Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Nebr Symp Motiv. 2009;55:91–109. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-78748-0_6

Figure 6.3.

Figure 6.3

(a) Responses on the active lever, inactive lever and number of stimulus presentations (mean + SEM) during a 30-minute test for conditioned reinforcement by rats trained previously with a stimulus that was paired with sucrose (n=41), or the same stimulus that was explicitly unpaired with sucrose (n=25). (b) Interaction between stimulus-training condition (sucrose-paired vs. sucrose-unpaired) and drug contingency (contingent NIC vs. non-contingent NIC). Data from non-contingent SAL + stimulus conditions are also shown for comparison. Panels represent data from either the entire 180 minute test session (no break point), or after a 30 minute or 60 minute break point was imposed. Data are mean (* SEM) stimulus presentations earned on the last 2 days of the progressive ratio schedule. All interactions are significant at P<0.05 (From Chaudhri et al. 2006a. Copyright © 2006 by Springer-Verlag. Reprinted with permission)