Corrigendum: Task demands influence search strategy selection in otoconia-deficient mice
Ryan M. Yoder, Lucas C. Carstensen, Keshav Jagannathan
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling · Pharmacological Effects and Assays · Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
In the published article, there was an error in the Results, Small Barnes maze search strategy analysis, Paragraph 2. One statistical result (chi square value) reported in the text was incorrect.
This sentence previously stated:
“A chi-square test for independence revealed that the frequencies of spatial, serial, and mixed strategies were different between training days 1 and 8 for control mice (χ2 (2, N = 64) = 11.22, p < 0.01) and tilted mice (χ2 (2, N = 64) = 6.68, p < 0.05).”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“A chi-square test for independence revealed that the frequencies of spatial, serial, and mixed strategies were different between training days 1 and 8 for control mice [χ^2^ (2, N = 64) = 11.22, p < 0.01] and tilted mice [χ^2^ (2, N = 64) = 9.18, p < 0.05].”
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.