For nearly a decade, Vincent Bombail has spent his working hours tickling rats. While the image may seem whimsical, the practice is a rigorous component of affective neuroscience—the study of emotions. For years, this technique has served as a gold standard for measuring animal happiness in laboratory settings. However, new data suggests that the scientific community may have been overlooking a critical variable: the rats’ own preferences, which differ significantly by sex.
A study published April 15 in Biology Letters reveals that female rats like a different kind of tickling than males. While male rats generally enjoy the standard, more vigorous approach, females show a marked preference for gentler, more playful interactions. This discovery suggests that the same physical stimulus can evoke wildly different emotional responses depending on the individual, a finding that could reshape how researchers evaluate animal welfare and happiness.
The implications extend beyond simple preference. If the standard protocols used to induce “happiness” in lab animals are actually stressful or unappealing to females, the resulting data on positive emotion and brain chemistry could be skewed. By recognizing these nuances, scientists can move toward a more precise understanding of the affective lives of animals.
The Evolution of the ‘Tickle Protocol’
The history of studying animal emotion has long been asymmetrical. As early as the 1930s, researchers developed standardized methods to expose rats to negative experiences to study the physical and hormonal markers of stress. It took several more decades to flip the script and study positive states. In the 1990s, a standard tickling protocol was established to mimic the “rough-and-tumble” play observed in young male rats.
In this traditional method, a researcher flips the rat onto its back, pins it down, and tickles its belly. For years, this was assumed to be a universal proxy for play and pleasure. However, Bombail, an animal behavior researcher at Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC) in Edinburgh, noticed that not every rat responded with the same enthusiasm. Some seemed to relish the experience, while others appeared indifferent or uneasy.
To determine if these variations were linked to sex, Bombail and his team designed an experiment to “ask” the rats which style of interaction they preferred. They compared a “high-pinning” approach (the standard protocol) with a “low-pinning” approach, where the interaction was more fluid. In the gentler sessions, rats were allowed to chase and be chased by the researcher’s hand, spending significantly less time pinned to the ground.
Measuring Happiness Through Association
Because rats cannot self-report their emotions, the team used a method of associative learning to gauge preference. The researchers paired different tickling treatments with specific tactile materials—such as pieces of felt, ribbons, or cardboard—immediately before giving the rats a treat.
The logic is grounded in behavioral psychology: if a rat feels happy after a specific type of tickling, it forms a positive association with the material it is digging through to find its reward. If the tickling experience was neutral or unpleasant, the association with that material would be weaker.
The results highlighted a clear divide in preference:
| Rat Sex | High-Pinning (Rough) | Low-Pinning (Gentle) | Preference Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Strongly Preferred | Strongly Preferred | Liked both equally over no interaction |
| Female | Slightly Preferred | Strongly Preferred | Clear preference for gentle play |
Male rats showed a high affinity for both styles of tickling, choosing materials paired with either treatment more often than the control material (no interaction). Female rats, however, were far more discerning. They showed only a marginal preference for high-pinning over no interaction at all, but frequently chose the materials associated with the low-pinning, gentler protocol.
The Biology of ‘Feeling Good’
These findings align with natural observations of rodent behavior in the wild. Male rats are typically more physical and aggressive in their play, whereas female play involves more running, escaping, and social chasing. By imposing a “male-centric” play model on females, researchers may have been missing the mark on what actually constitutes a positive emotional state for them.
Daniel Weary, an animal welfare scientist at the University of British Columbia who was not involved in the study, noted that the research helps scientists view these animals as “playful but also rich and complex and having opinions.” He emphasized that understanding the affective lives of animals remains one of the most challenging and rewarding frontiers in science.
From a medical perspective, this research opens the door to a deeper exploration of the physiology of positive affect. For decades, the medical community has mapped the biology of stress—how cortisol and adrenaline impact the immune system, the gut microbiome, and cardiovascular health. Now, the focus is shifting toward the opposite end of the spectrum.
Bombail intends to use these findings to explore the “biology of feeling good.” This likely involves studying the release of oxytocin and dopamine during preferred play and how these “happiness” chemicals might mitigate the physiological damage caused by stress.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical or veterinary advice.
The next phase of Bombail’s research will focus on identifying the specific hormonal and neurological markers that distinguish a preferred positive experience from a neutral one. These insights may eventually lead to new guidelines for animal care and the ethical treatment of laboratory subjects across various species.
Do you think animal research protocols should be tailored by sex? Share your thoughts in the comments or share this story on social media.
Keep reading
