Rats that acquire a THC discrimination more rapidly are more sensitive to THC and faster in reaching operant criteria

O'Neal, Margaret F.; Means, Larry W.; Porter, Joseph H.; Rosecrans, John A.; Mokler, David J.

doi:10.1016/0091-3057(88)90275-4

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A group of subjects that learned rapidly had a lower generalization EDSo than animals that learned slowly. O'Neal et al [1988] reported a similar effect with THC: animals that learned rapidly were more sensitive to the drug's cue properties than slow learners. However, O'Neal et al [I9881 also reported that animals who learned a THC discrimination rapidly learned more quickly to lever press in initial shaping sessions.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Individual differences in cocaine discrimination

Goudie

Leathley

McNally

et al. 1989

Drug Development Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Goudie, A.J., M. Leathley, J. McNally, and C.R. West: Individual differences in cocaine discrimination. Drug Dev. Res. 16:123-131, 1989. This study involved an attempt to develop a screening test to select animals that would learn a cocaine drug discrimination (DD) rapidly and an analysis of factors affecting rates of acquisition of cocaine DD. Rats (n = 18) were trained initially in a conditioned taste aversion (C.T.A.) procedure with cocaine (36 mgikg). Subjects were then trained to discriminate cocaine (5 mgikg) in an operant procedure, and the cocaine generalization curve was determined. Subjects were then tested for cocaine-induced hyperthermia. Animals that showed weak C.T.A. showed relatively rapid acquisition of DD (r, = -0.56, P < 0.05, two tailed). Cocaine-induced hyperthermia did not predict speed of acquisition reliably, nor did cocaine's effects on operant responding. Animals were allocated retrospectively to groups of "rapid" and "slow" discriminators. These groups did not differ in generalization EDSOs, in sensitivity to cocaine's effects on operant responding, or in hyperthermic responses to cocaine. Thus speed of DD acquisition was not dependent on individual sensitivity to cocaine. Furthermore, "rapid" and "slow" discriminators probably cannot be dissociated in terms of learning ability, since animals that acquired marked C.T.A. showed slow learning of DD. The C.T.A. data suggest that animals sensitive to dysphoric effects of cocaine are less sensitive to the drug's cueing properties and thus that the cocaine cue at 5 mgikg may be related to its euphoriant actions. It is possible that C.T.A. procedures can be used to select animals that will learn cocaine DD rapidly.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Individual differences in cocaine discrimination

Goudie

Leathley

McNally

et al. 1989

Drug Development Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also, in rats trained to discriminate apomorphine from saline, the ED 50 for apomorphine was significantly lower in rats who acquired the discrimination faster (Schechter, 1983). Similar results were obtained in rats trained to discriminate delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) from saline, in that fast learners exhibited a lower ED 50 for THC than the slow learners (O'Neal, Means, Porter, Rosecrans, & Mokler, 1988). These results from nonhuman studies suggest that greater drug sensitivity is associated with a faster rate of DD acquisition.…”

supporting

confidence: 57%

“…These findings are consistent with a previous report of enhanced drug effects among Ds relative to NDs (Chait et al., 1989). Also, several nonhuman discrimination studies have shown that rats slower at acquiring the d -amphetamine (Tomie & Mosakowski, 1996), apomorphine (Schechter, 1983), or THC (O'Neal et al, 1988) discrimination were also less sensitive to the training drug during subsequent generalization tests. Hence, our findings suggest that Ds are more sensitive than NDs to the effects of cocaine.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual differences in humans responding under a cocaine discrimination procedure: Discriminators versus nondiscriminators.

Singha¹,

McCance‐Katz²,

Heck³

et al. 1999

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Twenty-six cocaine-abusing volunteers were trained to discriminate cocaine (80 mg/70 kg, p.o.) from placebo. On the basis of a discrimination acquisition criterion (i.e., >80% drug-appropriate responding for 4 consecutive sessions within 8-10 sessions), 18 participants were classified as discriminators (Ds) and 8 as nondiscriminators (NDs). Relative to Ds, NDs reported a greater amount of cocaine use per time. During the training phase, NDs showed significantly lower ratings than Ds on a stimulant ratings scale, regardless of the training drug condition. During the test-of-acquisition phase, cocaine-induced increases in scores on ratings of drug strength, anxious-nervous and cocaine high, as well as on a euphoria ratings scale, were significantly greater in Ds than NDs, relative to placebo. These results suggest that drug use history, general arousal level, and drug sensitivity may be important variables influencing the acquisition of cocaine versus placebo discrimination in cocaine abusers.

show abstract

Perceptual Drug Discriminative Aspects of the Endocannabinoid Signaling System in Animals And Man

Järbe

2011

Drug Discrimination

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats that acquire a THC discrimination more rapidly are more sensitive to THC and faster in reaching operant criteria

Cited by 11 publications

References 14 publications

Individual differences in cocaine discrimination

Individual differences in cocaine discrimination

Individual differences in humans responding under a cocaine discrimination procedure: Discriminators versus nondiscriminators.

Perceptual Drug Discriminative Aspects of the Endocannabinoid Signaling System in Animals And Man

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About