Adult-Juvenile Play Fighting in Rats: Insight into the Experiences that Facilitate the Development of Socio-Cognitive Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rats reared with playful peers during the juvenile period have a modified prefrontal cortex and improved executive functions, whereas ones reared with less playful partners, such as an adult, do not. It has been hypothesized that peer-peer play fighting creates unique experiences that tax executive functions and so influence the refinement of the prefrontal cortex. The present study compares the rough-and-tumble play of juveniles interacting with another peer with that of juveniles interacting with an adult. The juveniles interacting with adults engage in as much play as those that interact with juveniles. However, they experience fewer attacks from their adult partners and experience fewer bouts of close-quarter wrestling. Moreover, the juveniles in these juvenile-adult pairs experience fewer opportunities to perform role reversals in which the attacker becomes the defender. These findings support the hypothesis that the turn taking typical of the play fighting with peers is critical for the development of executive functions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".