Skip to main content
Log in

Chlorpromazine and pimozide alter reinforcement efficacy and motor performance

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

Abstract

This study evaluated the effects of chlorpromazine and pimozide on reinforced responding. In each session, rats were exposed to a series of five variable-interval reinforcement schedules. The response requirement was a lever press, the reward was a small portion of water, and the reinforcement rate varied from about 20 to 660 reinforcers per hour. Response rate was a negatively accelerated function of reinforcement rate, and the relationship between the two variables was described by the equation for a rectangular hyperbola (the matching law). One parameter of the hyperbola is equivalent to the asymptotic response rate and the other parameter is equivalent to the rate of reinforcement that maintains a one-half asymptotic response rate. Chlorpromazine (0.75–3.0 mg/kg) and pimozide (0.1–0.4 mg/kg) dose-dependently decreased response rates. At low doses, the response rate decreases were, for the most part, restricted to the low reinforcement rate schedules. In contrast, the highest dose tested decreased response rates at both low and high reinforcement rates. The patterns of response rate decreases resulted in dose-dependent changes in the parameters of the matching law equation. The shifts in the matching law parameters were discussed in terms of the motoric and motivational interpretations of neuroleptic-induced response rate changes.

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

  • Bradshaw CM, Szabadi E, Bevan P (1978) Effect of variable-interval punishment on the behavior of humans in variable-interval schedule of monetary reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav 29:161–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw CM, Ruddle HV, Szabadi E (1981) Relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency in variable-interval schedules: III. The effect of d-amphetamine. J Exp Anal Behav 36:29–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw CM, Szabadi E, Ruddle HV (1983a) Herrnstein's equation: Effect of response-force requirement on performance in variable-interval schedules. Behav Anal Lett 3:93–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw CM, Szabadi E, Ruddle HV, Pears E (1983b) Herrnstein's equation: effect of deprivation level on performance in variable-interval schedules. Behav Anal Lett 3:267–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad DG, Sidman M (1956) Sucrose concentration as reinforcement for lever pressing by monkeys, Psychol Rep 2:381–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Creese I, Burt DR, Snyder SH (1976) Dopamine receptor binding predicts clinical and pharmacological potencies of antischizophrenic drugs. Science 192:481–483

    Google Scholar 

  • de Villiers PA, Herrnstein RJ (1976) Toward a law of response strength. Psychol Bull 83:1121–1153

    Google Scholar 

  • Ettenberg A, Carlisle HJ (1985) Neuroleptic induced deficits in operant responding for temperature reinforcement. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 22:761–767

    Google Scholar 

  • Ettenberg A, Koob GG, Bloom FE (1981) Response artifact in the measurement of neuroleptic-induced anhedonia. Science 209:357–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Fibiger HC, Carter DA, Phillips AG (1976) Decreased intracranial self-stimulation after neuroleptics or 6-hydroxydopamine: Evidence for mediation by motor deficits rather than by reduced reward. Psychopharmacology 47:21–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin KBJ (1978) Catecholamines and self-stimulation: Reward and performance effects dissociated. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 9:813–820

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallistel CR, Karras D (1984) Pimozide and amphetamine have opposing effects on the reward summation function. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 20:73–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Geldard FA (1972) The human senses. John Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerber GJ, Sing J, Wise RA (1981) Pimozide attenuates lever pressing for water in rats. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 14:201–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Gramling SE, Fowler SC, Collins KR (1984) Some effects of pimozide on nondeperived rats licking sucrose solutions in an anhedonia paradigm. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 21:617–624

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman N (1954) Equal-reinforcement values for sucrose and glucose solutions compared with equal-sweetness values. J Comp Physiol Psychol 47:358–361

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton AL, Stellar JR, Hart EB (1985) Reward, performance, and the response strength method in self-stimulating rats: Validation and neuroleptics. Physiol Behav (in press)

  • Herrnstein RJ (1970) On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav 13:243–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrnstein RJ (1974) Formal properties of the matching law. J Exp Anal Behav 21:159–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyman GM (1983) A parametric evaluation of the hedonic and motoric effects of drugs: pimozide and amphetamine. J Exp Anal Behav 40:113–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyman GM (1985) How drugs affect cells and reinforcement affects behavior: Formal analogies. In: Church RM, Commons M, Stellar JR, Wagner AR (eds) Biological determinants of reinforcement and memory, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey (in press)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heyman GM, Coons W (1981) The effects of pimozide on reinforced responding. Abstract: Eastern Psychological Association Meeting, New York

  • Heyman GM, Seiden LS (1985) A parametric description of amphetamine's effects on response rate: changes in reinforcement efficacy and response topography. Psychopharmacology 85:154–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraeling P (1961) Analysis of amount of reward as a variable in learning. J Comp Physiol Psychol 54:560–565

    Google Scholar 

  • Logan FA (1960) Incentive, Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • McSweeney FK (1978) Prediction of concurrent key-peck and treadle press responding from simple schedule performance. Anim Learn Behav 6:444–450

    Google Scholar 

  • Morley MJ, Bradshaw CM, Szabadi E (1984) The effects of pimozide on variable-interval performance: A test of the anhedonia hypothesis of the mode of action of neuroleptics. Psychopharmacology 84:531–536

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosteller F, Rourke REK, Thomas GB (1972) Probability with statistical applications. Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Olds J, Travis RP (1960) Effects of chlorpromazine, meprobamate, pentobarbital and morphine on self-stimulation. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 128:397–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Scatchard G (1949) The attraction of proteins for small molecules and ions. Ann NY Acad Sci 51:660–672

    Google Scholar 

  • Tombaugh TN, Tombaugh J, Anisman H (1979) Effects of dopamine receptor blockade on alimentary behaviors: Home cage food consumption, magazine training, and performance. Psychopharmacology 66:219–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetherington CL, Lucas TR (1980) A note on fitting Herrnstein's equation. J Exp Anal Behav 34:199–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise RA (1982) Neuroleptics and operant behavior: The anhedonia hypothesis, Behav Brain Sci 5:39–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise RA, Spindler J, de Wit H, Gerber GJ (1978) Neuroleptic-induced “anhedonia” in rats: pimozide blocks the reward quality of food. Science 201:262–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods PJ, Holland CH (1964) Instrumental escape conditioning in a water tank: Effects of constant reinforcement at different levels of drive stimulus intensity. J Comp Physiol Psychol 62:403–408

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Offprint requests to: G.M. Heyman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heyman, G.M., Kinzie, D.L. & Seiden, L.S. Chlorpromazine and pimozide alter reinforcement efficacy and motor performance. Psychopharmacology 88, 346–353 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00180837

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00180837

Key words

Navigation