Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31120280›Full record

ArticleExperimental and clinical psychopharmacology2020

Using a dependent schedule to measure risky choice in male rats: Effects of d-amphetamine, methylphenidate, and methamphetamine.

Justin R Yates, Nicholas A Prior, Marissa R Chitwood, Haley A Day, Jonah R Heidel, Sarah E Hopkins, Brittany T Muncie, Tatiana A Paradella-Bradley, Alexandra P Sestito, Ashley N Vecchiola and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Histamine HMolecular psychiatry · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

11 authors.

Justin R YatesDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Nicholas A PriorDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Marissa R ChitwoodDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Haley A DayDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Jonah R HeidelDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Sarah E HopkinsDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Brittany T MuncieDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Tatiana A Paradella-BradleyDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Alexandra P SestitoDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Ashley N VecchiolaDepartment of Psychological Science, Northern Kentucky University.
Emily E WellsDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Louisville.

Funding

WKU Lead Faculty AwardP20GM103436 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE · PI ERIC C ROUCHKA · 2012 to 2026
$60.1M
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103436Northern Kentucky University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risky choice is the tendency to choose a large, uncertain reward over a small, certain reward, and is typically measured with probability discounting, in which the probability of obtaining the large reinforcer decreases across blocks of trials. One caveat to traditional procedures is that independent schedules are used, in which subjects can show exclusive preference for one alternative relative to the other. For example, some rats show exclusive preference for the small, certain reinforcer as soon as delivery of the large reinforcer becomes probabilistic. Therefore, determining if a drug increases risk aversion (i.e., decreases responding for the probabilistic alternative) is difficult (due to floor effects). The overall goal of this experiment was to use a concurrent-chains procedure that incorporated a dependent schedule during the initial link, thus preventing animals from showing exclusive preference for one alternative relative to the other. To determine how pharmacological manipulations alter performance in this task, male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 8) received injections of amphetamine (0, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 mg/kg), methylphenidate (0, 0.3, 1.0, 3.0 mg/kg), and methamphetamine (0, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 mg/kg). Amphetamine (0.25 mg/kg) and methylphenidate (3.0 mg/kg) selectively increased risky choice, whereas higher doses of amphetamine (0.5 and 1.0 kg/mg) and each dose of methamphetamine impaired stimulus control (i.e., flattened the discounting function). These results show that dependent schedules can be used to measure risk-taking behavior and that psychostimulants promote suboptimal choice when this schedule is used. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Reinforcement ScheduleRisk-TakingAnimalsCentral Nervous System StimulantsChoice BehaviorDextroamphetamineMaleMethamphetamineMethylphenidateProbabilityRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyCentral Nervous System StimulantsDextroamphetamineMethamphetamineMethylphenidate

Identifiers

PMID31120280
PMCPMC7317298

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.