Skip to main content
Log in

Scopolamine and acquisition of go-no go avoidance: A further analysis of the perseverative antimuscarinic deficit

  • Original Investigations
  • Published:
Psychopharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rats treated with scopolamine (0.5 mg/kg SC daily) during the acquisition of a discrimination task with symmetrical negative reinforcement (light-go, noise/light-no go) showed a learning impairment, with both active and passive avoidance deficits. In the initial stage of such training, however, fewer passive avoidance errors and more active avoidance errors were made by treated animals if active avoidance pretraining had occurred in the no-drug state. A similar experiment using the same stimulus arrangement with asymmetrical reinforcement (no punishment of intertrial, and no go signal, responses) showed a scopolamine effect consisting mainly of increased responding to extinction signals and during intertrial intervals, with little or no active avoidance deficit. Furthermore, interactions due to changes in treatment conditions in successive stages of training were minimized in the latter task, suggesting that the effects of the shift-no shift factor on distribution of errors in the early stages of active-passive avoidance learning were unlikely to have been due to a genuine drug dissociation. Overall, these results and others obtained previously in the same and related tasks tend to rule out some unidimensional explanations of antimuscarinic effects, e.g., response disinhibition (an exclusively motor deficit) or impairment of stimulus sensitivity (an exclusively sensory deficit). The data rather confirm the notion of a sensorimotor drug bias leading to a shift in response prepotencies depending jointly on stimuli, responses, and response consequences. Prior learning history and behavioural compensation for adverse treatment consequences at the reinforcement level may interact with the sensorimotor bias so as to produce “set perseveration” (perseveration of response tendencies).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anisman H (1978) Neurochemical changes elicited by stress: Behavioral correlates. In: Anisman H, Bignami G (ed) Psychopharmacology of aversively motivated behavior. Plenum, New York, pp 119–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Bignami G (1967) Anticholinergic agents as tools in the investigation of behavioral phenomena. In: Brill H (ed) Neuro-Psycho-Pharmacology, Proceedings of the 5th International Congress of the Collegium Internationale Neuro-Psycho-Pharmacologicum, Washington D.C., 1966. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam, pp 819–830

    Google Scholar 

  • Bignami G (1967) Nonassociative explanations of behavioral changes induced by central cholinergic drugs. Acta Neurobiol Exp Warsz 36:5–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Bignami G (1979) Pharmacological evidence on the specialization of CNS mechanisms responsible for motor act inhibition by aversive events. Acta Neurobiol Exp Warsz 39:395–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Bignami G, Michałek H (1978) Cholinergic mechanisms and aversively motivated behaviors. In: Anisman H, Bignami G (ed) Psychopharmacology of aversively motivated behavior. Plenum, New York, pp 173–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Bignami G, Rosić N (1971) The nature of disinhibitory phenomena caused by central cholinergic (muscarinic) blockade. In: Vinař O, Votava Z, Bradley PB (ed) Advances in neuro-psychopharmacology, Proceedings of the Symposia held at the VII Congress of the Collegium Internationale Neuro-Psychopharmacologicum, Prague, 1970. North Holland and Avicenum, Amsterdam and Prague, pp 481–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bignami G, Amorico L, Frontali M, Rosić N (1971) Central cholinergic blockade and two-way avoidance acquisition: The role of response disinhibition. Physiol Behav 7:461–470

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown K, Warburton DM (1971) Attenuation of stimulus sensitivity by scopolamine. Psychon Sci 22:297–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlton PL (1963) Cholinergic mechanisms in the control of behavior by the brain. Psychol Rev 70:19–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlton PL (1968) Brain acetylcholine and habituation. Prog Brain Res 28:48–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlton PL (1969) Brain acetylcholine and inhibition. In: Tapp J (ed) Reinforcement and behavior. Academic, New York, pp 286–327

    Google Scholar 

  • Carro-Ciampi G, Bignami G (1968) Effects of scopolamine on shuttle-box avoidance and go-no go discrimination: Response-stimulus relationships, pretreatment baselines, and repeated exposure to drug. Psychopharmacologia 13:89–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabrowska J (1975) Prefrontal lesions and avoidance, reflex differentiation in dogs. Acta Neurobiol Exp Warsz 35:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Dieter SE (1977) Preexposure to situational cues and shock intensity in two-way avoidance learning. Anim Learn Behav 5:403–406

    Google Scholar 

  • Frontali M, Bignami G (1974) Stimulus nonequivalences in go no-go avoidance discriminations: Sensory, drive, and response factors. Anim Learn Behav 2:153–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Frontali M, Amorico L, De Acetis L, Bignami G (1976) A pharmacological analysis of processes underlying differential responding: A review and further experiments with scopolamine, amphetamine, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD-25), chlordiazepoxide, physostigmine, and chlorpromazine. Behav Biol 18:1–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Giardini V, Meneguz A, Amorico L, De Acetis L, Bignami G (1982) Behaviorally augmented tolerance during chronic cholinesterase reduction by paraoxon. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol 4:335–345

    Google Scholar 

  • Hearst E (1959) Effects of scopolamine on discriminated responding in the rat. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 126:349–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise GA (1975) Discrete trial analysis of drug action. Fed Proc 34:1898–1903

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise GA, Boff E (1971) Stimulant action of d-amphetamine in relation to test compartment dimensions and behavioral measure. Neuropharmacology 10:259–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise GA, Lilie NL (1970) Effects of scopolamine, atropine, and d-amphetamine on internal and external control of responding on non-reinforced trials. Psychopharmacologia 18:38–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise GA, Laughlin N, Keller C (1970) A behavioral and pharmacological analysis of reinforcement withdrawal. Psychopharmacologia 16:345–368

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise GA, Hrabrich B, Lilie NL, Martin RA (1975) Scopolamine effects on delayed spatial alternation in the rat. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 3:993–1002

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise GA, Conner R, Martin RA (1976) Effects of scopolamine on variable intertrial interval spatial alternation and memory in the rat. Psychopharmacology 49:131–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Konorski J (1972) Some hypotheses concerning the functional organization of prefrontal cortex. Acta Neurobiol Exp Warsz 32:595–613

    Google Scholar 

  • Milar KS (1981) Cholinergic drug effects on visual discriminations: A signal detection analysis. Psychopharmacology 74:383–388

    Google Scholar 

  • Milar KS, Halgren CR, Heise GA (1978) A reappraisal of scopolamine effects on inhibition. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 9:307–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Posluns D, Vanderwolf CH (1970) Improved avoidance performance following exploratory movement. Can J Psychol 24:499–504

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosić N, Bignami G (1970) Scopolamine effects on go-no go avoidance discriminations: Influence of stimulus factors and primacy of training. Psychopharmacologia 17:203–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosvold HE, Mishkin M (1961) Non-sensory effects of frontal lesions on discrimination learning and performance. In: Delafresnaye JF (ed) Brain mechanisms and learning. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 555–567

    Google Scholar 

  • Warburton DM (1972) The cholinergic control of inhibition. In: Boakes R, Halliday MS (ed) Inhibition and learning. Academic, New York, pp 431–460

    Google Scholar 

  • Warburton DM (1974) The effects of scopolamine on a two-cue discrimination. Q J Exp Psychol 26:395–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Warburton DM (1977) Stimulus selection and behavioral inhibition. In: Iversen LL, Iversen SD, Snyder SH (ed) Handbook of psychopharmacology, Vol. 8: Drugs, neurotransmitters, and behavior. Plenum, New York, pp 385–431

    Google Scholar 

  • Warburton DM, Brown K (1971) Attenuation of stimulus sensitivity induced by scopolamine. Nature 230:126–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins LR, Mayer DJ (1982) Organization of endogenous opiate and nonopiate pain control systems. Science 216:1185–1192

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Giardini, V., Amorico, L., De Acetis, L. et al. Scopolamine and acquisition of go-no go avoidance: A further analysis of the perseverative antimuscarinic deficit. Psychopharmacology 80, 131–137 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00427956

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00427956

Key words

Navigation