Social isolation in early childhood can have life-long effects on social behaviors and development. Cerebellar crus I has additionally been linked to social behaviors through forebrain pathways. In this study, we hypothesized that social isolation of mice from postnatal day 21 (P21) until p35 would result in impaired social behaviors. Additionally, we hypothesized that gq DREADD injections into crus I, to increase levels of cerebellar stimulation, at the start of the isolation period would counteract the effects of isolation, leading to mice who displayed normal social behaviors. Social behavior at P35 was tested using the 3-Chamber Task, a well-established model, and SLEAP deep-learning software was used to obtain quantifiable data. We found no difference in social behaviors between socially raised and isolated mice. However, gq DREADD mice displayed greater levels of social interaction and exploration than either socially raised mice or isolated mice. This research carries implications for possible therapeutic interventions for groups prone to social isolation, such as those with developmental disabilities, minority groups, the elderly, and prison populations.

Many organisms associate environmental events that occur together and can predict the outcome of the event. This ability is termed associative learning. Through associative learning, organisms are able to change their behavior to increase their fitness and survival. However, little is known about how these same learning processes proceed when subjects are not alone, but in a group. The behavior of conspecifics could serve as a cue for learning, similar to stimuli during individual learning. This study was designed to compare learning across rats exposed to a simple simultaneous discrimination task, either in an individual or a social learning setting. Sixteen rats were trained to choose between two corridors differentiated by visual stimuli (flashing or steady light). One of the two cues signaled that food was available in the feeders at the end of the corridor. Half of the rats were trained individually and the other half were trained in groups of four. To compare the effect of the social training setting, all rats were tested independently and in a group. Next, contingencies were reversed and the previously non-reinforced cue now signaled the availability of food, and rats were again tested individually and in a group. The results suggest that the social setting interferes with the rats’ ability to make associations but makes the performance of the rats less sensitive to changes in their learning environment.