Abstract

A two-lever, multiple-schedule task was used to evaluate the effects of haloperidol (HA) and amphetamine (AM) on responding controlled by continuous reinforcement (CRF) and progressive ratio (PR) schedules of reinforcement. Rats were trained to press one lever for food delivered on a CRF schedule and the other lever for food delivered on a PR schedule. The operative schedule was signaled by the illumination of a cuelight mounted above the appropriate lever. Following 30 sessions of training, dose–response functions were determined for HA (0.0075, 0.015, 0.03, and 0.06 mg/kg) and AM (0.0625, 0.125, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, and 1.00 mg/kg). Both drugs produced dose- and schedule-dependent effects. For example, administration of 0.03 mg/kg HA did not affect responding under the CRF schedule but did reduce responding during PR components, whereas administration of 0.06 mg/kg reduced responding under both schedules of reinforcement. Some doses of AM produced increased responding under the CRF schedule and, within the same session, decreased responding under the PR schedule. The results with HA are consistent with the view that interfering with dopaminergic function affects the allocation and maintenance of responding and that this effect depends on properties of the schedule of reinforcement. The results with AM emphasize that statements about the effects of the drug on positively reinforced behavior cannot be made without reference to specific schedules of reinforcement.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.