Opposite regulation of conditioned place preference and intravenous drug self-administration in rodent models: Motivational and non-motivational examples
被引:19
|
作者:
Green, Thomas A.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Texas Med Branch, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Galveston, TX 77555 USAUniv Texas Med Branch, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Galveston, TX 77555 USA
Green, Thomas A.
[1
]
Bardo, Michael T.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Kentucky, Dept Psychol, BBSRB Room 447, Lexington, KY 40536 USAUniv Texas Med Branch, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Galveston, TX 77555 USA
Bardo, Michael T.
[2
]
机构:
[1] Univ Texas Med Branch, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Galveston, TX 77555 USA
[2] Univ Kentucky, Dept Psychol, BBSRB Room 447, Lexington, KY 40536 USA
Although developed from a common antecedent, conditioned place preference (CPP) and intravenous drug self-administration (SA) represent different behavioral paradigms, each with strong face validity. The field has treated results from these studies largely interchangeably; however, there is considerable evidence of opposite modulation of CPP vs. SA. This review outlines four manipulations that differentially affect CPP and SA based on alterations of motivation. These examples are contrasted with one example of differential CPP and SA results that can be explained by simple parallel shifts in dose-response functions. The final two examples have yet to be classified as motivation-based or parallel shifts. Important aspects, including motivation, volitional control of drug administration, reward, and the role of cues are discussed. One major conclusion of this paper is that explanations for apparent discrepancies between CPP and SA require full dose effect functions and assessment of PR breakpoints. Overall, this manuscript offers a more nuanced insight into how CPP and SA can be used to study different aspects of substance use disorders.