Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24201046›Full record

ArticlePharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior2013

Interoceptive conditioning in rats: effects of using a single training dose or a set of 5 different doses of nicotine.

Steven T Pittenger, Rick A Bevins

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Steven T PittengerUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Psychology, 238 Burnett Hall, Lincoln, NE 68588-0308, USA.
Rick A Bevins
University of Nebraska–Lincoln · US

Funding

Pharmacological interventions to diminish nicotine associated respondingR01DA034389 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI BEVINS, RICK A · 2012 to 2016
$1.4M
Acquired Appetitive Properties of NicotineR01DA018114 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI BEVINS, RICK A · 2004 to 2010
$1.4M
Altering nicotine reward through conditioningR21DA023951 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI BEVINS, RICK A · 2008 to 2009
$339k
NIDA NIH HHS DA018114NIDA NIH HHS DA023951NIDA NIH HHS DA034389NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA018114NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA034389NIDA NIH HHS R21 DA023951
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interoceptive conditioning contributes to the tenacity of nicotine dependence. Previous research investigating nicotine as an interoceptive stimulus has typically employed administration of a single training dose of nicotine over an extended time. This approach has allowed for careful study of the nicotine stimulus. In humans, the nicotine stimulus is unlikely to be fixed across learning episodes. Thus, from a translational perspective, systematic variation of nicotine dose in training might better approximate interoceptive conditioning in humans. Notably, training with a class or set of discrete exteroceptive stimuli (e.g., different pictures of cars) produces interesting behavioral differences relative to training with a single stimulus. The present study sought to determine whether similar differences would occur if a set of nicotine stimuli were used in place of a single dose. To investigate this question, one group of male Sprague-Dawley rats was trained on a discriminated goal-tracking task with a set of nicotine doses (0.05, 0.125, 0.2, 0.275, and 0.35mg/kg). A second group received the standard protocol of training with a single nicotine dose (0.2mg/kg). On each nicotine session, there was intermittent access to liquid sucrose (26%) in a conditioning chamber. On intermixed saline sessions, sucrose was withheld. We examined acquisition, subsequent extinction, transfer of extinction, nicotine generalization, and mecamylamine blockade. Both groups reliably discriminated between nicotine and saline sessions, were sensitive to non-reinforcement, displayed transfer of extinction, demonstrated dose-dependent nicotine generalization, and responding was blocked by mecamylamine. There were no significant differences between the two groups. The unique nature of an interoceptive pharmacological stimulus and the challenges posed for studying the impact of training with a set of interoceptive stimuli are discussed.

Indexed as

Conditioning, OperantAnimalsDose-Response Relationship, DrugMaleMecamylamineNicotineNicotinic AntagonistsRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyMecamylamineNicotineNicotinic AntagonistsDrug discriminationPavlovian conditioningRatsSmokingTobacco

Identifiers

PMID24201046
PMCPMC3867972
OpenAlexW2032680993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.