The Determinants of Alcohol Preference in Animals

Myers, R.D.; Veale, W. L.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-0895-9_6

Cited by 94 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 128 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Study of the rewarding pbarmacological effect of ethanol has been limited primarily to examination of ethanol drinking and preference (Myers & Veale, 1972) or operant self-administration by various routes (Meisch, 1977;Samson, 1987;Samson, Pfeffer, & ToUiver, 1988;Winger, Young, & Woods, 1983). Although these studies offer convincing evidence of ethanol's positive reinforcing effect, they also suggest that ethanol is a relatively weak reinforcer and that special techniques must be used to initiate ethanol-maintained behavior (Samson et al, 1988;Winger et al, 1983).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditioning trial duration affects ethanol-induced conditioned place preference in mice

Cunningham

Prather

1992

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present experiments were designed to determine the efIect of conditioning trial duration on strength of ethanol-induced conditioned place preference in mice. In a counterbalanced, differential conditioning procedure, DBA/2J mice received four pairings of a distinctive tactile (floor) stimulus with injection of ethanol (2 g/kg); a different floor stimulus was paired with saline. Different groups were exposed to the floor stimuli for 5, 15, or 30 min after injection. Conditioned place preference was inversely related to trial duration, with mice in the 5-, 15-, and 30-min groups, spending 83%,74%, and 66% oftheir time, respectively, on the ethanol-paired floor during a choice test. This outcome was replicated in a second experiment, which also showed that context familiarity can influence conditioned place preference. In general, these findings suggest that ethanol's rewarding efIect is greatest shortly after injection.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditioning trial duration affects ethanol-induced conditioned place preference in mice

Cunningham

Prather

1992

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Drugs and water are often presented concurrently to demonstrate that orally delivered drugs are functioning as reinforcers (Carroll & Meisch 1979;Myers & Veale, 1972;Roehrs & Samson, 1981). Other than the concurrent drug and water studies, there have been relatively few comparisons of responding maintained by concurrently available drug and nondrug reinforcers across a range of reinforcer magnitudes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Concurrent Phencyclidine and Saccharin Access: Presentation of an Alternative Reinforcer Reduces Drug Intake

Carroll

1985

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Six monkeys self-administered orally delivered phencyclidine ("angel dust") and saccharin under concurrent fixed-ratio 16 schedules during daily three-hour sessions. Liquid deliveries were contingent upon lip-contact responses on solenoid-operated drinking spouts. Three saccharin concentrations (0.003%, 0.03% and 0.3%, wt/vol) were tested in a nonsystematic order. For each saccharin concentration, the following series of phencyclidine concentrations (mg/ml) was presented: 0.25, 0.5, 1, 0.25 (retest), 0. 125, 0.0625, 0.0312, 0.25 (retest) and 0 (water with stimuli signaling phencyclidine). As the saccharin concentration increased, the number of drug deliveries decreased, and the peaks of the concentration-response functions were shifted to the right. The lowest saccharin concentration (0.003%, wt/vol) maintained responding in excess of phencyclidine levels in only one monkey. The two higher saccharin concentrations maintained behavior far in excess of phencyclidine, but saccharin deliveries decreased in some monkeys as phencyclidine concentration and intake (mg/kg) increased. The time course and patterns of phencyclidinereinforced responding were also altered when saccharin was concurrently available. The results are discussed in terms of strategies to reduce drug-reinforced behavior, preference between different reinforcers, and measures of reinforcing efficacy.Key words: phencyclidine, saccharin, reinforcing efficacy, suppression of drug-reinforced behavior, oral drug self-administration, concurrent fixed-ratio schedules, lip-contact response, rhesus monkeys Concurrent schedules have been used extensively for assessing response-strengthening effects of reinforcer magnitudes

show abstract

“…The failure of procedures to induce oral consumption of ethanol for its pharmacological effect (Lester, 1966;Mardones, 1960;Meisch, 1977;Mello, 1973;Myers & Veale, 1972;Wallgren & Barry, 1970;Wayner & Greenberg, 1972) hasbeen attributed to either the aversive taste of ethanol (Altshuler, Weaver, & Phillips, 1975;Mello, 1973) or to the delay between ingestion and the onset of its pharmacological effect (Lester & Freed, 1973;Mello, 1973). Yet failure to consume because of taste and delay Presented at the Seventh Harvard Symposium on Quantitative Analyses of Behavior: Biological Determinants, Harvard University, June [8][9]1984.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting the amount of ethanol consumed per bout from schedule of access to ethanol

Marcucella

1989

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present paper suggests that the difficulty in inducing animals to orally self-administer quantities of ethanol sufficient to produce dependence is related to the schedule of ethanol access. If the variables that control the various patterns of ethanol consumption can be identified, then the patterns of ethanol consumption leading to excessive intake and the development of dependence will be able to be identified and generated experimentally. Evidence is presented which shows that the amount of ethanol consumed per bout, the daily frequency of ethanol bouts, as well as the total amount of ethanol consumed, is a function of the frequency of ethanol access periods, feeding condition, ethanol concentration, and the temporal proximity of ethanol access periods.In the attempt to discover the variables responsible for the development of human alcoholism, many investigators have attempted to induce excessive ethanol consumption in nonhuman organisms. Modeling pathology in animals has proved enormously useful in other areas of science and medicine, and there is little reason to believe, a priori, that an animal model of human alcoholism would not contribute to our understanding of human alcoholism. Not only could the many presumed psychological causes of alcoholism, such as stress, for example, be examined under controlled conditions, but also treatment techniques having the potential to decrease consumption could be designed andtested. An adequate animal model would also help determine the physiological effects of prolonged ethanol consumption uncontaminated by the possible nutritional and other health-eare deficiencies usually observed in human alcoholics.Unfortunately, nonhuman organisms do not spontaneously consume ethanol in amounts that readily lead to intoxication or the development of physical dependence. The failure of procedures to induce oral consumption of ethanol for its pharmacological effect (

show abstract

The Determinants of Alcohol Preference in Animals

Cited by 94 publications

References 128 publications

Conditioning trial duration affects ethanol-induced conditioned place preference in mice

Conditioning trial duration affects ethanol-induced conditioned place preference in mice

Concurrent Phencyclidine and Saccharin Access: Presentation of an Alternative Reinforcer Reduces Drug Intake

Predicting the amount of ethanol consumed per bout from schedule of access to ethanol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About