Re-evaluation of the reward comparison hypothesis for alcohol abuse

He, Alan Bo-Han; Chang, Yu-Chieh; Meng, Anna Wan Yun; Huang, Andrew Chih Wei

doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2017.06.006

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The paradoxical effect of abused drugs can simultaneously show reward and aversion, and the present finding was consistent with the viewpoint of the task-dependent drug effect hypothesis [ 9 ]. In addition, the present data were consistent with the previous findings [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 41 , 42 ]. For example, the microinjection of amphetamine into the rewarding NAc induces a CPP effect; however, the microinjection of amphetamine into the aversive area postrema induces a conditioned suppression effect [ 41 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Concerning the recent issue of the CTA, Grigson and her colleagues examined how the suppression of preferred taste (conditioned stimulus; CS) was caused by the reward value of abused drugs (unconditioned stimulus; US) outweighing that of the preferred taste, and the CTA is due to the rewarding property of abused drugs, which is called the reward comparison hypothesis [ 8 ]. Our further evidence challenged the reward comparison hypothesis and demonstrated that abused drugs induced CTA resulting from the aversion of abused drugs but not its reward [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Moreover, we suggest that abused drugs, including amphetamine [ 10 ] and ethanol [ 11 ], simultaneously induced reward and aversion, called the paradoxical effect hypothesis of abused drugs [ 12 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…Our further evidence challenged the reward comparison hypothesis and demonstrated that abused drugs induced CTA resulting from the aversion of abused drugs but not its reward [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Moreover, we suggest that abused drugs, including amphetamine [ 10 ] and ethanol [ 11 ], simultaneously induced reward and aversion, called the paradoxical effect hypothesis of abused drugs [ 12 ]. However, no research examines whether morphine can simultaneously induce reward and aversion as well as amphetamine [ 10 ] and ethanol [ 11 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…In addition, the synergic injection of rewarding amphetamine and aversive LiCl exhibited a strong conditioned taste suppression effect but did not eliminate the conditioned taste suppression effect [ 9 ]. Compared to high doses of ethanol (including 0.35 g/kg and 0.5 g/kg), only the middle dose of ethanol (i.e., 0.20 g/kg) simultaneously revealed an aversion in conditioned taste suppression and a reward in CPP [ 11 ]. These data contradict the notion of reward comparison in terms of the reward value of the CS solution and the US, thus challenging the reward comparison hypothesis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, we suggest that abused drugs, including amphetamine [ 10 ] and ethanol [ 11 ], simultaneously induced reward and aversion, called the paradoxical effect hypothesis of abused drugs [ 12 ]. However, no research examines whether morphine can simultaneously induce reward and aversion as well as amphetamine [ 10 ] and ethanol [ 11 ]. Therefore, Experiment 1 addressed this issue and tested various doses of morphine for aversion in a CTA task and reward in a CPP task.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Paradoxical Effect Hypothesis of Abused Drugs in a Rat Model of Chronic Morphine Administration

Liou

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of studies has recently shown that abused drugs could simultaneously induce the paradoxical effect in reward and aversion to influence drug addiction. However, whether morphine induces reward and aversion, and which neural substrates are involved in morphine’s reward and aversion remains unclear. The present study first examined which doses of morphine can simultaneously produce reward in conditioned place preference (CPP) and aversion in conditioned taste aversion (CTA) in rats. Furthermore, the aversive dose of morphine was determined. Moreover, using the aversive dose of 10 mg/kg morphine tested plasma corticosterone (CORT) levels and examined which neural substrates were involved in the aversive morphine-induced CTA on conditioning, extinction, and reinstatement. Further, we analyzed c-Fos and p-ERK expression to demonstrate the paradoxical effect—reward and aversion and nonhomeostasis or disturbance by morphine-induced CTA. The results showed that a dose of more than 20 mg/kg morphine simultaneously induced reward in CPP and aversion in CTA. A dose of 10 mg/kg morphine only induced the aversive CTA, and it produced higher plasma CORT levels in conditioning and reacquisition but not extinction. High plasma CORT secretions by 10 mg/kg morphine-induced CTA most likely resulted from stress-related aversion but were not a rewarding property of morphine. For assessments of c-Fos and p-ERK expression, the cingulate cortex 1 (Cg1), prelimbic cortex (PrL), infralimbic cortex (IL), basolateral amygdala (BLA), nucleus accumbens (NAc), and dentate gyrus (DG) were involved in the morphine-induced CTA, and resulted from the aversive effect of morphine on conditioning and reinstatement. The c-Fos data showed fewer neural substrates (e.g., PrL, IL, and LH) on extinction to be hyperactive. In the context of previous drug addiction data, the evidence suggests that morphine injections may induce hyperactivity in many neural substrates, which mediate reward and/or aversion due to disturbance and nonhomeostasis in the brain. The results support the paradoxical effect hypothesis of abused drugs. Insight from the findings could be used in the clinical treatment of drug addiction.

show abstract