Literature DB >> 8047570

Relative hedonic value modulates anticipatory contrast.

C F Flaherty1, J Turovsky, K L Krauss.   

Abstract

Intake of an initial substance (e.g., 0.15% saccharin) is suppressed when the presentation of this substance precedes the availability of a preferred solution (e.g., 32% sucrose) in brief daily pairings. The present experiments show that degree of this anticipatory contrast effect is related to the relative hedonic value of the substances paired each day. When the initial substance has low hedonic value relative to the second substance (e.g., water or empty tube paired with 32% sucrose), then a facilitation effect rather than contrast occurs. As the hedonic value of the initial substance increases (0.0015% saccharin, 0.5% sucrose, 0.015% saccharin, 1% sucrose, 2% sucrose, 0.15% saccharin), facilitation is replaced by contrast, which develops sooner and becomes larger the greater the hedonic value of the initial substance. The serotonin antagonist cyproheptadine increased absolute lick frequencies, but did not alter contrast. The serotonin1A agonist buspirone tended to decrease absolute lick frequencies, but did not alter contrast. The occurrence of contrast is discussed in terms of response competition, inhibition, and devaluation of the initial substance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8047570     DOI: 10.1016/0031-9384(94)90386-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Behav        ISSN: 0031-9384


  17 in total

1.  Reduced palatability in drug-induced taste aversion: II. Aversive and rewarding unconditioned stimuli.

Authors:  Joe Arthurs; Jian-You Lin; Leslie Renee Amodeo; Steve Reilly
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 1.912

2.  Emotion and relative reward processing: an investigation on instrumental successive negative contrast and ultrasonic vocalizations in the rat.

Authors:  K A Binkley; E S Webber; D D Powers; H C Cromwell
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 1.777

3.  Appetitive sensitization by amphetamine does not reduce its ability to produce conditioned taste aversion to saccharin.

Authors:  John Scott-Railton; Gretchen Arnold; Paul Vezina
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2006-10-04       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Within-trial contrast: pigeons prefer conditioned reinforcers that follow a relatively more rather than a less aversive event.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Rebecca A Singer
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Relative reward effects on operant behavior: Incentive contrast, induction and variety effects.

Authors:  E S Webber; N E Chambers; J A Kostek; D E Mankin; H C Cromwell
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2015-05-12       Impact factor: 1.777

6.  Pontine and thalamic influences on fluid rewards: III. Anticipatory contrast for sucrose and corn oil.

Authors:  Nu-Chu Liang; Ralph Norgren; Patricia S Grigson
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2011-06-16

7.  Rhesus monkeys lack a consistent peak-end effect.

Authors:  Eric R Xu; Emily J Knight; Jerald D Kralik
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 2.143

8.  The role of dose and restriction state on morphine-, cocaine-, and LiCl-induced suppression of saccharin intake: A comprehensive analysis.

Authors:  Robert C Twining; Christopher S Freet; Robert A Wheeler; Christian G Reich; Dennie A Tompers; Sarah E Wolpert; Patricia S Grigson
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2016-04-13

Review 9.  The state of the reward comparison hypothesis: theoretical comment on Huang and Hsiao (2008).

Authors:  Patricia Sue Grigson
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.912

10.  Morphine-induced suppression of conditioned stimulus intake: effects of stimulus type and insular cortex lesions.

Authors:  Jian-You Lin; Christopher Roman; Steve Reilly
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 3.252

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.