Relationship between nose-poke latencies in the during-learning period and task performance.

<p>(a) The number of sessions spent to reach the criterion is plotted against the latency to respond. Each dot indicates data from a single rat. The blue line is the best-fit line determined by the least-squares method, and its 95% confidence intervals are shown by two broken lines. As a whole, rats with shorter latencies reached the criterion more slowly (<i>P =</i> 0.024, <i>R</i> = -0.48, Pearson's correlation test, <i>n</i> = 22 rats). (b) The latencies of individual trials are separately plotted for correct trials (<i>L</i>_C) and incorrect trials (<i>L</i>_I). <i>L</i>_I was significantly shorter than <i>L</i>_C (<i>P =</i> 0.016, bootstrap resampling test). Error bars represent SEMs for 22 rats. (c) Same as a, but against the latency ratio <i>L</i>_I/<i>L</i>_C. Rats with a smaller <i>L</i>_I/<i>L</i>_C ratio learned more slowly (<i>P =</i> 0.012, <i>R</i> = -0.52). (d) Same as a, but against the mean correct-trial ratio from the beginning of the test phase to the first session that reached the criterion (<i>P</i> = 0.197, <i>R</i> = -0.29).