Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28832319›Full record

ArticleJournal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN2017

Uncertainty exposure causes behavioural sensitization and increases risky decision-making in male rats: toward modelling gambling disorder.

Fiona D Zeeb, Zhaoxia Li, Daniel C Fisher, Martin H Zack, Paul J Fletcher

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. DThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  7. Positive Affect: Nature and brain bases of liking and wanting.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Maladaptive consequences of repeated intermittent exposure to uncertainty.Progress in neuro-psychopharmacology & biological psychiatry · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Fiona D ZeebFrom the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Section of Biopsychology, Toronto (Zeeb, Li, Fisher, Zack, Fletcher); the Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zeeb, Fletcher); the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zack); and the Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada (Fletcher).
Zhaoxia LiFrom the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Section of Biopsychology, Toronto (Zeeb, Li, Fisher, Zack, Fletcher); the Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zeeb, Fletcher); the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zack); and the Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada (Fletcher).
Daniel C FisherFrom the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Section of Biopsychology, Toronto (Zeeb, Li, Fisher, Zack, Fletcher); the Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zeeb, Fletcher); the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zack); and the Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada (Fletcher).
Martin H ZackFrom the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Section of Biopsychology, Toronto (Zeeb, Li, Fisher, Zack, Fletcher); the Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zeeb, Fletcher); the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zack); and the Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada (Fletcher).
Paul J FletcherFrom the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Section of Biopsychology, Toronto (Zeeb, Li, Fisher, Zack, Fletcher); the Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zeeb, Fletcher); the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Toronto, Toronto (Zack); and the Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada (Fletcher).
Mental Health Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn animal model of gambling disorder, previously known as pathological gambling, could advance our understanding of the disorder and help with treatment development. We hypothesized that repeated exposure to uncertainty during gambling induces behavioural and dopamine (DA) sensitization - similar to chronic exposure to drugs of abuse. Uncertainty exposure (UE) may also increase risky decision-making in an animal model of gambling disorder.

methodsMale Sprague Dawley rats received 56 UE sessions, during which animals responded for saccharin according to an unpredictable, variable ratio schedule of reinforcement (VR group). Control animals responded on a predictable, fixed ratio schedule (FR group). Rats yoked to receive unpredictable reward were also included (Y group). Animals were then tested on the Rat Gambling Task (rGT), an analogue of the Iowa Gambling Task, to measure decision-making.

resultsCompared with the FR group, the VR and Y groups experienced a greater locomotor response following administration of amphetamine. On the rGT, the FR and Y groups preferred the advantageous options over the risky, disadvantageous options throughout testing (40 sessions). However, rats in the VR group did not have a significant preference for the advantageous options during sessions 20-40. Amphetamine had a small, but significant, effect on decision-making only in the VR group. After rGT testing, only the VR group showed greater hyperactivity following administration of amphetamine compared with the FR group. LIMITATIONS: Reward uncertainty was the only gambling feature modelled.

conclusionActively responding for uncertain reward likely sensitized the DA system and impaired the ability to make optimal decisions, modelling some aspects of gambling disorder.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDisease Models, AnimalGamblingStress, PsychologicalUncertaintyAmphetamineAnimalsCentral Nervous System StimulantsMaleMotor ActivityRats, Sprague-DawleyReinforcement ScheduleRewardSaccharinAmphetamineCentral Nervous System StimulantsSaccharin

Identifiers

PMID28832319
PMCPMC5662462
OpenAlexW2765768211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.