The application of the 5-choice serial reaction time task for the assessment of visual attentional processes and impulse control in rats

Abstract

One popular way of measuring visual attentional processes in the rat is using 5-choice serial reaction time task (5-CSRTT). This paradigm requires subjects to detect brief flashes of light presented in a pseudorandom order in one of five spatial locations over a large number of trials. For this task, the animals are trained for approximately 30-40 daily sessions during which they gradually learn to respond in the appropriate aperture within a certain amount of time. If they fail to respond, respond in the wrong hole or at an inappropriate time, a short period of darkness (time-out) is presented as punishment and no reward is delivered. The 5-CSRTT provides the possibility to test the effects of various neural, pharmacological and behavioral manipulations on discrete and somewhat independent measures of behavioral control, including accuracy of discrimination, impulsivity, perseverative responses and response latencies.

Chemogenetic Inactivation of Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex Neurons Disrupts Attentional Behavior in Mouse

“…We next assessed accurate and omitted trials as stimulus duration decreased in both groups upon CNO administration (Bari et al, 2008;Mar et al, 2013). Compared with vehicle delivery, CNO administration significantly increased the number of trials omitted in both hSyn-hM4Di and CaMKII-hM4Di mice.…”

“…Because an increase in omission can also arise because of altered motor function and decreased motivation to obtain a reward, we next sought to evaluate motivation and motor deficits through latency to collect rewards as well as the open field test (Bari et al, 2008;Mar et al, 2013). Although we observed a significant lengthening of latency to produce a correct response in hSyn-hM4Di mice (po0.05), but not in CaMK2-hM4Di mice (p = 0.13), CNO administration did not affect latency to collect reward (hSyn-hM4Di, p = 0.40; CaMKII-hM4Di, p = 0.13) (Figure 3a-d).…”

“…To examine whether the effect of chemogenetic inactivation of dACC neurons is specific to attention processing, we also assessed for alterations in impulsivity and compulsivity upon CNO administration by measuring the number of premature responses and perseverative responses, respectively (Bari et al, 2008;Mar et al, 2013). No effect of CNO administration on the number of premature responses ( Figure 4a and b: hSyn-hM4Di, p = 0.71; CaMKII-hM4Di, p = 0.50) and perseverative responses (Figure 4c and d: hSynhM4Di, p = 0.15; CaMKII-hM4Di, p = 0.30) was observed in either hSyn-hM4Di or CaMKII-hM4Di mice, indicating that response control was not affected by the dACC pan-neuronal or excitatory inactivation.…”

“…When coupled to behavioral paradigms, this methodology affords the opportunity to examine behavioral outcomes in conjunction with molecular-, cellular-, and circuit-level disruptions. Addressing these concerns, we expressed hM4Di in dACC neurons and subjected mice to the five-choice serial reaction time task (5CSRTT) that measures sustained visuospatial attention alongside processing speed and response control (Bari et al, 2008;Robbins, 2002). Our study was conducted in Bussey-Saksida touch-screen operant chambers with a high degree of automation and standardization, applying similar stimulus and response characteristics to those used by the analogous Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery in humans and non-human primates (Bussey et al, 2012;Mar et al, 2013;Romberg et al, 2011;Silverman et al, 2013).…”

Impulsivity in animal models for drug abuse disorders

“…A number of tests measure the ability to stop or withhold a pre-potent response; these include the go/no-go and stop-signal reaction time tasks [7][8][9]. Additionally, choice reaction time tasks [10][11][12][13] and reinforcement of low rates of responding schedules [14][15][16][17] can be used to assess the ability to temporarily delay a reward-directed response over an interval. Other tests measure the ability to adaptively inhibit one response in favor of another when contingencies are adjusted during performance, i.e.…”