Addictive agents and intracranial stimulation:Daily amphetamine and hypothalamic self-stimulation

Obaldia, Ricardo De; Magnuson, Debra J.; Reid, Larry D.

doi:10.3758/bf03337028

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present experiment, amphetamine tended to reduce maximum rates as the dosage level was increased. This effect has been reported by others for doses of 1.0 mg/kg and above (De Obaldia, Magnuson, & Reid, 1977; Schaefer & Holtzmann, 1979). Given our observation of profound stereotypy at 3.0 mg/kg, it is likely that the reduction in response rates observed in the present study was related to the development of stereotyped behaviors that interfered with lever pressing.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

A systematic evaluation of the properties of self-stimulation train-duration response functions.

Frank¹,

Markou²,

Wiggins³

1987

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of experiments examined the characteristics of train-duration response functions and two statistics derived from these functions: train-duration thresholds and maximum rates. Train-duration response functions exhibited a steplike appearance. The slope of the train-duration curves was not influenced by either reward or performance manipulations, which suggests that the animals were not matching their response rates to changes in these factors along the steep part of the function. Substantial shifts in train-duration thresholds were observed following changes in the reward value of the brain stimulation, whereas maximum rates were affected by changes in factors such as response effort. The results of Experiments 1 through 6 demonstrate several similarities and differences between train-duration response functions and the reward summation functions generated with manipulations of stimulation frequency. The experiments described in this report provide convergent evidence for the validity of both of these approaches.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%