ReviewPsychopharmacology2023
Elucidating the reinforcing effects of nicotine: a tribute to Nadia Chaudhri.
Review in Psychopharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and preclinical evidence of sex differences in nicotine-induced enhancement of alcohol self-administration.Psychopharmacology · 2026Review
- Effects of nicotinic receptor antagonism on nicotine and THC self-administration in a model of polysubstance use.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Contraceptive hormone ethinyl estradiol but not levonorgestrel modulates the role of reinforcer-enhancement in nicotine self-administration in ovary-intact female Sprague-Dawley rats.Neuropharmacology · 2025Article
- Effects of nicotinic receptor antagonism on nicotine and THC self-administration in a model of polysubstance use.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- A preliminary investigation of tobacco co-use on endocannabinoid activity in people with cannabis use.Drug and alcohol dependence reports · 2025Article
- Pavlovian conditioning with the internal stimulus effects of intravenous nicotine heightens later nicotine taking with variation by dose and sex.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Individual variations in motives for nicotine self-administration in male rats: evidence in support for a precision psychopharmacology.Translational psychiatry · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Nadia Chaudhri worked with us as a graduate student in the Center for Neuroscience at the University of Pittsburgh from 1999 until she earned her PhD in 2005, a time that coincided with the discovery in our lab of the dual reinforcing actions of nicotine, a concept that she played an important role in shaping. The research that was described in her doctoral thesis is among the foundational pillars of the now well-accepted notion that nicotine acts as both a primary reinforcer and an amplifier of other reinforcer stimuli. This reinforcement-enhancing action of nicotine is robust and likely to be a powerful driver of nicotine use. Below, we discuss the evidence that these two actions of nicotine - primary reinforcement and reinforcement enhancement - are distinct and dissociable, a finding that Nadia was closely associated with. We go on to address two other topics that greatly interested Nadia during that time, the generalizability of the reinforcement-enhancing action of nicotine to multiple classes of reinforcing stimuli and potential sex differences in the dual reinforcing actions of nicotine. The research has greatly expanded since Nadia's involvement, but the core ideas that she helped to develop remain central to the concept of the dual reinforcing actions of nicotine and its importance for understanding the drivers 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.