Novelty at second glance: A critical appraisal of the novel-object paradigm based on meta-analysis

Author:

Takola E.ORCID,Krause E. T.ORCID,Müller C.ORCID,Schielzeth H.ORCID

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe study of consistent individual differences in behaviour has become an important focus in research on animal behaviour. Behavioural phenotypes are typically measured through standardized testing paradigms and one frequently used paradigm is the novel object test. In novel object tests, animals are exposed to new (unknown) objects and their reaction is quantified. When repeating trials to assess the temporal consistency of individual differences, researchers face the dilemma of whether to use the same or different ‘novel’ objects, since the same stimulus can result in habituation, while exposure to different objects can result in context-dependent responses. We performed a quantitative assessment of 254 effect sizes from 113 studies on novel-object trials to evaluate the properties of this testing paradigm, in particular the effect of object novelty and time interval between novel-object trials on estimates of individual consistency. We found an increase of sample sizes and an increase of estimates of repeatabilities with time. The vast majority of short-term studies (<one month) used different novel objects, while long-term studies (>one month) used either the same or different novel objects about equally often. The average estimate for individual consistency was r = 0.47 (short-term r = 0.52, long-term r = 0.44). Novelty, time interval between trials and their interaction together explained only 3% of the total heterogeneity. Overall, novelobject trials reliably estimate individual differences in behaviour, but results were very heterogeneous even within the same study species, suggesting susceptibility to unknown details in testing conditions. Most studies that measure novel-object responses in association with food label the trait as neophobia, while novel-object trials in a neutral context are labelled variously as boldness/shyness, exploratory behaviour or neophobia/neophilia. Neophobia/neophilia is also the term most specific to novel object presentations. To avoid ambiguity, we suggest object neophobia/neophilia as the most specific label for novel-object responses.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3