BEHAVIORALBIOLOGY, 13, 537-539 (1975), Abstract No. 4301 NOTE W h a t D o e s the T u b e Test Measure?

KLAUS A. MICZEK

Department of Psychology, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 and HERBERT BARRY, III

University of t~ttsburgh, School of Pharmacy, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261

It is clear that the term "winning" fails to dissociate the behavior from the concept of dominance. We recommend that the behavior of advancing in the tube should be described as such without connotation of either dominance or winning, especially in the absence of information on how advancing in the tube relates to other social interactions.

We are pleased that Masur (1975) has extensively and vigorously supported our claim (Miczek and Barry, 1974) that advancing in the tube test is not a valid measure of social dominance in the rat. In addition to her own series of studies, and Van Riezen and Rijk (1972), an earlier report showed that the animal which advances in the tube test does not tend to be dominant in tests of food competition or fighting (Lindzey, Manosevitz, and Winston, 1966). In laboratory rats, poor correlations have been reported among different competition tests (e.g., Baenninger, 1970). In our recent article on effects of Ag-tetrahydrocannabinol on aggressive behavior in rats (Miczek and Barry, 1974), drug conditions and dominance in the fighting tests both showed no consistent relationship with advancing in the tube test. The data, not presented in our article, are summarized in Table 1. Contrary to Masur's (1974) suggestion, we believe that "winner" is no improvement over "dominant" as a term for the rat which advances in the tube. Both of these terms are closely related in their dictionary definitions, connotations, and prior usage by other authors. Lindzey et aL, (1961), who introduced the tube test in their paper "Social Dominance in Inbred Mouse Strains," referred, for example, to "the proportion of mice that achieved 537 Copyright © 1975 by AcademicPress, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

538

MICZEK AND BARRY TABLE 1 Percentage of Rats Advancing in the Tube Test After Injection with the Vehicle or Designated A9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Dose, Comparing Those Which were Dominant and Subordinate in the Fighting Test Dominant in fighting test

Subordinate in fighting test

Dose (mg/kg)

N

% Advancing in Tube test

N

% Advancing in Tube test

Vehicle

10

40

11

44

1

4

50

8

50

2

3

67

8

25

4

2

0

8

25

19

42

35

37

All doses

dominance b y winning." Subsequent investigators have used the terms " d o m i n a n c e " and "winning" interchangeably when referring to advancing in the tube or runway test (Lindzey et al., 1966; Schumsky and Jones, 1966; Wilson, 1968; Hsiao and Schreiber, 1968; Boice et al., 1969; Work et al., 1969; Work and Rogers, 1972; Brennan, 1969; Syme, 1974). The principal need is to identify characteristics of the animal and situation which determine the behavior o f advancing or retreating in the tube test. Previous efforts have been unsuccessful, whether the animal which advances is selectively rewarded, as in the studies by Masur, or is not differentially rewarded (Lindzey et al., 1961, 1966; Miczek and Barry, 1974). The development o f advancer and retreater strains o f rats (Masur, 1975) constitutes an important effort to identify the determinants of the tube test behavior.

REFERENCES Baenninger, L. P. (1970). Social dominance orders in the rat: "Spontaneous," food, and water competition. J. Comp. Physiol. Psych. 71,202-209. Boice, R., Hughes, D., and Cobb, C. J. (1969). Social dominance in gerbils and hamsters. Psychon. Sci. 16, 127-128. Brennan, J. F. (1969). Running speed in the dominance tube. Psychon. ScL 14, 118. Hsiao, S., and Sehreiber, S. C. (1968). Social dominance and motivational variables in rats. Psychon. ScL 10, 117-118. Lindzey, G., Manosevitz, M., and Winston~ H. (1966). Social dominance in the mouse. Psychon. ScL 5,451-452.

WHAT DOES THE TUBE TEST MEASURE

539

Lindzey, G., Winston, H., and Manosevitz, M. (1961). Social dominance in inbred mouse strains. Nature (London}, 191,474-476. Masur, J. (1975). Competitive behavior between rats: Some definition problems. Behav. Biol. 6, 533-535. Miczek, K. A., and Barry, H. (1974). 9 -tetrahydrocannablnol and aggressive behavior in rats. Behav. Biol. 11,261-267. Schumsky, D. A., and Jones, P. D. (1966). Reliable paired comparison dominance orders in rats. Psych. Rec. 16, 473-478. Syme, G. J. (1974). The approach response and performance in the dominance tube. Austral. J. Psych. 26, 31-36. van Riezen, H., and Rijk, H. (1972). Do "loser" rats become "winners"? J. Pharm. PharmacoL 24,829-830. Wilson, W. J. (1968). Adaptation to the dominance tube. Psychon. Sci. 10, 119-120. Work, M. S., Grossen, N., and Rogers, H. (1969). Role of habit and androgen level in food-seeking dominance among rats. J. Comp. PhysioL Psych. 69, 601-607. Work, M. S., and Rogers, H. (1972). Effect of estrogen level on food-seeking dominance among male rats. J. Comp. PhysioL Psych. 79, 414--418.

What does the tube test measure?

BEHAVIORALBIOLOGY, 13, 537-539 (1975), Abstract No. 4301 NOTE W h a t D o e s the T u b e Test Measure? KLAUS A. MICZEK Department of Psychology, Ca...
111KB Sizes 0 Downloads 0 Views