2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.alcohol.2004.02.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Devaluation of ethanol reinforcement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
42
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
7
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have found that ethanol consumption among animals tested using this paradigm is both influenced by genetic variants (lopioid) that increase alcohol-induced stimulation and is sensitive to l-opioid receptor blockade (S. Chen, unpublished data), providing evidence that reward pathways are involved. However, as research performed in rodents has shown, oral self-administration of ethanol is driven by numerous factors in addition to reinforcement (Samson et al, 1998(Samson et al, , 2000(Samson et al, , 2004. Our data appear to support this as well, in that the lack of similar associations in the other testing groups, while possibly related to the smaller sample sizes, argues against a strict relationship between reinforcement ⁄ reward and voluntary ethanol consumption.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…We have found that ethanol consumption among animals tested using this paradigm is both influenced by genetic variants (lopioid) that increase alcohol-induced stimulation and is sensitive to l-opioid receptor blockade (S. Chen, unpublished data), providing evidence that reward pathways are involved. However, as research performed in rodents has shown, oral self-administration of ethanol is driven by numerous factors in addition to reinforcement (Samson et al, 1998(Samson et al, , 2000(Samson et al, , 2004. Our data appear to support this as well, in that the lack of similar associations in the other testing groups, while possibly related to the smaller sample sizes, argues against a strict relationship between reinforcement ⁄ reward and voluntary ethanol consumption.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…This effect was also found with cocaine, confirming the conclusion that addictive behaviour is especially prone to control by stimulus-response habit relative to naturally motivated behaviour (Miles et al 2003). It must be noted however, that responding for addictive drugs is not always controlled by stimulus-response habit but sometimes is mediated by an expectancy; that is, it can be sensitive to devaluation (Olmstead et al 2001;Samson et al 2004) or revaluation (Hutcheson et al 2000(Hutcheson et al , 2001. The disparity of these effects could be due to the fact that instrumental action shifts from cognitive mediation to stimulus-response habit with overtraining as shown for natural reinforcers (Dickinson et al 1995).…”
Section: Habit Theorysupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Active (experimental subjects) and passive (yoked controls) consumption did not differ, although sucrose consumption was higher than ethanol or water intake; in addition, ethanol intake scores were higher than the ones observed for water. Although the present operant model does not allow independent analysis of appetitive and consummatory behaviors (as employed by Samson et al 2004;Sharpe and Samson 2001), correlations involving the two dependent variables (operant responses vs. consumption scores) support the fact that animals not only worked to obtain the reinforcer but also consumed it (data not shown). In addition, operant behavior during extinction provided information about appetitive (or seeking) behavioral patterns (Berridge et al 2009); seeking responses associated with sucrose or ethanol reinforcement during extinction were comparable to those during acquisition, reflecting the persistent motivational value of these reinforcers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 50%
“…Yet, because naloxone preceded ethanol or sucrose during reexposure, counterconditioning would depend on a backward association, which would be improbable or weak. On this basis, a more useful conceptualization of the present effects might be in terms of devaluation of the US (ethanol or sucrose; e.g., Adams and Dickinson 1981;Kraemer et al 1992;Samson et al 2004). Pairing with naloxone apparently reduced the appetitive value of these USs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%