, Volume 84, Issue 3, pp 405–412 | Cite as

Enhanced behavioural control by conditioned reinforcers following microinjections of d-amphetamine into the nucleus accumbens

  • Jane R. Taylor
  • Trevor W. Robbins
Original Investigations


Stimulant drugs have been shown to enhance the control over behaviour exerted by stimuli previously correlated with primary reinforcers, termed conditioned reinforcers (CR). Experiment 1 examined the possible neuroanatomical specificity of the enhancement of conditioned reinforcement following intracerebral injections ofd-amphetamine. Thirsty rats were trained to associate, a light with water. In the test phase, water was no longer presented but the light (CR) was intermittently produced by responding on one of two novel levers. Rats with bilateral guide cannulae aimed at the nucleus accumbens, posterior caudate nucleus, or medio-dorsal nucleus of the thalamus received four counterbalanced microinfusions ofd-amphetamine (10, 20, 30 μg/2 μl) or vehicle (control) over 4 test days. There was a dose-dependent selective increase in responding on the lever that produced the light (CR) with intra-accumbensd-amphetamine infusions. Quantitatively similar, but much more variable effects were found with intra-caudate infusions and no effects following intra-thalamicd-amphetamine. Experiment 2 provided evidence that the enhanced control over responding by a CR with intra-accumbensd-amphetamine is behaviourally specific. Three groups of rats received a compound tone — plus —light stimulus that was positively, negatively or randomly correlated with water during training. Intra-accumbensd-amphetamine produced selective increases in responding only if the contingent stimulus had been positively correlated. The results suggest that the nucleus accumbens may play an important role ind-amphetamine's enhanced control over behaviour exerted by conditioned reinforcers.

Key words

Conditioned reinforcement d-Amphetamine Nucleus accumbens Caudate nucleus Thalamus Rat 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Beninger RJ, Hanson DR, Phillips AG (1980) The effects of pipradrol on the acquisition of responding with conditioned reinforcement: A role for sensory preconditioning. Psychopharmacology 69:235–242Google Scholar
  2. Beninger RJ, Hanson DR, Phillips AG (1981) The acquisition of responding with conditioned reinforcement: Effects of cocaine, (+)amphetamine and pipradrol. Br J Pharmacol 74:149–154Google Scholar
  3. Brown BB, Werner HW (1954) Pharmacological studies on a central stimulant 1(2-piperidyl)-benzhydrol hydrochloride (MRD-108). J Pharmacol Exp Ther 110:180–187Google Scholar
  4. Bugelski R (1938) Extinction with and without sub-goal reinforcement. J Comp Psychol 26:121Google Scholar
  5. Goldberg SR, Spealman RD, Kelleher RT (1979) Enhancement of drug-seeking behaviour by environmental stimuli associated with cocaine or morphine injections. Neurophamrmacology 18:1015–1017Google Scholar
  6. Hill RT (1967) A behavioural analysis of the psychomotor stimulant effects of a drug: The interaction of pipradrol with conditioned reinforcement. PhD dissertation, Columbia University, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. Hill RT (1970) Facilitation of conditioned reinforcement as a mechanism of psychomotor stimulation. In: Costa E, Garattini S (eds) Amphetamine and related compounds. Raven, New York, pp 781–795Google Scholar
  8. Jones B, Mishkin M (1972) Limbic lesions, and the problem of stimulus-reinforcementassociations. Exp Neurol 36:362–377Google Scholar
  9. Kelley AE, Domesick VB (1982) The distribution of the projection from the hippocampal formation to the nucleus accumbens in the rat: An anterograde- and retrograde-horseradish peroxide study. Neuroscience 7:2321–2335Google Scholar
  10. Lindvall O, Bjorklund A (1978) Organization of, catecholamine neurons in the rat central nervous system. Handb Psychopharmacol 9:139–222Google Scholar
  11. Lyness WH, Friedle NM, Moore KE (1979) Destruction of dopaminergic nerve terminals in nucleus accumbens: Effects ofd-amphetamine self-administration. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 11:553–556Google Scholar
  12. Mackintosh NJ (1974) The psychology of animal learning Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Mucha RF, Van der Kooy D, O'Shaughnessy, M, Bucenieks P (1982) Drug reinforcement studied by the use of place conditioning in rat. Brain Res 243:91–105Google Scholar
  14. Pellegrino LJ, Cushman AJ (1967) A stereotaxic atlas of the rat brain. Century Crofts, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Pijnenburg AJJ, Honig WMM, Van der Heyden JAM, Van Rossum JM (1976) Effects of chemical stimulation of the mesolimbic dopamine system on locomotor activity. Eur J Pharmacol 35:45–58Google Scholar
  16. Robbins TW (1976) Relationship between reward-enhancing and stereotypical effects of psychomotor stimulant drugs. Nature 264:57–59Google Scholar
  17. Robbins TW, (1978) The acquisition of responding with conditioned reinforcement: Effects of pipradrol, methylphenidate,d-amphetamine and nomifensine. Psychopharmacology 58:79–87Google Scholar
  18. Robbins TW, Everitt BJ (1982) Functional studies of the central catecholamines. Int Rev Neurobiol 23:303–365Google Scholar
  19. Robbins TW, Watson BA, Gaskin M, Ennis C (1983a) Contrasting interactions of pipradrol,d-amphetamine, cocaine, cocaine analogues, apomorphine and other drugs with conditioned reinforcement. Psychopharmacology 80:113–119Google Scholar
  20. Robbins TW, Roberts DCS, Koob GF (1983b) Effects ofd-amphetamine and apomorphine upon operant behaviour and schedule-induced licking in rats with 6-hydroxydopamine-induced lesions of the nucleus accumbens. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 222:662–673Google Scholar
  21. Roberts DCS, Corcoran ME, Fibiger HC (1977) On the role of ascending catecholaminergic systems in intravenous self-administration of cocaine. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 6:615–620Google Scholar
  22. Sherman JE, Roberts T, Roskam SE, Holman EW (1980) Temporal properties of the rewarding and aversive effects of amphetamine in rats. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 13:597–599Google Scholar
  23. Spealman RD, Goldberg SR (1978) Drug self-administration by laboratory animals: Control by schedules, of reinforcement. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 18:313–339Google Scholar
  24. Spyraki C, Fibiger HC, Phillips AG (1982) Dopaminergic substrates of amphetamine-induced place-preference conditioning. Brain Res 253:185–193Google Scholar
  25. Winer BJ (1971) Statistical principles, in experimental design. Tokyo McGraw-Hill KogakushaGoogle Scholar
  26. deWit H, Stewart J (1981) Reinstatement of cocaine-reinforced responding in the rat. Psychopharmacology 75:134–143Google Scholar
  27. Wolf G (1971) Elementary histology for neuropsychologists. In: Myers RD (ed) Methods in psychobiology, vol. 1. Academic, London New York, pp 281–300Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jane R. Taylor
    • 1
  • Trevor W. Robbins
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Experimental PsychologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeEngland

Personalised recommendations