Shifting behavior: an analysis of response patterns of Parkinson patients in discrimination learning.

Parkinson patients often show decreased performance on what is generally referred to as "shift tasks." This does not necessarily imply that Parkinson patients have problems with shifting, since task performance reflects not only shifting but also other factors. Using a discrimination learning task, we analyzed response patterns to determine the decision rules used. As well, we varied the manner of problem alternation (implicit versus explicit) and the type of problem alternation (extradimensional versus intradimensional shifts). In accordance with the literature, we found that Parkinson patients needed more trials to solve the problems. However, the response patterns of the Parkinson patients and controls were practically the same. An important finding was that Parkinson patients did not hold on longer to a rule, which was correct in a former problem, than controls did. Therefore, we concluded that Parkinson patients are able to shift from one decision rule to another.

Effects of selective antagonism or depletion of the cholinergic system on visual discrimination performance in rats.

A two-lever simultaneous visual discrimination task was used to study the effects on performance in Long-Evans rats of the muscarinic antagonists scopolamine (0.0125, 0.05, 0.2 and 0.8mg/kg s.c.), the M(1) antagonist pirenzepine, the M(2) antagonist AF-DX 116, the M(3) antagonist UH-AH 37 (each 3.2, 10, 32µg/rat, i.c.v.), and the cholinergic depleting agent, hemicholinium-3 (0.04, 0.2, 1.0 and 5.0µg/rat i.c.v.). Scopolamine dose-dependently decreased accuracy, increased the number of trials on which the rats failed to respond, and significantly lengthened latency to respond. Only the highest doses of hemicholinium-3, pirenzepine and AF-DX 116 reduced accuracy and increased errors of omission as well as response latency. UH-AH 37 reduced overall task performance at 10 and 32µg, suggesting that antagonism of both M(3) and other muscarinic receptors (including M(1)) had a greater effect on performance than selective antagonism of the M(1) or M(2) receptors. These data indicate that the disruptive effects of cholinergic antagonism on attentionally demanding tasks are strengthened by activity at multiple subtypes of the receptor.

Haloperidol affects stimulus-dependent strategies and not reward-dependent strategies.

In order to investigate effects of haloperidol on response strategies, rats were confronted with an unsolvable discrimination problem after being injected with haloperidol (0.1 mg/kg, IP) or its solvent. The results showed that haloperidol-treated rats displayed systematic behaviour to a lesser degree than the control rats. Haloperidol did not affect reward-dependent response strategies. However, haloperidol did affect stimulus-dependent response strategies. Haloperidol-treated rats showed more response strategies based on visual or auditory cues, and less spatial response strategies than control rats. It is concluded that this differential effect of haloperidol is the consequence of the different nature of the stimuli (discretely present visual and auditory stimuli versus constantly present spatial stimuli).

Problem-solving behaviour in apomorphine-susceptible and unsusceptible rats.

Pharmacogenetically selected apomorphine-susceptible (APO-SUS) and apomorphine-unsusceptible (APO-UNSUS) rats were trained in a discrimination learning paradigm. After the initial discrimination task was solved, reinforcement contingencies were reversed. No differences between APO-SUS and APO-UNSUS animals were found in the rate of learning. However, negative transfer from the initial discrimination to its reversal was less for the APO-SUS rats than for the APO-UNSUS rats. Moreover, the APO-SUS rats responded more to the relevant dimension (light) than the APO-UNSUS rats in the last 100 trials before solving the initial problem as well as the reversal. During overtraining on the first problem, APO-SUS animals responded less to an irrelevant dimension (position of the lever) than APO-UNSUS animals. In the first 100 trials of the reversal APO-SUS rats responded more to another irrelevant dimension (noise) than APO-UNSUS rats. The data show that APO-SUS and APO-UNSUS rats used the various dimensions (visual, auditory, and spatial) differently in the chosen discrimination learning paradigm. It is concluded that the interline differences found are the consequences of the interline differences in the dopaminergic activity of the ventral and dorsal striatum.