Use when
- Options are clearly defined and simultaneously or sequentially available by design.
- The endpoint can distinguish target-option behavior from total activity.
- Side, order, novelty, and sensory controls are built into the protocol.
Research Paradigms
Research paradigm
Preference and choice paradigms
Preference and choice paradigms compare allocation between options, but the interpretation depends on opportunity, sampling, and bias controls.
Decision summary
Use preference and choice paradigms when the research question depends on relative allocation between alternatives. Treat preference scores as structured summaries of sampling behavior, not direct proof of valuation without controls.
| Typical endpoints | Preference index, option time, visits, contacts, or consumption. |
|---|---|
| Design control | Counterbalancing, baseline preference checks, and side-bias handling. |
| Confound watch | Low sampling, object identity, odor, lighting, chamber location, and habituation. |
| Reporting unit | Raw option values plus normalized preference score. |
Do not use when
- The animal or participant does not sample both options enough to support comparison.
- The method cannot separate preference from avoidance, immobility, or access differences.
Caveats
- Preference can be shaped by novelty, location, sensory cues, or prior exposure.
- A normalized score can hide low total engagement.
- The same endpoint may support different interpretations across species and tasks.
Reporting checklist
- Describe option identity and presentation order.
- Report counterbalancing and side-bias controls.
- Report raw option data and derived preference score.
- State minimum sampling criteria.
- Report exclusions and non-sampling sessions.
References
Related surfaces
Use these related surfaces to move from the scientific method question to the relevant product page, endpoint definition, analysis tool, or adjacent guide.
