Cited by 247Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Elevated novelty seeking and peculiar d-amphetamine sensitization in periadolescent mice compared with adult mice

Adriani, Walter, Chiarotti, Flavia, Laviola, Giovanni·1998·Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Novelty seeking as well as amphetamine sensitization were studied in adult (postnatal day "PND" > 60) and periadolescent (PND 3343) mice treated with saline or amphetamine (2 or 10 mg/kg once per day) for 3 days in a familiar environment. After a 48-hr wash-out period, mice were challenged with either saline or amphetamine (2 mg/kg) in the same environment. When given a choice, animals showed a preference for a novel environment, an effect more marked in periadolescents. Acute amphetamine strongly increased novelty seeking in adults, whereas it had an opposite effect in periadolescents. Adult mice in the chronic amphetamine 2 group showed a conditioned preference for the drug-paired compartment, whereas an aversion characterized adult mice in the amphetamine 10 group. Periadolescents in the latter group exhibited a greater sensitization of the locomotor response, but did not show the compulsive licking typical of adults. This appears to be a useful model to study psychobiological risk factors involved in vulnerability to addiction during human adolescence.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0735-7044.112.5.1152

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Adolescent rodents exhibit increased reinforcing effects to drugs that influence DA release, such as alcohol, nicotine, amphetamines, and cocaine.

    “adolescent rodents exhibit increased reinforcing effects to drugs that influence DA release, such as alcohol, nicotine, amphetamines, and cocaine (Adriani, Chiarotti et al. 1998; Laviola, Adriani et al. 1999; Adriani and Laviola 2000; Badanich, Adler et al. 2006; Shram, Funk et al. 2006; Frantz, O'Dell et al. 2007; Mathews and McCormick 2007; Brenhouse and Andersen 2008; Varlinskaya and Spear 2010”

    From Developmental imaging genetics: Linking dopamine function to adolescent behavior (2014) · cites this paper as Adriani, Chiarotti et al. 1998

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adriani, W., Chiarotti, F., & Laviola, G.
Affiliations
Istituto Superiore di Sanità (IT)
Venue
Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
1998
Volume
112
Issue
5
Pages
1152-1166
ISSN
  • 0735-7044 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0084
OpenAlex
W1993940093
Cited by
247
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 12
FWCI
1.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
novelty seeking, amphetamine sensitization, periadolescence, adolescence, addiction vulnerability, locomotor sensitization, drug preference, drug aversion, novelty preference
MeSH terms
Aging, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Body Weight, Corticosterone, Dextroamphetamine, Drug Tolerance, Exploratory Behavior, Grooming, Male, Motor Activity, Repression-Sensitization, Research Design, Multivariate Analysis, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review