Table 3 Comparability between the touchscreen-based human CANTAB paired-associates learning (PAL) and rodent version of PAL task.
Characteristics | CANTAB PAL | Rodent PAL |
|---|---|---|
Type of cognitive process assessed | Visuospatial episodic memory and is sensitive to hippocampal function | |
Mode of delivery | Touchscreen | |
Overall measure of correct choices | First attempt memory score | Rate of correct choices (%) |
Overall measure of errors | Mean errors to success and total errors (adjusted) | Number of correction trials performed |
Duration of assessment | Cross-sectional | Longitudinal |
Pre-training/habituation prior to assessment | No pre-training is required | A series of habituation tasks is required |
Training length (mins) | Eight | 60 |
Number of tasks per session | Four tasks, completion of each task activates the following task | 36 |
Number of objects (visual stimuli) presented at one time | Two, four, six or eight patterns | Two patterns |
Criteria for completion of task | Either the time limit is reached or the maximum number of patterns had been correctly selected | Either the time limit is reached or the maximum number of tasks had been completed (including both correct and incorrect choices) |
Reward for correct choices | None | Strawberry-flavoured milkshake |
Task complexity | Increasing task complexity, but modifiable | Constant task complexity, but modifiable |
Practice effects | Randomisation of number, location and characteristics (colours and shapes) of stimuli reduces possible practice effects | Standardised presentation of three different stimuli (flower, plane and spider), each with a specific location across all tasks may cause possible practice effects |
