The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The exploratory behaviour of rats in the hole-board apparatus: Is head-dipping a valid measure of neophilia?
Open accessAbstract
The exploratory behaviour of laboratory rodents is of interest within a number of areas of behavioural pharmacology. However, how best to measure exploratory behaviour in rodents remains a contentious issue. Many unconditioned tests, such as the open field, potentially confound general locomotor activity with exploration. The hole-board apparatus appears to avoid this confound, as head-dipping into holes in the floor is assumed to be a valid measure of the subject's attraction towards novelty (neophilia). This study aimed to investigate whether head-dipping should be considered a valid measure of neophilia by comparing performance of adult male and female Lister hooded rats on the hole-board task (a) over repeated sessions and (b) when novel objects were absent or present underneath the holes. The results show that head-dipping initially decreased across repeated exposures, while time spent in the aversive central area increased. No change in head-dipping was seen in response to objects being placed underneath the holes. Rather than being a measure of neophilia, these results support the hypothesis that head-dipping represents an escape response, which declines as the subject becomes less fearful. These results are compared with previous studies of repeated exposure to other novel environments.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring normal and pathological anxiety-like behaviour in mice: a review
Belzung, C., & Griebel, G. (2001) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/s0166-4328(01)00291-1 · Cited by 912
Cited by
Tests of unconditioned anxiety — Pitfalls and disappointments
Ennaceur, A. (2014) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.05.032 · Cited by 259
Novelty Seeking and Drug Addiction in Humans and Animals: From Behavior to Molecules
Wingo, T., Nesil, T., Choi, J.-S., & Li, M. D. (2016) · Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology · doi:10.1007/s11481-015-9636-7 · Cited by 144
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, G. R., & Nemes, C.
- Venue
- Behavioural Processes
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-07
- Volume
- 78
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 442-448
- ISSN
- 0376-6357 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1964473837
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The exploratory behaviour of rats in the hole-board apparatus: Is head-dipping a valid measure of neophilia? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.beproc.2008.02.019
- The paper
- Brown, G. R., & Nemes, C. (2008). The exploratory behaviour of rats in the hole-board apparatus: Is head-dipping a valid measure of neophilia? Behavioural Processes. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2008.02.019
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.