When faced with decisions, rats sometimes pause and look back and forth between possible alternatives, a phenomenon termed vicarious trial and error (VTE). When it was first observed in the 1930s, VTE was theorized to be a mechanism for exploration. Later theories suggested that VTE aided the resolution of sensory or neuroeconomic conflict. In contrast, recent neurophysiological data suggest that VTE reflects a dynamic search and evaluation process. These theories make unique predictions about the timing of VTE on behavioral tasks. We tested these theories of VTE on a T-maze with return rails, where rats were given a choice between a smaller reward available after one delay or a larger reward available after an adjustable delay. Rats showed three clear phases of behavior on this task: investigation, characterized by discovery of task parameters; titration, characterized by iterative adjustment of the delay to a preferred interval; and exploitation, characterized by alternation to hold the delay at the preferred interval. We found that VTE events occurred during adjustment laps more often than during alternation laps. Results were incompatible with theories of VTE as an exploratory behavior, as reflecting sensory conflict, or as a simple neuroeconomic valuation process. Instead, our results were most consistent with VTE as reflecting a search process during deliberative decision making. This pattern of VTE that we observed is reminiscent of current navigational theories proposing a transition from a deliberative to a habitual decision-making mechanism.
Both orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and ventral striatum (vStr) have been identified as key structures that represent information about value in decision-making tasks. However, the dynamics of how this information is processed are not yet understood. We recorded ensembles of cells from OFC and vStr in rats engaged in the spatial adjusting delay-discounting task , a decision-making task that involves a trade-off between delay to and magnitude of reward. Ventral striatal neural activity signalled information about reward before the rat's decision, whereas such reward-related signals were absent in OFC until after the animal had committed to its decision. These data support models in which vStr is directly involved in action selection, but OFC processes decision-related information afterwards that can be used to compare the predicted and actual consequences of behaviour.
Summary Purpose Benzodiazepines such as diazepam may fail to effectively treat status epilepticus because benzodiazepine-sensitive GABAA receptors are progressively internalized with continued seizure activity. Ionotropic glutamate receptors, including AMPA receptors, are externalized, so that AMPA receptor antagonists, which are broadspectrum anticonvulsants, could be more effective treatments for status epilepticus. We assessed the ability of the noncompetitive AMPA receptor antagonist GYKI 52466 to protect against kainic acid–induced status epilepticus in mice. Methods Groups of animals treated with kainic acid received GYKI 52466 (50 mg/kg followed in 15 min by 50 mg/kg) or diazepam (25 mg/kg followed in 20 min by 12.5 mg/kg) beginning at 5 min of continuous seizure activity or 25 min later. The duration of seizure activity was determined by EEG recording from epidural cortical electrodes. Results Both GYKI 52466 and diazepam rapidly terminated electrographic and behavioral seizures when administered early. However, diazepam-treated animals exhibited more seizure recurrences. With late administration, GYKI 52466 also rapidly terminated seizures and they seldom recurred, whereas diazepam was slow to produce seizure control and recurrences were common. Although both treatments caused sedation, GYKI 52466-treated animals retained neurological responsiveness whereas diazepam-treated animals did not. GYKI 52466 did not affect blood pressure whereas diazepam caused a sustained drop in mean arterial pressure. Discussion Noncompetitive AMPA receptor antagonists represent a promising approach for early treatment of status epilepticus; they may also be effective at later times when there is refractoriness to benzodiazepines.
Motivationally attractive cues can draw in behavior in a phenomenon termed incentive salience. Incentive cue attraction is an important model for animal models of drug seeking and relapse. One question of interest is the extent to which the pursuit of motivationally attractive cues is related to the value of the paired outcome or can become unrelated and habitual. We studied this question using a sign-tracking (ST) paradigm in rats, in which a lever stimulus preceding food reward comes to elicit conditioned lever-interaction behavior. We asked whether reinforcer devaluation by means of conditioned taste aversion, a classic test of habitual behavior, can modify ST to incentive cues, and whether this depends upon the manner in which reinforcer devaluation takes place. In contrast to several recent reports, we conclude that ST is indeed sensitive to reinforcer devaluation. However, this effect depends critically upon the congruence between the context in which taste aversion is learned and the context in which it is tested. When the taste aversion successfully transfers to the testing context, outcome value strongly influences ST behavior, both when the outcome is withheld (in extinction) and when animals can learn from outcome feedback (reacquisition). When taste aversion does not transfer to the testing context, ST remains high. In total, the extent to which ST persists after outcome devaluation is closely related to the extent to which that outcome is truly devalued in the task context. We believe this effect of context on devaluation can reconcile contradictory findings about the flexibility/inflexibility of ST. We discuss this literature and relate our findings to the study of habits generally.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.