PERSONALITY BEHAVIORAL & COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE:
PERSONALITY NOVELTY SEEKING ADDICTION
temperament + character
III. SYSTEMS OR HIERARCHICAL APPROACH > twin & family studies
= predisposed how to = disposition (some- = PS has 3 layers: > neuropharmacology studies
react in situations thing acquired) in > persona = external layers = mask for > neurobehavioral studies of learning
→ basis for basic individual ≠ in values ≠ occasions > psychometric studies
emotions: eg. & goals → change behavior based on persons PERSONALITY = UNIQUE
anger & disgust → develops during or situations based on this all he developed the first tool
→ hardwired from life bcs of > the self = ego behind mask = tridimensional personality questionnaire COMBINATION OF
birth experiences → dominates conscious experience UNIVERSAL BUILDING
→ closely related personal TPQ BLOCKS
throughout history many philosophers & memories scale based on 3 dimensions/personality Cloninger convinced genetics !!!! +
researchers tried to distinguish personality > the unconscious awareness = not traits: determines how you react -> bcs everyone
groups normally accessible to conscious > novelty seeking traits genetically in- reacts ≠
→ always 4 big categories: awareness > harm avoidance dependent & determined → genetic variance ~ Gaussian distribut.
eg. Hippocrates: based on bodily fluids > reward dependence by specific B mechanisms → most people intermediate values
eg. Keirsey’s 4 temperaments REVIVAL TRAIT THEORY → at both ends extreme variants
→ used for personality all studies distinguish 5 main aspects that • each dimensions 4 subdivisions → = personality disorders
questionnaire & coupled to distinguish ≠ people • self-report: 15min
success = the big 5 • 100 T/F questions: eg. I am much + P also influence by sex:
more controlled than most people > HA & RD: ♀>♂
DEFINITION I. EXTRAVERSION: energetic people -> show → RD also influenced by age & cultural
Allport (psychologist) has 3 approaches: positive emotions, surgency (quick in factors
I. OMNIBUS DEFINITION: personality (PS) = thought & reactions), simulation seeking → eg. in Japan = job = life -> will
everything that makes you an individual II. AGREEABLENESS: more compassionate & determine a lot of things
→ it’s the integration & interaction of care about others > NS & PS: ♀ = ♂
genetic inheritance, experience & III. CONSCIENTIOUSNESS: self-discipline,
ways to relate the 2 act dutifully & aim for achievement TPI TCI TEMPERAMENT CUBE
→ okay to describe personality, but IV. NEUROTICISM: go more to negative = 7 PS scale:
not to discriminate personalities side of feelings = representation how ≠ PS-aspects work
> 4 ~ temperament: novelty seeking, together to form persons PS
II. TRAIT OR INTEGRATIVE / V. OPENNESS: more open to new things: art, harm avoidance, reward dependence
CONFIGURATIONAL APPROACH: trait emotion, adventures,... → combo’s of building blocks describe
& persistence
= dynamic trend of behavior which way of behaving & reacting
> 3 ~ character: self-directedness,
results from integration of numerous PSYCHOBIOLOGICAL MODEL OF cooperativeness & self-transcendence
→ can help to distinguish PS-
specific habits (=character) of TEMPERAMENT & CHARACTER > self-report: 35-45min disorders
adjustment & which expresses a > Likert scale: give score based on if
Cloninger = psychiatrist
characteristic mode of individual you (dis)agree with statement
reaction to his surroundings → interested in PS, but more in how ≠ in B is
wired + how we react > 240 T/F
(=temperament) → tool looks more in detail at
→ did a lot of things:
personalities
, perfect balance? principle last 2 test = conflict
SCORING PERSONALITY
→ rodents chose between safe – not
TRAITS IN RODENTS safe environment
→ conflict between exploring &
HOLEBOARD TEST potential threatening environm.
animal put head in dark holes
→ count #head dips + how many ≠ holes
NEUROCHEMICAL ANALYSES
~ how much animal explores new OF NT
PS-TRAITS & NEURO- environment 2 methods:
I. HOMOGENATES: sacrifice animal ->
TRANSMISSION CANOPY TEST take B -> homogenize -> add compound
NOVELTY SEEKING have canopy (onderdak) where animal can to extract NT -> homogenize -> HPLC
= heritable tendency toward intense crawl under & explore or UPLC -> chromatography: see NT
excitement → measure how long till animal comes from or NT-metabolites
→ stimulates to seek something new under canopy + how much time under
that gives reward or to stop some- NT determine aspects of personality canopy & open parts here you take all NT present in tissue,
thing that is perceived as negative → everyone genetic variations in NT-systems also presynaptic ones (are not yet
(relief of punishment) → can explain PS ≠ DARK-LIGHT influencing animal behavior
→ behavioral actions aiming at II. MICRODIALYSIS: measures only NT in
BIOGENIC AMINES TRANSITION synaptic cleft -> only these have
> avoidance monotony (eentonigheid)
> pursuit potential rewards BOX influence on behavior
> active avoidance punishment 2 compartments: → so only NT present when animal
> small & black was showing specific behavior
> open & bright are measured = big advantage!!!
→ measure latency for 1st entry in
bright part + time spend in light-dark > need constant flow perfusion fluid
SYNTHESIS & BREAKDOWN NT of ACSF
HARM AVOIDANCE → use of probes with semi-
= heritable tendency to respond intensely INDOLAMINES
ELEVATED PLUSMAZE permeable membranes: occur
CATECHOLAMINES:
to signals of aversive stimuli Phe → Tyr → DOPA → 2 open bright arms & closed compartment osmosis
→ behavioral inhibition aiming at: DA → NA → A Trp → measure time light-dark compartment > surgical procedure to plant probes
> avoiding punishment > in vivo awake animals
> avoiding novelty DOPAC MHPG 5-HT OPEN FIELD TEST → so direct link between NT
> avoiding nonreward release & animal behavior
measure where animal walks
→ helps to prevent dangerous HVA → does it explore? or stay put?
situations when chose which technique?
→ where is it walking? safe place ~ edges? homogenates: can look at more B-regions
REWARD DEPENDENCE or center room? in same animal
= heritable tendency to respond intensely → microdialysis limited bcs of skull +
to signals of reward, particularly: verbal acclimatization period needed to live
signs of social approval, help/relief & sentiment with probe
,so choice depends on research question conclusion study:
→ deep B structures = homogenates !!! DOPAMINE ANTAGONISTS > white = animals in home cage = controls GLUTAMATE
= inhibition dopaminergic N > black = animals put in open field set up conclusion study:
DOPAMINERGIC eg. clozapine = neuroleptic compound = → exploration I: in both cortex & hippo- glutamate = excitatory NT
PATHWAYS flattens emotional response: campus Ach↑ → modulate cortical & hippocampal
> ignore stimuli → exploration II: slight ↑ & then ↓ cholinergic activity
≠ dopaminergic PW !!! for behavioral > spontaneous activity & speech↓ → but no role in exploration new
activation & NS: → apathic behavior so: environment & habituation
> nigrostriatal
> associative ability & seeking -> Ach follows level of exploration: role
> mesolimbic/ventral mesostriatal ENDOCRINOLOGY: HPA-AXIS
behavior ↓ in motor activity
> mesolimbocortical
> mesodiencephalic -> Ach !!! NT to activate explore new environment = stress
OTHER PATHWAYS activation & not only dopa!!! → HPA-axis control mechanism stress
researchers also interested in other NT response
NIGROSTRIATAL → animal based study: link Ach, GABA & → animal study: NS in correlation with
= substantia nigra --> nucleus caudate & glutamate to behavior HPA-axis (elevated plusmaze)
putamen (=dorsal striatum): → methodology: → saw:
> part of basal ganglia loop > behavior: open field test: > high responders (HR) = rats
> responsible for limb movement a) 30min open field = exploration I exhibited locomotor counts
→ PW degenerated in Parkinson → highest activity level first in highest 3th of sample
→ movement problems 10min & then declines > LR = “” lowest 3th of sample
b) 60min home cage
MESOLIMBIC c) 30min exploration II
= ventral tegmental area --> → first 10 min ≠ with
→ limbic structures (hippocampus, exploration I GABA
amygdala & septum) -> regulation d) 60min home cage
emotional responses conclusion study:
> neurochemistry: microdialysis
→ complete neo-cortex -> motivational > exploration I: slight ↑, but not significant
behavior from controls
CHOLINERGIC PW: Ach > exploration II: negative correlation cortex
PHARMACOLOGICAL = basal foreB nuclei -> limbic system, hippo- GABA & motor activity exploration II
campus, complete neo-cortex & diencephalon → the more GABA, the less animals move
INTERVENTION = B-stem nuclei -> diencephalic B regions, → GABA = behavioral inhibition & role A) latency to enter light compartment
intervene with B mechanisms with agonist lower B regions & spinal cord in habituation → HR entered faster light
& antagonists → main source cholinergic NT ~ Ach B-C) how much time spend in light part
DOPAMINE AGONISTS → HR longer in light
> role cognitive tasks: LTP (learning & D) results elevated plusmaze: time
= stimulation dopaminergic N memory) spend open arms, closed arms & middle
eg. L-dopa: > !!! for response new stimuli: puts new open part
> locomotor activity ↑ info in B -> next time to new stimuli → HR > open arms
> feeling of joy & satisfaction ↑ you’re going to recognize it
→ LR > closed arms
> can reinforce drug effects > sleep
, influence on dopa release in system:
PLASMA CORTICOSTERONE EtOH DEPENDENCE dopa release VTA↑↑
LEVELS human based study: tried to link risk of → gives addicted feeling
killed animals to sample B regions & becoming alcoholic ~ NS
determine HPA related parameters ~ → looked at: COCAINE ADDICTION
corticosterone levels: > medium risk families = brother/sister rodent based study -> did 2 things:
A) comparison HR & LR: addicted, but parents not > wheel running: after running cocaine
> high risk families = both brother/sister
> before experiment: no ≠ administration
& parents addicted → HNS more on the wheel then LNS
> during experiment: HR↑ → subdivided based on EtOH usage:
B) restraint: induced other stress to COMPLETE HPA-AXIS -> moderate drinkers
rule out that response was a general -> problem drinkers
response to stress HR & LR ≠ stress systems?
-> alcohol addicts
→ no ≠ HR & LR → each group tested with
personality questionnaires
conclusion: animals exposed to focused on NS
general stress = no ≠ → high NS score = high risk > self administration: probe in animals
→ animal in plusmaze (control alcohol usage -> push handle -> cocaine directly
own response) = significant ≠ → link personality ~ risk infused in reward system
→ HPA-axis role in NS & becoming addict • first maintenance phase: animals
cause ≠?
aspects of personality knows handle releases cocaine
> (epi)genetic?
> maternal behavior?
NICOTINE ADDICTION → HNS push handle more
> environment? rodent based study: does nicotine act on → addiction risk ↑
B-reward system? • then reinstatement period:
PATHO- HNS & LNS given saline instead of
PHYSIOLOGY first holeboard: cocaine → then followed by 1
> #head dips ~ NS → high NS >> head dips cocaine dose → HNS start pulling
MR & GR mRNA LEVELS OF NS > #holes visited ~ anxiety handle wayyyy more
hippocampal mineralocorticoid R & gluco- !!!! PW = mesolimbocortical: activated bcs of → link personality ~ risk addiction
corticoid R also !!! HPA parameter: then animals exposed to normal H2O & nicotine
positive rewards
A) GR: HR < LR solution
→ neurocircuitry of reward: ventral
→ ↓GR expression responsible for → nicotine consumption: HNS >> LNS
tegmental area -> PFC -> nucl. accumbens
lower anxiety HR rats? → did internal control to see if animals
& amydala
→ gave GR antagonist to LR that consumed more, were bigger &
→ anxiety ↓: >> exploration addictions stimulate dopa release in PW just needed more -> was not the case
→ other indication that → HNS = risk becoming nicotine addict !!! handle not always active (would over-
there’s a link between dose)
stress & personality
EFFECT NICOTINE → work with light: light on? = can
B) MR = regulation basal secretion cortico- nicotine influence dopa reward system via administer cocaine / light off = no
sterone → no ≠ HR & LR cholinergic system cocaine
→ nicotine can replace Ach & activate R → need a learning period
PERSONALITY NOVELTY SEEKING ADDICTION
temperament + character
III. SYSTEMS OR HIERARCHICAL APPROACH > twin & family studies
= predisposed how to = disposition (some- = PS has 3 layers: > neuropharmacology studies
react in situations thing acquired) in > persona = external layers = mask for > neurobehavioral studies of learning
→ basis for basic individual ≠ in values ≠ occasions > psychometric studies
emotions: eg. & goals → change behavior based on persons PERSONALITY = UNIQUE
anger & disgust → develops during or situations based on this all he developed the first tool
→ hardwired from life bcs of > the self = ego behind mask = tridimensional personality questionnaire COMBINATION OF
birth experiences → dominates conscious experience UNIVERSAL BUILDING
→ closely related personal TPQ BLOCKS
throughout history many philosophers & memories scale based on 3 dimensions/personality Cloninger convinced genetics !!!! +
researchers tried to distinguish personality > the unconscious awareness = not traits: determines how you react -> bcs everyone
groups normally accessible to conscious > novelty seeking traits genetically in- reacts ≠
→ always 4 big categories: awareness > harm avoidance dependent & determined → genetic variance ~ Gaussian distribut.
eg. Hippocrates: based on bodily fluids > reward dependence by specific B mechanisms → most people intermediate values
eg. Keirsey’s 4 temperaments REVIVAL TRAIT THEORY → at both ends extreme variants
→ used for personality all studies distinguish 5 main aspects that • each dimensions 4 subdivisions → = personality disorders
questionnaire & coupled to distinguish ≠ people • self-report: 15min
success = the big 5 • 100 T/F questions: eg. I am much + P also influence by sex:
more controlled than most people > HA & RD: ♀>♂
DEFINITION I. EXTRAVERSION: energetic people -> show → RD also influenced by age & cultural
Allport (psychologist) has 3 approaches: positive emotions, surgency (quick in factors
I. OMNIBUS DEFINITION: personality (PS) = thought & reactions), simulation seeking → eg. in Japan = job = life -> will
everything that makes you an individual II. AGREEABLENESS: more compassionate & determine a lot of things
→ it’s the integration & interaction of care about others > NS & PS: ♀ = ♂
genetic inheritance, experience & III. CONSCIENTIOUSNESS: self-discipline,
ways to relate the 2 act dutifully & aim for achievement TPI TCI TEMPERAMENT CUBE
→ okay to describe personality, but IV. NEUROTICISM: go more to negative = 7 PS scale:
not to discriminate personalities side of feelings = representation how ≠ PS-aspects work
> 4 ~ temperament: novelty seeking, together to form persons PS
II. TRAIT OR INTEGRATIVE / V. OPENNESS: more open to new things: art, harm avoidance, reward dependence
CONFIGURATIONAL APPROACH: trait emotion, adventures,... → combo’s of building blocks describe
& persistence
= dynamic trend of behavior which way of behaving & reacting
> 3 ~ character: self-directedness,
results from integration of numerous PSYCHOBIOLOGICAL MODEL OF cooperativeness & self-transcendence
→ can help to distinguish PS-
specific habits (=character) of TEMPERAMENT & CHARACTER > self-report: 35-45min disorders
adjustment & which expresses a > Likert scale: give score based on if
Cloninger = psychiatrist
characteristic mode of individual you (dis)agree with statement
reaction to his surroundings → interested in PS, but more in how ≠ in B is
wired + how we react > 240 T/F
(=temperament) → tool looks more in detail at
→ did a lot of things:
personalities
, perfect balance? principle last 2 test = conflict
SCORING PERSONALITY
→ rodents chose between safe – not
TRAITS IN RODENTS safe environment
→ conflict between exploring &
HOLEBOARD TEST potential threatening environm.
animal put head in dark holes
→ count #head dips + how many ≠ holes
NEUROCHEMICAL ANALYSES
~ how much animal explores new OF NT
PS-TRAITS & NEURO- environment 2 methods:
I. HOMOGENATES: sacrifice animal ->
TRANSMISSION CANOPY TEST take B -> homogenize -> add compound
NOVELTY SEEKING have canopy (onderdak) where animal can to extract NT -> homogenize -> HPLC
= heritable tendency toward intense crawl under & explore or UPLC -> chromatography: see NT
excitement → measure how long till animal comes from or NT-metabolites
→ stimulates to seek something new under canopy + how much time under
that gives reward or to stop some- NT determine aspects of personality canopy & open parts here you take all NT present in tissue,
thing that is perceived as negative → everyone genetic variations in NT-systems also presynaptic ones (are not yet
(relief of punishment) → can explain PS ≠ DARK-LIGHT influencing animal behavior
→ behavioral actions aiming at II. MICRODIALYSIS: measures only NT in
BIOGENIC AMINES TRANSITION synaptic cleft -> only these have
> avoidance monotony (eentonigheid)
> pursuit potential rewards BOX influence on behavior
> active avoidance punishment 2 compartments: → so only NT present when animal
> small & black was showing specific behavior
> open & bright are measured = big advantage!!!
→ measure latency for 1st entry in
bright part + time spend in light-dark > need constant flow perfusion fluid
SYNTHESIS & BREAKDOWN NT of ACSF
HARM AVOIDANCE → use of probes with semi-
= heritable tendency to respond intensely INDOLAMINES
ELEVATED PLUSMAZE permeable membranes: occur
CATECHOLAMINES:
to signals of aversive stimuli Phe → Tyr → DOPA → 2 open bright arms & closed compartment osmosis
→ behavioral inhibition aiming at: DA → NA → A Trp → measure time light-dark compartment > surgical procedure to plant probes
> avoiding punishment > in vivo awake animals
> avoiding novelty DOPAC MHPG 5-HT OPEN FIELD TEST → so direct link between NT
> avoiding nonreward release & animal behavior
measure where animal walks
→ helps to prevent dangerous HVA → does it explore? or stay put?
situations when chose which technique?
→ where is it walking? safe place ~ edges? homogenates: can look at more B-regions
REWARD DEPENDENCE or center room? in same animal
= heritable tendency to respond intensely → microdialysis limited bcs of skull +
to signals of reward, particularly: verbal acclimatization period needed to live
signs of social approval, help/relief & sentiment with probe
,so choice depends on research question conclusion study:
→ deep B structures = homogenates !!! DOPAMINE ANTAGONISTS > white = animals in home cage = controls GLUTAMATE
= inhibition dopaminergic N > black = animals put in open field set up conclusion study:
DOPAMINERGIC eg. clozapine = neuroleptic compound = → exploration I: in both cortex & hippo- glutamate = excitatory NT
PATHWAYS flattens emotional response: campus Ach↑ → modulate cortical & hippocampal
> ignore stimuli → exploration II: slight ↑ & then ↓ cholinergic activity
≠ dopaminergic PW !!! for behavioral > spontaneous activity & speech↓ → but no role in exploration new
activation & NS: → apathic behavior so: environment & habituation
> nigrostriatal
> associative ability & seeking -> Ach follows level of exploration: role
> mesolimbic/ventral mesostriatal ENDOCRINOLOGY: HPA-AXIS
behavior ↓ in motor activity
> mesolimbocortical
> mesodiencephalic -> Ach !!! NT to activate explore new environment = stress
OTHER PATHWAYS activation & not only dopa!!! → HPA-axis control mechanism stress
researchers also interested in other NT response
NIGROSTRIATAL → animal based study: link Ach, GABA & → animal study: NS in correlation with
= substantia nigra --> nucleus caudate & glutamate to behavior HPA-axis (elevated plusmaze)
putamen (=dorsal striatum): → methodology: → saw:
> part of basal ganglia loop > behavior: open field test: > high responders (HR) = rats
> responsible for limb movement a) 30min open field = exploration I exhibited locomotor counts
→ PW degenerated in Parkinson → highest activity level first in highest 3th of sample
→ movement problems 10min & then declines > LR = “” lowest 3th of sample
b) 60min home cage
MESOLIMBIC c) 30min exploration II
= ventral tegmental area --> → first 10 min ≠ with
→ limbic structures (hippocampus, exploration I GABA
amygdala & septum) -> regulation d) 60min home cage
emotional responses conclusion study:
> neurochemistry: microdialysis
→ complete neo-cortex -> motivational > exploration I: slight ↑, but not significant
behavior from controls
CHOLINERGIC PW: Ach > exploration II: negative correlation cortex
PHARMACOLOGICAL = basal foreB nuclei -> limbic system, hippo- GABA & motor activity exploration II
campus, complete neo-cortex & diencephalon → the more GABA, the less animals move
INTERVENTION = B-stem nuclei -> diencephalic B regions, → GABA = behavioral inhibition & role A) latency to enter light compartment
intervene with B mechanisms with agonist lower B regions & spinal cord in habituation → HR entered faster light
& antagonists → main source cholinergic NT ~ Ach B-C) how much time spend in light part
DOPAMINE AGONISTS → HR longer in light
> role cognitive tasks: LTP (learning & D) results elevated plusmaze: time
= stimulation dopaminergic N memory) spend open arms, closed arms & middle
eg. L-dopa: > !!! for response new stimuli: puts new open part
> locomotor activity ↑ info in B -> next time to new stimuli → HR > open arms
> feeling of joy & satisfaction ↑ you’re going to recognize it
→ LR > closed arms
> can reinforce drug effects > sleep
, influence on dopa release in system:
PLASMA CORTICOSTERONE EtOH DEPENDENCE dopa release VTA↑↑
LEVELS human based study: tried to link risk of → gives addicted feeling
killed animals to sample B regions & becoming alcoholic ~ NS
determine HPA related parameters ~ → looked at: COCAINE ADDICTION
corticosterone levels: > medium risk families = brother/sister rodent based study -> did 2 things:
A) comparison HR & LR: addicted, but parents not > wheel running: after running cocaine
> high risk families = both brother/sister
> before experiment: no ≠ administration
& parents addicted → HNS more on the wheel then LNS
> during experiment: HR↑ → subdivided based on EtOH usage:
B) restraint: induced other stress to COMPLETE HPA-AXIS -> moderate drinkers
rule out that response was a general -> problem drinkers
response to stress HR & LR ≠ stress systems?
-> alcohol addicts
→ no ≠ HR & LR → each group tested with
personality questionnaires
conclusion: animals exposed to focused on NS
general stress = no ≠ → high NS score = high risk > self administration: probe in animals
→ animal in plusmaze (control alcohol usage -> push handle -> cocaine directly
own response) = significant ≠ → link personality ~ risk infused in reward system
→ HPA-axis role in NS & becoming addict • first maintenance phase: animals
cause ≠?
aspects of personality knows handle releases cocaine
> (epi)genetic?
> maternal behavior?
NICOTINE ADDICTION → HNS push handle more
> environment? rodent based study: does nicotine act on → addiction risk ↑
B-reward system? • then reinstatement period:
PATHO- HNS & LNS given saline instead of
PHYSIOLOGY first holeboard: cocaine → then followed by 1
> #head dips ~ NS → high NS >> head dips cocaine dose → HNS start pulling
MR & GR mRNA LEVELS OF NS > #holes visited ~ anxiety handle wayyyy more
hippocampal mineralocorticoid R & gluco- !!!! PW = mesolimbocortical: activated bcs of → link personality ~ risk addiction
corticoid R also !!! HPA parameter: then animals exposed to normal H2O & nicotine
positive rewards
A) GR: HR < LR solution
→ neurocircuitry of reward: ventral
→ ↓GR expression responsible for → nicotine consumption: HNS >> LNS
tegmental area -> PFC -> nucl. accumbens
lower anxiety HR rats? → did internal control to see if animals
& amydala
→ gave GR antagonist to LR that consumed more, were bigger &
→ anxiety ↓: >> exploration addictions stimulate dopa release in PW just needed more -> was not the case
→ other indication that → HNS = risk becoming nicotine addict !!! handle not always active (would over-
there’s a link between dose)
stress & personality
EFFECT NICOTINE → work with light: light on? = can
B) MR = regulation basal secretion cortico- nicotine influence dopa reward system via administer cocaine / light off = no
sterone → no ≠ HR & LR cholinergic system cocaine
→ nicotine can replace Ach & activate R → need a learning period
