Drug Discrimination Learning

Cue Properties of Drugs
  • Torbjörn U. C. Järbe
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Neuroscience book series (CNEURO)

Abstract

In his tales of travels in the Far East, Marco Polo describes how the “Old Man on the Mountain” (Hassan Sabbah, year 1090, and followers) recruited loyal warriors, the assassins, to faithfully obey and follow their master. According to the tale, the old man invited the potential warrior to a delicious dinner in his fortress. A drug (hashish?) had been mixed with the food, and while intoxicated, the guest was transferred to a magnificent garden to enjoy “paradise.” After once again being drugged and brought back to the old man, the guest was assured of a return to paradise if he served the old man faithfully. Having “experienced” paradise, the assassins became feared enemies of anyone who opposed the will of their master. This story is an early account reminiscent of what was later described as dissociative learning. Siegel (1982) has summarized other accounts of the phenomenon, for example “the well-known case of the Irish porter who, having lost a package when drunk, got drunk again and remembered where he had left it.”

Keywords

Discriminative Stimulus Stimulus Property Stimulus Effect Discrimination Training Discriminative Stimulus Effect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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. Barrett R. J., Blackshear M. A., and Sanders-Bush E. (1982) Discriminative stimulus properties of 1–5-hydroxytryptophan: Behavioral evidence for multiple serotonin receptors. Psycho-pharmacology 76, 29–35.Google Scholar
  2. Barry III, H. (1974) Classification of drugs according to their discriminable effects in rats. Fed. Proc. 33, 1814–1824.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barry III, H. and Krimmer E. C. (1977) Discriminable Stimuli Produced by Alcohol and Other CNS Depressants, in Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Drugs ( Lal H., ed.), Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Barry III, H. and Krimmer E. C. (1978) Similarities and Differences in Discriminative Stimulus Effects of Chlordiazepoxide, Pentobarbital, Ethanol and Other Sedatives, in Stimulus Properties of Drugs: Ten Years of Progress ( Colpaert F. C. and Rosecrans J. A., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  5. Bertalmio A. J., Herling S., Hampton R. Y., Winger G., and Woods J. H. (1982) A procedure for rapid evaluation of the discriminative stimulus effects of drugs. J. Pharmacol. Meth. 7, 289–299.Google Scholar
  6. Boren J. J. (1966) The Study of Drugs With Operant Techniques, in Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application ( Honig W. K., ed.), Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Carter R. B. and Leander J. D. (1982) Discriminative stimulus properties of naloxone. Psychopharmacology 77, 305–308.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chance W. T., Murfin D., Krynock C. M., and Rosecrans J. A. (1977) A description of the nicotine stimulus and tests of its generalization to amphetamine. Psychopharmacology 55, 1926.Google Scholar
  9. Colpaert F. C. (1977a) Drug-Produced Cues and States: Some Theoretical and Methodological Inferences, in Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Drugs ( Lal H., ed.), Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Colpaert F. C. (1977b) Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Benzodiazepines and Barbiturates, in Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Drugs ( Lal H., ed.), Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Colpaert F. C. (1978a) Some Properties of Drugs as Physiological Signals: The FR Procedure and Signal Detection Theory, in Stimulus Properties of Drugs: Ten Years of Progress ( Colpaert F. C. and Rosecrans J. A., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  12. Colpaert F. C. (1978b) Discriminative stimulus properties of narcotic analgesic drugs. Pharmacol. Biochem. Bheay. 9, 863–887.Google Scholar
  13. Colpaert F. C. (1982) The Pharmacological Specificity of Opiate Drug Discrimination, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  14. Colpaert F. C. and Janssen P. A. J. (1981) Factors regulating drug cue sensitivity: The effect of frustrative non-reward in fentanyl—saline discrimination. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 254, 241–251.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Colpaert F. C. and Janssen P. A. J. (1982a) Factors regulating drug cue sensitivity: Limits of discriminability and the role of progressively decreasing training dose in cocaine—saline discrimination. Neuropharmacology 21, 1187–1194.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Colpaert F. C. and Janssen P. A. J. (1982b) Factors regulating drug cue sensitivity: the effects of dose ratio and absolute dose level in the case of fentanyl dose—dose discrimination. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 258, 283–299.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Colpaert F. C. and Rosecrans J. A., eds. (1978) Stimulus Properties of Drugs: Ten Years of Progress. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  18. Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds. (1982) Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  19. Colpaert F. C., Niemegeers C. J. E., and Janssen P. A. J. (1978) Factors Regulating Drug Cue Sensitivity. A Long-Term Study on the Cocaine Cue, in Stimulus Properties of Drugs: Ten Years of Progress ( Colpaert F. C. and Rosecrans J. A., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  20. Colpaert F. C., Niemegeers C. J. E., and Janssen P. A. J. (1980a) Factors regulating drug cue sensitivity: Limits of discriminability and the role of a progressively decreasing training dose in fentanyl—saline discrimination. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 212, 474–480.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Colpaert F. C., Niemegeers C. J. E., and Janssen P. A. J. (1980b) Factors regulating drug cue sensitivity: The effect of training dose in fentanyl—saline discrimination. Neuropharmacology 19, 705–713.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. DeWitte P. H. (1982a) Response Latency as the Dependent Variable in Discrimination Procedures, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  23. DeWitte P. H. (1982b) Brain stimulation as the reinforcer in alcohol—saline discrimination. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behay. 17, 1093–1096.Google Scholar
  24. D’Mello G. D. (1981) A comparison of some behavioural effects of amphetamine and electrical brain stimulation of the mesolimbic dopamine system in rats. Psychopharmacology 75, 184–192.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. D’Mello G. D. and Stolerman I. P. (1978) Methodological Issues in Drug-Discrimination Research, in Stimulus Properties of Drugs: Ten Years of Progress ( Colpaert F. C. and Rosecrans J. A., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  26. Emmett-Oglesby M. W., Spencer Jr., D. G., Elmesallamy F., and Lal H. (1983) The pentylenetetrazol model of anxietyt detects withdrawal from diazepam in rats. Life Sci. 33, 161–168.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Finney D. A. (1976) A computer program for parallel line bioassays. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 198, 497–506.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Gellert V. F. and Holtzman S. G. (1979) Discriminative stimulus effects of naltrexone in the morphine-dependent rat. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 211, 596–605.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Girden E. and Culler E. A. (1937) Conditioned responses in curar- ized striate muscles in dogs. J. Comp. Psychol. 23, 261–274.Google Scholar
  30. Glennon R. A. and Rosecrans J. A. (1982) Indolealkylamine and phenylamine hallucinogens: A brief overview. Neurosci. Biobehay. Rev. 6, 489–497.Google Scholar
  31. Haenlein M., Caul W. F., Barrett R. J., and Michaelis R. C. (1983) Discrimination of serotonergic drugs is unaltered in rats prenatally exposed to ethanol. Neurobehay. Toxicol. Teratol. 5, 475–478.Google Scholar
  32. Harris R. T. and Balster R. L. (1968) Discriminative control by d,lamphetamine and saline of lever choice and response patterning. Psychon. Sci. 10, 105–106.Google Scholar
  33. Harris R. T. and Balster R. L. (1970) An Analysis of Psychological Dependence, in Drug Dependence ( Harris R. T., McIsaac W. M., and Schuster C. R., eds.), Univ. Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  34. Haug T. and Götestam K. G. (1982) Onset and offset of the diazepam stimulus complex. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behay. 17, 1171–1174.Google Scholar
  35. Heinemann E. G. and Chase S. (1975) Stimulus Generalization, in Conditioning and Behavior Theory ( Estes W. K., ed.), LEA, Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  36. Herling S. and Shannon H. E. (1982) Ro 15–1788 antagonizes the discriminative stimulus effects of diazepam in rats but not similar effects of pentobarbital. Life Sci. 31, 2105–2112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Herling S., Coale E. H., Valentino R. J., Hein D. W., and Woods J. H. (1980) Narcotic discrimination in pigeons. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 214, 139–146.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Hiltunen A. J., Järbe T. U. C., and Swedberg M. D. B. (1983) Drug discrimination studies with ethanol and benzodiazepines. Acta Pharmacol. Toxicol. 53, SII (abstract no. 37 ).Google Scholar
  39. Ho B. T., Richards III, W., and Chute D. L., eds. (1978) Drug Discrimination and State Dependent Learning. Academic, New York.Google Scholar
  40. Holtzman S. G. (1982) Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Opioids in the Rat and Squirrel Monkey, in Drug Discrimination. Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  41. Honig W. K. and Urcuioli P. J. (1981) The legacy of Gutman and Kalish (1956); 25 years of research on stimulus generalization. J. Exp. Anal. Behay. 36, 405–445.Google Scholar
  42. Iwamoto E. T. and Martin W. R. (1981) Multiple opioid receptors. Med. Res. Rev. 1, 411–440.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Järbe T. U. C. (1976) Characteristics of pentobarbital discrimination in the gerbil: Transfer and antagonism. Psychopharmacology 49, 33–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Järbe T. U. C. (1977) Alcohol-discrimination in gerbils: Interactions with bemegride, DH-524 amphetamine, and delta-9THC. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 227, 118–129.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Järbe T. U. C. (1981) Cocaine cue in pigeons: Time course studies and generalization to structurally related compounds (norcocaine, WIN 35, 428 and 35,065–2) and (+)-amphetamine. Br. J. Pharmacol. 73, 843–852.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Järbe T. U. C. and Henriksson B. G. (1974) Discriminative response control produced with hashish, tetrahydrocannabinols (delta-8-THC and delta-9-THC), and other drugs. Psychopharmacologia 40, 1–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Järbe T. U. C. and Johansson B. (1984) Interaction between drug discriminative stimuli and exteroceptive signals. Behay. Neurosci. 98, 686–694.Google Scholar
  48. Järbe T. U. C. and Kroon-Järbe E. R. (1983) Discriminability and procedure: Effects of cocaine and d-amphetamine. Psycho!. Rep. 52, 611–616.Google Scholar
  49. Järbe T. U. C. and McMillan D. E. (1983) Interaction of the discriminative stimulus properties of diazepam and ethanol in pigeons. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behay. 18, 73–80.Google Scholar
  50. Järbe T. U. C. and Ohlin G. C. (1979) Discriminative effects of combinations of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and pentobarbital in pigeons. Psychopharmacology 63, 233–239.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Järbe T. U. C. and Rollenhagen C. (1978) Morphine as a discriminative cue in gerbils: Drug generalization and antagonism. Psychopharmacology 58, 271–275.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Järbe T. U. C. and Swedberg M. D. B. (1982) A Conceptualization of Drug Discrimination Learning, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  53. Järbe T. U. C. and Swedberg M. D. B. (1981) Differences in the stimulus effects of CNS depressant substances as evidenced by drug vs drug discrimination techniques. Acta. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 49, SIV (abstract no. 45 ).Google Scholar
  54. Järbe T. U. C., Laaksonen T., and Svensson R. (1983a) Influence of exteroceptive contextual conditions upon internal drug stimulus control. Psychopharmacology 80, 31–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Järbe T. U. C., Svensson R.,and Laaksonen T. (1983b) Conditioning of a discriminative drug stimulus: Overshadowing and blocking like procedures. Scand. I Psychol. 24, 325–330.Google Scholar
  56. Järbe T. U. C., Swedberg M. D. B., and Mechoulam R. (1981a) A repeated tests procedure to assess onset and duration of the cue properties of (—)-delta-9-THC, (—)-delta-8-THC-DMH and (+)-delta-8-THC. Psychopharmacology 75, 152–157.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Järbe T. U. C., Sterner U., and Hjerpe C. (1981b) Conditioning of an interoceptive drug stimulus to different exteroceptive contexts. Psychopharmacology 73, 23–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Järbe T. U. C., Loman P., and Swedberg M. D. B. (1979) Evidence supporting lack of discriminative stimulus properties of a combination of naltrexone and morphine. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behay. 10, 493–497.Google Scholar
  59. Järbe T. U. C., Swedberg M. D. B., Hiltunen A. J., and Mechoulam R. (1985) Drug discrimination techniques for assessing structure activity relationships of cannabimimetics. Acta Physiol. Scand. 124, 185 (Supplementum 542 ).Google Scholar
  60. Koek W. and Slangen J. L. (1982a) The role of fentanyl training dose and of the alternative stimulus condition in drug generalization. Psychopharmacology 76, 149–156.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Koek W. and Slangen J. L. (1982b) Effects of Reinforcement Differences Between Drug and Saline Sessions on Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Fentanyl, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  62. Krimmer E. C., Barry III, H., and Coltrin D. (1978) Antagonism of Pentobarbital Discriminative Stimulus by Bemegride in Immobilized Rats, in Stimulus Properties of Drugs: Ten Years of Progress ( Colpaert F. C. and Rosecrans J. A., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  63. Krimmer E. C., Benson B. J., McGuire M., and Barry III, H. (1982) Conditional Sensory Stimuli During Morphine Discrimination, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  64. Kubena R. K. and Barry III, H. (1969) Two procedures for training differential responses to alcohol and nondrug conditions. J. Pharmacol. Sci. 58, 99–101.Google Scholar
  65. Lal H., ed. (1977a) Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Drugs. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  66. Lal H. (1977b) Drug Induced Discriminable Stimuli: Past Research and Future Perspectives, in Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Drugs ( Lal H., ed.), Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  67. Lal H. and Shearman G. T. (1982) Attenuation of chemically induced anxiogenic stimuli as a novel method for evaluating anxiolytic drugs: A comparison of clonazepam with other benzodiazepines. Drug Dev. Res. 51, 127–134.Google Scholar
  68. Leberer M. R. and Fowler S. C. (1977) Drug discrimination and generalization in pigeons. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behay. 7, 483–486.Google Scholar
  69. Litchfield J. T. and Wilcoxon F. (1949) A simplified method of evaluating dose-effect experiments. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 96, 99–113.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. McMillan D. E. (1982) Generalization of the discriminative stimulus properties of phencyclidine to other drugs in the pigeon using color tracking under second-order schedules. Psychopharmacology 78, 131–134.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. McMillan D. E., Cole-Fullenwider D. A., Hardwick W. C., and Wenger G. R. (1982) Phencyclidine discrimination in the pigeon using color tracking under second-order schedules. J. Exp. Anal. Behay. 37, 143–147.Google Scholar
  72. Morrison C. F. and Stephenson J. A. (1969) Nicotine injections as the conditioned stimulus in discrimination learning. Psychopharmacologia 15, 351–360.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Overton D. A. (1966) State-dependent learning produced by depressant and atropine-like drugs. Psychopharmacologia 10, 6–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Overton D. A. (1967) Differential responding in a three-choice maze controlled by three drug states. Psychopharmacologia 11, 376–378.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Overton D. A. (1971) Discriminative Control of Behavior by Drug States, in Stimulus Properties of Drugs ( Thompson T. and Pickens R., eds.), Appleton-Century Crofts, New York.Google Scholar
  76. Overton D. A. (1974) Experimental methods for the study of state-dependent learning. Fed. Proc. 33, 1800–1813.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Overton D. A. (1977) Comparison of ethanol, pentobarbital and phenobarbital using drug vs drug discrimination training. Psychopharmacology 53, 195–199.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Overton D. A. (1978a) Influence of Training Compartment Design on Performance in the Two-Bar Drug Discrimination Task: A Methodological Report, in Stimulus Properties of Drugs: Ten Years of Progress ( Colpaert F. C. and Rosecrans J. A., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  79. Overton D. A. (1978b) Major Theories of State Dependent Learning, in Drug Discrimination and State Dependent Learning ( Ho B. T., Richards III, D. W., and Chute D. L., eds.), Academic, New York.Google Scholar
  80. Overton D. A. (1979a) Influence of shaping procedures and schedules of reinforcement on performance in the two-bar drug discrimination task: A methodological report. Psycho-pharmacology 65, 291–298.Google Scholar
  81. Overton D. A. (1979b) Drug discrimination training with progressively lowered doses. Science 205, 720–721.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Overton D. A. (1982a) Comparison of the degree of discriminability of various drugs using the T-maze drug discrimination paradigm. Psychopharmacology 76, 385–395.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Overton D. A. (1982b) Multiple drug training as a method for increasing the specificity of the drug discrimination procedure. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 221, 166–172.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Richards III, D. W. (1978) A Functional Analysis of the Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Amphetamine and Pentobartical, in Drug Discrimination and State Dependent Learning ( Ho B. T., Richards III, D. W., and Chute D. L., eds.), Academic, New York.Google Scholar
  85. Romano C., Goldstein A., and Jewell N. P. (1981) Characterization of the receptor mediating the nicotine discriminative stimulus. Psychopharmacology 74, 310–315.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Rosecrans J. A. and Meltzer L. T. (1981) Central sites and mechanisms of action of nicotine. Neurosci. Biobehay. Rev. 5, 497–501.Google Scholar
  87. Schechter M. D. (1981) Extended schedule transfer of ethanol discrimination. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behay. 14, 23–25.Google Scholar
  88. Schechter M. D. and Lovano D. M. (1982) Time-course of action of ethanol upon a stimulant—depressant continuum. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 260, 189–195.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Schuster C. R. and Balster R. L. (1977) The Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Drugs, in Advances in Behavioral Pharmacology, vol. 1 (Thompson T. and Dews P. B., eds.), Academic, New York.Google Scholar
  90. Shannon H. E. and Holtzman S. G. (1976) Evaluation of the discriminative effects of morphine in the rat. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 198, 54–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Shannon H. E. and Holtzman S. G. (1979) Morphine training dose: A determinant of stimulus generalization to narcotic antagonists in the rat. Psychopharmacology 61, 239–244.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Shearman G. T., Cafaro M. P.,Lal H., and Howard J. L. (1981) Saccharin-taste discrimination by two-lever choice; A rat bioassay for sweeteners. Drug. Dev. Res. 1, 145–150.Google Scholar
  93. Siegel S. (1982) Drug Dissociation in the Nineteenth Century, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  94. Silverman P. B. and Ho B. T. (1977) Characterization of Discriminative Response Control by Psychomotor Stimulants, in Discriminative Stimulus Properties of Drugs ( Lal H., ed.), Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  95. Stolerman I. P. and D’Mello G. D. (1981) Role of training conditions in discrimination of central nervous system stimulants in rats. Psychopharmacology 73, 295–303.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Stolerman I. P., Baldy R. E., and Shine P. J. (1982) Drug Discrimination Procedure: A Bibliography, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  97. Swedberg M. D. B. and Järbe T. U. C. (1982) Morphine Cue Saliency: Limits of Discriminability and Third State Perception by Pigeons, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C.and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  98. Swedberg M. D. B., Loman P., and Järbe T. U. C. (1978) Effects of chlormethiazole (Heminevrin®) on drug discrimination and open-field behavior of gerbils. Psychopharmacology 59, 165–170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Valentino R. J., Herling S., and Woods J. H. (1983) Discriminative stimulus effects of naltrexone in narcotic-naive and morphine treated pigeons. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 224, 307–313.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Weissman A. (1976) The discriminability of aspirin in arthritic and non-arthritic rats. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behay. 5, 583–586.Google Scholar
  101. White J. M. and Holtzman S. C. (1981) Three-choice drug discrimination in the rat: Morphine, cyclazocine and saline. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 217, 254–262.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. White J. M. and Holtzman S. G. (1983a) Further characterization of the three-choice morphine, cyclazocine and saline discrimination paradigm: Opioids with agonist and antagonist properties. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 224, 95–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. White J. M. and Holtzman S. G. (1983b) Three-choice drug discrimination: Phencyclidine-like stimulus effects of opiates. Psychopharmacology 80, 1–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Winter J. C. (1978) Drug-Induced Stimulus Control, in Contemporary Research in Behavioral Pharmacology ( Blackman D. E. and Sanger D. J., eds.), Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  105. Winter J. C. (1981) Drug induced stimulus control and the concept of breaking point: LSD and quipazine. Psychopharmacology 72, 217–218.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. York J. L. (1978) A comparison of the discriminative stimulus effects of ethanol, barbital and phenobarbital in rats. Psycho-pharmacology 60, 19–23.Google Scholar
  107. Young R. and Dewey W. L. (1982) Differentiation of the Behavioral Responses Produced by Barbiturates and Benzodiazepines by the Benzodiazepine Antagonist Ro 15–1788, in Drug Discrimination: Applications in CNS Pharmacology ( Colpaert F. C. and Slangen J. L., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  108. Zenick H. and Goldsmith M. (1981) Drug discrimination learning in lead-exposed rats. Science 212, 569–571.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Torbjörn U. C. Järbe

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations