ArticleeNeuro2026
Learning and Motivation State Fluctuations from Motoric and Neurophysiologic Metrics during a Somatosensory Task in Mice.
Article in eNeuro, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal learning can be analyzed on two timescales: task acquisition across training sessions and motivation fluctuations within training sessions. How do variations in motor and neurophysiologic activity relate to task performance over these timescales? Here, this question was examined in head-fixed mice performing a whisker-based sensory discrimination task. Male mice were trained for 12-14 daily sessions on a go/no-go task, each lasting ∼1 h to capture spontaneous performance fluctuations over minutes. Simultaneous to task performance, "nonperformance variables" were tracked, including wheel running, pupil size, eyelid aperture, and sensory cortical activity. First, motivation states were defined based on performance tendencies over minutes, leading to three state categories: persistent, disengaged, or attentive. Nonperformance variables were found to predict these states independent of task correctness. Then, when further parsing these states by the go/no-go outcomes of hit, miss, false alarm, or correct rejection, learning-like changes were detected in wheel running, eye movements, and brain activity. Thus, learning over days and motivation fluctuations over minutes form a continuum, as evidenced by changes in motor and physiologic activity variables not directly controlled by task contingencies, even during periods of suboptimal performance in well-trained subjects. These findings improve the understanding of performance variations and implicit learning, in addition to contributing a framework for the analysis of task performance indirectly from motor and neurophysiologic activity.
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.