ArticleBehavioral neuroscience2008
Re-examination of amphetamine-induced conditioned suppression of tastant intake in rats: the task-dependent drug effects hypothesis.
Article in Behavioral neuroscience, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- D2 Receptors and Sodium Ion Channel Blockades of the Basolateral Amygdala Attenuate Lithium Chloride-Induced Conditioned Taste Aversion Applying to Cancer Chemotherapy Nausea and Vomiting.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Impact of the Aversive Effects of Drugs on Their Use and Abuse.Behavioural neurology · 2022Review
- The Paradoxical Effect Hypothesis of Abused Drugs in a Rat Model of Chronic Morphine Administration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Inhibiting gustatory thalamus or medial amygdala has opposing effects on taste neophobia.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2018Article
- The effects of amygdala and cortical inactivation on taste neophobia.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2018Article
- Conditioned taste avoidance, conditioned place preference and hyperthermia induced by the second generation 'bath salt' α-pyrrolidinopentiophenone (α-PVP).Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior · 2017Article
- Conditioned taste aversions: From poisons to pain to drugs of abuse.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2017Article
- Cocaine self-administration punished by intravenous histamine in adolescent and adult rats.Behavioural pharmacology · 2015Article
- Conditioned taste aversion, drugs of abuse and palatability.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2014Review
- Food consumption and weight gain after cessation of chronic amphetamine administration.Appetite · 2014Article
- Reduced palatability in drug-induced taste aversion: I. Variations in the initial value of the conditioned stimulus.Behavioral neuroscience · 2012Article
- Ontogenetic differences in sensitivity to LiCl- and amphetamine-induced taste avoidance in preweanling rats.Chemical senses · 2011Article
- Differential involvement of the norepinephrine, serotonin and dopamine reuptake transporter proteins in cocaine-induced taste aversion.Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior · 2009Article
- Brain Fos expression induced by the chemotherapy agent cisplatin in the rat is partially dependent on an intact abdominal vagus.Autonomic neuroscience : basic & clinical · 2009Article
- The state of the reward comparison hypothesis: theoretical comment on Huang and Hsiao (2008).Behavioral neuroscience · 2008Review
- Conditioned Aversion for a Cocaine-Predictive Cue is Associated with Cocaine Seeking and Taking in Rats.International journal of comparative psychologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study reexamined Grigson's reward comparison hypothesis (1997), which claimed to have resolved the paradox of addictive, rewarding drugs manifesting an aversive effect in the conditioned taste aversion (CTA) paradigm. Here, the authors compared the conditioned suppression effects of lithium chloride (LiCl) and amphetamine in a series of three experiments. In Experiment 1, the concentrations of saccharin solution (conditioned stimulus [CS]) and the doses of amphetamine or LiCl (unconditioned stimulus [US]) were manipulated. In Experiment 2, the effects of employing backward versus forward pairings of the CS and US were compared. Finally, in Experiment 3, the additivity of amphetamine's reward property and LiCl's aversive property was examined. The results of these experiments, respectively, indicated that: (1) manipulating saccharin solution concentrations does not distinguish the suppression effect caused by rewarding or aversive effects when amphetamine or LiCl served as the US; (2) both backward and forward pairings produced suppression of saccharin solution intake regardless of whether amphetamine or LiCl was used as the US; and (3) combining amphetamine and LiCl did not diminish the suppression effect, as would be expected if they had opposing mechanisms for the effects; instead, an additive effect occurred. Taken together, these results suggest that the drug of abuse amphetamine and the emetic drug LiCl both possess aversive properties in the CTA paradigm. No rewarding effects of amphetamine were detected in our experimental data. In all, our results do not support the Grigson's reward comparison hypothesis (1997) and a new "task-dependent drug effects hypothesis" is proposed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19045940What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.