Assessment of Sustained and Divided Attention in Rats

H. Moore Arnold1, John P. Bruno2, Martin Sarter2

1 Sention Pharmaceutical, Providence, Rhode Island, 2 The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
Publication Name:  Current Protocols in Neuroscience
Unit Number:  Unit 8.5E
DOI:  10.1002/0471142301.ns0805es22
Online Posting Date:  May, 2003
GO TO THE FULL TEXT: PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Abstract

Behavioral tasks must be evaluated in terms of the cognitive functions they require in order to be performed. All of the tasks described in this chapter can be used with each of four experimental manipulations: stimulation of a single brain region by drugs or small electrical current, impairment of normal function by production of a lesion or administration of appropriate pharmacological agents, recording of brain activity during the performance of a specific behavioral task, or behavioral phenotyping of transgenic and knockout mice for genes expressed in specific brain regions. This unit describes protocols for the radial arm maze task and the water maze task, both of which require intact spatial memory abilities.

     
 
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Table of Contents

  • Basic Protocol 1: Sustained Attention Task in Rats
  • Alternate Protocol 1: Divided Attention Task in Rats
  • Commentary
  • Figures
     
 
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Materials

Basic Protocol 1: Sustained Attention Task in Rats

  Materials
  • 8 to 10 naïve adult rats (per treatment group)
  • Sound‐attenuated operant chambers (Med Associates or equivalent) equipped with two retractable levers, houselight (2.8 W), food dispenser (or a water dispenser), panel light (2.8 W), and 2900‐Hz tone generator
  • Computer software package to control operant boxes and record data (typically available from the operant box vendor, e.g., Med Associates)
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Figures

Videos

Literature Cited

Literature Cited
   Ballard, J.C. 1996. Computerized assessment of sustained attention: A review of factors affecting vigilance performance. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 18:843‐863.
   Burk, J.A. and Sarter, M. 2001. Dissociation between the attentional functions mediated via basal forebrain cholinergic and GABAergic neurons. Neuroscience 105:899‐909.
   Bushnell, P.J. 1998. Behavioral approaches to the assessment of attention in animals. Psychopharmacology 138:231‐259.
   Bushnell, P.J., Kelly, K.L., and Crofton, K.M. 1994. Effects of toluene inhalation on detection of auditory signals in rats. Neurotoxicol. Teratol. 16:149‐160.
   Cowan, N. 1995. Attention and Memory: An Integrated Framework. Oxford University Press, New York.
   Craik, F.I.M. and Byrd, M. 1982. Aging and cognitive deficits. In Aging and Cognitive Processes (F.I.M. Craik and S. Trehub, eds.) pp. 191‐211. Plenum Press, New York.
   Deller, T. and Sarter, M. 1998. Effects of repeated administration of amphetamine on behavioral vigilance: Evidence for “sensitized” attentional impairments. Psychopharmacology 137:410‐414.
   Godefroy, O. and Rousseaux, M. 1996. Divided and focused attention in patients with lesions of the prefrontal cortex. Brain Cogn. 30:155‐174.
   Hohnsbein, J., Falkenstein, M., Hoorman, J., and Blanke, L. 1991. Effects of crossmodal divided attention on late ERP components I. simple and choice reaction time tasks. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 78:438‐446.
   Mackworth, N.H. 1948. The breakdown of vigilance during prolonged visual search. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A 1:6‐21.
   McDowd, J.M. and Craik, F.I.M. 1988. Effects of aging and task difficulty on divided attention performance. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 14: 267‐280.
   McGaughy, J. and Sarter, M. 1995. Behavioral vigilance in rats: Task validation and effects of age, amphetamine, and benzodiazepine receptor ligands. Psychopharmacology 117:340‐357.
   McGaughy, J., Turchi, J., and Sarter, M. 1994. Crossmodal divided attention in rats: Effects of chlordiazepoxide and scopolamine. Psychopharmacology 115:213‐220.
   McGaughy, J., Kaiser, T., and Sarter, M. 1996. Behavioral vigilance following infusions of 192 IgG‐saporin into the basal forebrain: Selectivity of the behavioral impairment and relation to cortical AChE‐positive fiber density. Behav. Neurosci. 110:247‐265.
   McGaughy, J., Decker, M.W., and Sarter, M. 1999. Enhancement of sustained attention performance by the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist ABT‐418 in intact but not basal forebrain‐lesioned rats. Psychopharmacology 144:175‐182.
   Nestor, P.G., Parasuraman, R., Haxby, J.V., and Grady, C.L. 1991. Divided attention and metabolic brain dysfunction in mild dementia of the Alzheimer's type. Neuropsychologia 29:379‐387.
   Norman, D. and Bobrow, D. 1975. On data limited and resource limited processing. J. Comp. Psychol. 7:44‐60.
   Parasuraman, R. and Haxby, J.V. 1993. Attention and brain function in Alzheimer's disease: A review. Neuropsychology 7:242‐272.
   Parasuraman, R., Warm, J.S., and Dember, W.N. 1987. Vigilance: Taxonomy and utility. In Ergonomics and Human Factors: Recent Research (L.S. Mark, J.S. Warm, and R.L. Huston, eds.) pp. 11‐32. Springer‐Verlag, New York.
   Pashler, H., Johnston, J.C., and Ruthruff, E. 2001. Attention and performance. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 52:629‐651.
   Sarter, M. and McGaughy, J. 1998. Assessment of sustained and divided attention in rats: Aspects of validity. Psychopharmacology 138:260‐262.
   Sarter, M. and Turchi, J. 2002. Age‐ and dementia‐associated impairments in divided attention: Psychological constructs, animal models, and underlying neuronal mechanisms. Dement. Geriatr. Cogn. Disord. 13:46‐58.
   Sarter, M., Givens, B., and Bruno, J.P. 2001. The cognitive neuroscience of sustained attention: Where top‐down meets bottom‐up. Brain Res. Rev. 35:146‐160.
   Turchi, J. and Sarter, M. 1997. Cortical acetylcholine and processing capacity: Effects of cortical cholinergic deafferentation on crossmodal divided attention in rats. Cogn. Brain Res. 6:147‐158.
   Turchi, J. and Sarter, M. 2001. Antisense oligonucleotide‐induced suppression of basal forebrain NMDA‐R1 subunits selectively impairs visual attentional performance in rats. Eur. J. Neurosci. 14:103‐117.
   Wickens, C.D. 1984. Processing resources in attention. In Varieties of Attention (R. Parasuraman and D.R. Davies, eds.) pp. 63‐102. Academic Press, Orlando, Fla.
   Wright, R.E. 1981. Aging, divided attention, and processing capacity. J. Gerontol. 36:605‐614.
Key References
   McGaughy and Sarter, 1995. See above.
  Describes the sustained attention task and experimentally examines a number of the parameters controlling performance of this task.
   McGaughy et al., 1994. See above.
  Describes the initial experiments that used a cross‐modal divided attention task.
   Sarter et al., 2001. See above.
  A review of the neuronal circuits mediating sustained attention performance.
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library