ReviewTrends in neurosciences2025
The curious interpretation of novel object recognition tests.
Review in Trends in neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterizing behavioral effects of early-life stress in an animal model of auditory processing.Physiology & behavior · 2026Article
- High-fat diet attenuates estradiol's efficacy on cognitive function and hippocampal synaptic plasticity in middle-aged ovariectomized mice.Physiological reports · 2026Article
- A "personality test" for rats reveals subtle but distinct effects of sex and early life inflammation on brain and behavior.Behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Ketogenic interventions enhance REM sleep in females and support memory in aged rats.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- Obesity suppresses hippocampal neurogenesis and impairs memory and executive function in a weight and sex-specific manner.Physiology & behavior · 2026Article
- Too Little and Too Much: Balanced Hippocampal, But Not Medial Prefrontal, Neural Activity Is Required for Intact Novel Object Recognition in Rats.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Sex-dimorphic oxytocin regulation of CA1-dependent spatial memory and synaptic plasticity in juvenile rats.Behavioral and brain functions : BBF · 2025Article
- Agmatine Mitigates Diabetes-Related Memory Loss in Female Mice by Targeting IAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Fibrinogen and Complement Factor H Induce Parkinsonian and Cognitive Impairment-Like Features in Mice.Cellular and molecular neurobiology · 2025Article
- That Sync-ing Feeling: The Progressive Drop of Hippocampal and Entorhinal Coordination in Murine Epilepsy.Epilepsy currentsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Novel object recognition tasks are commonly used to assess memory in rodents. These tests rely on an innate preference for exploring objects that are new or have been moved or changed. However, this preference, while normally seen in control conditions, is not immutable. Stressful experiences as well as lesions and genetic mutations can lead mice and rats to show clear preferences for exploring familiar objects and familiar locations. This opinion article discusses the evidence for changes in novelty preference, implications of this lability for assessing memory, and the significance of shifts in novelty preference as a readout of changes in curiosity with implications in approach-avoidance behavior and explore-exploit decision-making. Finally, we provide some recommendations for reporting and interpreting novelty preference task findings moving forward.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.