A Translational Model to Assess Sign-Tracking and Goal-Tracking Behavior in Children

Joyner, Michelle A.; Gearhardt, Ashley N.; Flagel, Shelly B.

doi:10.1038/npp.2017.196

Cited by 29 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are a number of possible reasons for these differing results, including species differences between the development of these systems in humans vs. rodents. Although there is evidence that humans, including children, display sign tracking-and goal tracking-like behavior in a Pavlovian conditioning context (Garofalo and di Pellegrino, 2015;Joyner et al, 2018), it is currently unknown whether human adolescents exhibit less sign tracking and more goal tracking than adults. Moreover, there may be important developmental differences in the engagement of different learning systems during Pavlovian conditioning vs. instrumental tasks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increased Goal Tracking in Adolescent Rats Is Goal-Directed and Not Habit-Like

Rode

Moghaddam

Morrison

2020

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a cue is paired with reward in a different location, some animals will approach the site of reward during the cue, a behavior called goal tracking, while other animals will approach and interact with the cue itself: a behavior called sign tracking. Sign tracking is thought to reflect a tendency to transfer incentive salience from the reward to the cue. Adolescence is a time of heightened sensitivity to rewards, including environmental cues that have been associated with rewards, which may account for increased impulsivity and vulnerability to drug abuse. Surprisingly, however, studies have shown that adolescents are actually less likely to interact with the cue (i.e., sign track) than adult animals. We reasoned that adolescents might show decreased sign tracking, accompanied by increased apparent goal tracking, because they tend to attribute incentive salience to a more reward-proximal "cue": the food magazine. On the other hand, adolescence is also a time of enhanced exploratory behavior, novelty-seeking, and behavioral flexibility. Therefore, adolescents might truly express more goal-directed reward-seeking and less inflexible habit-like approach to a reward-associated cue. Using a reward devaluation procedure to distinguish between these two hypotheses, we found that adolescents indeed exhibit more goal tracking, and less sign tracking, than a comparable group of adults. Moreover, adolescents' goal tracking behavior is highly sensitive to reward devaluation and therefore goal-directed and not habit-like.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increased Goal Tracking in Adolescent Rats Is Goal-Directed and Not Habit-Like

Rode

Moghaddam

Morrison

2020

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These findings suggest that in contrast to the HR/LR model, the main strength of the ST/GT model is elucidating the neurobiological mechanisms associated with individual variation in relapse propensity. This model also has translational validity, as work in humans has shown sign- and goal-tracking behavior (Garofalo and di Pellegrino, 2015; Joyner et al, 2018; Schad et al, 2019), though linking a specific conditioned response in humans with addiction-related behaviors has yet to be explored.…”

Section: Individual Variation In Addiction-related Behaviorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Addiction Using Animal Models

Kuhn

Kalivas

Bobadilla

2019

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drug addiction is a neuropsychiatric disorder with grave personal consequences that has an extraordinary global economic impact. Despite decades of research, the options available to treat addiction are often ineffective because our rudimentary understanding of drug-induced pathology in brain circuits and synaptic physiology inhibits the rational design of successful therapies. This understanding will arise first from animal models of addiction where experimentation at the level of circuits and molecular biology is possible. We will review the most common preclinical models of addictive behavior and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each. This includes non-contingent models in which animals are passively exposed to rewarding substances, as well as widely used contingent models such as drug self-administration and relapse. For the latter, we elaborate on the different ways of mimicking craving and relapse, which include using acute stress, drug administration or exposure to cues and contexts previously paired with drug self-administration. We further describe paradigms where drug-taking is challenged by alternative rewards, such as appetitive foods or social interaction. In an attempt to better model the individual vulnerability to drug abuse that characterizes human addiction, the field has also established preclinical paradigms in which drug-induced behaviors are ranked by various criteria of drug use in the presence of negative consequences. Separation of more vulnerable animals according to these criteria, along with other innate predispositions including goal- or sign-tracking, sensation-seeking behavior or impulsivity, has established individual genetic susceptibilities to developing drug addiction and relapse vulnerability. We further examine current models of behavioral addictions such as gambling, a disorder included in the DSM-5, and exercise, mentioned in the DSM-5 but not included yet due to insufficient peer-reviewed evidence. Finally, after reviewing the face validity of the aforementioned models, we consider the most common standardized tests used by pharmaceutical companies to assess the addictive potential of a drug during clinical trials.

show abstract

“…In animals, sign-and goal-tracking behaviors are distinguished during presentation of the Pavlovian stimulus (e.g., a lever cue that has been associated with the delivery of food in a cup): Some animals approach and engage with the Pavlovian stimulus itself (e.g., approach the lever cue, signtracking), whereas other individuals approach the location where the food will be delivered (e.g., approach the food cup, goal-tracking). These inter-individual differences in Pavlovian conditioning are thought to reflect different learning styles that can predict impulsive behaviors and might represent a vulnerability to some mental disorders such as substance abuse (Joyner et al 2018). Moreover, a consistent amount of research has shown that humans are also attracted to the Pavlovian stimuli themselves: For instance, human attention is very rapidly oriented toward the Pavlovian stimuli (Bucker & Theeuwes 2017;Pool et al 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%