Relative stereotypy of water-ingestive behavior induced by chronic alcohol injections in the rat

Crow, Lowell T.; McWilliams, Lawrence S.; Ley, Michael F.

doi:10.3758/bf03329454

Cited by 20 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, compare these data to Fourier transformation of CRF rate data from Crow et al (1979) (Figure 3). Although the dosage of alcohol was greater in that study-1.5 g/kg-it can be seen that the CRF conditions are affected very differently by alcohol.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time-series analysis of response rates: Alcohol effects on variability-contingent operants

Crow

McKinley

1989

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Albino rats were trained in a two-bar LAG-5 reinforcement schedule in which the previous five four-response sequences could not be repeated. Accounting for order, on different days, the animals were given ethanol (0, .4, and .8 glkg) 10-min prior to the operant sessions and measures were made of total responses per minute for 16 min . Fourier transforms of the data for each animal showed that although alcohol diminished response rate, it did not diminish response variability. The data are compared with Fourier'analyses of alcohol effects on CRF reinforcement schedules for which alcohol is shown to diminish both rate and variability of responding. The possible importance of this differential effect of alcohol on variability of responding is discussed.As measured by uncertainty statistics, ethyl alcohol has been shown to diminish response variability in a number of tasks, including operant responding under continuous reinforcement (CRF) and fixed-interval (FI) reinforcement schedules (Crow & Hart, 1983; Crow, McWilliams, & Ley, 1979) and performance in a radial-arm maze (Devenport & Merriman, 1983). With schedules that selectively reinforce response variability (Page & Neuringer, 1985), however, alcohol does not appear to diminish uncertainty (Crow, 1988;Tennison, 1988).The Fourier transform of data from the time domain to the frequency domain has become increasingly useful in the understanding of time-series events (Ramirez, 1985) but has been used sparingly in behavioral research. The present study represents an attempt to depict response-rate data , particularly response variability, from this unique perspective in the hope of gaining a better understanding of alcohol-induced stereotypy of behavior. MEmOD SubjectsSixteen malealbinoSprague-Dawley rats bred at WesternWashington University were used as subjects. The animals ranged in age from 90 to 100 days at the beginning of the experiment and were experimentally naive.The rats were housed individuallyin suspended7 X 9 X 7 in. stainless steel cages with wire-mesh floors. The day/night lighting schedule was 12 h on and 12 h off. Temperature and ventilationwere controlled centrally and kept at 70°F. Purina Lab Chow was available ad lib. All animals received 30 min of free water in addition to that obtained in the daily experimental sessions.Three, two-bar operant chambers (Gerbrands), modified for water delivery, were used in conjunction with three Atari 800 XL personal computers, which were used both for programming contingencies and for on-linecomputation of V-values. Fourier analysis(Turbo Pascal NumericalMethodsToolbox) was done witha Pony XT personalcomputer.Correspondence may be addressed to Lowell T. Crow, Department of Psychology, WesternWashington University, Bellingham, WA 98225. Alcohol DosesTen minutes prior to the session, a 10% aqueous solution of 95% ethanol was injectedi.p. in an amount which was either 0.4 or 0.8 g/kg. Control injections were isotonic saline. ProcedureThe animalswere put on a 23.5-h water-deprivation regimenand were manually sha...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time-series analysis of response rates: Alcohol effects on variability-contingent operants

Crow

McKinley

1989

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, operant rates of response on continuous-reinforcement schedules were stabilized by ethanol (Crow, McWilliams, & Ley, 1979), and rats' responding in a radial-arm maze showed less variability in paths chosen and sequence of visitation with alcohol (Devenport & Merriman, 1983). The latter authors suggest that a great many of the common effects of alcohol upon behavior may be, in fact, a suppression of behavioral variability.…”

mentioning

confidence: 84%

“…The data for the uncertainty index (Crow et at, 1979) consisted of sequences of barpressing and approach-to-dipper responses throughout the final test day. Analysis of variance yielded a significant effect [F(2,18) = 4.12, P < .05].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alcohol and behavioral variability with fixed-interval reinforcement

Crow

Hart

1983

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rates of response were noted in rats under a fixed-interval I-min schedule of reinforcement after repeated ethanol treatments of 0.0, 1.0, or 1.4 g/kg. Response rates of the initial and concluding segments of the interval were diminished differentially by the high dose, and a measure of response uncertainty on the last treatment day indicated reduced behavioral variability in the high-dose group throughout the session. The results are discussed as they relate to the theory of Devenport and Merriman of the general effects of alcohol upon behavior.Under certain conditions, alcohol is known to diminish behavioral variability. Thus, operant rates of response on continuous-reinforcement schedules were stabilized by ethanol (Crow, McWilliams, & Ley, 1979), and rats' responding in a radial-arm maze showed less variability in paths chosen and sequence of visitation with alcohol (Devenport & Merriman, 1983). The latter authors suggest that a great many of the common effects of alcohol upon behavior may be, in fact, a suppression of behavioral variability.Ethanol has been found to produce rate-dependent effects upon behavior (Leander, McMillan, & Ellis, 1976), and one of the present authors has related these alcohol effects to decreased behavioral variability (Crow, 1982). The present study was designed to extend these earlier fmdings to include an independent measure of behavioral variability as well as an estimate of the influence of alcohol tolerance upon the effect. METHOD SubjectsTwenty-one experimentally naive male albino rats were used. The animals, bred from Sprague-Dawley stock at Western Washington University, ranged in weight from 346 to 446 g and in age from 239 to 251 days at the start of the experiment. ApparatusFour Gerbrands water-delivery operant chambers were programmed for a fixed-interval I-min schedule of reinforcement and to provide running counts of responses within each 3D-sec interval segment. Alcohol DosesIntraperitoneal injections were given in amounts of 1.0 or 1.4 g/kg 10 min prior to tests. Control injections were isotonic saline. Injection solutions were 95% ethanol and tap water in a concentration of 23.75% (v/v). ProcedureThe animals were assigned randomly to one of three groupsThe authors' mailing address is: Department of Psychology, Western Washington University, Bellingham, Washington 98225. 483of seven rats each, adapted to a 23.5-h water-deprivation schedule, and trained to a stable level of fixed-interval I-min responding in a 3D-min daily session. Test sessions consisted of alternateday injections of control, low (1.0-g/kg), and high (1.4-g/kg) group doses of alcohol for 6 days (12 days total). Measures were made of the number of responses in each 3D-sec interval segment on all test days, and on Test Day 6, measures were made of barpressing and approach to the dipper sequences for the entire session.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Figure 1 shows the response rate (responses per minute) for each segment of each dosage group for each of the 6 test days. These data were subjected to a dosage x...

show abstract

“…In rats, frontal lobe lesions as well as alcohol injections (Crow , McWilliams, & Ley, 1979) were shown to reduce the variability of operant responding. In the latter study , alcohol was shown to reduce the uncertainty of response sequences as measured by an uncertainty index (Frick & Miller, 1951).…”

Section: Western Washington University Bellingham Washingtonmentioning

confidence: 99%