trains and these values were used to compute a 95% confidence interval of the null distribution for each neuron. To evaluate differences in d´ on drinking versus non-drinking trials, a two-way ANOVA was conducted with responsiveness group (drinking significant, non-drinking significant, both significant) and trial type (drinking and non-drinking trials) as factors, which was followed by Sidak-corrected post hoc comparisons. To evaluate proportions of responsive neurons in P versus Wistar rats, χ2 analyses were conducted on alcohol and water sessions separately.
