RATIONALE: Reward-associated cues can promote maladaptive behavior, including risky decision-making in a gambling setting. A propensity for sign tracking over goal tracking-i.e., interaction with a reward-predictive cue rather than the site of reward-demonstrates an individual's tendency to transfer motivational value to a cue. However, the relationship of sign tracking to risky decision-making remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether sign tracking predicts risky choice, we used a Pavlovian conditioned approach task to evaluate the tendency of male rats to sign track to a lever cue and then trained rats on a rodent gambling task (rGT) with win-associated cues. We also tested the effects of D-amphetamine, quinpirole (a D2/D3 receptor agonist), and PD128907 (a D3 receptor agonist) on gambling behavior in sign tracker and goal tracker individuals. RESULTS: Increased sign tracking relative to goal tracking was associated with suboptimal performance on the rGT, including decreased selection of the optimal choice, increased selection of a high-risk/high-reward option, and increased impulsive premature choices. Amphetamine increased choices of a low-risk/low-reward option at the expense of optimal and high-risk choices, whereas quinpirole and PD128907 had little effect on choice allocation, but reduced impulsivity. Drug effects were similar across sign tracker and goal tracker individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Cue reactivity, as measured by sign tracking, is predictive and may be an important driver of risky and impulsive choices in a gambling setting laden with salient audiovisual cues. Evaluating an individual's sign tracking behavior may be an avenue to predict vulnerability to pathological gambling and the efficacy of treatments.
RATIONALE: Reward-associated cues can promote maladaptive behavior, including risky decision-making in a gambling setting. A propensity for sign tracking over goal tracking-i.e., interaction with a reward-predictive cue rather than the site of reward-demonstrates an individual's tendency to transfer motivational value to a cue. However, the relationship of sign tracking to risky decision-making remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether sign tracking predicts risky choice, we used a Pavlovian conditioned approach task to evaluate the tendency of male rats to sign track to a lever cue and then trained rats on a rodent gambling task (rGT) with win-associated cues. We also tested the effects of D-amphetamine, quinpirole (a D2/D3 receptor agonist), and PD128907 (a D3 receptor agonist) on gambling behavior in sign tracker and goal tracker individuals. RESULTS: Increased sign tracking relative to goal tracking was associated with suboptimal performance on the rGT, including decreased selection of the optimal choice, increased selection of a high-risk/high-reward option, and increased impulsive premature choices. Amphetamine increased choices of a low-risk/low-reward option at the expense of optimal and high-risk choices, whereas quinpirole and PD128907 had little effect on choice allocation, but reduced impulsivity. Drug effects were similar across sign tracker and goal tracker individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Cue reactivity, as measured by sign tracking, is predictive and may be an important driver of risky and impulsive choices in a gambling setting laden with salient audiovisual cues. Evaluating an individual's sign tracking behavior may be an avenue to predict vulnerability to pathological gambling and the efficacy of treatments.
Authors: Shelby L Blaes; Caitlin A Orsini; Marci R Mitchell; Megan S Spurrell; Sara M Betzhold; Kenneth Vera; Jennifer L Bizon; Barry Setlow Journal: Behav Pharmacol Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 2.293
Authors: Michael M Barrus; Jay G Hosking; Fiona D Zeeb; Melanie Tremblay; Catharine A Winstanley Journal: J Psychiatry Neurosci Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 6.186
Authors: Allison M Ahrens; Paul J Meyer; Lindsay M Ferguson; Terry E Robinson; J Wayne Aldridge Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2016-07-27 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Jonathan J Chow; Aaron P Smith; A George Wilson; Thomas R Zentall; Joshua S Beckmann Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 3.332
Authors: Janna M Colaizzi; Shelly B Flagel; Michelle A Joyner; Ashley N Gearhardt; Jennifer L Stewart; Martin P Paulus Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2020-01-20 Impact factor: 8.989