177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11548112)
1. Individual differences in behavioral responses to novelty and amphetamine self-administration in male and female rats.
Klebaur JE; Bevins RA; Segar TM; Bardo MT
Behav Pharmacol; 2001 Jul; 12(4):267-75. PubMed ID: 11548112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The effect of novelty on amphetamine self-administration in rats classified as high and low responders.
Cain ME; Smith CM; Bardo MT
Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2004 Nov; 176(2):129-38. PubMed ID: 15502935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Individual differences in amphetamine self-administration: the role of the central nucleus of the amygdala.
Cain ME; Denehy ED; Bardo MT
Neuropsychopharmacology; 2008 Apr; 33(5):1149-61. PubMed ID: 17568395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Individual differences in novelty seeking on the playground maze predict amphetamine conditioned place preference.
Klebaur JE; Bardo MT
Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 1999 May; 63(1):131-6. PubMed ID: 10340533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Individual differences in response to novelty, amphetamine-induced activity and drug discrimination in rats.
Bevins RA; Klebaur JE; Bardo MT
Behav Pharmacol; 1997 Jun; 8(2-3):113-23. PubMed ID: 9833007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Individual differences in the effect of novel environmental stimuli prior to amphetamine self-administration in rats (Rattus norvegicus).
Cain ME; Dotson WF; Bardo MT
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol; 2006 Aug; 14(3):389-401. PubMed ID: 16893281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Novelty seeking and drug use: contribution of an animal model.
Cain ME; Saucier DA; Bardo MT
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol; 2005 Nov; 13(4):367-75. PubMed ID: 16366767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Genetics of novelty seeking, amphetamine self-administration and reinstatement using inbred rats.
Meyer AC; Rahman S; Charnigo RJ; Dwoskin LP; Crabbe JC; Bardo MT
Genes Brain Behav; 2010 Oct; 9(7):790-8. PubMed ID: 20618445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Strain differences in response to escapable and inescapable novel environments and their ability to predict amphetamine-induced locomotor activity.
Miserendino MJ; Haile CN; Kosten TA
Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2003 May; 167(3):281-90. PubMed ID: 12664191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Differential effects of novelty exposure on place preference conditioning to amphetamine and its oral consumption.
Pelloux Y; Costentin J; Duterte-Boucher D
Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2004 Jan; 171(3):277-85. PubMed ID: 12961061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Differences in locomotor response to an inescapable novel environment predict sensitivity to aversive effects of amphetamine.
Kunin D; Gaskin S; Borjas MB; Smith BR; Amit Z
Behav Pharmacol; 2001 Feb; 12(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 11270513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Predisposition to self-administer amphetamine: the contribution of response to novelty and prior exposure to the drug.
Pierre PJ; Vezina P
Psychopharmacology (Berl); 1997 Feb; 129(3):277-84. PubMed ID: 9084067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Individual differences in rats' reactivity to novelty and the unconditioned and conditioned locomotor effects of methamphetamine.
Bevins RA; Peterson JL
Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 2004 Sep; 79(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 15388285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Environmental enrichment decreases intravenous self-administration of amphetamine in female and male rats.
Bardo MT; Klebaur JE; Valone JM; Deaton C
Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2001 May; 155(3):278-84. PubMed ID: 11432690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Individual responses to novelty predict qualitative differences in d-amphetamine-induced open field but not reward-related behaviors in rats.
Antoniou K; Papathanasiou G; Panagis G; Nomikos GG; Hyphantis T; Papadopoulou-Daifoti Z
Neuroscience; 2004; 123(3):613-23. PubMed ID: 14706774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Novelty response and 50 kHz ultrasonic vocalizations: Differential prediction of locomotor and affective response to amphetamine in Sprague-Dawley rats.
Garcia EJ; Cain ME
Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2016 Feb; 233(4):625-37. PubMed ID: 26564232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Relationship between schedule-induced polydipsia and amphetamine intravenous self-administration. Individual differences and role of experience.
Piazza PV; Mittleman G; Deminière JM; Le Moal M; Simon H
Behav Brain Res; 1993 Jun; 55(2):185-93. PubMed ID: 8357527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Individual differences in response to novelty predict prefrontal cortex dopamine transporter function and cell surface expression.
Zhu J; Bardo MT; Bruntz RC; Stairs DJ; Dwoskin LP
Eur J Neurosci; 2007 Aug; 26(3):717-28. PubMed ID: 17651428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Age and sex differences in the locomotor effect of repeated methylphenidate in rats classified as high or low novelty responders.
Wooters TE; Dwoskin LP; Bardo MT
Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2006 Sep; 188(1):18-27. PubMed ID: 16896959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Individual differences in novelty-induced activity and the rewarding effects of novelty and amphetamine in rats.
Robinet PM; Rowlett JK; Bardo MT
Behav Processes; 1998 Jul; 44(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 24896722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
