Literature DB >> 24954026

Experimental predictions drawn from a computational model of sign-trackers and goal-trackers.

Florian Lesaint1, Olivier Sigaud2, Jeremy J Clark3, Shelly B Flagel4, Mehdi Khamassi2.   

Abstract

Gaining a better understanding of the biological mechanisms underlying the individual variation observed in response to rewards and reward cues could help to identify and treat individuals more prone to disorders of impulsive control, such as addiction. Variation in response to reward cues is captured in rats undergoing autoshaping experiments where the appearance of a lever precedes food delivery. Although no response is required for food to be delivered, some rats (goal-trackers) learn to approach and avidly engage the magazine until food delivery, whereas other rats (sign-trackers) come to approach and engage avidly the lever. The impulsive and often maladaptive characteristics of the latter response are reminiscent of addictive behaviour in humans. In a previous article, we developed a computational model accounting for a set of experimental data regarding sign-trackers and goal-trackers. Here we show new simulations of the model to draw experimental predictions that could help further validate or refute the model. In particular, we apply the model to new experimental protocols such as injecting flupentixol locally into the core of the nucleus accumbens rather than systemically, and lesioning of the core of the nucleus accumbens before or after conditioning. In addition, we discuss the possibility of removing the food magazine during the inter-trial interval. The predictions from this revised model will help us better understand the role of different brain regions in the behaviours expressed by sign-trackers and goal-trackers.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Autoshaping; Conditioned approach; Dopamine; Factored representation; Goal-tracker; Model-based; Model-free; Pavlovian conditioning; Reinforcement learning; Sign-tracker

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24954026      PMCID: PMC4272685          DOI: 10.1016/j.jphysparis.2014.06.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Physiol Paris        ISSN: 0928-4257


  29 in total

Review 1.  Ventral striatum: a critical look at models of learning and evaluation.

Authors:  Matthijs A A van der Meer; A David Redish
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 6.627

2.  Individual differences in the propensity to approach signals vs goals promote different adaptations in the dopamine system of rats.

Authors:  Shelly B Flagel; Stanley J Watson; Terry E Robinson; Huda Akil
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2006-09-14       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 3.  The role of learning-related dopamine signals in addiction vulnerability.

Authors:  Quentin J M Huys; Philippe N Tobler; Gregor Hasler; Shelly B Flagel
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.453

4.  Dissociating hippocampal and striatal contributions to sequential prediction learning.

Authors:  Aaron M Bornstein; Nathaniel D Daw
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.386

5.  Ventral striatum and orbitofrontal cortex are both required for model-based, but not model-free, reinforcement learning.

Authors:  Michael A McDannald; Federica Lucantonio; Kathryn A Burke; Yael Niv; Geoffrey Schoenbaum
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-02-16       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 6.  Predictive reward signal of dopamine neurons.

Authors:  W Schultz
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Quantifying individual variation in the propensity to attribute incentive salience to reward cues.

Authors:  Paul J Meyer; Vedran Lovic; Benjamin T Saunders; Lindsay M Yager; Shelly B Flagel; Jonathan D Morrow; Terry E Robinson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A neural computational model of incentive salience.

Authors:  Jun Zhang; Kent C Berridge; Amy J Tindell; Kyle S Smith; J Wayne Aldridge
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2009-07-17       Impact factor: 4.475

9.  Integrating cortico-limbic-basal ganglia architectures for learning model-based and model-free navigation strategies.

Authors:  Mehdi Khamassi; Mark D Humphries
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 3.558

10.  Modelling individual differences in the form of Pavlovian conditioned approach responses: a dual learning systems approach with factored representations.

Authors:  Florian Lesaint; Olivier Sigaud; Shelly B Flagel; Terry E Robinson; Mehdi Khamassi
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  10 in total

1.  Accounting for negative automaintenance in pigeons: a dual learning systems approach and factored representations.

Authors:  Florian Lesaint; Olivier Sigaud; Mehdi Khamassi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-27       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  The sensory features of a food cue influence its ability to act as an incentive stimulus and evoke dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens core.

Authors:  Bryan F Singer; Myranda A Bryan; Pavlo Popov; Raymond Scarff; Cody Carter; Erin Wright; Brandon J Aragona; Terry E Robinson
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 2.460

3.  Feeder Approach between Trials Is Increased by Uncertainty and Affects Subsequent Choices.

Authors:  Aaron J Gruber; Rajat Thapa; Sienna H Randolph
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2018-01-08

4.  Sign-tracking is an expectancy-mediated behavior that relies on prediction error mechanisms.

Authors:  Rifka C Derman; Kevin Schneider; Shaina Juarez; Andrew R Delamater
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 2.460

5.  Sign-tracking behavior is sensitive to outcome devaluation in a devaluation context-dependent manner: implications for analyzing habitual behavior.

Authors:  Kenneth A Amaya; Jeffrey J Stott; Kyle S Smith
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 2.460

6.  Editorial: bridging the gap with computational and translational psychopharmacology.

Authors:  Shelly B Flagel; Joshua A Gordon; Martin P Paulus
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2019-07-08       Impact factor: 4.530

7.  Learning what to approach.

Authors:  Neir Eshel; Elizabeth E Steinberg
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 8.029

8.  Manipulating the revision of reward value during the intertrial interval increases sign tracking and dopamine release.

Authors:  Brian Lee; Ronny N Gentry; Gregory B Bissonette; Rae J Herman; John J Mallon; Daniel W Bryden; Donna J Calu; Geoffrey Schoenbaum; Etienne Coutureau; Alain R Marchand; Mehdi Khamassi; Matthew R Roesch
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 8.029

9.  Checking responses of goal- and sign-trackers are differentially affected by threat in a rodent analog of obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Authors:  George H Vousden; Sloane Paulcan; Trevor W Robbins; Dawn M Eagle; Amy L Milton
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 2.460

Review 10.  Retrieval-Extinction and Relapse Prevention: Rewriting Maladaptive Drug Memories?

Authors:  Eloise J Kuijer; Antonio Ferragud; Amy L Milton
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 3.558

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.