ArticleAlcoholism, clinical and experimental research2017
Conditioned Stimulus Form Does Not Explain Failures to See Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer With Ethanol-Paired Conditioned Stimuli.
Article in Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conditioned stimulus effects on paired or alternative reinforcement depend on presentation duration: Implications for conceptualizations of craving.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Outcome-specific Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) with alcohol cues and its extinction.Alcohol (Fayetteville, N.Y.) · 2019Article
- Nicotine as a discriminative stimulus for ethanol use.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer (PIT) examines the effects of associative learning upon instrumental responding. Previous studies examining PIT with ethanol (EtOH)-maintained responding showed increases in responding following presentation of an EtOH-paired conditioned stimulus (CS). Recently, we conducted 2 studies examining PIT with an EtOH-paired CS. One of these found increases in responding, while the other did not. This less robust demonstration of PIT may have resulted from the form of the CS used, as we used a 120-second light stimulus as a CS, while the previous studies used either a 120-second auditory stimulus or a 10-second light stimulus. This study examined whether using conditions similar to our earlier study, but with either a 120-second auditory or a 10-second light stimulus as a CS, resulted in more robust PIT. We also examined the reliability of our previous failure to observe PIT.
methodsThree experiments were conducted examining whether PIT was obtained using (i) a 120-second light stimulus, (ii) a 10-second light stimulus, or (iii) a 120-second auditory stimulus as CSs.
resultsWe found PIT was not obtained using (i) a 120-second light stimulus as a CS, (ii) a 10-second light stimulus as a CS, or (iii) a 120-second auditory stimulus as a CS.
conclusionsThese results suggest that CS form does not account for our earlier failure to see PIT. Rather, factors like rat strain or how EtOH drinking is induced may account for when PIT is or is not observed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.