Four Arms Plus Maze
Cross-shaped behavioral maze apparatus for spatial learning, working memory, and motor function assessment in laboratory animals with four 10.2 cm wide arms and integrated feeding cups.
Louise Corscadden, PhD
Director of Science · ConductScience
Ask Louise about Four Arms Plus Maze fit, setup, configuration, or quote prep.
Already working with us? Sign in to connect this with My Scientist.
Used in a 2019 paper in the journal International Journal of Comparative Psychology
“Drinks Like a Fish: The Effects of Ethanol on Associative Learning in Zebrafish (Danio rerio)”
The test learning apparatus was a plus-shaped, 4-armed Plexiglas maze designed by MazeEngineers, Inc (Boston, MA).
Maze Engineers, the maker named in the paper, is part of ConductScience.
As of , this is the only study we’ve found that used this product.
Key Specifications
Full details →- Automation Level
- Manual
- Species
- Mouse, Rat
- Compatible Tracking Software
- ConductVision
- SKU family
- ME-24201
- Shipping box
- 43.2 × 38.0 × 27.9 cm
- Ordering
- Online checkout and quote request available
The Four Arms Plus Maze is a cross-shaped behavioral apparatus designed for cognitive and motor function assessment in laboratory animals. Measuring 101.6 cm in total length and width with 45.7 cm height, this maze provides four identical arms extending from a central platform, each 10.2 cm wide with feeding cups (6 cm diameter, 3 cm height) for reward-based paradigms.
This apparatus enables researchers to evaluate spatial learning, working memory, and motor coordination through various experimental protocols. The plus-maze configuration allows for flexible experimental designs including spontaneous alternation tasks, spatial memory assessments, and motor deficit evaluations following neurological interventions.
How It Works
The Four Arms Plus Maze operates on principles of spatial cognition and exploratory behavior in laboratory animals. The cross-shaped design creates four equivalent choice points, allowing researchers to measure spontaneous alternation - the natural tendency of rodents to explore novel environments over recently visited areas. This behavior reflects intact working memory and spatial processing capabilities.
During testing, animals are placed in the central platform and allowed to explore freely. The maze design eliminates visual cues that might bias arm selection, ensuring that choices reflect internal cognitive processes rather than external guidance. Feeding cups at arm terminals can be baited with food rewards to motivate exploration and create reinforcement-based learning paradigms.
Data collection focuses on arm entry sequences, dwell times, and alternation patterns. Spontaneous alternation percentage is calculated as the number of alternations divided by possible alternations, providing a quantitative measure of working memory function. Motor assessments examine gait patterns, movement velocity, and coordination during maze navigation.
Features & Benefits
Add-ons and modifications
| Add-on | Price | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Four Arms Plus Maze | $1,990 | Total length and width of maze: 101.6cm Height of maze: 45.7cm Width of arms: 10.2cm Diameter of feeding cups: 6cm Height of feeding cups: 3cm |
Add any of these to your quote request.
Research identifiers
These IDs come from NCBI Taxonomy. Use them in data records and methods sections.
- Species
- Mouse
NCBITaxon:10090 - Rat
NCBITaxon:10116
- Mouse
Behavioral Construct
- spatial memory
- working memory
- spontaneous alternation
- exploratory behavior
- motor coordination
- anxiety-like behavior
Automation Level
- manual
Research Domain
- Anxiety and Depression
- Behavioral Pharmacology
- Learning and Memory
- Motor Function
- Neurodegeneration
- Neuroscience
Species
- Mouse
- Rat
Compatible Tracking Software
- ConductVision
Shipping weight
- 21.0 lb
Shipping box
- L: 43.2 cm
- W: 38.0 cm
- H: 27.9 cm
| Feature | This Product | Typical Alternative | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Arms | Four arms in cross configuration | Y-mazes offer three arms while radial arm mazes provide eight or more | Balances choice complexity with manageable analysis, providing more options than Y-mazes without the overwhelming cognitive load of eight-arm designs |
| Maze Dimensions | 101.6 cm total length/width with 10.2 cm arm width | Entry-level mazes often feature smaller overall dimensions | Generous dimensions accommodate natural rodent movement patterns and reduce stress from spatial confinement |
| Feeding Cup Integration | Built-in feeding cups (6 cm diameter, 3 cm height) at each arm terminus | Many maze designs require separate reward delivery systems | Eliminates need for external feeding apparatus and ensures consistent reward positioning across trials |
| Height Specification | 45.7 cm height | Variable heights depending on manufacturer and intended species | Optimized height prevents escape while maintaining open-top design for clear behavioral observation |
This maze provides an optimal balance of cognitive challenge and analytical simplicity with its four-arm cross design. The integrated feeding cups and generous dimensional specifications support both spontaneous and reward-based behavioral paradigms in a single apparatus.
Practical Tips
Establish consistent entry criteria by marking threshold lines on each arm at identical distances from the center platform.
Why: Standardized entry definitions ensure reproducible data collection across sessions and operators.
Inspect feeding cup attachments regularly and replace any loose or damaged components before testing sessions.
Why: Secure cup placement prevents distraction artifacts that could confound behavioral measurements.
Test animals during their active phase and maintain consistent lighting conditions throughout the study period.
Why: Circadian timing and environmental consistency minimize confounding variables in cognitive assessment.
Record arm entry sequences for at least 15-20 total entries per session to achieve statistical reliability.
Why: Adequate sample size ensures spontaneous alternation calculations accurately reflect working memory performance.
If animals show arm preference, rotate the maze orientation between sessions or examine for environmental cues causing bias.
Why: Uneven arm usage indicates external influences that compromise the validity of cognitive measurements.
Allow complete drying time after cleaning and ensure no residual disinfectant vapors remain before animal testing.
Why: Chemical residues can cause respiratory irritation and alter natural exploratory behavior patterns.
Use food restriction protocols carefully, maintaining 85-90% free-feeding weight for motivation without compromising animal welfare.
Why: Appropriate motivation levels optimize task engagement while meeting ethical standards for animal care.
Setup Guide
What’s in the Box
- Four Arms Plus Maze apparatus (typical)
- Four feeding cups (typical)
- Assembly instructions (typical)
- User manual (typical)
Warranty
ConductScience provides a standard one-year manufacturer warranty covering defects in materials and workmanship, with technical support for experimental protocol optimization.
Compliance
What is the optimal trial duration for spontaneous alternation testing?
Typical sessions range from 5-10 minutes depending on species and experimental objectives. Shorter durations (5 minutes) are often sufficient for detecting working memory deficits, while longer sessions may be needed for detailed motor assessment.
How should the maze be cleaned between subjects to prevent odor contamination?
Clean all surfaces with 70% ethanol or similar disinfectant, allow to air dry completely, and rotate multiple maze sets if testing multiple animals consecutively. Some protocols include acetic acid solution for thorough odor elimination.
What video tracking specifications are recommended for behavioral analysis?
Overhead camera positioning with minimum 30 fps recording rate and sufficient resolution to distinguish nose-point location. Tracking software should accurately detect arm entries and calculate alternation patterns automatically.
Can this apparatus accommodate different rodent species?
The 10.2 cm arm width accommodates rats and mice comfortably. For larger species, consult dimensional compatibility with expected animal size and locomotor patterns.
What constitutes a valid arm entry for data analysis?
Typically defined as all four paws entering an arm past a predetermined threshold point. Consistent entry criteria must be established before data collection and maintained throughout the study.
How does this compare to Y-maze configurations for memory assessment?
The four-arm design provides more choice points than Y-mazes, potentially increasing sensitivity to working memory deficits and allowing for more complex behavioral sequences.
What environmental controls are critical for consistent results?
Maintain consistent lighting, temperature, and noise levels. Minimize visual cues around the maze that could bias arm selection. Test subjects at consistent times of day to control for circadian effects.
Have a question about this product?
Each paper below used this product. Under each title is the paper’s own sentence naming the equipment it used.
The test learning apparatus was a plus-shaped, 4-armed Plexiglas maze designed by MazeEngineers, Inc (Boston, MA).
Have a question? Just ask.
Send it over and we'll email you a personalized answer, with no call or scheduling.
Prefer to talk it through?
Accessories
Enhance your setup with compatible accessories
Frequently Bought Together
Use this apparatus with
The complete Four Arms Plus Maze workflow
Track behavior
Automate target-arm time, latency, zone occupancy, path order, and event timing for Four Arms Plus Maze studies.
ConductVision Four Arms Plus Maze ->Run protocol
Stepwise four-arm exploration setup, trial timing, exclusion rules, and reporting checkpoints.
ConductMaze Four Arms Plus Maze Protocol ->Analyze output
Summarize target-arm time, group differences, and quality-control flags before export.
Four Arms Plus Maze Calculator ->§ 1
Introduction
The Four Arms Plus Maze is a anxiety assay built around arm-choice, anxiety-like exploration, and comparator testing against elevated plus or zero maze protocols. Interpretable data depend on matching the apparatus geometry, subject species, trial structure, and scoring rules to the behavioral construct under study. 1
Four-arm exploration protocols depend on stable geometry, consistent trial timing, and pre-defined scoring rules. Without those controls, target-arm time can be shifted by motivation, locomotion, light level, odor, cue salience, or handling rather than the intended behavioral construct. 1
This methods section summarizes setup, endpoint definitions, common confounds, sample output, adjacent assays, and reporting details needed to evaluate Four Arms Plus Maze results alongside the product specifications. 1
§ 2
Methods
2.1 Procedure
Four-arm exploration with standardized setup, trial timing, and endpoint extraction.
Pre-test setup
- 1.Define construct: Pre-register whether the study uses Four Arms Plus Maze for anxiety behavior, screening, cohort comparison, or apparatus validation.
- 2.Calibrate apparatus: Verify plus-shaped maze with four arms configured for open, closed, or cue-defined comparisons, visibility, lighting, surface condition, cue placement, and camera field of view before animals enter the room.
- 3.Set scoring rules: Define target-arm time, omissions, exclusions, latency cutoffs, and event thresholds before acquisition starts.
- 4.Control carryover: Use consistent cleaning, handling, acclimation, and inter-trial timing so odor, stress, and fatigue do not become hidden treatment variables.
Trial sequence
- 1.Start trial: Place the subject at the protocol-defined start location and begin synchronized video or event logging.
- 2.Record behavior: Capture target-arm time, path order, latency, dwell time, and relevant zone or arm events throughout the trial.1
- 3.Apply endpoint rules: Score only committed entries or events that meet the pre-defined body-position and timing criteria.
- 4.End and reset: Stop at the maximum duration, completion criterion, or humane endpoint, then clean and reset the apparatus.
- 5.Export QC: Review tracking loss, outlier latency, immobility, omissions, and apparatus notes before group-level analysis.
Critical methodological constraints
- Arm configuration. Document arm configuration because it can shift target-arm time independent of the intended construct.
- Lighting. Keep lighting stable across cohorts and sessions.
- Height exposure. Audit height exposure before interpreting group differences.
- Locomotor activity. Report locomotor activity when it changes engagement, exploration, or measurable trial completion.
- Center dwell. Flag center dwell during QA because it often explains apparent assay failure.2
2.2 Measurement & Analysis
Core Four Arms Plus Maze endpoints for behavioral interpretation and apparatus quality control.
Target-arm time
Arm preference
Entry latency
Latency and initiation
Arm transitions
Spatial or zone strategy
Closed-arm dwell
Engagement control
Fall or escape events
Quality-control flag
+ Additional metrics: trial duration, zone dwell, event count, path efficiency, tracking confidence, exclusions, and session-level notes.
2.3 target-arm time ratio (analysis)
A compact percentage summary for Four Arms Plus Maze output.
§ 3
Results
3.1 Sample apparatus output
Representative Four Arms Plus Maze output for methods review and endpoint interpretation.
§ 4
Discussion
Limitations of the paradigm, methodological caveats, and current directions.
4.1 Common confounds
Variables that can shift Four Arms Plus Maze results apart from the effect under study.
Arm configuration
Arm configuration can change apparent Four Arms Plus Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct.
Lighting
Lighting can change apparent Four Arms Plus Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct.
Height exposure
Height exposure can change apparent Four Arms Plus Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct.
Locomotor activity
Locomotor activity can change apparent Four Arms Plus Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct.
Center dwell
Center dwell can change apparent Four Arms Plus Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct.
4.2 Construct validity caveats
Four Arms Plus Maze is strongest when endpoint definitions, apparatus settings, and exclusion rules are specified before testing. Treat a single summary metric as a screening signal, then confirm interpretation with latency, engagement, comparator assays, and quality-control review. 1
4.3 Special considerations
When should I choose Four Arms Plus Maze?
Choose Four Arms Plus Maze when the research question matches arm-choice, anxiety-like exploration, and comparator testing against elevated plus or zero maze protocols. and the lab can control arm configuration, lighting, and trial timing.
What setup variables should be specified before testing?
Specify species, cohort size, apparatus dimensions, lighting, tracking method, automation level, cleaning workflow, endpoint definitions, and exclusion criteria before data collection begins.
What makes the data interpretable?
Interpretation is strongest when the apparatus configuration, trial timing, scoring thresholds, confound controls, and comparator assays are documented together with the primary endpoint.
4.4 Current directions
Quarterly editorial review of emerging Four Arms Plus Maze methodology. Q2 2026
Endpoint standardization
Define target-arm time, latency, exclusions, and engagement flags before comparing cohorts.
Automated scoring
Camera and event-log workflows can reduce observer burden and improve consistency when zone definitions and event thresholds are validated.
Comparator batteries
Four Arms Plus Maze should link to adjacent maze, motor, or motivation assays when interpretation depends on controls.
Integrated method reporting
Apparatus dimensions, protocol fit, tracking compatibility, and endpoint definitions should be reported together so results are easier to reproduce.
§ 5
Background references
10 selected methods and validation studies of the Four Arms Plus Maze, from any lab.
- Dudchenko PA. An overview of the tasks used to test working memory in rodents. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2004;28(7):699-709. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.09.002
- Shoji H, et al. Comprehensive behavioral test battery for mice. Curr Protoc Mouse Biol. 2012;2:153-187. Find source
- Vorhees CV, Williams MT. Assessing spatial learning and memory in rodents. ILAR J. 2014;55(2):310-332. Find source
- Lalonde R. The neurobiological basis of spontaneous alternation. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2002;26(1):91-104. doi:10.1016/S0149-7634(01)00041-0
- Walf AA, Frye CA. The use of the elevated plus maze as an assay of anxiety-related behavior in rodents. Nat Protoc. 2007;2(2):322-328. doi:10.1038/nprot.2007.44
- Pellow S, Chopin P, File SE, Briley M. Validation of open:closed arm entries in an elevated plus-maze as a measure of anxiety in the rat. J Neurosci Methods. 1985;14(3):149-167. doi:10.1016/0165-0270(85)90031-7
- Crawley JN, Goodwin FK. Preliminary report of a simple animal behavior model for the anxiolytic effects of benzodiazepines. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1980;13(2):167-170. doi:10.1016/0091-3057(80)90067-2
- File SE, Wardill AG. Validity of head-dipping as a measure of exploration in a modified hole-board. Psychopharmacologia. 1975;44(1):53-59. Find source
- Walsh RN, Cummins RA. The Open-Field Test: a critical review. Psychol Bull. 1976;83(3):482-504. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.83.3.482
- Brown RE, Corey SC, Moore AK. Differences in measures of exploration and fear in MHC-congenic C57BL/6J and B6-H-2K mice. Behav Genet. 1999;29(4):263-271. Find source
