Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 May 11.
Published in final edited form as: Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2010 Apr 18;96(1):75–81. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2010.04.009

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Least-squares regression lines predicting responding from the percent of IRTs which were pauses (IRTs > 5s). AM 251 and SKF 83566 produced a significantly stronger slope than raclopride. **p < .01 difference between raclopride and both SKF 83566 and AM 251. Regression equations: AM 251: Y = 1582.4 - 114.8 X. SKF 83566: Y = 1683.7 – 86.8 X. Raclopride: Y = 1400.6 – 51.6 X.