Advertisement

Psychopharmacologia

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 169–177 | Cite as

Theoretical and methodological considerations on drug discrimination learning

  • Francis C. Colpaert
  • Carlos J. E. Niemegeers
  • Paul A. J. Janssen
Animal Studies

Abstract

A method is described which allows the assessment of discriminative stimulus properties of drugs, and the ability of amphetamine (0.16 mg/kg, s.c), chlordiazepoxide (5 mg/kg, p.o.), desipramine (5 mg/kg, s.c), and haloperidol (0.02 mg/kg, s.c.) to produce a discriminative stimulus complex (DSC) is evidenced. The method is found to yield clear-cut data that are specifically related to drug discrimination learning without being possibly confounded by state dependent effects. In addition, the experimental procedure is designed so as to provide an appropriate measurement of operant response modulating drug effects.

Key words

Drug discrimination Cue State dependent learning Amphetamine Desipramine Haloperidol Chlordiazepoxide 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barry III, H.: Classification of drugs according to their discriminable effects in rats. Fed. Proc. 33, 1814–1824 (1974)Google Scholar
  2. Bliss, D. K.: Dissociated learning and state-dependent retention induced by pentobarbital in rhesus monkeys. J. comp. physiol. Psychol. 84, 149–161 (1973)Google Scholar
  3. Bliss, D. K.: Theoretical explanations of drug-dissociated behaviors. Fed. Proc. 33, 1787–1796 (1974)Google Scholar
  4. Brown, A., Feldman, R. S., Moore, J. W.: Conditional discrimination learning based upon chlordiazepoxide: Dissociation or cue? J. comp. physiol. Psychol. 66, 211–215 (1968)Google Scholar
  5. Browne, R. G., Harris, R. T., Ho, B. T.: Stimulus properties of mescaline and N-methylated derivatives: Difference in peripheral and direct central administration. Psychopharmacologia (Berl.) 39, 43–56 (1974)Google Scholar
  6. Cameron, O. G., Appel, J. B.: A behavioral and pharmacological analysis of some discriminable properties of d-LSD in rats. Psychopharmacologia (Berl.) 33, 117–134 (1973)Google Scholar
  7. Colpaert, F. C., Lal, H., Niemegeers, C. J. E., Janssen, P. A. J.: Investigations on drug produced and subjectively experienced discriminative stimuli. 1. The fentanyl cue, a tool to investigate subjectively experienced narcotic drug actions. Life Sci. 16, 705–716 (1975a)Google Scholar
  8. Colpaert, F. C., Niemegeers, C. J. E., Lal, H., Janssen, P. A. J.: Investigations on drug produced and subjectively experienced discriminative stimuli. 2. Loperamide, an antidiarrheal devoid of narcotic cue producing actions. Life Sci. 16, 717–728 (1975b)Google Scholar
  9. Colpaert, F. C., Niemegeers, C. J. E., Kuyps, J. J. M. D., Janssen, P. A. J.: Apomorphine as a discriminative stimulus, and its antagonism by haloperidol. Europ. J. Pharmacol. 32, 383–386 (1975c)Google Scholar
  10. Dinsmoor, J. A.: A quantitative comparison of the discriminative and reinforcing functions of a stimulus. J. exp. Psychol. 40, 458–472 (1950)Google Scholar
  11. Gardner, L., McCullough, C.: A reinvestigation of the dissociative effect of curariform drugs. Amer. J. Psychol. 17, 398 (1962)Google Scholar
  12. Girden, E., Culler, E. A.: Conditioned responses in curarized striate muscle in dogs. J. comp. Psychol. 23, 261–274 (1937)Google Scholar
  13. Hilgard, R. E., Bower, G. H.: Theories of learning, pp. 512–539. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts 1956Google Scholar
  14. Hill, H. E., Jones, B. E., Bell, E. C.: State dependent control of discrimination by morphine and pentobarbital. Psychopharmacologia (Berl.) 22, 305–313 (1971)Google Scholar
  15. Mowrer, O. H.: Learning theory and behavior, pp. 438–494. New York: Wiley 1960Google Scholar
  16. Osgood, C. E.: Method and theory in experimental psychology. New York: Oxford University Press 1953Google Scholar
  17. Overton, D. A.: State-dependent learning produced by depressant and atropine-like drugs. Psychopharmacologia (Berl.) 10, 6–31 (1966)Google Scholar
  18. Overton, D. A.: Experimental methods for the study of statedependent learning. Fed. Proc. 33, 1800–1813 (1974)Google Scholar
  19. Rosecrans, J. A., Goodloe, M. H., Bennett, G. J., Hirschhorn, I. D.: Morphine as a discriminative cue: Effects of amine depletors and naloxone. Europ. J. Pharmacol. 21, 252–256 (1973)Google Scholar
  20. Siegel, S.: Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences, p. 312. New York: McGraw-Hill 1956Google Scholar
  21. Skinner, B. F.: The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts 1938Google Scholar
  22. Winter, J. C.: A comparison of the stimulus properties of mescaline and 2,3,4-trimethoxyphenylethylamine. J. Pharmacol. exp. Ther. 185, 101–107 (1973)Google Scholar
  23. Winter, J. C.: The effects of 3,4-dimethoxyphenylethylamine in rats trained with mescaline as a discriminative stimulus. J. Pharmacol. exp. Ther. 189, 741–747 (1974)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francis C. Colpaert
    • 1
  • Carlos J. E. Niemegeers
    • 1
  • Paul A. J. Janssen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PharmacologyJanssen Pharmaceutica Research LaboratoriesBelgium

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options