1. bookVolume 42 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)
Journal Details
First Published
30 Jun 2018
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
access type Open Access

Partial reinforcement in rat autoshaping with a long CS: Effects of pramipexole and chlordiazepoxide on sign and goal tracking

Published Online: 29 Jan 2021
Page range: 85 - 108
Received: 18 May 2020
Accepted: 03 Dec 2020
Journal Details
First Published
30 Jun 2018
Publication timeframe
2 times per year

In Pavlovian autoshaping, sign-tracking responses (lever pressing) to a conditioned stimulus (CS) are usually invigorated under partial reinforcement (PR) compared to continuous reinforcement (CR). This effect, called the PR acquisition effect (PRAE), can be interpreted in terms of increased incentive hope or frustration-induced drive derived from PR training. Incentive hope and frustration have been related to dopaminergic and GABAergic activity, respectively. We examined the within-trial dynamics of sign and goal tracking in rats exposed to 20-s-long lever presentations during autoshaping acquisition under PR vs. CR conditions under the effects of drugs tapping on dopamine and GABA activity. There was no evidence of the PRAE in these results, both groups showing high, stable sign-tracking response rates. However, the pharmacological treatments affected behavior as revealed in within-trial changes. The dopamine D2 receptor agonist pramipexole (0.4 mg/kg) suppressed lever pressing and magazine entries relative to saline controls in a within-subject design, but only in PR animals. The allosteric benzodiazepine chlordiazepoxide (5 mg/kg) failed to affect either sign or goal tracking in either CR or PR animals. These results emphasize the roles of dopamine and GABA receptors in autoshaping performance, but remain inconclusive with respect to incentive hope and frustration theories. Some aspects of within-trial changes in sign and goal tracking are consistent with a mixture of reward timing and response competition.

Amsel, A. (1992). Frustration theory. An analysis of dispositional learning and memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Amsel, A., MacKinnon, J.R., Rashotte, M.E., & Surridge, C.T. (1964). Partial reinforcement (acquisition) effects within subjects. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 7, 135–138. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1964.7-135Search in Google Scholar

Anselme, P. (2018). Gambling hijacks an ancestral motivational system shaped by natural selection. In: Tomie, A., Morrow, J. (Editors). Sign-tracking and drug addiction. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/mpub.10215070Search in Google Scholar

Anselme, P., Dreher, T., & Güntürkün, O. (2018). Pigeons consistently prefer easy over harder access to food: No reversal after direct dopaminergic stimulation. Behavioral Neuroscience, 132, 293–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/bne0000249Search in Google Scholar

Anselme, P. & Güntürkün, O. (2019). How foraging works: Uncertainty magnifies food-seeking motivation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 42, e35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X18000948Search in Google Scholar

Anselme, P., Robinson, M.J.F., & Berridge, K.C. (2013). Reward uncertainty enhances incentive salience attribution as sign-tracking. Behavioral Brain Research, 238, 53–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2012.10.006Search in Google Scholar

Berridge, K.C. (2007). The debate over dopamine’s role in reward: The case for incentive salience. Psychopharmacology, 191, 391–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-006-0578-xSearch in Google Scholar

Boakes, R.A. (1977). Performance on learning to associate a stimulus with positive reinforcement. In: Davis, H. & Hurwitz, H.M.B. (Editors), Operant-Pavlovian interactions (pp. 67–97). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar

Boughner, R.L. & Papini, M.R. (2008). Assessing the relationship between latent inhibition and the partial reinforcement extinction effect in autoshaping with rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 89, 432–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbb.2008.01.019Search in Google Scholar

Chen, J.-S., Gross, K., & Amsel, A. (1981). Ontogeny of successive negative contrast and its dissociation from other paradoxical reward effects in preweanling rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 95, 146–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077749Search in Google Scholar

Chen, J.-S., Gross, K., Stanton, M., & Amsel, A. (1980). The partial reinforcement acquisition effect in preweanling and juvenile rats. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 16, 239–242. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329532Search in Google Scholar

Crum, J., Brown, W.L., & Bitterman, M.E. (1951). The effect of partial and delayed reinforcement on resistance to extinction. American Journal of Psychology, 64, 228–237. https://doi.org/10.2307/1418669Search in Google Scholar

Derman, R.C., Schneider, K., Juarez, S., & Delamater, A.R. (2018). Sign-tracking is an expectancy-mediated behavior that relies on prediction error mechanisms. Learning and Memory, 25, 550–563. https://dx.doi.org/10.1101%2Flm.047365.118Search in Google Scholar

Dodd, M.L., Klos, K.J., Bower, J.H., Geda, Y.E., Josephs, K.A., & Ahlskog, J.E. (2005). Pathological gambling caused by drugs used to treat Parkinson disease. Archives of Neurology, 62, 1377–1381. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.62.9.noc50009Search in Google Scholar

Dudley, R.T. & Papini, M.R. (1995). Pavlovian performance of rats following unexpected reward omissions. Learning and Motivation, 26, 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/0023-9690(95)90011-XSearch in Google Scholar

Dziedzicka-Wasylewska, M., Ferrari, F., Johnson, R.D., Mireau, J., Rógoz, Z., Skuza, G., & Sokoloff, P. (2001). Mechanisms of action of pramipexole: Effects on receptors. Review of Contemporary Pharmacotherapy, 12, 1–31.Search in Google Scholar

Flagel, S. B., Clark, J. J., Robinson, T. E., Mayo, L., Czuj, A., Willuhn, I., et al. (2011). A selective role for dopamine in stimulus-reward learning. Nature, 469, 53–57. http://doi.org/10.1038/nature09588.Search in Google Scholar

Gallistel, C.R., & Gibbon, J. (2000). Time, rate, and conditioning. Psychological Review, 107, 289–344. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.107.2.289Search in Google Scholar

Gibbon, J., Farrell, L., Locurto, C.M., Duncan, H.J., & Terrace, H.S. (1980). Partial reinforcement in autoshaping with pigeons. Animal Learning and Behavior, 8, 45–59. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209729Search in Google Scholar

Glueck, A.C., Torres, C., & Papini, M.R. (2018). Transfer between anticipatory and consummatory tasks involving reward loss. Learning and Motivation, 63, 105–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2018.05.001Search in Google Scholar

Goodrich, K.P. (1959). Performance in different segments of an instrumental response chain as a function of reinforcement schedule. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043228Search in Google Scholar

Gray, J.A. (1969). Sodium amobarbital and effects of frustrative nonreward. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 69, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027935Search in Google Scholar

Haggard, D.F. (1959). Acquisition of a simple running response as a function of partial and continuous schedules of reinforcement. Psychological Records, 9, 11–18.Search in Google Scholar

Hart, A.S., Clark, J.J. & Phillips, P.E.M. (2015). Dynamic shaping of dopamine signals during probabilistic Pavlovian conditioning. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 117, 84–92 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2014.07.010Search in Google Scholar

Hearst, E., & Jenkins, H.M. (1974). Sign-tracking: The stimulus-reinforcer relation and directed action. Psychonomic Society.Search in Google Scholar

Hellberg, S.N., Levit, J.D., & Robinson, M.J.F. (2018). Under the influence: Effects of adolescent ethanol exposure and anxiety on motivation for uncertain gambling-like cues in male and female rats. Behavioral Brain Research, 337, 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2017.09.036Search in Google Scholar

Hubble, J.P. (2002). Pre-clinical studies of pramipexole: clinical relevance. European Journal of Neurology, 7, 15–20 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-1331.2000.0070s1015.xSearch in Google Scholar

Iliescu, A. F., Dwyer, D. M. & Honey, R. C. (in press). Individual differences in the nature of conditioned behavior across a conditioned stimulus: adaptation and application of a model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognitionhttps://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000270.Search in Google Scholar

Iliescu, A.F., Hall, J., Wilkinson, L., Dwyer, D., & Honey, R.C. (2018). The nature of phenotypic variation in Pavlovian conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition 44, 358–369. https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000177Search in Google Scholar

Johnson, P.S., Madden, G.J., Brewer, A.T., Pinkston, J.W., & Fowler, S.C. (2011). Effects of acute pramipexole on preference for gambling-like schedules of reinforcement in rats. Psychopharmacology, 213, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-010-2006-5Search in Google Scholar

Killeen, P.R., & Pellón, R. (2013). Adjunctive behaviors are operants. Learning and Behavior, 41, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-012-0095-1Search in Google Scholar

Lagos, P., Scorza, C., Monti, J.M., Jantos, A., Reyes-Parada, M., Silveira, R., & Ponzoni, A. (1998). Effects of the D3 preferring dopamine agonist on sleep and waking, locomotor activity and striatal dopamine release in rats. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 8, 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-977X(97)00054-0Search in Google Scholar

Lewis, D.J. (1960). Partial reinforcement: A selective review of the literature since 1950. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040963Search in Google Scholar

Liao, R.M., & Chang, F.J. (2003). Differential effects of diazepam infused into the amygdala and hippocampus on negative contrast. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 74, 953–960. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-3057(03)00023-6Search in Google Scholar

Lopez, J.C., Karlsson, R.-M., & O’Donnell, P. (2015). Dopamine D2 modulation of sign and goal tracking in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology, 40, 2096–2102 (https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2015.68).Search in Google Scholar

McElroy, J.R., Miller, J.M., & Meyer, J.S. (1987). Comparison of the effects of chlordiazepoxide and CL 218,872 on serum corticosterone concentrations in rats. Psychopharmacology, 91, 467–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00216012Search in Google Scholar

McNaughton, N. (1984). Effects of anxiolytic drugs on the partial reinforcement extinction effect in runway and Skinner box. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, B36, 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748408402211.Search in Google Scholar

Meltzer, D., & Brahlek, J.A. (1970). Conditioned suppression and conditioned enhancement with the same positive UCS: An effect of CS duration. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1970.13-67Search in Google Scholar

Meyer, P.J., Lovic, V., Saunders, B.T., Yager, L.M., Flagel, S.B., Morrow, J.D., & Robinson, T.E. (2012). Quantifying individual variation in the propensity to attribute incentive salience to reward cues. PLoS ONE, 7, e38987. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038987Search in Google Scholar

Nelson, P.B., & Wollen, K.A. (1965). Effects of ethanol and partial reinforcement upon runway acquisition. Psychonomic Science, 3, 135–136 https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03343060Search in Google Scholar

Ortega, L.A., Glueck, A.C., Daniel, A.M., Prado-Rivera, M.A., White, M.M., & Papini, M.R. (2014). Memory interfering effects of chlordiazepoxide on consummatory successive negative contrast. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 116, 96–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbb.2013.11.031Search in Google Scholar

Papini, M.R., & Brewer, M. (1994). Response competition and the trial-spacing effect in autoshaping with rats. Learning and Motivation, 25, 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1006/lmot.1994.1011Search in Google Scholar

Pavlov, I.P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Pearce, J.M., & Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 532–552. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.6.532Search in Google Scholar

Pellón, R., & Killeen, P.R. (2015). Responses compete and collaborate, shaping each other’s distributions: Commentary on Boakes, Patterson, Kendig, and Harris (2015). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition, 41, 444–451. https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000067Search in Google Scholar

Pellón, R., Íbias, J., & Killeen, P.R. (2018). Delay gradients for spout-licking and magazine-entering induced by a periodic food schedule. The Psychological Record, 68, 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-018-0275-2Search in Google Scholar

Pivonello, R., Ferone, D., Lombardi, G., Colao, A., Lamerts, S.W.J., & Hofland, L.J. (2007). Novel insights in dopamine receptor physiology. European Journal of Endocrinology, 156, S13–S21. https://doi.org/10.1530/eje.1.02353Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, M.J.F., Anselme, P., Fischer, A.M., & Berridge, K.C. (2014). Initial uncertainty in Pavlovian reward prediction persistently elevates incentive salience and extends sign-tracking to normally unattractive cues. Behavioral Brain Research, 266, 119–130. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2014.03.004Search in Google Scholar

Schultz, W. (1998). Predictive reward signal of dopamine neurons. Journal of Neurophysiology, 80, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1998.80.1.1Search in Google Scholar

Strecht, R., Houston, M., & Jenkins, A. (1964). Effects of amobarbital on extinction of an instrumental response in rats. Nature (London), 201, 472–474. https://doi.org/10.1038/201472a0Search in Google Scholar

Thomas, B., Honeycutt, D., & Papini, M. R. (1998). Reward magnitude, but not time of day, influences the trial-spacing effect in autoshaping with rats. Physiology and Behavior, 65, 423–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0031-9384(98)00178-4Search in Google Scholar

Torres, C., Glueck, A.C., Conrad, S.E., Morón, I., & Papini, M.R. (2016). Dorsomedial striatum lesions affect adjustment to reward uncertainty, but not to reward devaluation or omission. Neuroscience, 332, 13–25 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.06.041Search in Google Scholar

Tremblay, M., Silveira, M.M., Kaur, S., Hosking, J.G., Adams, W.K., Baunez, C. et al. (2017). Chronic D2/3 agonist ropinirole treatment increases preference for uncertainty in rats regardless of baseline choice patterns. European Journal of Neuroscience, 45, 159–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13332Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, A.R. (1963). Sodium amytal and partially reinforced runway performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 474–477. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043679Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo