Intra-Accumbens Amphetamine Increases the Conditioned Incentive Salience of Sucrose Reward: Enhancement of Reward “Wanting” without Enhanced “Liking” or Response Reinforcement

By C. Wyvell, Kent C. Berridge. Journal of Neuroscience, 2000

757 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Amphetamine microinjection into the nucleus accumbens shell enhanced the ability of a Pavlovian reward cue to trigger increased instrumental performance for sucrose reward in a pure conditioned incentive paradigm. Rats were first trained to press one of two levers to obtain sucrose pellets. They were separately conditioned to associate a Pavlovian cue (30 sec light) with free sucrose pellets. On test days, the rats received bilateral microinjection of intra-accumbens vehicle or amphetamine (0.0, 2.0, 10.0, or 20.0 μg/0.5 μl), and lever pressing was tested in the absence of any reinforcement contingency, while the Pavlovian cue alone was freely presented at intervals throughout the session. Amphetamine microinjection selectively potentiated the cue-elicited increase in sucrose-associated lever pressing, although instrumental responding was not reinforced by either sucrose or the cue during the test. Intra-accumbens amphetamine can therefore potentiate cue-triggered incentive motivation for reward in the absence of primary or secondary reinforcement. Using the taste reactivity measure of hedonic impact, it was shown that intra-accumbens amphetamine failed to increase positive hedonic reaction patterns elicited by sucrose (i.e., sucrose “liking”) at doses that effectively increase sucrose “wanting.” We conclude that nucleus accumbens dopamine specifically mediates the ability of reward cues to trigger “wanting” (incentive salience) for their associated rewards, independent of both hedonic impact and response reinforcement.

Subfields: Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Molecular Biology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a2d9c605ad778e77e327324e99cb1286d54e135b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

In Molecular Biology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Reward learning: Reinforcement, incentives, and expectations (2000, background): “But the enhanced "wanting" for food is not accompanied by increased "liking," as evidenced by the microinjection's failure to increase positive hedonic patterns of behavior elicited from the rats by a sweet taste (Wyvell & Berridge, 2000 ).”
Hedonic Hot Spot in Nucleus Accumbens Shell: Where Do μ-Opioids Cause Increased Hedonic Impact of Sweetness? (2005, background): “Observation of increased eating without enhanced hedonic impact appears somewhat similar to dissociations of food “wanting” from “liking” produced by other manipulations of mesolimbic function (Berridge and Valenstein, 1991; Reynolds and Berridge, 2002; Wyvell and Berridge, 2000; Peciña et al., 2003”
Model-Based and Model-Free Pavlovian Reward Learning: Revaluation, Revision and Revelation (2014, background): “…or by drug-induced neural sensitization interposed between CS–UCS training and CS reencounter (DiFeliceantonio & Berridge, 2012; Pecina & Berridge, 2013; Smith, Berridge, & Aldridge, 2011; Tindell, Berridge, Zhang, Peciña, & Aldridge, 2005; Vezina & Leyton, 2009; Wyvell & Berridge, 2000).”
From prediction error to incentive salience: mesolimbic computation of reward motivation (2012, methodology): “…in re-encounter if dopamine levels in nucleus accumbens are elevated above normal at that moment by a drug such as amphetamine or by neural sensitization induced by previous exposures to amphetamine or related drugs (Wyvell & Berridge, 2000, 2001; Tindell et al., 2005; Smith et al., 2011).”
Human and Rodent Homologies in Action Control: Corticostriatal Determinants of Goal-Directed and Habitual Action (2010, background): “Thus, for example, dopamine activity appears to be critical for general transfer, which is abolished by DA antagonists and local inactivation of the VTA (Dickinson et al, 2000; Murschall and Hauber, 2006), whereas amphetamine-induced sensitization can enhance it (Wyvell and Berridge, 2000).”
Disentangling the Roles of Approach, Activation and Valence in Instrumental and Pavlovian Responding (2011, background): “Third, given dopamine’s established positive correlation with approach and PIT [87,88], we expect genetic polymorphisms that boost DA levels, such as the SLC6A3 polymorphism of the dopamine transporter [89], to increase the impact of appetitive Pavlovian stimuli on approach.”
The cognitive functions of the caudate nucleus. (2008, background): “…Parkinson et al., 1999; Parkinson et al., 2000b) and its role in instrumental Page 12 of 47 Ac ce pt ed M an us cr ip t 12 behaviour may be best described as providing a stimulus-induced motivational influence on the performance (Balleine, 2005; Parkinson et al., 2000a; Wyvell and Berridge, 2000).”
The Neuroscience of Natural Rewards: Relevance to Addictive Drugs (2002, background): “Originally surprising were findings that mesocorticolimbic DA manipulations do not change “liking” for the taste of sucrose (Peciña et al., 1997; Wyvell and Berridge, 2000), despite their role in incentive “wanting” for these and other rewards.”
Dopamine Operates as a Subsecond Modulator of Food Seeking (2004, background): “These cues promote motor behavior to obtain food reward (Wyvell and Berridge, 2000).”