Comparison of Adaptive Functioning Measures in Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder Without Intellectual Disability.

There is limited literature examining the adaptive functioning of adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This study aimed to (a) document Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS-3) and Adaptive Behavior Assessment System (ABAS-3) adaptive behavior profiles of adolescents with ASD; (b) examine the comparability of the two measures; and (c) assess potential discrepancies between IQ and adaptive behaviors. Participants included 14- to 18-year-olds with ASD without intellectual disability. Significant adaptive skills deficits were observed with most scores at least one standard deviation below the mean. Relative weaknesses were observed for social and daily living skills. The absolute magnitude of VABS-3 and ABAS-3 scores differed. There were significant discrepancies between IQ and adaptive functioning. These findings have implications for clinicians and researchers.

Using a dependent schedule to measure risky choice in male rats: Effects of d-amphetamine, methylphenidate, and methamphetamine.

Risky choice is the tendency to choose a large, uncertain reward over a small, certain reward, and is typically measured with probability discounting, in which the probability of obtaining the large reinforcer decreases across blocks of trials. One caveat to traditional procedures is that independent schedules are used, in which subjects can show exclusive preference for one alternative relative to the other. For example, some rats show exclusive preference for the small, certain reinforcer as soon as delivery of the large reinforcer becomes probabilistic. Therefore, determining if a drug increases risk aversion (i.e., decreases responding for the probabilistic alternative) is difficult (due to floor effects). The overall goal of this experiment was to use a concurrent-chains procedure that incorporated a dependent schedule during the initial link, thus preventing animals from showing exclusive preference for one alternative relative to the other. To determine how pharmacological manipulations alter performance in this task, male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 8) received injections of amphetamine (0, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 mg/kg), methylphenidate (0, 0.3, 1.0, 3.0 mg/kg), and methamphetamine (0, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 mg/kg). Amphetamine (0.25 mg/kg) and methylphenidate (3.0 mg/kg) selectively increased risky choice, whereas higher doses of amphetamine (0.5 and 1.0 kg/mg) and each dose of methamphetamine impaired stimulus control (i.e., flattened the discounting function). These results show that dependent schedules can be used to measure risk-taking behavior and that psychostimulants promote suboptimal choice when this schedule is used. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Effects of d-amphetamine and MK-801 on impulsive choice: Modulation by schedule of reinforcement and delay length.

Procedural modifications can modulate drug effects in delay discounting, such as signaling the delay to reinforcement and altering the order in which delays are presented. Although the schedule of reinforcement can alter the rate at which animals discount a reinforcer, research has not determined if animals trained on different schedules of reinforcement are differentially affected by pharmacological manipulations. Similarly, research has not determined if using different delays to reinforcement can modulate drug effects in delay discounting. Male Sprague Dawley rats (n = 36) were split into four groups and were trained in a delay-discounting procedure. The schedule of reinforcement (fixed ratio [FR] 1 vs. FR 10) and delays to reinforcement (0, 5, 10, 20, and 50 s vs. 0, 10, 30, 60, 100 s) were manipulated for each group. Following behavioral training, rats were treated with d-amphetamine (0, 0.25, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/kg) and MK-801 (0, 0.03, and 0.06 mg/kg). Results showed that amphetamine decreased impulsive choice when a FR 1 schedule was used, but only when the short delay sequence was used. Conversely, amphetamine decreased impulsive choice when a FR 10 schedule was used, but only when rats were trained on the long delay sequence. MK-801 decreased impulsive choice in rats trained on a FR 1 schedule, regardless of delay sequence, but did not alter choice in rats trained on a FR 10 schedule. These results show that schedule of reinforcement and delay length can modulate drug effects in delay discounting.

Effects of GluN2B-selective antagonists on delay and probability discounting in male rats: Modulation by delay/probability presentation order.

The contribution of the GluN2B subunit of the NMDA receptor to impulsivity has recently been examined. Ro 63-1908, a highly selective antagonist for the GluN2B, decreases impulsive choice. Because the order in which delays are presented modulates drug effects in discounting procedures, one goal of the current study was to determine the effects of Ro 63-1908 in delay discounting procedures in which the delays to obtaining the large reinforcer either increase or decrease across the session. We also determined if Ro 63-1908 differentially alters risky choice in probability discounting procedures that use ascending/descending schedules. Male rats were trained in either delay (n = 24) or probability (n = 24) discounting in which the delay to/odds against reinforcement were presented in either ascending or descending order (n = 12 each schedule). Following training, rats received the GluN2B antagonists Ro 63-1908 (0-1.0 mg/kg) and CP-101,606 (0-3.0 mg/kg). In delay discounting, Ro 63-1908 (1.0 mg/kg), but not CP-101,606, decreased choice for the large reinforcer, but only when the delays decreased across the session. In probability discounting, Ro 63-1908 (0.3 mg/kg)/CP-101,606 (1.0 mg/kg) increased choice for the large reinforcer when the probability of obtaining this alternative decreased across the session, but Ro 63-1908 (1.0 mg/kg)/CP-101,606 (3.0 mg/kg) decreased choice when the probabilities increased. These results show that the GluN2B is a mediator of impulsive/risky choice, but the effects of GluN2B antagonists are dependent on the order in which delays/probabilities are presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).