Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2001 May;75(3):275–297. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-275

Behavioral and pharmacological variables affecting risky choice in rats.

B J Kaminski 1, N A Ator 1
PMCID: PMC1284818  PMID: 11453619

Abstract

The effects of manipulations of response requirement, intertrial interval (ITI), and psychoactive drugs (ethanol, phencyclidine, and d-amphetamine) on lever choice under concurrent fixed-ratio schedules were investigated in rats. Responding on the "certain'' lever produced three 45-mg pellets, whereas responding on the "risky" lever produced either 15 pellets (p = .33) or no pellets (p .67). Rats earned all food during the session, which ended after 12 forced trials and 93 choice trials or 90 min, whichever occurred first. When the response requirement was increased from 1 to 16 and the ITI was 20 s, percentage of risky choice was inversely related to fixed-ratio value. When only a single response was required but the ITI was manipulated between 20 and 120 s (with maximum session duration held constant), percentage of risky choice was directly related to length of the ITI. The effects of the drugs were investigated first at an ITI of 20 s, when risky choice was low for most rats, and then at an ITI of 80 s, when risky choice was higher for most rats. Ethanol usually decreased risky choice. Phencyclidine did not usually affect risky choice when the ITI was 20 s but decreased it in half the rats when the ITI was 80 s. For d-amphetamine, the effects appeared to he related to baseline probability of risky choice; that is, low probabilities were increased and high probabilities were decreased. Although increase in risky choice as a function of the ITI is at variance with previous ITI data, it is consistent with foraging data showing that risk aversion decreases as food availability decreases. The pharmacological manipulations showed that drug effects on risky choice may be influenced by the baseline probability of risky choice, just as drug effects can be a function of baseline response rate.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (419.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Abarca N., Fantino E. Choice and foraging. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Sep;38(2):117–123. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ainslie G. W. Impulse control in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):485–489. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Beardsley P. M., Balster R. L. Evaluation of antagonists of the discriminative stimulus and response rate effects of phencyclidine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1988 Jan;244(1):34–40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bergman J., Hassoun J., Schuster C. R. Behavioral effects of selected opiates and phencyclidine in the nondependent and cyclazocine-dependent rhesus monkey. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1985 Nov;235(2):463–469. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chait L. D., Balster R. L. The effects of acute and chronic phencyclidine on schedule-controlled behavior in the squirrel monkey. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1978 Jan;204(1):77–87. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fantino E., Preston R. A., Dunn R. Delay reduction: current status. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Jul;60(1):159–169. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.60-159. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fromme K., Katz E., D'Amico E. Effects of alcohol intoxication on the perceived consequences of risk taking. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 1997 Feb;5(1):14–23. doi: 10.1037//1064-1297.5.1.14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hastjarjo T., Silberberg A., Hursh S. R. Risky choice as a function of amount and variance in food supply. J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 Jan;53(1):155–161. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.53-155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hursh S. R., Raslear T. G., Shurtleff D., Bauman R., Simmons L. A cost-benefit analysis of demand for food. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Nov;50(3):419–440. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.50-419. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Ito M., Asaki K. Choice behavior of rats in a concurrent-chains schedule: Amount and delay of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 May;37(3):383–392. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Ito M., Takatsuru S., Saeki D. Choice between constant and variable alternatives by rats: effects of different reinforcer amounts and energy budgets. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Jan;73(1):79–92. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.73-79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Logue A. W., Rodriguez M. L., Peña-Correal T. E., Mauro B. C. Choice in a self-control paradigm: Quantification of experience-based differences. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Jan;41(1):53–67. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Mazur J. E., Romano A. Choice with delayed and probabilistic reinforcers: effects of variability, time between trials, and conditioned reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Nov;58(3):513–525. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.58-513. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Mazur J. E. Theories of probabilistic reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 Jan;51(1):87–99. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. McMillan D. E., Li M., Snodgrass S. H. Effects of drugs on concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedule performance. Behav Pharmacol. 1998 Dec;9(8):663–670. doi: 10.1097/00008877-199812000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Silberberg A., Murray P., Christensen J., Asano T. Choice in the repeated-gambles experiment. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Sep;50(2):187–195. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.50-187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Squires N., Fantino E. A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Jan;15(1):27–38. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Thompson D. M., Mastropaolo J., Winsauer P. J., Moerschbaecher J. M. Repeated acquisition and delayed performance as a baseline to assess drug effects on retention in monkeys. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1986 Jul;25(1):201–207. doi: 10.1016/0091-3057(86)90253-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Wenger G. R., Dews P. B. The effects of phencyclidine, ketamine, delta-amphetamine and pentobarbital on schedule-controlled behavior in the mouse. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1976 Mar;196(3):616–624. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Wenger G.R., Hudzik T., Moore E., Wright D.W. Pentobarbital, diazepam and phencyclidine disrupt delayed matching performance: interactions with picrotoxin in pigeons and squirrel monkeys. Behav Pharmacol. 1996 Aug;7(4):384–394. doi: 10.1097/00008877-199608000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES