$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Factors affecting, or potentially affecting, responses to tickling are summarized in Table 1. Positive outcomes from rat tickling have been indicated by multiple measures of rat welfare and positive affect. Common findings include increased production of 50-kHz USVs, increased approach behavior, and increased ease of handling. Reported effects of rat tickling at the genetic and cellular level include altered gene expression in the hypothalamus37, and increased neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus38,39. Outcomes indicative of reduced generalized anxiety and fear of humans are also reported such as reduced latency to approach in 9 different experiments13, less freezing after fear conditioning40,41, and increased entries into the center of an open field arena by individually housed rats36. For further information see LaFollette et al., who present a systematic review of the tickling literature that identifies 22 reports investigating the outcomes of rat tickling in comparison to other techniques13.
Next, specific examples of results that can be obtained when the tickling technique is paired with restraint and intra-peritoneal (IP) injection procedures are outlined.
Sprague-Dawley rats (males; 85-94 days of age; n = 48) tickled for 2 min immediately before and after IP saline injection daily for 10 days, especially when combined with the juvenile tickling experience (2 min/day from 25-45 days of age), produced more 50-kHz USV just before (GLM ANOVA, F3, 44 = 9.59, p < 0.0001; Figure 3A) and just after (F3, 44 = 8.74, p = 0.0001; Figure 3B) injection (Tukey-Kramer, p < 0.05) compared to rats exposed to a passive hand10. During the actual brief delivery of the injection, production of 50-kHz USVs was curbed (mean ± SE, 15 ± 1.4 USVs/min) and handling treatment had no effect on their rate10. It was concluded that tickling, when applied both before and after an injection procedure, induced a positive affective state that moderated the aversiveness of the procedure, especially for those that had been exposed to tickling as juveniles.
To find out if tickling would be effective if reduced to before or after an injection rather than both and, if so, which time would be better, rat responses to tickling before, after, and before-after injection were compared. Rates of 50-kHz USVs and audible calls were measured as indicators of positive and negative affect, respectively12. Sprague-Dawley rats (males; 32-41 days of age; n = 96) were either restrained and given a daily IP saline injection (INJ) or restrained without receiving an injection (control, CON), and exposed to one of the following treatments: no tickling, the rats were not touched before and after the restraint procedure (TN); tickled for 2 min right before (TB), after (TA), or before and after (TBA) restraint12. In the 2 min before restraint, rats from treatments that received tickling before the restraint (TB, TBA) produced the most 50-kHz USVs (GLMM ANOVA, F3,88 = 49.19, p < 0.0001; Figure 3C). TA and TN rats did not differ in the rate of USVs produced before the restraint procedure. During the procedure, any rat that received tickling (TA, TB, TBA) produced more 50-kHz USV than those that were not tickled (TN; F3,88 = 50.67, p < 0.0001; Figure 3D). Among tickled rats, those receiving tickling prior to the procedure (TB, TBA) produced more 50-kHz USVs during the restraint compared to the ones tickled afterwards (TA; p < 0.05). In the 2-min period after the procedure, rats in all tickled groups (TA, TB, TBA) produced more 50-kHz USVs than those that were not tickled (TN; F3,88 = 53.64, p < 0.0001; Figure 3E). Furthermore, during the procedure, rats tickled before restraint (TB, TBA) produced fewer audible calls compared to rats that did not received tickling (TN), whereas rats tickled afterwards (TA) did not differ from those in the other groups (F3,88 = 3.67, p= 0.02; Figure 3F). The results demonstrate that tickling rats before restraining them for an IP injection produced signs of greater positive affect across the periods before, during, and after the procedure than tickling only after restraint12.
Caretakers applied one of the following handling treatments to rats (Sprague-Dawley males; n = 32) from 57 to 74 days of age: (1) Minimal handling once a week at cage change; (2) Exposure to a passive hand for 2 min daily; (3) 2 min of tickling each day, to mimic social play; (4) 2 min daily of restraint on the rat's back, simulating unreciprocated pinning by a dominant11. In the minute following an IP injection, rats from the Tickled and Passive treatments spent more time rearing in the front half of the cage, close to where the researcher was standing, compared to rats from the Minimal and Restraint treatments (GLM ANOVA, F3, 27 = 5.70, p = 0.004; Figure 3G). Additionally, Tickled rats uttered more 50-kHz USVs than rats in the Passive treatment when exposed to a familiar or unfamiliar hand for 3 min in a Human approach test (Log-transformed mean ± SE calls/min, Minimal: 0.7 ± 0.26, Passive: 0.6 ± 0.18, Tickled: 1.8 ± 0.30, Restraint: 1.4 ± 0.28; F3,28 = 4.04, p = 0.02). Thus, the simple presence of a passive hand aided habituation of rats to humans relative to minimal handling, but tickling was the most effective method for producing a positive response towards humans11.

Figure 1: Rat rough-and-tumble play behavior. (A) Dorsal contact; (B) Pin18. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: 50-kHz ultrasonic vocalizations of the frequency modulated "trill" type. Five trill vocalizations were produced in 1 s by a rat during tickling. The horizontal lines at 17-, 25-, and 70-kHz were produced by electronic equipment in the room (e.g., computer, microphone, camera).

Figure 3: Responses of rats exposed to tickling prior to, or in combination with, experimental procedures such as intra-peritoneal (IP) injections. Rate (mean ± SE calls/min) of 50-kHz USVs produced (A) before and (B) after an injection procedure by adult male rats exposed to minimal handling (M) or tickling (T) as juveniles and a passive hand (P) or tickling (T) immediately before and after injection (yielding four treatment combination: M-P, T-P, M-T, T-T); from Cloutier et al.10. Rate of 50-kHz USVs (mean ± SE calls/min) produced (C) before, (D) during, and (E) after restraint (with or without an IP injection) once daily for 10 consecutive days by juvenile male rats that received no tickling (TN) or tickling before (TB), after (TA), or both before and after (TBA) the procedure; and (F) the rate of audible calls produced during restraint; from Cloutier et al.12. (G) Duration (mean ± SE s) of rearing nearby the researcher during the 1 min following an IP injection by male rats exposed to minimal, passive, tickle, or restraint handling by caretakers; from Cloutier et al.11. Bars with different letters (a, b, c) indicate differences in pairwise comparisons (Tukey-Kramer, p < 0.05). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Factor | Effect | References |
| Intrinsic | | |
| Age | No difference in 50-kHz ultrasonic vocalizations (USVs) between rats ages 24-44 and 89-92 days old | 18, 29, 42 |
| Decrease in 50-kHz USVs for rats from 71 days old to 148 days old | 29 |
| 17 day old males made many more 50-kHz USVs than 7-9 month old males | 43 |
| Rats tickled as both juveniles and adults showed the most positive results compared to rats only tickled as juveniles or adults. | 10 |
| Sex | Male rats produced more 50-kHz USVs at 44 and 71 days old, but females produced more 50-kHz USVs at 148 days old | 29 |
| Male rats produced more 50-kHz USVs than females at 44 and 58 days. | 43 |
| No sex differences in 50-kHz USVs in 96 juvenile Long-Evans rats or 52 juvenile Wistar rats | 42, 44 |
| Female juvenile Wistar rats produced more 22-kHz USVs than males | 44 |
| Inter-individual differences | Rats that uttered more 50-kHz USVs showed decreased approach time to self-administered tickling, increased positive judgement bias after tickling, and increased hippocampal cell proliferation after tickling | 27, 37, 45 |
| More playful rats produced more 50-kHz USVs | 43 |
| Strain | Not reported, but anecdotal evidence suggests rats from different strains and breeders differ in their response to tickling. Rat lines diverged when selected upon high vs. low 50-KHz USVs rate in response to tickling. | 22, 26, 42, 46 |
| Previous experience of tickling | Increased production of 50-kHz ultrasonic USVs | 12 |
| Extrinsic | | |
| Bedding | Rats produced more 50-kHz USVs when tickled on familiar bedding vs no bedding | 33 |
| Stress | Tickling rats 1 hour, but not 23 hours, after restraint stress reduced 50-kHz USVs production | 47, 48 |
| Timing | Tickling rats before injection was more effective in increasing 50-KHz USVs than tickling after injection | 12 |
| Sex of handler | No effect found | Panksepp, J. 2014, Unpublished data |
| Familiarity of rat with handler | Rats produced more 50-kHz USVs and spent more time near a familiar compared to an unfamiliar tickler | 11 |
| Handler tickling experience / vigor of tickling by handler | Affected production of 50-kHz USVs but not preference and approach behavior | Cloutier, S. 2011, Unpublished data |
| Duration of pins by handler / frequency of alternation between dorsal contacts and pins | Lower frequency of nibbles (interpreted as play solicitation) was directed to a hand imposing 15-s pins (restraint) than a hand giving tickles with multiple dorsal contacts and pins per 15 s | 11 |
| Odorants (e.g., perfume, shampoo, shaving cream) used by handler | Not reported | |
| Social group size | Individual housing increased positive responses to tickling compared to group housing in most experiments. Tickling group-housed rats with cage mates in the home cage reduced this difference | 7, 22, 27, 36 |
| Light intensity | Tickling at 1000 lux reduced 50-kHz USVs compared to 25 lux. | 43 |
| Noise | Not reported | |
| Cage cleaning before tickling | Induced production of 22-kHz USVs in some rats | 12 |
| Time of day | No effect on 50-kHz USVs production when performed at the beginning or end of the light period. Tickling rats at the beginning/end of the light period vs middle of light or dark period has not yet been compared | Cloutier, S. 2011, Unpublished data |
Table 1: List of factors affecting, or potentially affecting, the responses of rats to tickling, a playful handling technique intended to mimic rat rough-and-tumble play.