Cited by 52Schizophrenia research and treatmentNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Predictably irrational: assaying cognitive inflexibility in mouse models of schizophrenia

Open access
Brigman, Jonathan L.·2010·Frontiers in Neuroscience

Abstract

The development of sophisticated, translatable mouse-based assays modeling the behavioral manifestations of neuropsychiatric diseases, such as schizophrenia, has lagged the advances in molecular and genomic techniques. Our laboratory has made efforts to fill this gap by investing in the development of novel assays, including adapting a touchscreen-based method for measuring cognitive and executive functions for use in mice. As part of these efforts, a recent study by Brigman et al. (2009) investigated the effects of subchronic phencyclidine treatment on mouse touchscreen-based pairwise visual discrimination and reversal learning. Here, we summarize the results of that study, and place them in the larger context of ongoing efforts to develop valid mouse "models" of schizophrenia, with a focus on reversal learning and other measures of cognitive flexibility. Touchscreen-based systems could provide a tractable platform for fully utilizing the mouse to elucidate the pathophysiology of cognitive inflexibility in schizophrenia and other neuropsychiatric disorders.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/neuro.01.013.2010

Cites

124 of 124 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Available mouse operant touchscreen paradigms seem to have face validity relative to human cognitive touchscreen tasks, although there is concern that the cognitive profile of Fmr1-KO mice may not emulate the cognitive deficits in the human syndrome.

    “available mouse operant touchscreen paradigms seem to have face validity63,89,101–104 relative to human cognitive touchscreen tasks97, although there is concern that the cognitive profile of Fmr1-KO mice may not emulate the cognitive deficits in the human syndrome63.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brigman, J. L.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Brigman, Jonathan L.
Venue
Frontiers in Neuroscience
Published
2010-05-15
Volume
4
ISSN
  • 1662-453X (ISSN-L)
  • 1662-4548
OpenAlex
W2035613511
Cited by
52
References
124
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (Z01AA000411)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
schizophrenia, cognitive inflexibility, cognitive flexibility, reversal learning, executive function, neuropsychiatric disorders

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