Drug expectancy is necessary for stimulus control of human attention, instrumental drug-seeking behaviour and subjective pleasure

被引:35
作者
Hogarth, L
Dickinson, A
Hutton, SB
Elbers, N
Duka, T [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sussex, Sch Life Sci, Expt Psychol Lab, Brighton BN1 9QG, E Sussex, England
[2] Univ Cambridge, Dept Expt Psychol, Cambridge CB2 3EB, England
基金
英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会;
关键词
conditioning; addiction; smoking; eye tracking;
D O I
10.1007/s00213-005-0287-x
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Background: It has been suggested that drug-paired stimuli (S+) control addictive behaviour by eliciting an explicit mental representation or expectation of drug availability. Aims: The aim of the present study was to test this hypothesis by determining whether the behavioural control exerted by a tobacco-paired S+ in human smokers would depend upon the S+ eliciting an explicit expectation of tobacco. Design: In each trial, human smokers (n=16) were presented with stimuli for which attention was measured with an eyetracker. Participants then reported their cigarette reward expectancy before performing, or not, an instrumental tobacco-seeking response that was rewarded with cigarette gains if the S+ had been presented or punished with cigarette losses if the S- had been presented. Following training, participants rated the pleasantness of stimuli. Results: The S+ only brought about conditioned behaviour in an aware group (those who expected the cigarette reward outcome when presented with the S+). This aware group allocated attention to the S+, performed the instrumental tobacco-seeking response selectively in the presence of the S+ and rated the S+ as pleasant. No conditioned behaviour was seen in the unaware group (those who did not expect the cigarette reward outcome in the presence of the S+). Conclusions: Drug-paired stimuli control selective attention, instrumental drug-seeking behaviour and positive emotional state by eliciting an explicit expectation of drug availability.
引用
收藏
页码:495 / 504
页数:10
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]   INSTRUMENTAL RESPONDING FOLLOWING REINFORCER DEVALUATION [J].
ADAMS, CD ;
DICKINSON, A .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY SECTION B-COMPARATIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1981, 33 (MAY) :109-121
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1989, Psychoactive Drugs: tolerance and sensitization. Eds
[3]   REINFORCEMENT, EXPECTANCY, AND LEARNING [J].
BOLLES, RC .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1972, 79 (05) :394-&
[4]   Cognitive and social learning models of drug dependence: implications for the assessment of tobacco dependence in adolescents [J].
Brandon, TH ;
Herzog, TA ;
Irvin, JE ;
Gwaltney, CJ .
ADDICTION, 2004, 99 :51-77
[5]   The cue-availability paradigm: The effects of cigarette availability on cue reactivity in smokers [J].
Carter, BL ;
Tiffany, ST .
EXPERIMENTAL AND CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2001, 9 (02) :183-190
[6]   Trace and delay eyeblink conditioning: Contrasting phenomena of declarative and nondeclarative memory [J].
Clark, RE ;
Manns, JR ;
Squire, LR .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2001, 12 (04) :304-308
[7]  
COLLINS L, 1985, J EXP PSYCHOL ANIM B, V11, P548
[8]   ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE DISCRIMINATIVE STIMULUS AND THE REINFORCER IN INSTRUMENTAL LEARNING [J].
COLWILL, RM ;
RESCORLA, RA .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-ANIMAL BEHAVIOR PROCESSES, 1988, 14 (02) :155-164
[9]   COMPARISON OF CLASSICAL CONDITIONING AND RELATIONAL LEARNING [J].
DAWSON, ME ;
GRINGS, WW .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1968, 76 (2P1) :227-&
[10]   Learning and selective attention [J].
Dayan, Peter ;
Kakade, Sham ;
Montague, P. Read .
NATURE NEUROSCIENCE, 2000, 3 (11) :1218-1223