4.4 Article

Perturbations in different forms of cost/benefit decision making induced by repeated amphetamine exposure

Journal

PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
Volume 205, Issue 2, Pages 189-201

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-009-1529-0

Keywords

Decision making; Psychostimulant; Sensitization; Animal models; Dopamine; Drug abuse

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Psychostimulant abuse has been linked to impairments in cost-benefit decision making. We assessed the effects of repeated amphetamine (AMPH) treatment in rodents on two distinct forms of decision making. Separate groups of rats were trained for 26 days on either a probabilistic (risk) or effort-discounting task, each consisting of four discrete blocks of ten choice trials. One lever always delivered a smaller reward (one or two pellets), whereas another lever delivered a four-pellet reward. For risk-discounting, the probability of receiving the larger reward decreased across trial blocks (100-12.5%), whereas on the effort task, four pellets could be obtained after a ratio of presses that increased across blocks (2-20). After training, rats received 15 saline or AMPH injections (escalating from 1 to 5 mg/kg) and were then retested during acute and long-term withdrawal. Repeated AMPH administration increased risky choice 2-3 weeks after drug exposure, whereas these treatments did not alter effort-based decision making in a separate group of animals. However, prior AMPH exposure sensitized the effects of acute AMPH on both forms of decision making, whereby lower doses were effective at inducing risky and lazy patterns of choice. Repeated AMPH exposure leads to relatively long-lasting increases in risky choice, as well as sensitization to the effects of acute AMPH on different forms of cost/benefit decision making. These findings suggest that maladaptive decision-making processes exhibited by psychostimulant abusers may be caused in part by repeated drug exposure.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available