect cognitive Judgment Bias.
-
Cognitive Judgment Bias in the psychostimulant-induced model of mania in rats
Psychopharmacology, 2014Co-Authors: Rafal Rygula, Joanna Golebiowska, J. Kregiel, Ewa Szczech, J. Kubik, Piotr PopikAbstract:Rationale Animal models of mania lack genuine cognitive parameters. The present gold standard of mania models, amphetamine-induced hyperlocomotion, is rather unspecific and does not necessarily target its cardinal symptoms. Therefore, alternative behavioral markers that are sensitive to stimulants are required.
Timothy Hugh Barker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Subordination in female rats impedes learning as determined by a Judgment Bias training protocol
Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2020Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Abstract Legislative direction has encouraged the standard laboratory practice of group-housing rats used for scientific purposes. It has been demonstrated that this type of housing causes the induction of anxiety-like behaviours in subordinate animals. Despite previous studies documenting the negative effects of stress on learning, there has been relatively little attention given to the effects of subordination on animal learning. The aim of this study therefore, was to assess the effects of social stress leading to subordination on rat learning aptitude. Twenty, female, Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed to three training trials of a commonly employed Judgment Bias test. The results showed that dominant animals took significantly fewer days (42.50 ± 5.15) to learn the training criteria than their subordinate-subdominant (68.60 ± 4.61) (p = 0.003) and subordinate cage-mates (64.60 ± 4.61) (p = 0.015). This implied that subordination, as imposed by standard group-housing could impede the ability of subordinate animals to learn. In conclusion, at least in group-housed female rats, researchers should modify experimental design to account for social status when learning parameters are a critical study outcome.
-
Oestrous phase cyclicity influences Judgment Biasing in rats.
Behavioural processes, 2018Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Karen L. Kind, Peta Danielle Groves, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:The identification of cognitive Bias has become an important measure of animal welfare. Negative cognitive Biases develop from a tendency for animals to process novel information pessimistically. Judgment-Bias testing is the commonplace methodology to detect cognitive Biases. However, concerns with these methods have been frequently-reported; one of which being the discrepancy between male and female cognitive expression. The current study assessed the factors of social status and oestrus, to investigate whether oestrous cycle rotation, or subordination stress encouraged an increase in pessimistic responses. Female Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 24) were trained on an active-choice Judgment Bias paradigm. Responses to the ambiguous probe were recorded as optimistic or pessimistic. Oestrous phase was determined by assessing vaginal cytology in stained vaginal cell smears. Rats in the dioestrous phase and those rats considered to be subordinate demonstrated an increased percentage of pessimistic responses. However, no interaction between these factors was observed. This suggests that oestrous cyclicity can influence the Judgment Biases of female animals; a previously unreported finding. On this basis, researchers should be encouraged to account for both oestrous phase cyclicity and social status as an additional fixed effect in study design.
-
Increased latencies to respond in a Judgment Bias test are not associated with pessimistic Biases in rats.
Behavioural processes, 2017Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Extinction of learning is a common, yet under-reported limitation of Judgment Bias testing methods Repeated exposure to the ambiguous probe of a Judgment Bias paradigm encourages the animal to cease display of the required behaviours. However, there remains a need to repeatedly test animals to achieve statistical power. A delicate balance therefore needs to be struck between over- and under-exposure of the animals to the test conditions. This study presents the data of rats, a common animal subject of Judgment Bias testing. Rats were exposed to the ambiguous probe of a common, active-choice Judgment Bias test for 11 consecutive days. There was a significant increase in the latency to respond to the ambiguous probe following day 8, with no significant increase experienced for either the positive or less-positive probes. Following day 8 there was a significant increase in both optimistic and pessimistic latencies in response to the ambiguous probe. Therefore, repeated exposure to the ambiguous probe caused an increased latency in response even though optimistic interpretations were recorded. This implies that the use of response latency alone as a measure in Judgment Bias testing can falsely identify pessimism. Researchers should modify experimental design to include both choice and latency measures.
-
assessment of housing density space allocation and social hierarchy of laboratory rats on behavioural measures of welfare
PLOS ONE, 2017Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Rebecca P George, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Minimum space allowances for laboratory rats are legislated based on weight and stocking rates, with the understanding that increased housing density encourages crowding stress. However, there is little evidence for these recommendations, especially when considering positive welfare outcomes. This study consisted of two experiments which investigated the effects of housing density (rats per cage), space allocation (surface area per rat) and social rank (dominance hierarchy) on the ability to perform simple behavioural tests. Male Sprague Dawley (SD) rats (n = 64) were allocated to either high-density (n = 8) or low-density (n = 8) cages. The second experiment investigated the effects of surface area. SD rats (n = 40) were housed in dyads in either the large (n = 10) or small (n = 10) cage. In both experiments, animals were tested on a Judgment Bias paradigm, with their responses to an ambiguous stimulus being ascribed as optimistic or pessimistic. Animals were also tested on open-field, novel-object recognition and social-interaction tests. Recordings were taken from 1700-2100h daily for rat observation and social rank establishment. Dominant animals responded with significantly more optimistic decisions compared to subordinates for both the housing density (p<0.001) and space allocation (p = 0.0015) experiment. Dominant animals responded with increased social affiliative behaviours in the social-interaction test, and spent more time in the centre of the open-field test for both experiments. No significance was detected between housing density or space allocation treatments. These findings suggest that social rank is a significantly greater modifier of affective state than either housing density or space allocation. This finding has not yet been reported and suggests that future drafts of housing guidelines should consider animal social status in addition to floor space requirements.
-
female rats display fewer optimistic responses in a Judgment Bias test in the absence of a physiological stress response
Physiology & Behavior, 2017Co-Authors: Timothy Hugh Barker, Gordon S. Howarth, Larisa Bobrovskaya, Alexandra L. WhittakerAbstract:Metabolic cages are a type of housing used in biomedical research. Metabolic cage housing has been demonstrated to elicit behavioural and physiological changes in rodents housed within them. The nature of this effect has been characterized as anxiogenic. However, few studies have evaluated positive affect in response to metabolic cage housing and the interaction between this, sex and traditional physiological measures of stress. Cognitive Biasing, as measured through a Judgment Bias paradigm has proven a reliable measure of animal affective state, particularly through its ability to measure positive affect. The current study investigated differences in cognitive Biasing between male and female rats when transferred from open-top, grouped housing to a metabolic cage. Rats (Rattus norvegicus) (n=60) were trained in a Judgment Bias paradigm previously validated for use in the rat model. Upon exposure to an intermediate, ambiguous probe rats responded with either an optimistic or pessimistic decision. The animals were also subjected to the sucrose preference test to identify the presence of anhedonia. Faecal corticosterone and changes in adrenal tyrosine hydroxylase were also measured to establish whether a stress-like state was experienced. There was a significant interaction between sex and metabolic cage housing on the number of optimistic decisions made F (1, 56)=7.461, p=0.008. Female rats that remained in control housing responded with a reduced number of days featuring an optimistic decision compared to males in control housing (p=0.036). However, both males and females responded with significantly fewer optimistic decisions in the metabolic cage compared to control (p<0.001). There was a significant negative correlation between treatment and sucrose consumption (rpb=-0.654, n=195, p<0.001). There was also a significant sex effect for faecal corticosterone concentrations F (1, 30)=6.305, p=0.018) with female rats (4.050±1.285), displaying greater corticosterone concentrations than males (2.291±0.495). No differences between treatment were observed for either corticosterone or tyrosine hydroxylase levels. This data demonstrates that movement into a metabolic cage resulted in rats displaying significantly greater pessimistic cognitive Biases as determined through the Judgment Bias test. Interestingly, male rats that remained in control housing demonstrated cognitive Biases that were not equivalent to female rats. Furthermore, despite a behavioural change being evident, a physiological change in corticosterone or tyrosine hydroxylase levels was not observed.
Franz Josef Van Der Staay - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Discrimination learning and Judgment Bias in low birth weight pigs.
Animal cognition, 2019Co-Authors: Sanne Roelofs, Franz Josef Van Der Staay, Floor A. C. Alferink, Allyson F. Ipema, Tessa Van De Pas, Rebecca E. NordquistAbstract:Low birth weight (LBW) is a risk factor for cognitive and emotional impairments in humans. In pigs, LBW is a common occurrence, but its effects on cognition and emotion have received only limited scientific attention. To assess whether LBW pigs suffer from impaired cognitive and emotional development, we trained and tested 21 LBW and 21 normal birth weight (NBW) pigs in a Judgment Bias task. Judgment Bias is a measure of emotional state which reflects the influence of emotion on an animal’s interpretation of ambiguous stimuli. Pigs were trained to perform a specific behavioral response to two auditory stimuli, predicting either a positive or negative outcome. Once pigs successfully discriminated between these stimuli, they were presented with intermediate, ambiguous stimuli. The pigs’ responses to ambiguous stimuli were scored as optimistic (performance of ‘positive’ response) or pessimistic (performance of ‘negative’ response). Optimistic or pessimistic interpretation of an ambiguous stimulus is indicative of a positive or negative emotional state, respectively. We found LBW pigs to require more discrimination training sessions than NBW pigs to reach criterion performance, suggesting that LBW causes a mild cognitive impairment in pigs. No effects of LBW on Judgment Bias were found, suggesting a similar emotional state for LBW and NBW pigs. This was supported by comparable salivary and hair cortisol concentrations for both groups. It is possible the enriched housing conditions and social grouping applied during our study influenced these results.
-
female and male pigs performance in a spatial holeboard and Judgment Bias task
Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2017Co-Authors: Sanne Roelofs, Rebecca E. Nordquist, Franz Josef Van Der StaayAbstract:Abstract Studies of the cognitive abilities of pigs are increasing in number, due to their relevance for the fields of animal welfare and biomedical research. While both female and male pigs have been used in cognitive tasks, possible sex differences in performance have not yet received extensive attention. This is of interest, as sexual dimorphism in cognitive abilities has been documented for a variety of species. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of sex on pigs’ performance in two cognitive tasks. Spatial learning and memory of ten female and ten male pigs was compared in a spatial holeboard task. Working and reference memory, as well as measures of motivation and exploration were assessed. Both females and males acquired the task and no differences were found between sexes for any measures of spatial memory. However, female pigs performed more successfully during reversal trials (shorter latency to first reward, higher number of rewards found), indicating greater response flexibility. This difference between sexes was transient, with males eventually reaching the same level of performance as the females. Judgment Bias, a cognitive measure of affective state, was subsequently assessed using an active choice Judgment Bias task. Pigs were trained to respond differently to a negative and a positive stimulus, signaling either a small or a large reward. During Judgment Bias testing, pigs were presented with ambiguous cues and their trained ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ responses were recorded as optimistic or pessimistic choices, respectively. Both females and males displayed a slightly optimistic Judgment Bias. Optimistic choosing decreased with repeated testing for both groups. It is likely the pigs learned about the unrewarded outcome of ambiguous cues, rendering them no longer ambiguous. Further improvement of the Judgment Bias task as a cognitive measure of affective state is deemed necessary. Overall, our results indicate that sex is not a confounding factor when measuring baseline performance of pigs in the spatial holeboard or Judgment Bias task. Sex effects were only found when subjecting the pigs to a reversal task, warranting further study of sex differences in response flexibility. Such a difference would have implications for pig welfare, as it suggests that males are slower to cope with changes in their environment.
-
Female and male pigs’ performance in a spatial holeboard and Judgment Bias task ☆
Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2017Co-Authors: Sanne Roelofs, Rebecca E. Nordquist, Franz Josef Van Der StaayAbstract:Abstract Studies of the cognitive abilities of pigs are increasing in number, due to their relevance for the fields of animal welfare and biomedical research. While both female and male pigs have been used in cognitive tasks, possible sex differences in performance have not yet received extensive attention. This is of interest, as sexual dimorphism in cognitive abilities has been documented for a variety of species. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of sex on pigs’ performance in two cognitive tasks. Spatial learning and memory of ten female and ten male pigs was compared in a spatial holeboard task. Working and reference memory, as well as measures of motivation and exploration were assessed. Both females and males acquired the task and no differences were found between sexes for any measures of spatial memory. However, female pigs performed more successfully during reversal trials (shorter latency to first reward, higher number of rewards found), indicating greater response flexibility. This difference between sexes was transient, with males eventually reaching the same level of performance as the females. Judgment Bias, a cognitive measure of affective state, was subsequently assessed using an active choice Judgment Bias task. Pigs were trained to respond differently to a negative and a positive stimulus, signaling either a small or a large reward. During Judgment Bias testing, pigs were presented with ambiguous cues and their trained ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ responses were recorded as optimistic or pessimistic choices, respectively. Both females and males displayed a slightly optimistic Judgment Bias. Optimistic choosing decreased with repeated testing for both groups. It is likely the pigs learned about the unrewarded outcome of ambiguous cues, rendering them no longer ambiguous. Further improvement of the Judgment Bias task as a cognitive measure of affective state is deemed necessary. Overall, our results indicate that sex is not a confounding factor when measuring baseline performance of pigs in the spatial holeboard or Judgment Bias task. Sex effects were only found when subjecting the pigs to a reversal task, warranting further study of sex differences in response flexibility. Such a difference would have implications for pig welfare, as it suggests that males are slower to cope with changes in their environment.
-
making decisions under ambiguity Judgment Bias tasks for assessing emotional state in animals
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2016Co-Authors: Sanne Roelofs, Rebecca E. Nordquist, Hetty Boleij, Franz Josef Van Der StaayAbstract:Judgment Bias tasks (JBTs) are considered as a family of promising tools in the assessment of emotional states of animals. JBTs provide a cognitive measure of optimism and/or pessimism by recording behavioral responses to ambiguous stimuli. For instance, a negative emotional state is expected to produce a negative or pessimistic Judgment of an ambiguous stimulus, whereas a positive emotional state produces a positive or optimistic Judgment of the same ambiguous stimulus. Measuring an animal's emotional state or mood is relevant in both animal welfare research and biomedical research. This is reflected in the increasing use of JBTs in both research areas. We discuss the different implementations of JBTs with animals, with a focus on their potential as an accurate measure of emotional state. JBTs have been successfully applied to a very broad range of species, using many different types of testing equipment and experimental protocols. However, further validation of this test is deemed necessary. For example, the often extensive training period required for successful Judgment Bias testing remains a possible factor confounding results. Also, the issue of ambiguous stimuli losing their ambiguity with repeated testing requires additional attention. Possible improvements are suggested to further develop the JBTs in both animal welfare and biomedical research.
Elia Strambini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
quantum cognition and bell s inequality a model for probabilistic Judgment Bias
Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 2017Co-Authors: Giorgio Gronchi, Elia StrambiniAbstract:Abstract Recently, quantum theory has shown its effectiveness in modeling psychological phenomena. Given the importance of Bell’s inequality in the context of quantum physics, this work aims to investigate this issue in the domain of human probabilistic reasoning. Here, we present two quantum models that are able to predict the employment of the representativeness heuristic in a probabilistic task based on Bell’s inequality in the Wigner–d’Espagnat format. The difference between the two models is based on the origins of the correlations achievable in conceptual combination; the first assumes incompatible variables while the second is based on quantum entanglement. From these models, two different scenarios related to three dichotomous variables ( A , A ), ( B , B ), ( C , C ) were created. Each scenario was manipulated in order to predict the violation of the inequality ( P r ( A ∩ C ) > P r ( ( A ∩ B ) ∪ ( B ∩ C ) ) ) or not ( P r ( A ∩ C ) ≤ P r ( ( A ∩ B ) ∪ ( B ∩ C ) ) ). Each condition was tested using two different modalities of response: Forced choice and probability rating of a single sentence. In Experiment 1, participants were randomly assigned to a single scenario, condition, and modality of response. The data showed a violation of the inequality consistent with the predictions of both models. In Experiment 2, we investigated the influence of an explicit subadditivity pattern (i.e., if P r ( ( A ∩ B ) ∪ ( B ∩ C ) ) ≤ P r ( A ∩ B ) + P r ( B ∩ C ) ) in our tasks, both from an empirical and theoretical point of view. Our results confirm the use of the quantum cognition approach in developing cognitive models.
-
Quantum cognition and Bell’s inequality: A model for probabilistic Judgment Bias
Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 2017Co-Authors: Giorgio Gronchi, Elia StrambiniAbstract:Abstract Recently, quantum theory has shown its effectiveness in modeling psychological phenomena. Given the importance of Bell’s inequality in the context of quantum physics, this work aims to investigate this issue in the domain of human probabilistic reasoning. Here, we present two quantum models that are able to predict the employment of the representativeness heuristic in a probabilistic task based on Bell’s inequality in the Wigner–d’Espagnat format. The difference between the two models is based on the origins of the correlations achievable in conceptual combination; the first assumes incompatible variables while the second is based on quantum entanglement. From these models, two different scenarios related to three dichotomous variables ( A , A ), ( B , B ), ( C , C ) were created. Each scenario was manipulated in order to predict the violation of the inequality ( P r ( A ∩ C ) > P r ( ( A ∩ B ) ∪ ( B ∩ C ) ) ) or not ( P r ( A ∩ C ) ≤ P r ( ( A ∩ B ) ∪ ( B ∩ C ) ) ). Each condition was tested using two different modalities of response: Forced choice and probability rating of a single sentence. In Experiment 1, participants were randomly assigned to a single scenario, condition, and modality of response. The data showed a violation of the inequality consistent with the predictions of both models. In Experiment 2, we investigated the influence of an explicit subadditivity pattern (i.e., if P r ( ( A ∩ B ) ∪ ( B ∩ C ) ) ≤ P r ( A ∩ B ) + P r ( B ∩ C ) ) in our tasks, both from an empirical and theoretical point of view. Our results confirm the use of the quantum cognition approach in developing cognitive models.
