The DOI matches its Crossref record.
EXPERIMENTS ON ‘NEOPHOBIA’ IN WILD AND LABORATORY RATS
Abstract
All rata ( Rattus norvegicus ), wild or tame, have a well‐marked tendency to explore their surroundings. Wild rats, but not tame ones, also tend to avoid unfamiliar objects in a previously explored, and therefore familiar, area. The effect of environmental change on feeding was studied in three groups of wild rats. Bats of Group 1 were accustomed to feeding from a wire basket at the back of the cage; for them the change consisted of transfer of the food to an unfamiliar tin at the front of the cage. Group 2 had food in the basket throughout, and the change consisted only in an empty, unfamiliar tin being put in the front of the cage. The rats of Group 3 fed from a basket in the front of the cage; the change for them was the placing of an unfamiliar empty tin between the back of the cage, where they slept, and the food. In all three groups feeding was interrupted by the change. In the first group, three of the five rats stopped eating completely for one or more days; in the other two groups, food consumption was merely reduced on the first day after the change. The check in eating was not due to exploration: the new object was at first completely avoided by all the rats. Tame albino and hooded rats, subjected to the same procedure as the wild rats of Group 1, investigated the tin and the food in it at once; their food intake during the day after the change was unaffected. The first approach of the hooded rats to the new object was, however, more hesitant than that of the albinos. Investigation of a new object, or new conditions, can sometimes lead to an interruption of feeding in tame rats, but this has nothing in common with avoidance behaviour in wild rats.
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
Cited by
Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans
Pliner, P., & Hobden, K. (1992) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/0195-6663(92)90014-w · Cited by 2,137
"Learned safety" as a mechanism in long-delay taste-aversion learning in rats.
Kalat, J. W., & Rozin, P. (1973) · Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0034424 · Cited by 389
AN ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR IN WILD RATS
BARNETT, S. A. (1958) · Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London · doi:10.1111/j.1096-3642.1958.tb00565.x · Cited by 248
Self-citationA chronometric approach to the study of feeding behavior
Armstrong, S. (1980) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/0149-7634(80)90024-x · Cited by 184
Physiological effects of “social stress” in wild rats—I
Barnett, S. A. (1958) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3999(58)90012-6 · Cited by 91
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- BARNETT, S. A.
- Venue
- British Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1958-08
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 195-201
- ISSN
- 0007-1269 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8295
- OpenAlex
- W2110542026
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: EXPERIMENTS ON ‘NEOPHOBIA’ IN WILD AND LABORATORY RATS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1958.tb00657.x
- The paper
- BARNETT, S. A. (1958). EXPERIMENTS ON ‘NEOPHOBIA’ IN WILD AND LABORATORY RATS. British Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1958.tb00657.x
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.