Back

A progressive ratio task with costly resets reveals adaptive effort-delay tradeoffs

Rivera, Z. M. G.; Guerrero Leon, K.; Cervera, M.; Aguayo, B.; Izquierdo, A.; Wikenheiser, A. M.

2025-06-06 animal behavior and cognition
10.1101/2025.06.03.657635 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The Progressive Ratio (PR) schedule is a popular test for measuring the motivational value of a reinforcer, in which subjects must exert an increasing amount of work to obtain each successive reward. Despite its popularity, the PR task hinges on a low-dimensional behavioral readout--breakpoint, or the maximum work requirement subjects are willing to complete before abandoning the task. Here, we show that with a simple modification, the PR task can be transformed into an optimization problem reminiscent of the patch-leaving foraging scenario, which has been analyzed extensively by behavioral ecologists, psychologists, and neuroscientists. In the Progressive Ratio with Reset (PRR) task, rats perform the PR task on one lever, but can press a second lever to reset the current ratio requirement back to its lowest value at the cost of enduring a reset delay, during which both levers are retracted. Rats used the reset lever adaptively on the PRR task, and their ratio reset decisions were sensitive to the cost of the reset delay. We derived an approach for computing the optimal bout length--the number of rewards to earn before pressing the reset lever that produces the greatest long-term rate of reward--and found that rats flexibly changed their behavior to approximate the optimal strategy. However, rats showed a systematic bias for bout lengths that exceeded the optimal length, an effect reminiscent of "overharvesting" in patch-leaving tasks. The PRR task thus represents a novel means of testing whether and how rats adapt their behavior to the cost-benefit structure of the environment in a way that connects deeply to the broader literature on associative learning and optimal foraging theory.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Behavioral Neuroscience
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
29.8%
2
Behavioural Brain Research
77 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
3
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
4
Behavioural Processes
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.3%
5
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 19%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 26%
4.6%
7
The Journal of Neuroscience
1025 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.1%
8
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 35%
3.9%
9
Animal Cognition
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
10
Physiology & Behavior
31 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.1%
11
Hormones and Behavior
45 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.3%
12
eneuro
439 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.0%
13
Hippocampus
56 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
14
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
40 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
15
European Journal of Neuroscience
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
Learning & Memory
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
17
Psychopharmacology
69 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
18
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
19
Journal of Experimental Biology
259 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
20
Frontiers in Neuroscience
256 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.0%
21
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
22
Evolution
225 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.6%
24
Genes, Brain and Behavior
30 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
25
Animal Behaviour
73 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
26
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 22%
0.6%