• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用与狗的并发操作性程序对糖类进行享乐性评分。

Hedonic scaling of sugars using concurrent operant schedules with dogs.

作者信息

Chao E T

出版信息

Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1984 Summer;8(2):225-9. doi: 10.1016/0149-7634(84)90045-9.

DOI:10.1016/0149-7634(84)90045-9
PMID:6462552
Abstract

An experiment is reported with 5 beagles in which the concurrent operants procedure was used to scale glucose and fructose against a "standard" sugar, sucrose. The sugars were in solution and the dogs were required to lever-press to obtain access to the solutions. In the first part of the experiment, the dogs chose between fructose and sucrose, and between glucose and sucrose, in a series of tests where different volumes of the two sugars were available for pressing the two levers. This arrangement made it possible to construct an empirical function for each pair of sugars showing the relation between relative strength of responding on the levers and the relative volumes of fluids obtained. From these functions it was possible to predict the ratio of fluid-volumes that would render hedonic equivalence. The data supported the prediction, indicating the ability of the concurrent schedules procedure to scale qualitatively different food-items in dogs.

摘要

报告了一项用5只比格犬进行的实验,其中采用并发操作程序,以“标准”糖蔗糖为对照来衡量葡萄糖和果糖。糖呈溶液状态,狗需要按压杠杆才能获取溶液。在实验的第一部分,在一系列测试中,狗在果糖和蔗糖之间,以及葡萄糖和蔗糖之间进行选择,在这些测试中,不同体积的两种糖可供按压两个杠杆。这种安排使得能够为每对糖构建一个经验函数,显示杠杆上反应的相对强度与所获得液体的相对体积之间的关系。从这些函数中可以预测出能产生享乐等效的液体体积比。数据支持了这一预测,表明并发程序法有能力对狗的性质不同的食物进行衡量。

相似文献

1
Hedonic scaling of sugars using concurrent operant schedules with dogs.使用与狗的并发操作性程序对糖类进行享乐性评分。
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1984 Summer;8(2):225-9. doi: 10.1016/0149-7634(84)90045-9.
2
Operant licking for intragastric sugar infusions: Differential reinforcing actions of glucose, sucrose and fructose in mice.通过操作性舔舐获取胃内输注的糖分:葡萄糖、蔗糖和果糖对小鼠的不同强化作用
Physiol Behav. 2016 Jan 1;153:115-24. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.10.021. Epub 2015 Oct 17.
3
Demonstration of basic concurrent-schedules effects with dogs: choice between different amounts of food.用狗展示基本的并发程序效应:在不同量食物之间的选择。
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1984 Summer;8(2):217-24. doi: 10.1016/0149-7634(84)90044-7.
4
Exclusive preference develops less readily on concurrent ratio schedules with wheel-running than with sucrose reinforcement.与蔗糖强化相比,在同时比率强化方案中,轮跑的独特偏好发展得更慢。
J Exp Anal Behav. 2010 Sep;94(2):135-58. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2010.94-135.
5
Preference for sugars and nonnutritive sweeteners in young beagles.幼年比格犬对糖类和非营养性甜味剂的偏好
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1984 Summer;8(2):199-203. doi: 10.1016/0149-7634(84)90041-1.
6
Attenuation of sucrose reinforcement in dopamine D1 receptor deficient mice.多巴胺D1受体缺陷小鼠中蔗糖强化作用的减弱
Eur J Neurosci. 2003 Feb;17(4):851-62. doi: 10.1046/j.1460-9568.2003.02496.x.
7
Flavor preferences conditioned by intragastric sugar infusions in rats: maltose is more reinforcing than sucrose.大鼠胃内输注糖溶液形成的味觉偏好:麦芽糖比蔗糖的强化作用更强。
Physiol Behav. 1998 Jun 15;64(4):535-41. doi: 10.1016/s0031-9384(98)00113-9.
8
Reinforcement value of sucrose measured by progressive ratio operant licking in the rat.通过大鼠渐进比率操作性舔舐测量蔗糖的强化值。
Physiol Behav. 2003 Sep;79(4-5):663-70. doi: 10.1016/s0031-9384(03)00143-4.
9
Automatic reinforcement from operant wheel-running undermines temporal control by fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement.来自操作性轮转运动的自动强化会破坏固定间隔强化时间表的时间控制。
Behav Processes. 2018 Dec;157:91-101. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2018.09.003. Epub 2018 Sep 13.
10
Operant conditioning methodology in the assessment of food preferences: introductory comments.食物偏好评估中的操作性条件反射方法:引言评论。
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1984 Summer;8(2):211-5. doi: 10.1016/0149-7634(84)90043-5.

引用本文的文献

1
Concurrent schedules of positive and negative reinforcement: differential-impact and differential-outcomes hypotheses.正强化与负强化的并发程序:差异影响和差异结果假说
J Exp Anal Behav. 2008 Jul;90(1):1-22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2008.90-1.