OBJECTIVE: Transfer of the discriminative stimulus effects of two drugs from one operant (original-response) to a topographically different response (transfer-response) that was spared drug discrimination training was investigated. MATERIALS: Eight rats were trained in a counterbalanced one manipulandum (lever press and nose poke) drug discrimination procedure. Counterbalanced IP administered nicotine (0.3 mg/kg) or Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (3.0 mg/kg) functioned as discriminative stimuli. S(D) drugs occasioned sessions of food-reinforcement (variable-interval 30-s schedule); S(Δ) drugs occasioned non-reinforcement. The original-response (lever-pressing or nose-poking) was initially reinforced during 30-min S(D) drug sessions, and non-reinforced on the other alternating S(Δ)-drug sessions. RESULTS: Two separate 5-min non-reinforcement tests, counterbalanced by drug order, revealed stimulus control over the original-response by both drugs, which transferred to the transfer-response. Subsequent extinction training of the transfer-response attenuated the original-response response rates with the S(D) drug conditions but had little impact on discriminative control. Discriminative control was reversed for the transfer-response but had little impact on the original-response but, again, reduced response rate. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that (a) discriminative control by two distinct drug states can transfer and modulate a topographically different free-operant response and, (b) as is true for exteroceptive stimuli, drug states that function as antecedents embedded within the operant three-term contingency have differing relationships with the response and the primary reinforcer.
OBJECTIVE: Transfer of the discriminative stimulus effects of two drugs from one operant (original-response) to a topographically different response (transfer-response) that was spared drug discrimination training was investigated. MATERIALS: Eight rats were trained in a counterbalanced one manipulandum (lever press and nose poke) drug discrimination procedure. Counterbalanced IP administered nicotine (0.3 mg/kg) or Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (3.0 mg/kg) functioned as discriminative stimuli. S(D) drugs occasioned sessions of food-reinforcement (variable-interval 30-s schedule); S(Δ) drugs occasioned non-reinforcement. The original-response (lever-pressing or nose-poking) was initially reinforced during 30-min S(D) drug sessions, and non-reinforced on the other alternating S(Δ)-drug sessions. RESULTS: Two separate 5-min non-reinforcement tests, counterbalanced by drug order, revealed stimulus control over the original-response by both drugs, which transferred to the transfer-response. Subsequent extinction training of the transfer-response attenuated the original-response response rates with the S(D) drug conditions but had little impact on discriminative control. Discriminative control was reversed for the transfer-response but had little impact on the original-response but, again, reduced response rate. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that (a) discriminative control by two distinct drug states can transfer and modulate a topographically different free-operant response and, (b) as is true for exteroceptive stimuli, drug states that function as antecedents embedded within the operant three-term contingency have differing relationships with the response and the primary reinforcer.
Authors: Matthew E Andrzejewski; Curtis D Ryals; Sean Higgins; Jennifer Sulkowski; Janice Doney; Ann E Kelley; Philip J Bersh Journal: Behav Processes Date: 2006-10-30 Impact factor: 1.777
Authors: Lee Hogarth; Chris Retzler; Marcus R Munafò; Dominic M D Tran; Joseph R Troisi; Abigail K Rose; Andrew Jones; Matt Field Journal: Behav Res Ther Date: 2014-06-17