Contribution of ingestive behaviors to taste-aversion learning in the rat.

Domjan, Michael; Wilson, Nancy

doi:10.1037/h0032972

Cited by 76 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In experiment 2, however, saccharin was presented in a bottle to deprived rats during both conditioning and testing. Stronger taste avoidance is produced when rats actively consume saccharin during conditioning than when they are passively infused with saccharin (Domjan and Wilson 1972). Therefore, it is possible that the failure of DPAT to interfere with taste avoidance when measured in a two-bottle test in experiment 2 was the result of stronger conditioning than in experiment 1.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

The 5-HT1A agonist 8-OH-DPAT dose-dependently interferes with the establishment and the expression of lithium-induced conditioned rejection reactions in rats

Limebeer

Parker

2003

Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

The 5-HT1A agonist 8-OH-DPAT dose-dependently interferes with the establishment and the expression of lithium-induced conditioned rejection reactions in rats

Limebeer

Parker

2003

Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies suggest that conditioning by IO taste exposure may produce weaker conditioning than does active consumption of the taste from a bottle (e.g., Domjan & Wilson, 1972;Fouquet et al, 2001;Wolgin & Wade, 1990;Yamamoto et al, 2002). More recently, however, Limebeer and Parker (2006) demonstrated that the strength of the expressed taste aversion was a function of the similarity of methods of CS exposure (bottle or IO) in conditioning and in testing, rather than simply the mode of fluid delivery per se.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Latent inhibition of conditioned disgust reactions in rats

López

Gasalla

Vega

et al. 2010

Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A conditioned taste aversion (CTA) is formed when an animal, usually a rat, associates a novel taste with subsequent visceral malaise produced by a drug with known emetic properties (see Reilly & Schachtman, 2009, for a recent review on this behavioral phenomenon). This paradigm typically involves conditioning trials in which thirsty rats voluntarily consume the novel flavor from a bottle shortly before the emetic agent (e.g., lithium chloride, LiCl) is administered. Conditioned aversion is then measured as decreased voluntary intake of flavor upon reexposure (consumption test). This procedure requires the rat to display both preparatory/appetitive responses of approaching the bottle containing the flavored solution and consummatory responses of drinking from the spout in accordance with Konorski's (1967) model of motivated behavior. Thus, it is conceivable that the preparatory responses, in addition to the consummatory responses, became associated with the illness. The taste reactivity (TR) test (Grill & Norgren, 1978) is an alternative measure of a conditioned taste aversion. This test measures the orofacial reactions elicited by an intraoral (IO) infusion of the flavor directly in the rat's mouth. If the rat learns the flavor-illness association, it will display conditioned disgust reactions, such as gaping, when intraorally infused with the previously lithium-paired flavor. Using this methodology, neither the acquisition nor the expression of a flavor-illness association includes the appetitive phase of responding. Therefore, the contribution of changes in consummatory responding independent of preparatory responding to taste aversion learning can be evaluated with the TR test. r It is well known that nonreinforced exposure to a flavor to be associated with illness interferes with the development of the taste aversion, a phenomenon referred to as latent inhibition (LI; see Lubow, 1989Lubow, , 2009. Although the LI effect with a CTA procedure has been evaluated extensively using the consumption test (i.e., preexposure retards subsequent suppressed consumption of an illnesspaired flavor), the effect of flavor preexposure on conditioned disgust has not been assessed. Given that preparatory and consummatory responses can be involved when a rat acquires a taste aversion, it is unclear whether the LI effect in taste aversion is based on a weakened tendency to approach and maintain contact with the bottle containing d the flavor, on a weakened rejection reaction (conditioned disgust), or both. The broad goal of the present study is to provide a demonstration that flavor familiarity attenur ates CTA based on acquired disgust. We assessed whether nonreinforced exposure to saccharin prior to conditioning with LiCl retards both suppressed consumption and conditioned disgust reactions.In each of the following experiments, rats were condih tioned by IO infusion in a TR test and were tested both in the TR test and in the consumption test. In different experiments, prior to conditioning with LiCl, rats were preexposed to a...

show abstract

“…1976; Domjan & Wilson, 1972). Somewhat surprising was the relative lack of changes in deprivation state influencing the degree of transfer, given Peck and Ader's (1974) results.…”

Section: Gillette Bellingham and Martinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transfer of a taste aversion from food to water under various states of deprivation

Gillette

Bellingham

Martin

1979

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of ingestive contexts (feeding and drinking) and deprivation states to rats' transfer of a taste aversion were examined. In Experiments 1 and 2, rats were trained with novel saccharin-treated foods while either food deprived or food and water deprived. They were then tested with a 1.0% saccharin solution while either water deprived or food and water deprived. Comparable aversions to the solution were displayed regardless of deprivation states. Two further experiments examined transfer to a .1% saccharin solution in conjunction with deprivation state change. When both stimulus properties and deprivation were widely discrepant from training to test, reduced transfer was noted. The results suggest that stimulus similarity was a stronger controlling variable than deprivation state similarity in facilitating the transfer of an aversion from a feeding context to a drinking context. The results were viewed as being consistent with the known parameters affecting generalization gradients.

show abstract

Contribution of ingestive behaviors to taste-aversion learning in the rat.

Cited by 76 publications

References 18 publications

The 5-HT1A agonist 8-OH-DPAT dose-dependently interferes with the establishment and the expression of lithium-induced conditioned rejection reactions in rats

The 5-HT1A agonist 8-OH-DPAT dose-dependently interferes with the establishment and the expression of lithium-induced conditioned rejection reactions in rats

Latent inhibition of conditioned disgust reactions in rats

Transfer of a taste aversion from food to water under various states of deprivation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About