Palatability Shifts in Taste and Flavour Preference Conditioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in palatability of tastes and flavours as a result of flavour preference conditioning were examined. In Experiment 1, when tastes were paired with glucose in a reverse-order differential conditioning paradigm, rats acquired conditioned preferences for CS(+) and displayed more hedonic responses to CS(+) than to CS(-) in a postconditioning taste reactivity test. In Experiment 2, rats that received oral infusions of flavours as CSs during a reverse-order conditioning procedure expressed both palatability shifts and conditioned preferences for CS(+). Rats that received a forward conditioning procedure acquired a preference for CS(+), but the palatability of CS(+) was unchanged. In Experiment 3, hungry rats drank mixtures of a flavour CS and a calorific or sweet tasting reinforcer in a long-exposure conditioning paradigm. When tested hungry, rats preferred CS(+) whether they had acquired flavour-calorie or flavour-taste associations. However, CS(+) became more palatable only for rats that acquired flavour-calorie associations. These results suggest that acquisition of flavour preferences, as measured by 2-bottle tests, may not always be accompanied by enhanced palatability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".