scholarly journals The cognitive and behavioral effects of D-amphetamine and nicotine sensitization in adult zebrafish

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeleine Cleal ◽  
Barbara D. Fontana ◽  
Matthew O. Parker
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Flexibility ◽  
Chronic Treatment ◽  
Behavioral Sensitization ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Adult Zebrafish ◽  
Withdrawal Period ◽  
Drug Induced ◽  
Binary Choices ◽  
Drug Challenge

Abstract Background Zebrafish are growing in use as a model for understanding drug dependence and addiction. Sensitization paradigms have been a useful tool in identifying mechanisms involved in drug-induced behavioral and neurological changes, but in zebrafish have tended to focus on locomotor, rather than cognitive, endpoints. Methods Here, we used a novel method, the FMP Y-maze, which measures continuous performance through a series of repeated binary choices (L vs R), to establish a model for assessing parameters associated with psychostimulant-induced behavioral and cognitive sensitization in adult zebrafish. Results Repeat, intermittent exposure to d-amphetamine (AMPH) for 14 days increased alternations (LRLR) in the maze, suggesting improved working memory, which was enhanced further following drug challenge after a short withdrawal period, suggesting behavioral sensitization. However, this cognitive enhancement coincided with a reduction in the use of other exploration strategies, hypolocomotion, and inhibition of cognitive flexibility. Like AMPH, exposure to nicotine (NIC) increased alternations following drug challenge after chronic treatment. Repeat NIC exposure appeared to induce both cognitive and psychomotor sensitization, as evidenced by increased working memory performance (alternations) and locomotor activity, without negatively impacting other search strategies or cognitive flexibility. Conclusion Chronic treatment with AMPH or NIC boosts cognitive performance in adult zebrafish. Cognitive sensitization occurred with both drugs, resulting in enhanced working memory; however, repeat AMPH exposure, following a withdrawal period, resulted in inhibited cognitive flexibility, an effect not evident with repeat NIC exposure. Cognitive and behavioral sensitization paradigms in zebrafish could serve as a useful tool for assessing cognitive states which result in cognitive enhancing or impairing effects of drugs.

Political Ideology and Executive Functioning: The Effect of Conservatism and Liberalism on Cognitive Flexibility and Working Memory Performance

2020 ◽  
pp. 194855062091318
Author(s):  
Bryan M. Buechner ◽  
Joshua J. Clarkson ◽  
Ashley S. Otto ◽  
Edward R. Hirt ◽  
M. Cony Ho
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Flexibility ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Cognitive Factors ◽  
Memory Processes ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Different Levels

Although models of political ideology traditionally focus on the motivations that separate conservatives and liberals, a growing body of research is directly exploring the cognitive factors that vary due to political ideology. Consistent with this emerging literature, the present research proposes that conservatives and liberals excel at tasks of distinct working memory processes (i.e., inhibition and updating, respectively). Consistent with this hypothesis, three studies demonstrate that conservatives are more likely to succeed at response inhibition and liberals are more likely to succeed at response updating. Moreover, this effect is rooted in different levels of cognitive flexibility and independent of respondents’ demographics, intelligence, religiosity, and motivation. Collectively, these findings offer an important perspective on the cognitive factors that delineate conservatism and liberalism, the role of cognitive flexibility in specific working memory processes, and the impact of political ideology on a multitude of behaviors linked to inhibition and updating (e.g., creativity, problem-solving, self-control).

Short- and long-term memory tasks predict working memory performance, and vice versa.

2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 79-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Neath ◽  
Jean Saint-Aubin ◽  
Tamra J. Bireta ◽  
Andrew J. Gabel ◽  
Chelsea G. Hudson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Short And Long Term

How Does Caffeine Impact Working Memory Performance in Extraverts and Introverts?

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaclyn Jansen ◽  
Gabriella Dimotsantos ◽  
Marian E. Berryhill
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Performance

Retrospective prioritization of multiple items during working memory storage

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley DiPuma ◽  
Kelly Rivera ◽  
Edward Ester
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Memory Item ◽  
Neutral Condition ◽  
Memory Storage ◽  
Single Item ◽  
Incorrect Item ◽  
Memory Precision ◽  
Neutral Conditions ◽  
Directing Attention

Working memory (WM) performance can be improved by an informative cue presented during storage. This effect, termed a retro-cue benefit, can be used to explore mechanisms of attentional prioritization in WM. Directing attention to a single item stored in memory is known to increase memory precision while decreasing the likelihood of incorrect item reports and random guesses, but it is unclear whether similar benefits manifest when participants direct attention to multiple items stored in memory. We tested this possibility by quantifying memory performance when participants were cued to prioritize one or two items stored in working memory. Consistent with prior work, cueing participants to prioritize a single memory item yielded higher recall precision, fewer swap errors, and fewer guesses relative to a neutral cue condition. Conversely, cueing participants to prioritize two memory items yielded fewer swap errors relative to a neutral condition, but no differences in recall precision or guess rates. Although swap rates were less likely during the cue-two vs. neutral conditions, planned comparisons revealed that when participants made swap errors during cue-two trials they were far more likely to confuse two prioritized stimuli than they were to confuse a prioritized stimulus vs. a non-prioritized stimulus. Our results suggest that it is possible to prioritize multiple items stored in memory, with the caveat that doing so may increase the probability of confusing prioritized items.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document