ArticlePsychopharmacology2026
Characterisation of a touchscreen-based task for assessing cognitive judgement bias in mice: a new translational tool for affective state disorder drug screening.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleA major obstacle in the pre-clinical study of mood-related disorders and novel affective state therapeutic evaluation is the lack of animal models that fully recapitulate human symptomatology.
objectiveIn this study, we developed a touchscreen-based cognitive judgement bias (CJB) task for mice.
methodsIn the CJB task, animals first learned to discriminate between two visual stimuli displayed on the touchscreen: one associated with a reward (S+) and one associated with a time-out and flashing house light (S-). Once mice learned to respond to the S + and to withhold responding to the S- consistently, a set of four ambiguous stimuli ranging in visual similarity to the S + and S- stimuli were randomly interspersed in the stimulus presentation sequence. Responses to these ambiguous stimuli were interpreted as a greater expectation of positive ('optimistic bias') or negative ('pessimistic bias') outcomes as a function of their similarity to the S + or S- stimuli.
resultsThe acute administration of the SSRIs fluoxetine and citalopram, and the 5HT-2 C receptor antagonist SB 242084, did not produce any effects on CJB task performance. However, the noradrenaline/dopamine reuptake inhibitor, bupropion, increased responses to the ambiguous stimuli consistent with the induction of an 'optimistic bias', and the pro-depressant tetrabenazine yielded the opposite effect.
conclusionThis study underscores the capacity of mice to respond to visually ambiguous stimuli in an ambiguity-dependent manner, a phenomenon observed across various species, including humans. Furthermore, it establishes and validates an operant behavioural task to assess CJB in mice delivered using the touchscreen platform, which has significant cross-species translational potential.
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.