Literature DB >> 25869302

Delay-specific stimuli and genotype interact to determine temporal discounting in a rapid-acquisition procedure.

Derek A Pope1, M Christopher Newland1, Blake A Hutsell1.   

Abstract

The importance of delay discounting to many socially important behavior problems has stimulated investigations of biological and environmental mechanisms responsible for variations in the form of the discount function. The extant experimental research, however, has yielded disparate results, raising important questions regarding Gene X Environment interactions. The present study determined the influence of stimuli that uniquely signal delays to reinforcement on delay discounting in two inbred mouse strains using a rapid-acquisition procedure. BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice responded under a six-component, concurrent-chained schedule in which the terminal-link delays preceding the larger-reinforcer were presented randomly across components of an individual session. Across conditions, components were presented either with or without delay-specific auditory stimuli, i.e., as multiple or mixed schedules. A generalized matching-based model was used to incorporate the impact of current and previous component reinforcer-delay ratios on current component response allocation. Sensitivity to reinforcer magnitude and delay were higher for BALB/c mice, but within-component preference reached final levels faster for C57Bl/6 mice. For BALB/c mice, acquisition of preference across blocks of a component was faster under the multiple than the mixed schedule, but final levels of sensitivity to reinforcement were unaffected by schedule. The speed of acquisition of preference was not different across schedules for C57Bl/6 mice, but sensitivity to reinforcement was higher under the multiple than the mixed schedule. Overall, differences in the acquisition and final form of the discount function were determined by a Gene X Environment interaction, but the presence of delay-specific stimuli attenuated genotype-dependent differences in magnitude and delay sensitivity. © Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.

Entities:  

Keywords:  delay discounting; generalized matching law; mouse strain; pseudorandom delay presentation; rapid acquisition; signaled delay

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25869302     DOI: 10.1002/jeab.148

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  10 in total

1.  Temporal discounting of aversive consequences in rats.

Authors:  William Rodríguez; Arturo Bouzas; Vladimir Orduña
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.986

2.  Using a dependent schedule to measure risky choice in male rats: Effects of d-amphetamine, methylphenidate, and methamphetamine.

Authors:  Justin R Yates; Nicholas A Prior; Marissa R Chitwood; Haley A Day; Jonah R Heidel; Sarah E Hopkins; Brittany T Muncie; Tatiana A Paradella-Bradley; Alexandra P Sestito; Ashley N Vecchiola; Emily E Wells
Journal:  Exp Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2019-05-23       Impact factor: 3.157

Review 3.  Dissecting drug effects in preclinical models of impulsive choice: emphasis on glutamatergic compounds.

Authors:  Justin R Yates
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2018-01-06       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 4.  Determinants of choice, and vulnerability and recovery in addiction.

Authors:  R J Lamb; David R Maguire; Brett C Ginsburg; Jonathan W Pinkston; Charles P France
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 1.777

5.  The effects of physical activity on impulsive choice: Influence of sensitivity to reinforcement amount and delay.

Authors:  Justin C Strickland; Max A Feinstein; Ryan T Lacy; Mark A Smith
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 1.777

6.  Adolescent methylmercury exposure affects choice and delay discounting in mice.

Authors:  Steven R Boomhower; M Christopher Newland
Journal:  Neurotoxicology       Date:  2016-09-24       Impact factor: 4.294

7.  Pair housing, but not using a controlled reinforcer frequency procedure, attenuates the modulatory effect of probability presentation order on amphetamine-induced changes in risky choice.

Authors:  Justin R Yates; Alexis L Ellis; Karson E Evans; Joy L Kappesser; Kadyn M Lilly; Prodiges Mbambu; Tanner G Sutphin
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Neuronal activity associated with cocaine preference: Effects of differential cocaine intake.

Authors:  Jonathan J Chow; Rebecca S Hofford; Joshua S Beckmann
Journal:  Neuropharmacology       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 5.250

9.  Delay discounting of different outcomes: Review and theory.

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

10.  Commentary "A Crisis in Comparative Psychology: Where have all the Undergraduates Gone?" Collaborating with Behavior Analysts Could Avert a Crisis in Comparative Psychology.

Authors:  Elizabeth G E Kyonka; Shrinidhi Subramaniam; Daniel Bell-Garrison; Matthew L Eckard
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-11-13
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.