The influence of open arm ledges and maze experience in the elevated plus-maze
Abstract
In Experiment 1, rats were tested in a plus-maze, with or without small ledges on the open arms, after injection with vehicle or chlordiazepoxide (7.5 mg/kg). They were scored either on their first or second exposure to the maze; those scored on trail 2 had received a 5-min undrugged exposure to the maze 24 h earlier. This dose of chlordiazepoxide had a significant anxiolytic effect on trial 1 only in the maze without ledges, and on trial 2 only in the maze with ledges; thus, the presence of ledges differentially affected anxiolytic sensitivity on trials 1 and 2. The results of a factor analysis study (Experiment 2) confirmed that ledges had a differential effect when rats were repeatedly exposed to the maze. Thus, in the maze without ledges, the scores reflecting anxiolytic activity on trial 1 loaded on one factor, whereas the scores from trials 2 and 3 loaded on another independent factor. In the maze with ledges, the scores reflecting anxiolytic activity on trials 1, 2, and 3 loaded on three independent factors. Considering the published evidence and the results of the present study, we suggest that both types of plus-maze may be measuring the same type of anxiety with different sensitivities on trial 1 (e.g., generalised anxiety or fear of open spaces); different types of anxiety on trial 2 (without ledges--phobia/fear of heights; with ledges--not known), and trial 3 in the maze with ledges, yet another type of anxiety. The factor analysis results are also presented for e…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The self-grooming levels observed would not be interpreted as excessive self-grooming characteristic of other ASD rodent models.
“and would not be interpreted as excessive self-grooming that is characteristic of other ASD rodent models [59,83].”
From Behavioral Phenotyping of Juvenile Long-Evans and Sprague-Dawley Rats: Implications for Preclinical Models of Autism Spectrum Disorders (2016) · cites this paper as [59]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 20 · Cited by 311
- Authors
- Fernandes, C., & File, S. E.
- Affiliations
- Guy's Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- File, Sandra E.
- ORCID
- Fernandes, Cathy
- Venue
- Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-05
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-40
- ISSN
- 0091-3057 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2120023340
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 22.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Keywords
- elevated plus maze, chlordiazepoxide, ledges, anxiety assessment, generalized anxiety disorder, phobia, motor activity, rats
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Anxiety, Chlordiazepoxide, Exploratory Behavior, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Male, Anti-Anxiety Agents, Rats
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review