Nikotinin dönme yönü tercihi ve uzaysal görsel dikkat üzerine etkisi

Abstract

Keywords

• -

Nikotinin Dönme Yönü Tercihi ve Uzaysal Görsel Dikkat Üzerine Etkisi

Abstract

Bu çalıșmada, genç, yetișkin, sağlıklı, erkeklerde nikotinin dönme yönü tercihi ve dikkat asimetrisine etkileri araștırılmıștır. Çalıșmaya 18-26 yaș arası, sağlıklı, sağlak, 20 adet sigara içen/20 adet sigara içmeyen 40 erkek gönüllü katılmıștır. Deneklere Dönme Yönü Tercihi Testi ve Landmark Testi uygulamıștır. Tüm denekler çalıșmaya iki kere katılmıșlardır. Sigara içen grup bir gelișlerinde, yoksunluk [yok(+)] durumunda, diğerinde ise normal sigara içme alıșkanlıklarını değiștirmeden [yok(-)], denemelere katılmıșlardır. Verilerin değerlendirilmesinde, Two-Way ANOVA, Student t, Paired t, Kruskal Wallis, Wilcoxon ve Mann-Whitney U testleri kullanılmıștır. 0,05’in altında olan p değeri istatistiksel olarak anlamlı kabul edilmiștir. Araștırmada deneklerin genel olarak soldan dönme eğilimi gösterdiği ancak bu eğilimin kontrol ve/veya deney grubunun alt grupları arasında herhangi bir değișim göstermediği bulunmuștur. Landmark Testi’nde deneklerin ortadan bölünmüș çizgilerdeki yanıtlarına göre asimetri indeksleri hesaplanmıș, dikkat asimetrisinin yönü ve șiddeti tespit edilmiștir. Tüm denekler için, sol alanda asimetri indeksi en düșük değeri alırken, bunu orta ve sağ alan izlemiștir. Sol ve orta alanda asimetri indeksi negatif değerler alırken, sağ alanda pozitif değer almıștır. Alanlar arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunmuștur. Kontrol grubu, yok(+) ve yok(-) grupları arasında yapılan çoklu analizlerde hiçbir grup arasında istatistiksel açıdan anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıștır. Araștırmanın tüm bulguları, nikotinin dönme yönü tercihine ve Landmark Testi sonuçlarına anlamlı bir etki yapmadığı yönündedir. Ayrıca Dönme Yönü Tercihi Testi ile Landmark Testi sonuçlar arasında bir korelasyon bulunmaması, dikkat asimetrisinin dopaminerjik asimetriden etkilendiği tezini desteklememektedir.

Keywords

• Serebral Asimetri, Landmark Testi, Nikotin, Dönme Yönü Tercihi

References

1. Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (WHO). The world health report 1999 – Making a difference. 1999 Geneva.
2. Grenhoff J, Svensson TH. Pharmacology of nicotine. Brit J Addict 1989; 84: 477492.
3. Clarke PBS, Schwartz RD, Paul SM, et al. Nicotinic binding in rat brain: Autoradiographic comparison of [³H] acetylcholine, [³H] nicotine and [¹²5] αbungarotoxin. J Neurosci 1985; 5: 13071315.
4. Berridge KC, Robinson TE. Parsing reward. Trends Neurosci 2003; 26: 507513.
5. Hyman ES, Malenka CM, Nestler JE. Neural mechanisms of addiction: The role of reward-related learning and memory. Annu Rev Neurosci 2006; 29: 565-598.
6. Berridge KC, Robinson TE. What is the role of dopamine in reward: hedonic impact reward learning or incentive salience? Brain Res Brain Res Rev 1998; 28: 309-369.
7. Koob FG, Sanna PP, Bloom EF. Neuroscience of addiction. Neuron 1998; 21: 467-476.
8. Cohen JD, Braver TS, Brown JW. Computational perspectives on dopamine function in prefrontal cortex. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2002; 12: 223-229.

9. Montague PR, Dayan P, Sejnowski TJ. A framework for mesencephalic dopamine systems based on predictive Hebbian learning. J Neurosci 1996; 16: 1936-1947.
10. Mansvelder HD, McGehee DS. Longterm potentiation of excitatory inputs to brain reward areas by nicotine. Neuron 2000; 27: 349-357.
11. Hellige JB. Hemispheric asymmetry. What’s right and what is left? London: Harvard University Press; 1993.
12. Tucker DM, Williamson PA. Asymmetric neural control systems in human selfregulation. Psychol Rev 1984; 91: 185215.
13. Glick SD, Ross DA, Hough LB. Lateral asymmetry of neurotransmitters in human brain. Brain Res 1982; 234: 53-63.
14. Wagner HN, Burns RF, Dannals DF, et al. Imaging dopamine receptors in the human brain by positron tomography. Science 1983; 221: 1264-1266.
15. Fuente-Fernandez RL, Kishore A, Calne DB, et al. Nigrostriatal dopamine system and motor lateralization. Behav Brain Res 2000; 112: 63-68.
16. Nalçacı E. Beyin işlevlerinin yanallaşması. In: Karakaş S. Editors. Kognitif Nörobilimler. Ankara: Özyurt; 2008. p. 149-168.
17. Nalçacı E. Beyin işlevlerinin ve dopaminerjik sistemin asimetrisi. In. XXXVI. Ulusal Psikiyatri Kongre Kitabı; 3-7 Ekim 2000; Antalya, Türkiye. s.40-44.
18. Vallortigara G. The Evolutionary Psychology of Left and Right: Costs and Benefits of Lateralization. Dev Psychobiol 2006; 48: 418-427.
19. Kerkhoff G. Spatial hemineglect in humans. Prog Neurobiol 2001; 63: 1-27.
20. Mesulam M. A cortical network for directed attention and unilateral neglect. Ann Neurol 1981; 10: 309-325.
21. Binder J, Marshall R, Lazar R, et al. Distinct syndromes of hemineglect. Arch Neurol 1992; 49: 1187-1194.
22. Speedie LJ, Wertman E, Verfaellie M, et al. Reading direction and spatial neglect. Cortex 2002; 38: 59-67.
23. Çiçek M, Deouell LY, Knight RT. Brain activity during landmark and line bisection tasks. Front Hum Neurosci 2009; 3: 1-8
24. Bowers D, Heilman KM. Pseudoneglect effects of hemispace on a tactile line bisection task. Neuropsychologia 1980; 18: 491-498.
25. Manly T, Dober VB, Dodds CM, et al. Rightward shift in spatial awareness with declining alertness. Neuropsychologia 2005; 43: 1721-1728.
26. Marshall JC, Halligan PW. Within and between task dissociations in visuo-spatial neglect: a case study. Cortex 1995; 31: 367-376.
27. Fink GR, Marshall JC, Weiss PH, et al. The neural basis of vertical and horizontal line bisection judgements: an fMRI study of normal volunteers. Neuroimage 2001; 14: 59-67.
28. Ungerstedt U, Arbuthnot GW. Quantative recording of behavior in rats after 6-hydroxy-dopamine lesions of nigrostriatal dopamine system. Brain Res 1970; 24: 294-298.
29. Glick SD, Cox RD. Nocturnal rotation in normal rats: correlation with amphetamine-induced rotation and effects of nigrostriatal lesions. Brain Res 1978; 150: 149-161.
30. Pycock CJ. Commentary: Turning behavior in animals. Neuroscience 1980; 5: 461-514.
31. Cunha CD, Wietzikoski EC, Ferro MM, et al. Hemiparkinsonian rats rotate toward the side with the weaker dopaminergic neurotransmission. Behav Brain Res 2008; 189: 364-372.
32. Bracha HS, Shults C, Glick SD, et al. Spontaneous asymmetric circling behavior in hemi-parkinsonism; a human equivalent of the lesioned-circling rodent behavior. Life Sci 1987; 40: 1127-1130.
33. Bracha HS, Seitz DJ, Otemaa J, et al. Rotational movement (circling) in normal humans: sex difference and relationship Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası 2012, 65 (2) 90 Nikotinin Dönme Yönü Tercihi ve Uzaysal Görsel Dikkat Üzerine Etkisi to hand, foot and eye preference. Brain Res 1987; 411: 231-235.
34. Wright GW, Gurfinkel V, King L, et al. Parkinson’s disease shows perceptuomotor asymmetry unrelated to motor symptoms. Neurosci Lett 2007; 417: 10-15.
35. Brugger P, Graves RE. Right hemispatial inattention and magical ideation. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1997; 247: 55-57.
36. Milton AL, Marshall JWB, Cummings RM, et al. Dissociation of hemi-spatial and hemi-motor impairments in a unilateral primate model of Parkinson’s disease. Behav Brain Res 2004; 150: 5563.
37. Tops M, Wijers AA, Koch T, et al. Modulation of rotational behavior in healthy volunteers by cortisol administration. Biol Psychol 2006; 71: 240-243.
38. Zivotofsky AZ, Edelman S, Green T, et al. Hemisphere asymmetry in schizophrenia as revealed through line bisection, line trisection, and letter cancellation. Brain Res 2007; 1142: 70-79.
39. McCourt ME, Shpaner M, Javitt DC, et al. Hemispheric asymmetry and callosal integration of visuospatial attention in schizophrenia: a tachistoscopic line bisection study. Schizophr Res 2008; 102: 189-196.
40. Bracha HS. Asymmetric rotational behavior, a dopamine-related asymmetry: preliminary findings in unmedicated and never medicated schizophrenic patients. Biol Psychiat 1987; 22: 995-1003.
41. Bracha HS, Livingston RL, Clothier J, et al. Correlation of severity of psychiatric patients’ delusions with right hemispatial inattention (left-turning behavior). The Am J Psychiatry 1993; 150: 330-332.
42. Levine J, Martine T, Feraro R, et al. Medicated chronic schizophrenic patients do not demonstrate left turning asymmetry. Neuropsychobiology 1997; 36: 22-24.
43. Mohr C, Bracha HS, Brugger P. Magical ideation modulates spatial behavior. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2003; 15: 168-174.
44. Mead LA, Hampson E. Turning bias in humans is influenced by phase of the menstrual cycle. Horm Behav 1997; 31: 65-74.
45. Kalaycıoğlu C, Güneş E, Nalçacı E. Dönme yönü tercihi belirleme testinin güvenilirliği. In. Türk Fizyolojik Bilimler Derneği 27. Ulusal Kongre Kitabı; 8-12 Ekim 2001; Đstanbul, Türkiye. s.91.
46. Nalçacı E, Kalaycıoğlu C, Güneş E, ve ark. El tercihi anketinin geçerlik ve güvenilirliliği. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi 2002; 13: 99-106.
47. Kalaycıoğlu C, Kara C, Atbaşoğlu C, ve ark. Aspects of foot preference: differential relationships of skilled and unskilled foot movements with motor asymmetry. Laterality 2008; 13: 124-142.
48. Uysal MA, Kadakal F, Karşıdağ Ç, ve ark. Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence: Reliability in a Turkish sample and factor analysis. Tüberküloz ve Toraks Dergisi 2004; 52: 115-121.
49. Bellgrove MA, Hawi Z, Kirley A, et al. Association between dopamine transporter (DAT1) genotype, left-sided inattention, and an enhanced response to methylphenidate in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology 2005; 30: 2290-2297.
50. Koshikawa N, Kitamura M, Kobayashi M, et al. Contralateral turning elicited by unilateral stimulation of dopamine D2 and D1 receptors in the nucleus accumbens of rats is due to stimulation of these receptors in the shell, but not the core, of this nucleus. Psychopharmacology 1996; 126: 185-190.
51. Han F, Wang H. Effects of desensitized nicotinic receptors on rotational behavior in a 6-hydroxydopamine model of Parkinson’s disease. Neurosci Lett 2007; 415: 200-204.
52. Lenoir M, Overschelde SV, Rycke M, et al. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors of turning preferences in humans. Neurosci Lett 2006; 393: 179–183.
53. Toussaint Y, Do MC, Fagard J. What are the factors responsible for the deviation in stepping on the spot. Neurosci Lett 2008; 435: 60-64.
54. Bisiach E, Ricci R, Lualdi M, et al. Perceptual and response bias in unilateral neglect: two modified versions of the milner landmark task. Brain Cognition 1998; 37: 369-386.
55. Fink GR, Marshall JC, Weiss PH, et al. The neural basis of vertical and horizontal line bisection judgements: an fMRI study of normal volunteers. Neuroimage 2001; 14: 59-67.
56. Kinsbourne M. The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta Psychol 1970; 33: 193-201.
57. Thiel CM, Fink GR. Effects of the cholinergic agoinst nicotine on reorienting of visual spatial attention and top-down attentional control. Neuroscience 2008; 152: 381-390.
58. Vossel S, Thiel CM, Fink GR. Behavioral and neural effects of nicotine on visuospatial attentional reorienting in non-smoking subjects. Neuropsychopharmacology 2008; 33: 731-738.
59. Geminiani G, Bottini G, Sterzi R. Dopaminergic stimulation in unilateral neglect. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 65: 344-347.
60. Damasio AR, Damasio H, Chui HC. Neglect following damage to frontal lobe or basal ganglia. Neuropsychologia 1980; 18: 123-132.
61. Tomer R. Attentional bias as trait: correlations with novelty seeking. Neuropsychologia 2008; 46: 2064-2070.
62. Carli M, Evenden JL, Robbins TW. Depletion of unilateral striatal dopamine impairs initiation of contralateral actions and not sensory attention. Nature 1985; 313: 679-682.
63. Posner MI, Petersen SE. The attention system of the human brain. Annu Rev Neurosci 1990; 13: 25-42.