Literature DB >> 3097705

The effects of (+)-amphetamine and apomorphine on responding for a conditioned reinforcer.

E J Mazurski, R J Beninger.   

Abstract

Two psychomotor stimulants, (+)-amphetamine and apomorphine, were examined for effects on associative learning and responding for a conditioned reinforcer. The experimental phases included: preexposure to an operant test chamber with two levers, each of which produced a neutral stimulus when pressed; pairings of one stimulus with food; and a subsequent test of lever pressing for the two stimuli. Groups of food deprived rats (n = 8-12) were given IP injections of one stimulant prior to each pairing or testing session. Given during pairings, (+)-amphetamine produced a dose-related attenuation of responding for the conditioned stimulus in the test; doses of 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0, but not 0.25 or 4.0 mg/kg, given during the test enhanced responding, as did 0.5 mg/kg given in both phases. Apomorphine did not significantly alter responding during testing when administered in either the pairing (0 0.75 mg/kg) or test (0.5 1.0 mg/kg) phase. The results suggest that the modulation of conditioned reinforcement by psychomotor stimulants may occur through a presynaptic influence. Furthermore, the results with (+)-amphetamine suggest that this drug differentially affects the learning of an association between a conditioned and unconditioned stimulus versus the acquisition of responding for that conditioned stimulus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3097705     DOI: 10.1007/bf00181249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)        ISSN: 0033-3158            Impact factor:   4.530


  15 in total

Review 1.  Rate-dependent effects of drugs: a review of the literature.

Authors:  D J Sanger; D E Blackman
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  1976-01       Impact factor: 3.533

2.  Apomorphine: chemistry, pharmacology, biochemistry.

Authors:  F C Colpaert; W F Van Bever; J E Leysen
Journal:  Int Rev Neurobiol       Date:  1976       Impact factor: 3.230

3.  RELATIVE RATE OF RESPONSE AND RELATIVE MAGNITUDE OF REINFORCEMENT IN MULTIPLE SCHEDULES.

Authors:  S SHETTLEWORTH; J A NEVIN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1965-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  The acquisition of responding with conditioned reinforcement: effects of pipradrol, methylphenidate, d-amphetamine, and nomifensine.

Authors:  T W Robbins
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1978-06-15       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 5.  Experimental methods for the study of state-dependent learning.

Authors:  D A Overton
Journal:  Fed Proc       Date:  1974-07

6.  The effects of pipradrol on the acquisitionof responding with conditioned reinforcement: a role for sensory preconditioning.

Authors:  R J Beninger; D R Hanson; A G Phillips
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 7.  The actions of amphetamine on neurotransmitters: a brief review.

Authors:  K E Moore
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 13.382

8.  The acquisition of responding with conditioned reinforcement: effects of cocaine, (+)-amphetamine and pipradrol.

Authors:  R J Beninger; D R Hanson; A G Phillips
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 8.739

9.  Contrasting interactions of pipradrol, d-amphetamine, cocaine, cocaine analogues, apomorphine and other drugs with conditioned reinforcement.

Authors:  T W Robbins; B A Watson; M Gaskin; C Ennis
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 10.  The role of dopamine in locomotor activity and learning.

Authors:  R J Beninger
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 3.252

View more
  10 in total

1.  Dopamine and conditioned reinforcement. I. Differential effects of amphetamine microinjections into striatal subregions.

Authors:  A E Kelley; J M Delfs
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 4.530

2.  Effects of novelty and methamphetamine on conditioned and sensory reinforcement.

Authors:  David R Lloyd; Michael A Kausch; Amy M Gancarz; Linda J Beyley; Jerry B Richards
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2012-07-16       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Dopaminergic mechanisms of reinstatement of MDMA-seeking behaviour in rats.

Authors:  S Schenk; D Gittings; J Colussi-Mas
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 8.739

4.  Amphetamine-induced enhancement of responding for conditioned reward in rats: interactions with repeated testing.

Authors:  Todor V Gerdjikov; Tyson W Baker; Richard J Beninger
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  Food-paired stimuli as conditioned reinforcers: effects of d-amphetamine.

Authors:  S L Cohen; M N Branch
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Bromocriptine enhancement of responding for conditioned reward depends on intact D1 receptor function.

Authors:  R Ranaldi; R J Beninger
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 4.530

7.  Dopamine D1 and D2 antagonists attenuate amphetamine-produced enhancement of responding for conditioned reward in rats.

Authors:  R Ranaldi; R J Beninger
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 4.530

8.  Dopamine modulates reward expectancy during performance of a slot machine task in rats: evidence for a 'near-miss' effect.

Authors:  Catharine A Winstanley; Paul J Cocker; Robert D Rogers
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 7.853

9.  Reduction of impulsivity with amphetamine in an appetitive fixed consecutive number schedule with cue for optimal performance in rats.

Authors:  Marion Rivalan; Stéphanie Grégoire; Françoise Dellu-Hagedorn
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2007-01-30       Impact factor: 4.415

10.  The form of a conditioned stimulus can influence the degree to which it acquires incentive motivational properties.

Authors:  Paul J Meyer; Elizabeth S Cogan; Terry E Robinson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.