MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017496770 · doi:10.1037//1064-1297.8.3.276

Pavlovian psychopharmacology: The associative basis of tolerance.

2000· review· en· W2017496770 on OpenAlexaff
Shepard Siegel, Marco A. S. Baptista, Joseph A. Kim, Robert V. McDonald, Lorraine Weise-Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopharmacologyDrugDrug withdrawalClassical conditioningNeurosciencePsychologyDrug toleranceMedicineConditioningPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Pavlovian conditioning analysis of drug tolerance emphasizes that cues present at the time of drug administration become associated with drug-induced disturbances. These disturbances elicit unconditional responses that compensate for the pharmacological perturbation. The drug-compensatory responses eventually come to be elicited by drug-paired cues. These conditional compensatory responses (CCRs) mediate tolerance by counteracting the drug effect when the drug is administered in the presence of cues previously paired with the drug. If the usual predrug cues are presented in the absence the drug, the unopposed CCRs are evident as withdrawal symptoms. Recent findings elucidate intercellular and intracellular events mediating CCRs and indicate the importance of internal stimuli (pharmacological cues and interoceptive cues inherent in self-administration) to the acquisition of drug tolerance and the expression of withdrawal symptoms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.169
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations153
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental and Clinical PsychopharmacologySame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207