“…In this regard, the sublines of Roman high‐ (RHA) and low‐avoidance (RLA) rats, psychogenetically selected for, respectively, rapid vs. extremely poor two‐way active avoidance acquisition (Driscoll & Bättig, 1982), appear to be a valid laboratory model of divergent novelty‐ and substance‐seeking profiles , as well as of differential central DAergic activity in a wide range of experimental situations (reviewed by Driscoll et al ., 1998). Thus, compared with RLA/Verh rats, RHA/Verh rats show: (i) higher levels of exploratory behaviour in tests of novelty seeking (Fernández‐Teruel et al ., 1992, 1997a, 2002; Escorihuela et al ., 1999); (ii) higher preference for alcohol (Driscoll et al ., 1990; Razafimanalina et al ., 1996; Corda et al ., 2001), as well as saccharin and quinine solutions (Razafimanalina et al ., 1996; Fernández‐Teruel et al ., 2002); (iii) stronger mesocortical and mesolimbic dopaminergic responses to, respectively, stress (D'Angio et al ., 1988; Giorgi et al ., 2003) and addictive substances, including EtOH (Giorgi et al ., 1997, 2005; Corda et al ., 2001). Moreover, RHA/Verh rats are less sensitive than RLA/Verh rats to the hypnotic effects of alcohol (Fernández‐Teruel et al ., 1997b).…”