Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25980485›Full record

ArticlePsychopharmacology2015

Individual variation in the motivational properties of a nicotine cue: sign-trackers vs. goal-trackers.

Lindsay M Yager, Terry E Robinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychopharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Sex and Adolescent Ethanol Exposure Influence Pavlovian Conditioned Approach.Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. P3 event-related potential reactivity to smoking cues: Relations with craving, tobacco dependence, and alcohol sensitivity in young adult smokers.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2017
    Article
  18. Individual Variations in the Mechanisms of Nicotine Seeking: A Key for Research on Nicotine Dependence.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Lindsay M YagerDepartment of Psychology (Biopsychology Program), The University of Michigan, East Hall, 530 Church St, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Terry E Robinson

Funding

Variation in Motivational Properties of Reward Cues: Implications for AddictionP01DA031656 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI FLAGEL, SHELLY BETH · 2012 to 2016
$6.3M
Variability in Responsivity to Drug CuesF31DA030799 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI YAGER, LINDSAY · 2012 to 2013
$65k
NIDA NIH HHS F31 DA030799NIDA NIH HHS P01 DA031656
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleIndividuals vary in the extent to which they attribute incentive salience to reward cues. Discrete food and drug (cocaine and opioid) cues become more attractive, eliciting approach toward them, and more "wanted," in that they serve as more effective conditioned reinforcers, in some rats (sign-trackers, STs), than in others (goal-trackers, GTs).

objectivesWe asked whether there is similar variation in the extent to which a cue associated with a drug from another class, nicotine, acquires incentive motivational properties.

methodsFirst, a Pavlovian conditioned approach procedure was used to identify rats that attribute incentive salience to a food cue (i.e., STs and GTs). We then measured the extent to which a cue (a light) paired with intravenous nicotine injections acquired two properties of an incentive stimulus: (1) the ability to elicit approach toward it, and (2) the ability to act as a conditioned reinforcer.

resultsIn contrast to previous findings with food, cocaine, and opioid cues, we found that the nicotine cue was equally attractive in STs and GTs, eliciting dose-dependent approach behavior in both. However, the nicotine cue was a more effective conditioned reinforcer in STs than in GTs.

conclusionsWe suggest the dissociation between these two measures of incentive salience attribution may be related to the fact that when present (as in the test of Pavlovian approach), nicotine can act as a potent "incentive amplifier," and by this action, nicotine may render cues especially salient for all animals.

Indexed as

CuesAnimalsConditioning, OperantDose-Response Relationship, DrugFoodGoalsIndividualityMaleMotivationNicotineNicotinic AgonistsRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyVideo RecordingNicotineNicotinic Agonists

Identifiers

PMID25980485
PMCPMC4536151

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.