The effects of scopolamine on the extinction of a continuously reinforced response

McKim, William A.

doi:10.3758/bf03329067

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with this theory, administration of the muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine produces an increase in resistance to extinction of operant behavior (Hearst, 1959;Heise, Laughlin, & Keller, 1970;Herblin, 1968;McKim, 1970;Morley & Russin, 1978;Stone, 1964). Morley and Russin (1978), however, have shown that scopolamine increases resistance to extinction in tasks involving water but not food motivation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 62%

“…the same effects as scopolamine hydrobromide, it can now be concluded that the mechanism is a central one. Increases in extinction responding in tasks involving natural rewards have been found after scopolamine administration in some (Hearst, 1959;Heise et aI., 1970;Herblin, 1968;McKim, 1970;Morley & Russin, 1978;Stone, 1964), but not all (McKim, 1980;Morley & Russin, 1978) experimental situations. Olds (1970) found that fast ICSS responders (>94 responses/min) showed a decrease in barpressing following scopolamine administration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Scopolamine effects on intracranial self-stimulation extinction

Weldon

Vaughan

1981

Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 62%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scopolamine effects on intracranial self-stimulation extinction

Weldon

Vaughan

1981

Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Hippocampecto my and scopolamine produce increased resistance to extinction on appetitive tasks (63,76,100,115), but the results with scopolamine have been somewhat mixed (102). Cannabis extract produces decreased resistance to extinction in a Lashely 111 and T-maze (58).…”

Section: Resistance To Extinctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cannabis: Neural Mechanisms and Behavior – a Theoretical Review

Drew¹,

Miller²

1974

Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hypothesis is advanced that marihuana and espedaily Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol, impair certain aspects of hippocampal neural functioning which are necessary for normal cognitive operations. It is suggested that many of the cognitive alterations induced by cannabinoids may be attributable to interference with cholinergic mechanisms. Both pharmacological and behavioral evidence are cited to support this hypothesis.

show abstract

“…Central cholinergic mechanisms have been implicated in processes that involve response inhibition (Carlton, 1969). Support for this proposition has been derived from demonstrations that centrally active anticholinergic drugs disinhibit responding in situations assumed to involve response inhibition, e.g., extinction (Hearst, 1959;Herblin, 1968;McKim, 1970), passive avoidance (Bohdanecky & Jarvik, 1967;Carro-Ciampi & Bignami, 1968;Meyers, 1965), habituation (Carlton, 1968), and punishment (Bignami, 1967), although recent studies have taken issue with this interpretation of the effects of scopolamine (e.g., Miczek & Lau, 1975;Milar, Halgren, & Heise, 1978).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%