ArticleBehavioural pharmacology2019
Differential effects of d-amphetamine and atomoxetine on risk-based decision making of Lewis and Fischer 344 rats.
Article in Behavioural pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chemogenetic inhibition of the anterior cingulate cortex increases safe decision-making in aged mice performing the Iowa Gambling Task.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Cross-species translational paradigms for assessing positive valence system as defined by the RDoC matrix.Journal of neurochemistry · 2025Review
- Heightened SAM- and HPA-axis activity during acute stress impairs decision-making: A systematic review on underlying neuropharmacological mechanisms.Neurobiology of stress · 2024Article
- The Effects of Drug Treatments for ADHD in Measures of Cognitive Performance.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2022Article
- Risk-Based Decision Making: A Systematic Scoping Review of Animal Models and a Pilot Study on the Effects of Sleep Deprivation in Rats.Clocks & sleep · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder tend to make risker choices during probabilistic-discounting procedures. Thus, how common attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder medications affect probabilistic discounting is of interest. In general, d-amphetamine increases risk-taking while atomoxetine has produced mixed effects in rats. Results from previous studies may result from genetic factors. Lewis and F344 rats have neurochemical differences that may be relevant to probabilistic discounting and how drugs affect such behavior. In this study, we evaluated dose-dependent effects of d-amphetamine and atomoxetine on probabilistic discounting of Lewis and F344. Male Lewis and F344 chose between one food pellet delivered 100% of the time and three food pellets delivered following decreasing probabilities of delivery (i.e. 100%, 66.7%, 33.3%, 16.5%, and 8.25%). Saline, d-amphetamine (0.1-1.8 mg/kg), and atomoxetine (0.1-7.8 mg/kg) were tested acutely. Lewis and F344 did not differ in choice at baseline. d-Amphetamine increased risky choice for both rat strains at low-to-moderate doses, although it did so at a lower dose (0.1 and 0.3 mg/kg) for F344 as compared to Lewis (0.3 mg/kg only). At high doses (1.0 and 1.8 mg/kg), d-amphetamine disrupted choice, increased frequencies of omitted trials, and reduced reinforcer sensitivity. Although atomoxetine increased frequencies of omitted trials at high doses (5.6 and 7.8 mg/kg), it had no effect on probabilistic discounting for either rat strain. Although Lewis and F344 differ in various types of impulsivity (i.e. motor, choice), with Lewis being the more impulsive of the two, the present results suggest that Lewis and F344 do not differ in risk-based decision-making. Effects of d-amphetamine on probabilistic discounting may be biology-dependent and differ from effects of atomoxetine.
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.