This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0269881107083842v1 0269881107083842v2 0269881107083842v3 0269881107083842v4 0269881107083842v5 0269881107083842v6 22/8/849    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Cassaday, H. Articles by Horsley, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cassaday, H. Articles by Horsley, R. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Methylphenidate and nicotine focus responding to an informative discrete CS over successive sessions of appetitive conditioning

School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK, helen.cassaday{at}nottingham.ac.uk

BC Finger

School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

RR Horsley

Psychology Division, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Methylphenidate (MP) and nicotine would be expected to improve associative learning, though previous evidence suggests that they should reduce the selectivity with which associations are formed. Here we tested their effects on learning the association between a conditioned stimulus (CS) and food (unconditioned stimulus, UCS) in male Wistar rats. The UCS was delivered immediately (0s) following CS offset or after a 10s trace. In addition to the measures of discrete CS conditioning, contextual and trace responding was measured in the inter-trial- and the inter-stimulus-interval, respectively. In all cases, conditioning was measured as nose poking for food. Both MP and nicotine improved the acquisition of discrete cue conditioning. Acquisition was accelerated (compared to saline) under 5 but not 1 mg/kg MP and 0.6, but not 0.4 mg/kg nicotine. In each case, this effect was observed in 0s but not 10s conditioned groups. For comparison, some earlier published data obtained following the same procedure with D-amphetamine were re-analysed in the same way. Amphetamine similarly improved conditioning in the 0s group, in this case at 0.5, but not 1.5 mg/kg. Thus three different dopamine agonists increased the ability to focus responding to CS presentations over successive sessions of appetitive acquisition.

Key Words: methylphenidate • nicotine • trace interval • appetitive conditioning • rat

This version was published on November 1, 2008

Journal of Psychopharmacology, Vol. 22, No. 8, 849-859 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0269881107083842


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?