Long-term social recognition memory in adult male rats: factor analysis of the social and non-social behaviors

A modified version of the intruder-resident paradigm was used to investigate if social recognition memory lasts at least 24 h. One hundred and forty-six adult male Wistar rats were used. Independent groups of rats were exposed to an intruder for 0.083, 0.5, 2, 24, or 168 h and tested 24 h after the first encounter with the familiar or a different conspecific. Factor analysis was employed to identify associations between behaviors and treatments. Resident rats exhibited a 24-h social recognition memory, as indicated by a 3- to 5-fold decrease in social behaviors in the second encounter with the same conspecific compared to those observed for a different conspecific, when the duration of the first encounter was 2 h or longer. It was possible to distinguish between two different categories of social behaviors and their expression depended on the duration of the first encounter. Sniffing the anogenital area (49.9% of the social behaviors), sniffing the body (17.9%), sniffing the head (3%), and following the conspecific (3.1%), exhibited mostly by resident rats, characterized social investigation and revealed long-term social recognition memory. However, dominance (23.8%) and mild aggression (2.3%), exhibited by both resident and intruders, characterized social agonistic behaviors and were not affected by memory. Differently, sniffing the environment (76.8% of the non-social behaviors) and rearing (14.3%), both exhibited mostly by adult intruder rats, characterized non-social behaviors. Together, these results show that social recognition memory in rats may last at least 24 h after a 2-h or longer exposure to the conspecific.

Beauty, Class and Discourse: Issues in Debate

In this text we proceed through a brief review of Naomi Lee`s (2009) article, highlighting her significant contributions to social and cultural psychology. In our dialogue with her text we inquire about some arguments and methodological procedures she presents. We raise some specific questions related to how the issue of beauty is framed, and we ponder on how a broadening of the scope to include history-of ideas, of relations-would bring some important elements to her approach. As Lee relates beauty and class, we examine the nuanced meanings of lack and deficiency in her analytical work. We also discuss her assumptions and position concerning discourse and dialogue which mark her ways of proceeding through the analysis of the interviews. We speculate that the depersonalized answer appointed in the interviewees` discourse can be related to a way of considering beauty as disembodied.