Back

A method for assessing approach and avoidance behavior across multiple olfactory stimuli in mice including multivariate hypothesis comparisons

Rosenthal, M. C.; Bakir, A. K.; Gaikwad, A.; Clark, K.; Garcia, A. T.; McGann, J. P.

2026-02-23 animal behavior and cognition
10.64898/2026.02.21.707096 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Approach and avoidance behavior towards sensory stimuli serve as powerful behavioral readouts of our mental representations of the external world and our expectations and motivations in navigating it. In the olfactory system, approach or avoidance of odors statistically associated with people, places, and things relate to ecologically critical functions like feeding, fear, and reproduction. However, experimental methods for quantifying approach/avoidance behavior in relative terms across odors have been limited. Here we present a novel method for quantifying mouse approach/avoidance in an open field arena scented with up to four odors simultaneously. In lieu of traditional inferential statistics (which greatly limit the information that can be learned in this multivariate experiment), we demonstrate the a priori definition of quantitative hypotheses for the distribution of time among scented corners and the use of information theory-derived statistical metrics to quantify the relative likelihood of each competing hypothesis given the data collected. Finally, we use data from a fear conditioning experiment to demonstrate the application of this method to conclude that fear conditioned mice exhibit a fear generalization gradient that decreases as odorants become more different from the threat-predictive odorant, as opposed to competing hypotheses that mice are specifically avoiding the threat-predictive odorant or have overgeneralized their fear and avoid all test odors regardless of similarity. Critically, this method takes only a few minutes per animal with no prior behavioral training required, and it can be performed easily without automated apparatus.

Matching journals

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

1
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 3%
14.0%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 4%
12.0%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 20%
9.8%
4
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.2%
5
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.2%
7
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.9%
8
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
46 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
9
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.2%
10
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 28%
2.0%
11
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
12
Behavioral Neuroscience
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.0%
13
Current Biology
596 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.8%
14
Animal Cognition
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
15
Chemical Senses
30 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
16
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.6%
17
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.3%
18
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
19
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
20
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
21
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
22
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 34%
0.7%
24
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
The American Naturalist
114 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
26
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
27
Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
28
Journal of Neurogenetics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.6%