Abstract

To elucidate the cognitive structures of animals, neuroscientists use several behavioral tasks. Therefore, it is imperative to have a firm understanding of each task's behavioral parameters in order to parse out possible task effects. We compare two operant discrimination tasks (Go/No-Go: GNG; Two-Alternative Choice: TAC) that are commonly used in olfactory research. Past research has suggested that solving the two tasks requires divergent cognitive strategies. One hypothesis is that the two tasks differ in how an animal optimizes reward rate by means of a speed-accuracy trade-off (SAT). If this is true, then changing tasks could give researchers an additional tool to understand animal cognition. However, no study has systematically analyzed the two tasks in parallel using odor stimuli. Using standardized training protocols, we test GNG and TAC in parallel. Our protocols allow us to isolate the stimulus sampling period from a general reaction time period. We find that the two tasks do not differ with regard to the stimulus sampling period and conclude that the two tasks do not differ in the amount of time it takes an animal to perform a discrimination. Instead, tasks differ in the time it takes to make an overt behavioral response, with GNG showing shorter periods than TAC. We also find no evidence of rats using either task-specific or intertrial interval-dependent SAT schema in order to optimize reward rate. We show that similarities between dependent variables, with the possible exception of response delay, appear to be under experimenter control.