Serial discrimination reversal learning as a repeated-acquisition method to test drug effects

Abstract

A repeated-acquisition procedure utilizing serial discrimination reversal (SDR) was developed to test drug effects on acquisition. Rats were trained on SDR until successive acquisitions were uniform and repeatable. Scopolamine, DL-amphetamine, and tranylcypromine were tested for effects on acquisition with this method. DL-amphetamine and tranylcypromine facilitated acquisition; scopolamine disrupted discrimination. This paper reports results of a repeated-acquisition procedure developed for use with rats. Repeatedacquisition procedures derive from work by Boren (e.g., Boren & Devine, 1968) and have been extended by Jones (1974a, 1974b) and Thompson (1970Thompson ( , 1971. In the Boren procedure, monkeys were trained to respond in a four-unit chain. The manipulanda were four groups of three response levers, and the monkeys were required to press a given sequence of four levers, one from each group, in order to receive food. Errors during the acquisition of each successive response chain were recorded. Following training of many sequences of four-unit chains, acquisition of new chains was uniform and stable. Thus, Boren and Devine had established a baseline of acquisition. Thompson (1970Thompson ( , 1971) modified this procedure for use with pigeons. The subjects were trained to peck at one of four response keys with a specific sequence of keys, each identified by a different hue, defined as correct. After the animals had learned many such sequences, acquisition of additional sequences followed a predictable pattern. Thompson (1973Thompson ( , 1975 next tested for drug effects on this baseline. In this paper, we demonstrate that a similar procedure can be used with rats, and that a repeatable baseline of acquisition can be obtained. Next, the effects of several drugs were tested.

Styrene Impairs Serial Spatial Reversal Learning in Rats

“…Serial reversal learning has provided a versatile instrument for the study of learning, including effects of aging (Stephens et al, 1985), drugs (Calhoun and Jones, 1979), and toxic chemicals in rats (Driscoll and Stegner, 1976), birds (Kreitzer, 1980), and monkeys (Bushnell and Bowman, 1979;Rice, 1985). The analytical power of the method derives from its ability to dissociate changes in learning ability from changes in motivational or sensorimotor function (Bushnell and Bowman, 1979).…”