Individual differences in the attribution of incentive salience to a reward-related cue: Influence on cocaine sensitization

When a discrete cue (a "sign") is presented repeatedly in anticipation of a food reward the cue can become imbued with incentive salience, leading some animals to approach and engage it, a phenomenon known as "sign-tracking" (the animals are sign-trackers; STs). In contrast, other animals do not approach the cue, but upon cue presentation go to the location where food will be delivered (the goal). These animals are known as goal-trackers (GTs). It has been hypothesized that individuals who attribute excessive incentive salience to reward-related cues may be especially vulnerable to develop compulsive behavioral disorders, including addiction. We were interested, therefore, in whether individual differences in the propensity to sign-track are associated with differences in responsivity to cocaine. Using an autoshaping procedure in which lever (conditioned stimulus) presentation was immediately followed by the response-independent delivery of a food pellet (unconditioned stimulus), rats were first characterized as STs or GTs and subsequently studied for the acute psychomotor response to cocaine and the propensity for cocaine-induced psychomotor sensitization. We found that GTs were more sensitive than STs to the acute locomotor activating effects of cocaine, but STs showed a greater propensity for psychomotor sensitization upon repeated treatment. These data suggest that individual differences in the tendency to attribute incentive salience to a discrete reward-related cue, and to approach and engage it, are associated with susceptibility to a form of cocaine-induced plasticity that may contribute to the development of addiction.

[1]  Hank Davis,et al.  Operant-Pavlovian Interactions , 1977 .

[2]  G. Molenberghs,et al.  Linear Mixed Models for Longitudinal Data , 2001 .

[3]  D. Newlin.  A comparison of drug conditioning and craving for alcohol and cocaine. , 1992, Recent developments in alcoholism : an official publication of the American Medical Society on Alcoholism, the Research Society on Alcoholism, and the National Council on Alcoholism.

[4]  N. Volkow,et al.  The neural basis of addiction: a pathology of motivation and choice. , 2005, The American journal of psychiatry.

[5]  G. Di Chiara,et al.  Psychostimulant sensitization: differential changes in accumbal shell and core dopamine. , 2000, European journal of pharmacology.

[6]  A. C. Roberts,et al.  Sign tracking in cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis). , 1999, Journal of comparative psychology.

[7]  R. Carelli,et al.  The Nucleus Accumbens and Pavlovian Reward Learning , 2007, The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry.

[8]  Jason M. Uslaner,et al.  The attribution of incentive salience to a stimulus that signals an intravenous injection of cocaine , 2006, Behavioural Brain Research.

[9]  T. Robinson,et al.  The induction of behavioural sensitization is associated with cocaine‐induced structural plasticity in the core (but not shell) of the nucleus accumbens , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[10]  D. R. Williams,et al.  Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  S. Young,et al.  Substance-dependent, conduct-disordered adolescent males: severity of diagnosis predicts 2-year outcome. , 1998, Drug and alcohol dependence.

[12]  T. Robinson,et al.  Quantifying the psychomotor activating effects of cocaine in the rat , 2007, Behavioural pharmacology.

[13]  M. Todtenkopf,et al.  The dorsomedial shell of the nucleus accumbens facilitates cocaine-induced locomotor activity during the induction of behavioral sensitization , 2002, Behavioural Brain Research.

[14]  B. L. Brown,et al.  Sign and goal tracking during delay and trace autoshaping in pigeons , 1993 .

[15]  P Duffy,et al.  Repeated cocaine augments excitatory amino acid transmission in the nucleus accumbens only in rats having developed behavioral sensitization , 1996, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[16]  P. I. Pavlov.  Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex. , 1929, Annals of Neurosciences.

[17]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  Sign-tracking : the stimulus-reinforcer relation and directed action , 1974 .

[18]  Ronald C. Kessler,et al.  Comparative epidemiology of dependence on tobacco, alcohol, controlled substances, and inhalants: Basic findings from the National Comorbidity Survey. , 1994 .

[19]  G. Chiara,et al.  Differential neurochemical and behavioral adaptation to cocaine after response contingent and noncontingent exposure in the rat , 2007, Psychopharmacology.

[20]  Trevor W. Robbins,et al.  Time-limited modulation of appetitive Pavlovian memory by D1 and NMDA receptors in the nucleus accumbens , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  Paul D. Allison,et al.  Logistic Regression Using the SAS System : Theory and Application , 1999 .

[22]  K. Berridge,et al.  Erratum to: “Parsing reward” [Trends Neurosci. 26 (2003) 507–513] , 2003, Trends in Neurosciences.

[23]  B. Everitt,et al.  Differential Involvement of NMDA, AMPA/Kainate, and Dopamine Receptors in the Nucleus Accumbens Core in the Acquisition and Performance of Pavlovian Approach Behavior , 2001, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  The effect of early feeding experience on signal-directed response topography in the rat , 1984, Physiology & Behavior.

[25]  Sign tracking versus goal tracking in the sexual conditioning of male Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica). , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[26]  K. Breland,et al.  The misbehavior of organisms. , 1961 .

[27]  B. Everitt,et al.  Neural and psychological mechanisms underlying appetitive learning: links to drug addiction , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[28]  D. Segal,et al.  Individual differences in responsiveness to single and repeated amphetamine administration: behavioral characteristics and neurochemical correlates. , 1987, The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics.

[29]  A. Phillips,et al.  Disruption of autoshaped responding to a signal of brain-stimulation reward by neuroleptic drugs , 1981, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[30]  T. Robbins,et al.  Dissociation in Effects of Lesions of the Nucleus Accumbens Core and Shell on Appetitive Pavlovian Approach Behavior and the Potentiation of Conditioned Reinforcement and Locomotor Activity byd-Amphetamine , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[31]  C. Cunningham,et al.  Rapid induction of Pavlovian approach to an ethanol-paired visual cue in mice , 2007, Psychopharmacology.

[32]  H. de Wit,et al.  Individual differences in the reinforcing and subjective effects of amphetamine and diazepam. , 1986, Drug and alcohol dependence.

[33]  S. Klein,et al.  Pavlovian conditioning and the status of traditional learning theory , 1991 .

[34]  K. Berridge.  Reward learning: Reinforcement, incentives, and expectations , 2000 .

[35]  T. Robbins,et al.  Neural systems of reinforcement for drug addiction: from actions to habits to compulsion , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[36]  G. Phillips,et al.  Enhanced appetitive conditioning following repeated pretreatment with d-amphetamine. , 1998, Behavioural pharmacology.

[37]  B. Everitt,et al.  Emotion and motivation: the role of the amygdala, ventral striatum, and prefrontal cortex , 2002, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[38]  K. Berridge,et al.  The neural basis of drug craving: An incentive-sensitization theory of addiction , 1993, Brain Research Reviews.

[39]  T. Robbins,et al.  Disconnection of the anterior cingulate cortex and nucleus accumbens core impairs Pavlovian approach behavior: further evidence for limbic cortical-ventral striatopallidal systems. , 2000, Behavioral neuroscience.

[40]  A. Dickinson,et al.  Involvement of the central nucleus of the amygdala and nucleus accumbens core in mediating Pavlovian influences on instrumental behaviour , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[41]  Peter H. Short,et al.  Changes in brain norepinephrine associated with sensitization to d-amphetamine , 1976, Psychopharmacology.

[42]  David Belin,et al.  Evidence for Addiction-like Behavior in the Rat , 2004, Science.

[43]  A. Tomie.  Locating Reward Cue at Response Manipulandum (CAM) Induces Symptoms of Drug Abuse , 1996, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[44]  Evolutionary game theory and multiple chemical sensitivity , 1999, Toxicology and industrial health.

[45]  K. Zener.  The significance of behavior accompanying conditioned salivary secretion for theories of the conditioned response. , 1937 .

[46]  E. Ellinwood,et al.  Rating the behavioral effects of amphetamine. , 1974, European journal of pharmacology.

[47]  K. Berridge,et al.  Parsing reward , 2003, Trends in Neurosciences.

[48]  T. Robinson,et al.  Individual differences in the propensity to approach signals vs goals promote different adaptations in the dopamine system of rats , 2007, Psychopharmacology.

[49]  T. Robinson,et al.  Neural and Behavioral Plasticity Associated with the Transition from Controlled to Escalated Cocaine Use , 2005, Biological Psychiatry.

[50]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  The form of the auto-shaped response with food or water reinforcers. , 1973, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[51]  M. Le Moal,et al.  Vertical Shifts in Self-Administration Dose–Response Functions Predict a Drug-Vulnerable Phenotype Predisposed to Addiction , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[52]  L. Shuster,et al.  Sensitization to cocaine stimulation in mice , 1977, Psychopharmacology.

[53]  H. Meltzer,et al.  Psychopharmacology : the third generation of progress , 1987 .

[54]  A. Tomie,et al.  Individual Differences in Pavlovian Autoshaping of Lever Pressing in Rats Predict Stress-Induced Corticosterone Release and Mesolimbic Levels of Monoamines , 2000, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.