Minimizing Variability in Developmental Fear Studies in Mice: Toward Improved Replicability in the Field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In rodents, the first weeks of postnatal life feature remarkable changes in fear memory acquisition, retention, extinction, and discrimination. Early development is also marked by profound changes in brain circuits underlying fear memory processing, with heightened sensitivity to environmental influences and stress, providing a powerful model to study the intersection between brain structure, function, and the impacts of stress. Nevertheless, difficulties related to breeding and housing young rodents, preweaning manipulations, and potential increased variability within that population pose considerable challenges to developmental fear research. Here we discuss several factors that may promote variability in studies examining fear conditioning in young rodents and provide recommendations to increase replicability. We focus primarily on experimental conditions, design, and analysis of rodent fear data, with an emphasis on mouse studies. The convergence of anatomical, synaptic, physiological, and behavioral changes during early life may increase variability, but careful practice and transparency in reporting may improve rigor and consensus in the field. © 2024 The Authors. Current Protocols published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
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 | 0.413 | 0.333 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".