The discriminative stimulus effects of cocaine in a pavlovian sexual approach paradigm in male Japanese quail

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 237-242

  Troisi II, Joseph R ^a   Akins, Chana ^b  

^a SAINT ANSELM COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COCAINE;

ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; COCAINE DEPENDENCE; COMPULSION; CONDITIONED REFLEX; CONTROLLED STUDY; COPULATION; COTURNIX; DISCRIMINATIVE STIMULUS; DRUG DISCRIMINATION; DRUG EFFECT; FEMALE; MALE; NONHUMAN; REINFORCEMENT; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL DEVIATION; SEXUALITY;

ANIMALS; COCAINE; CONDITIONING, CLASSICAL; COPULATION; COTURNIX; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; MALE; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 8644231734     PISSN: 10641297     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1064-1297.12.4.237     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Akins, C. K. (2000). Effects of species-specific cues and the CS-US interval on the topography of the sexually conditioned response. Learning and Motivation, 31, 211-235.
2. Akins, C. K, Domjan, M., & Gutierrez, G. (1994). Topography of sexually conditioned behavior in male Japanese quail (Coturinix japonica) depends on the CS-US interval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 20, 199-209.
3. Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (2003). Parsing reward. Trends in Neurosciences, 26, 507-513.
4. Booth, R. E., Kwiatkowski, C. F., & Chitwood, D. D. (2000). Sex-related HIV risk behaviors: Differential risks among injection drug users, crack smokers, and injection drug users who smoke crack. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 58, 219-226.
5. Colpaert, F. C. (1977). Drug-produced cues and states: Some theoretical and methodological inferences. In H. Lal (Ed.), Discriminative stimulus properties of drugs (pp. 5-21). New York: Plenum Press.
6. Crawford, L. L., & Domjan, M. (1993). Sexual approach conditioning: Omission contingency tests. Animal Learning & Behavior, 21, 42-50.
7. Domjan, M. (1994). Formulation of a behavior system for sexual conditioning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 421-428.
8. Domjan, M., Lyons, R., North, N. C., & Bruell, J. (1986). Sexual Pavlovian conditioned approach behavior in male Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 100, 413-421.
9. Fiorino, D. F., Coury, A., & Phillips, A. G. (1997). Dynamic changes in nucleus accumbens dopamine efflux during the Coolidge effect in male rats. Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 4849-4855.
10. Fiorino, D. F., & Phillips, A. G. (1999). Facilitation of sexual behavior in male rats following d-amphetamine-induced behavioral sensitization. Psychopharmacology, 142, 200-208.
11. Harris, R. T., & Balster, R. L. (1971). An analysis of the function of drugs in the stimulus control of operant behavior. In T. Thompson & R. Pickens (Eds.), Stimulus properties of drugs (pp. 111-132). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
12. Hearst, E. (1978). Stimulus relationships and feature selection in learning and behavior. In S. H. Hulse, H. Fowler, & A. R. Honig (Eds.), Cognitive, processes in animal behavior (pp. 51-88). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Holland, P. C. (1983). Occasion setting in Pavlovian feature positive discriminations. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & A. R. Wagner (Eds.), Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 4. Discrimination processes (pp. 183-186). New York: Ballinger.
14. Jarbe, T. U. (1993). Repeated testing within drug discrimination learning: Time course studies with cocaine, amphetamine, and 3-PPP. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 44, 481-486.
15. Jarbe, T. U., Hiltunen, A. J., & Swedberg, M. D. B. (1989). Compound drug discrimination learning. Drug Development Research, 16, 111-122.
16. Jarbe, T. U., Laaksonen, T., & Svensson, R. (1983). Influence of exteroceptive contextual conditions upon internal drug stimulus control. Psychopharmacology, 80, 31-34.
17. Jarbe, T. U., & Lamb, R. J. (1999). Effects of lithium dose (UCS) on the acquisition and extinction of a discriminated morphine aversion: Tests with morphine and delta9-THC. Behavioural Pharmacology, 10, 349-358.
18. Jarbe, T. U., Svensson, R., & Laaksonen, T. (1983). Conditioning of a discriminative drug stimulus: Overshadowing and blocking like procedures. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 24, 325-330.
19. Jenkins, H. M., & Sainsbury, R. S. (1969). The development of stimulus control through differential reinforcement. In N. J. Mackintosh & W. K. Honig (Eds.), Fundamental issues in associative learning (pp. 123-161). Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada: Dalhousie University Press.
20. Johanson, C. E., & Barrett, J. E. (1993). The discriminative stimulus effects of cocaine in pigeons. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 267, 1-8.
21. Kall, K. I. (1992). Effects of amphetamine on sexual behavior of male i.v. drug users in Stockholm - a pilot study. AIDS Education and Prevention, 1, 6-17.
22. Kall, K. I., & Nilsonne, A. (1995). Preference for sex on amphetamine: A marker for HIV risk behaviour among male intravenous amphetamine users in Stockholm. AIDS Care, 7, 171-188.
23. Leavitt, F. I. (1969). Drug-induced modifications in sexual behavior and open field locomotion of male rats. Physiology and Behavior, 4, 677-683.
24. Levens, N., & Akins, C. K. (2001). Cocaine induces conditioned place preference and increases locomotor activity in male Japanese quail. Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior, 68, 71-80.
25. Levens, N., & Akins, C. K. (2004). Cocaine pretreatment facilitates conditioned sexual behavior in male Japanese quail. Manuscript in preparation.
26. Maes, J. H. R., & Vossen, J. M. H. (1997). Conditional control by midazolam and amphetamine in a rapid appetitive discrimination procedure. European Journal of Pharmacology, 319, 5-11.
27. Miller, M. A, Parker, B. K., Keely, J. L., Johnson, J. L., & Schaal, D. W. (2002). Searching for evidence of transfer between drug facilitators. Learning and Motivation, 33, 197-229.
28. National Institutes of Health. (1985). Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals (DHEW Publication No. 86-23). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
29. Overton, D. A. (1982). Comparison of the degree of discriminability of various drugs using the T-maze drug discrimination paradigm. Psychopharmacology, 76, 385-395.
30. Palmatier, M. I., Peterson, J. L., Wilkinson, J. L., & Bevins, R. A. (2004). Nicotine serves a feature positive modulator of Pavlovian appetitive conditioning in rats. Behavioural Pharmacology, 15, 183-194.
31. Parker, B. K., Schaal, D. W., & Miller, M. (1994). Drug discrimination using a Pavlovian conditional discrimination paradigm in pigeons. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 49, 955-960.
32. Platt, J. J. (1997). Cocaine addiction: Theory, research and treatment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Rawson, R. A., Washton, A., Domier, C. P., & Reiber, C. (2002). Drugs and sexual effects: Role of drug type and gender. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 103-108.
34. Rescorla, R. A. (1985). Conditioned inhibition and facilitation. In R. R. Miller & N. S. Speer (Eds.), Information processing in animals: Conditioned inhibition (pp. 299-325). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. Rescorla, R. A. (1987). Facilitation and inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 13, 250-259.
36. Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning: II: Current theory and research (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
37. Rijnders, H. J., Jarbe, T. U., & Slangen, J. L. (1991). Reversal of a drug versus drug discrimination task with different exteroceptive conditions. Behavioural Pharmacology, 2, 429-435.
38. Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2000). The psychology and neurobiology of addiction: An incentive-sensitization view. Addiction, 95, S91-S117.
39. Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2001). Incentive-sensitization and addiction. Addiction, 96, 103-114.
40. Ross, M. W., Hwang, L. Y., Zack, L., Bull, L., & Williams, M. L. (2002). Sexual risk behaviours and STIs in drug abuse treatment populations whose drug of choice is crack cocaine. International Journal of STD and AIDS, 13, 769-774.
41. Schein, M. W., Diamond, M., & Carter, C. S. (1972). Sexual performance levels of male Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Animal Behaviour, 20, 61-67.
42. Skinner, D. M. (2000). Modulation of taste aversions by a pentobarbital drug state: An assessment of its transfer properties. Learning and Motivation, 31, 381-401.
43. Stolerman, I. P. (2004). Drug discrimination bibliography. Retrieved June 2004 from http://www.dd-database.org/
44. Swedberg, M. D., & Jarbe, T. U. (1985). Drug discrimination procedures: Roles of relative stimulus control in two-drug cases. Psychopharmacology, 86, 444-451.
45. Troisi, J. R., II. (2003a). Nicotine vs. ethanol discrimination: Extinction and spontaneous recovery of responding. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Sciences, 38, 104-123.
46. Troisi, J. R., II. (2003b). Spontaneous recovery during, but not following, extinction of the discriminative stimulus effects of nicotine in rats: Reinstatement of stimulus control. The Psychological Record, 53, 579-592.
47. Troisi, J. R., II. (2004). The discriminative stimulus properties of simultaneous and sequential compound mixtures of nicotine and ethanol in rats. Manuscript in preparation.
48. Washton, A. M. (1989). Cocaine abuse and compulsive sexuality. Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 23, 32-40.
49. Weatherby, N. L., Shultz, J. M., Chitwood, D. D., McCoy, H. V., McCoy, C. B., Ludwig, D. D., & Edlin, B. R. (1992). Crack cocaine use and sexual activity in Miami, Florida. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 24, 373-380.
50. Winter, J. C. (1973). A comparison of the stimulus properties of mescaline and 2,3,4-trimethoxyphenylethylamine, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 189, 101-107.