ArticlePsychopharmacology2017
Social context has differential effects on acquisition of nicotine self-administration in male and female rats.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex differences in nicotine intravenous self-administration: A meta-analytic review.Physiology & behavior · 2019Pooled it
- Article
- Peer-induced cocaine seeking in rats: Comparison to nonsocial stimuli and role of paraventricular hypothalamic oxytocin neurons.Addiction biology · 2022Article
- 5-HTFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Synthetic cathinone self-administration in female rats modulates neurotransmitter levels in addiction-related brain regions.Behavioural brain research · 2019Article
- Economic demand analysis of within-session dose-reduction during nicotine self-administration.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2019Article
- Social learning promotes nicotine self-administration by facilitating the extinction of conditioned aversion in isogenic strains of rats.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
rationalSmoking typically begins during adolescence or early adulthood in a social context, yet the role of social context in animal models is poorly understood.
objectivesThe present study examined the effect of social context on acquisition of nicotine self-administration.
methodsSixty-day-old male and female Sprague-Dawley rats were trained to press a lever for nicotine (0.015 mg/kg, IV) or saline infusions (males only) on a fixed ratio (FR1) schedule of reinforcement across nine sessions in duplex chambers that were conjoined with either a solid wall or a wall containing wire mesh creating a social context between rat dyads (social visual, auditory, and olfactory cues). In a subsequent experiment, sex differences and dose-dependent effects of nicotine [0 (saline), 0.015 or 0.03 mg/kg, IV] were directly compared in rats trained in the isolated or social context on a schedule progressing from FR1 to FR3. These rats were given 20 sessions followed by 3 extinction sessions.
resultsWe consistently found transient social facilitation of low-dose nicotine self-administration in males during the first session. However, across training overall, we found social suppression of nicotine intake that was most prominent in females during later sessions.
conclusionsCollectively, these findings suggest that at the age of transition from adolescence to adulthood, a social context enhances the initial reinforcing effects of nicotine in males, but protects against nicotine intake during later sessions especially in females. These findings highlight the importance of sex and social context in studying neural mechanisms involved in initiation of nicotine use.
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.