Cited by 221Memory and Neural MechanismsAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesPsychological and Educational Research Studies

Enrichment-dependent differences in novelty exploration in rats can be explained by habituation.

Zimmermann, Aurelia, Stauffacher, Markus, Langhans, Wolfgang, Würbel, Hanno·2001·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

In rats, exploratory activity and emotional reactivity towards novel stimuli reflect independent biological functions that are modulated differently by rearing experiences. Environmental enrichment is known to improve performance in exploratory tasks, while having inconsistent effects on emotionality. This study examined the effect of environmental enrichment on the behaviour of rats in two exploratory tasks. Male rats were reared under one of four conditions, differing in social and non-social complexity. At 9 weeks of age, exploration of a novel open field, and exploration of novel objects in the same open field following 24 h habituation, was assessed. Differences in social and non-social complexity of the rearing environment had inconsistent effects on exploration in the novel open field. In contrast, when rats were faced with novel objects in an otherwise familiar environment, exploration habituated faster with increasing stimulus complexity of the non-social environment. The social environment had no effect on this latter test. These findings indicate that environmental enrichment affects exploratory activity primarily through its effect on habituation to novelty. This effect depends on relative stimulus complexity of the rearing environment, but is independent of social factors. The present results further suggest that aversive tasks can obscure the expression of enrichment-dependent differences in habituation to novelty.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0166-4328(00)00377-6

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zimmermann, A., Stauffacher, M., Langhans, W., & Würbel, H.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Würbel, Hanno
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-06
Volume
121
Issue
1-2
Pages
11-20
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2070604675
Cited by
221
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 11
FWCI
3.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychological and Educational Research Studies
Keywords
environmental enrichment, novelty exploration, rearing conditions, social complexity, novel object exploration, open field exploration, emotional reactivity, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Arousal, Attention, Avoidance Learning, Exploratory Behavior, Habituation, Psychophysiologic, Male, Problem Solving, Social Environment, 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