BACKGROUND: Delay discounting (DD) is a measure of impulsivity that quantifies preference for a small reward delivered immediately over a large reward delivered after a delay. It has been hypothesized that impulsivity is an endophenotype associated with increased risk for development of alcohol use disorders (AUDs); however, a causal role of impulsivity is difficult to determine with human studies. We tested this hypothesis by assessing the degree of DD present in alcohol-naïve rats selectively bred for either high- or low-alcohol preference. METHODS: A novel adaptation of a within-sessions DD procedure was used to compare impulsivity differences between male alcohol-preferring (P) and nonpreferring (NP) rat lines (n = 6 per line) using a 5% sucrose reward. Animals chose between 2 options: 2-second sipper tube access delivered immediately (small reward) or 8-second access after a variable delay (large reward). Each 50-minute session consisted of 5 blocks of ten 60-second trials. Within each session, the delay to the large reward increased in each block of trials. Delays were gradually increased over 3 sets to attain a final delay set of 3, 8, 15, 18, and 25 seconds. RESULTS: Prior to starting delays, there were no significant differences between lines in sucrose consumption or percent choice for the large reward, and both lines exhibited a clear preference for the large reward. After delays were initiated, choice for the large reward decreased as the delay to its presentation increased. Although discounting of the large, delayed reward was observed for both lines, the degree of discounting, or "impulsivity," was greater for P rats compared with NP rats. CONCLUSIONS: P rats are more impulsive for sucrose rewards before exposure to alcohol compared with NP rats. Thus, individuals genetically predisposed toward developing AUDs may be more likely to engage in impulsive decision making prior to alcohol exposure.
BACKGROUND: Delay discounting (DD) is a measure of impulsivity that quantifies preference for a small reward delivered immediately over a large reward delivered after a delay. It has been hypothesized that impulsivity is an endophenotype associated with increased risk for development of alcohol use disorders (AUDs); however, a causal role of impulsivity is difficult to determine with human studies. We tested this hypothesis by assessing the degree of DD present in alcohol-naïve rats selectively bred for either high- or low-alcohol preference. METHODS: A novel adaptation of a within-sessions DD procedure was used to compare impulsivity differences between male alcohol-preferring (P) and nonpreferring (NP) rat lines (n = 6 per line) using a 5% sucrose reward. Animals chose between 2 options: 2-second sipper tube access delivered immediately (small reward) or 8-second access after a variable delay (large reward). Each 50-minute session consisted of 5 blocks of ten 60-second trials. Within each session, the delay to the large reward increased in each block of trials. Delays were gradually increased over 3 sets to attain a final delay set of 3, 8, 15, 18, and 25 seconds. RESULTS: Prior to starting delays, there were no significant differences between lines in sucrose consumption or percent choice for the large reward, and both lines exhibited a clear preference for the large reward. After delays were initiated, choice for the large reward decreased as the delay to its presentation increased. Although discounting of the large, delayed reward was observed for both lines, the degree of discounting, or "impulsivity," was greater for P rats compared with NP rats. CONCLUSIONS: P rats are more impulsive for sucrose rewards before exposure to alcohol compared with NP rats. Thus, individuals genetically predisposed toward developing AUDs may be more likely to engage in impulsive decision making prior to alcohol exposure.
Authors: Michael T Amlung; John Acker; Monika K Stojek; James G Murphy; James MacKillop Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2011-10-21 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: David N Linsenbardt; Michael P Smoker; Sarine S Janetsian-Fritz; Christopher C Lapish Journal: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: James MacKillop; Joshua C Gray; Jessica Weafer; Sandra Sanchez-Roige; Abraham A Palmer; Harriet de Wit Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2018-09-27 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Emanuela De Falco; Shelby M White; Mitchell D Morningstar; Baofeng Ma; Lionnel T Nkurunziza; Anisah Ahmed-Dilibe; Cara L Wellman; Christopher C Lapish Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 4.093
Authors: Cheryl Reed; Alexandra M Stafford; John R K Mootz; Harue Baba; Jason Erk; Tamara J Phillips Journal: Genes Brain Behav Date: 2020-06-17 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Amy L Odum; Ryan J Becker; Jeremy M Haynes; Ann Galizio; Charles C J Frye; Haylee Downey; Jonathan E Friedel; D M Perez Journal: J Exp Anal Behav Date: 2020-03-08 Impact factor: 2.215