1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0149-7634(97)00020-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modulation of the Induction or Expression of Psychostimulant Sensitization by the Circumstances Surrounding Drug Administration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

10
149
0
3

Year Published

2000
2000
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 206 publications
(163 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
10
149
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…However, our results demonstrated that repeated injection of METH dosedependently induced behavioral sensitization in mice, and this effect lasted at least 3 weeks after the cessation of the drug treatment. These results are consistent with the findings that psychomotor stimulant-induced sensitization is not entirely dependent on drug-environment interactions [40]. The environmental context therefore does not appear to be critical for the induction of METH sensitization.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, our results demonstrated that repeated injection of METH dosedependently induced behavioral sensitization in mice, and this effect lasted at least 3 weeks after the cessation of the drug treatment. These results are consistent with the findings that psychomotor stimulant-induced sensitization is not entirely dependent on drug-environment interactions [40]. The environmental context therefore does not appear to be critical for the induction of METH sensitization.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…However, behavioral sensitization has been suggested as representing a conditioning phenomenon that is largely dependent on learned interactions between drug effects and environmental cues [40,45]. In this study, the induction of behavioral sensitization was performed in home cages and the expression of behavioral sensitization was measured in the locomotor arena.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The association of a novel environment to stimulant administration has a profound effect on the development of behavioral sensitization Crombag et al, 1996;Robinson et al, 1998). Seemingly in contrast to the findings described with CPP paradigms, Itzhak and Martin (2000) found that cocaine-induced place-dependent sensitization (context dependent), as measured by locomotor activity, was blocked by pretreatment with scopolamine (1 mg/kg s.c.).…”
Section: Acetylcholine and Conditioned Learningmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In this study it was found that the motor stimulant response elicited by cocaine was blunted by pretreatment of the nucleus accumbens with 6-cyano-7-nitroquinoxaline-2,3-dione only in animals receiving daily cocaine injections in the paired environment. In contrast, the N-methyl-D-aspartate glutamate receptor antagonist R-(-)-3-(2-carboxypiperazin-4-yl)-propyl-1-phosphonic acid did not significantly affect cocaine-induced motor activity in any treatmentTo some extent, exploration beyond molecular binding of cocaine to dopamine transporters is impelled by a realization that the expression of behavioral adaptations to repeated cocaine is potently regulated by learned associations made between the pharmacological actions of the drug and environmental stimuli (Stewart and Vezina 1988;Robinson et al 1998). Thus, the daily administration of psychostimulant in a test environment produces more robust behavioral sensitization than when the drug is given in the home environment (Weiss et al 1989; Dietze and Kuschinsky 1994;Badiani et al 1997).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%