Limits...
The form of a conditioned stimulus can influence the degree to which it acquires incentive motivational properties.

Meyer PJ, Cogan ES, Robinson TE - PLoS ONE (2014)

Bottom Line: There is considerable individual variation in the extent to which food- and drug-associated cues (conditioned stimuli, CSs) acquire incentive salience, as indicated by whether they elicit approach towards them, and/or act as conditioned reinforcers.Even when presented in compound (a lever-tone CS), the two elements of the compound differentially acquired motivational properties.We conclude that variation in the to the ability of CSs to acquire incentive salience, and thus their ability to act as incentive stimuli capable of motivating behavior, is determined in part by properties of the CS itself.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
There is considerable individual variation in the extent to which food- and drug-associated cues (conditioned stimuli, CSs) acquire incentive salience, as indicated by whether they elicit approach towards them, and/or act as conditioned reinforcers. Here we asked whether this variation is influenced by properties of the CS itself. In rats, we assessed both the attractiveness and conditioned reinforcing properties of two CSs: a manipulable lever CS versus an auditory (tone) CS. There was considerable individual variation in the extent to which a lever CS acquired incentive motivational properties, as indicated by whether it became attractive (evoked a sign-tracking or goal-tracking conditioned response) or acted as a conditioned reinforcer. However, with a tone CS all rats learned a goal-tracking response, and the tone CS was an equally effective conditioned reinforcer in sign-trackers and goal-trackers. Even when presented in compound (a lever-tone CS), the two elements of the compound differentially acquired motivational properties. In contrast, amphetamine and stress potentiated the conditioned reinforcing properties of both visual and auditory CSs similarly in rats that primarily sign-tracked or goal-tracked. We conclude that variation in the to the ability of CSs to acquire incentive salience, and thus their ability to act as incentive stimuli capable of motivating behavior, is determined in part by properties of the CS itself.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Stress potentiates the conditioned reinforcing properties of reward paired cues equally in sign trackers (ST) and goal trackers (GT).Nosepoke responses in sessions immediately before and after an ip injection of sterile water (SW) or the pharamacological stressor yohimbine (YOH). Responding after administration of yohimbine was significantly greater than responding after administration of sterile water, but increased equally in STs and GTs after both sterile water and yohimbine injections.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4048203&req=5

pone-0098163-g008: Stress potentiates the conditioned reinforcing properties of reward paired cues equally in sign trackers (ST) and goal trackers (GT).Nosepoke responses in sessions immediately before and after an ip injection of sterile water (SW) or the pharamacological stressor yohimbine (YOH). Responding after administration of yohimbine was significantly greater than responding after administration of sterile water, but increased equally in STs and GTs after both sterile water and yohimbine injections.

Mentions: Fig. 8 shows the number of active responses on the reinstatement test day. A two-way ANOVA was used to analyze responding during the pre (extinction) and post (reinstatement) stress Sessions. Both STs and GTs showed significantly higher responding during the post stress period [F (1, 18) = 55.0; p<0.001 for the main effect of Session], but there were no differences between STs and GTs (ps>0.05). Interestingly, a vehicle injection also significantly reinstated responding [F (1,18) = 16.37; p = 0.001 for the main effect of Session], but again there were no differences between STs and GTs (ps>0.05). Of course, a vehicle injection is itself a mild stressor, which may explain why it produced a significant increase in responding. However, responding after yohimbine was significantly greater than after vehicle [F (1, 18) = 16.61; p = 0.001 for the main effect of Session]. Higher responding for yohimbine compared to vehicle cannot be explained by differences in baseline, as responding before both vehicle and yohimbine injection test days were not significantly different (p>0.05).


The form of a conditioned stimulus can influence the degree to which it acquires incentive motivational properties.

Meyer PJ, Cogan ES, Robinson TE - PLoS ONE (2014)

Stress potentiates the conditioned reinforcing properties of reward paired cues equally in sign trackers (ST) and goal trackers (GT).Nosepoke responses in sessions immediately before and after an ip injection of sterile water (SW) or the pharamacological stressor yohimbine (YOH). Responding after administration of yohimbine was significantly greater than responding after administration of sterile water, but increased equally in STs and GTs after both sterile water and yohimbine injections.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4048203&req=5

pone-0098163-g008: Stress potentiates the conditioned reinforcing properties of reward paired cues equally in sign trackers (ST) and goal trackers (GT).Nosepoke responses in sessions immediately before and after an ip injection of sterile water (SW) or the pharamacological stressor yohimbine (YOH). Responding after administration of yohimbine was significantly greater than responding after administration of sterile water, but increased equally in STs and GTs after both sterile water and yohimbine injections.
Mentions: Fig. 8 shows the number of active responses on the reinstatement test day. A two-way ANOVA was used to analyze responding during the pre (extinction) and post (reinstatement) stress Sessions. Both STs and GTs showed significantly higher responding during the post stress period [F (1, 18) = 55.0; p<0.001 for the main effect of Session], but there were no differences between STs and GTs (ps>0.05). Interestingly, a vehicle injection also significantly reinstated responding [F (1,18) = 16.37; p = 0.001 for the main effect of Session], but again there were no differences between STs and GTs (ps>0.05). Of course, a vehicle injection is itself a mild stressor, which may explain why it produced a significant increase in responding. However, responding after yohimbine was significantly greater than after vehicle [F (1, 18) = 16.61; p = 0.001 for the main effect of Session]. Higher responding for yohimbine compared to vehicle cannot be explained by differences in baseline, as responding before both vehicle and yohimbine injection test days were not significantly different (p>0.05).

Bottom Line: There is considerable individual variation in the extent to which food- and drug-associated cues (conditioned stimuli, CSs) acquire incentive salience, as indicated by whether they elicit approach towards them, and/or act as conditioned reinforcers.Even when presented in compound (a lever-tone CS), the two elements of the compound differentially acquired motivational properties.We conclude that variation in the to the ability of CSs to acquire incentive salience, and thus their ability to act as incentive stimuli capable of motivating behavior, is determined in part by properties of the CS itself.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
There is considerable individual variation in the extent to which food- and drug-associated cues (conditioned stimuli, CSs) acquire incentive salience, as indicated by whether they elicit approach towards them, and/or act as conditioned reinforcers. Here we asked whether this variation is influenced by properties of the CS itself. In rats, we assessed both the attractiveness and conditioned reinforcing properties of two CSs: a manipulable lever CS versus an auditory (tone) CS. There was considerable individual variation in the extent to which a lever CS acquired incentive motivational properties, as indicated by whether it became attractive (evoked a sign-tracking or goal-tracking conditioned response) or acted as a conditioned reinforcer. However, with a tone CS all rats learned a goal-tracking response, and the tone CS was an equally effective conditioned reinforcer in sign-trackers and goal-trackers. Even when presented in compound (a lever-tone CS), the two elements of the compound differentially acquired motivational properties. In contrast, amphetamine and stress potentiated the conditioned reinforcing properties of both visual and auditory CSs similarly in rats that primarily sign-tracked or goal-tracked. We conclude that variation in the to the ability of CSs to acquire incentive salience, and thus their ability to act as incentive stimuli capable of motivating behavior, is determined in part by properties of the CS itself.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus