Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1999 Nov;72(3):299–316. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.72-299

Similar consumption and responding across single and multiple sources of drug.

W K Bickel 1, G J Madden 1
PMCID: PMC1284742  PMID: 10605101

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to assess whether total response output and total consumption would be similar when drugs are available from single and multiple sources of reinforcement, as predicted by behavioral economics. In Experiment 1, cigarette-deprived smokers were exposed to a concurrent-chains schedule in which equal fixed-ratio schedules served as the initial links, and different reinforcer magnitudes (i.e., number of cigarette puffs) were arranged across alternatives. After the session, obtained unit price was calculated and imposed in the next session when a different number of puffs was available according to a single fixed-ratio schedule. Thus, the unit price at which cigarette puffs could be earned was yoked within subjects across the single and concurrent-chains schedules. When plotted as a function of unit price, similar consumption and response rates were usually obtained across these schedules. Experiment 2 addressed a weakness of Experiment 1, namely, that responding was allocated exclusively to the larger reinforcer magnitude in concurrent-chains conditions, and therefore this schedule may have functioned as a single schedule. In Experiment 2, subjects were instructed to alternate responding between the two alternative schedules. Instructions produced approximately equal response allocation between the two alternatives. Again, similar consumption and response rates were observed across the single and instructed concurrent-chains schedules. These findings are discussed in the context of direct effects and behavioral economics perspectives of drug self-administration.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (225.2 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Balster R. L., Schuster C. R. Fixed-interval schedule of cocaine reinforcement: effect of dose and infusion duration. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jul;20(1):119–129. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baron A., Kaufman A., Stauber K. A. Effects of instructions and reinforcement-feedback on human operant behavior maintained by fixed-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Sep;12(5):701–712. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-701. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bickel W. K., DeGrandpre R. J., Higgins S. T., Hughes J. R. Behavioral economics of drug self-administration. I. Functional equivalence of response requirement and drug dose. Life Sci. 1990;47(17):1501–1510. doi: 10.1016/0024-3205(90)90178-t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bickel W. K., DeGrandpre R. J., Higgins S. T. The behavioral economics of concurrent drug reinforcers: a review and reanalysis of drug self-administration research. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1995 Apr;118(3):250–259. doi: 10.1007/BF02245952. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bickel W. K., DeGrandpre R. J., Hughes J. R., Higgins S. T. Behavioral economics of drug self-administration. II. A unit-price analysis of cigarette smoking. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Mar;55(2):145–154. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bickel W. K., Hughes J. R., DeGrandpre R. J., Higgins S. T., Rizzuto P. Behavioral economics of drug self-administration. IV. The effects of response requirement on the consumption of and interaction between concurrently available coffee and cigarettes. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1992;107(2-3):211–216. doi: 10.1007/BF02245139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Carroll M. E. Concurrent phencyclidine and saccharin access: presentation of an alternative reinforcer reduces drug intake. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Jan;43(1):131–144. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.43-131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. DeGrandpre R. J., Bickel W. K., Hughes J. R., Layng M. P., Badger G. Unit price as a useful metric in analyzing effects of reinforcer magnitude. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Nov;60(3):641–666. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.60-641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fagerstrom K. O., Schneider N. G. Measuring nicotine dependence: a review of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire. J Behav Med. 1989 Apr;12(2):159–182. doi: 10.1007/BF00846549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Galizio M. Contingency-shaped and rule-governed behavior: instructional control of human loss avoidance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Jan;31(1):53–70. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.31-53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Goldberg S. R. Comparable behavior maintained under fixed-ratio and second-order schedules of food presentation, cocaine injection or d-amphetamine injection in the squirrel monkey. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1973 Jul;186(1):18–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Henningfield J. E., Griffiths R. R. Cigarette smoking and subjective response: effects of d-amphetamine. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981 Oct;30(4):497–505. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1981.194. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Henningfield J. E., Stitzer M. L., Griffiths R. R. Expired air carbon monoxide accumulation and elimination as a function of number of cigarettes smoked. Addict Behav. 1980;5(3):265–272. doi: 10.1016/0306-4603(80)90049-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hursh S. R., Raslear T. G., Shurtleff D., Bauman R., Simmons L. A cost-benefit analysis of demand for food. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Nov;50(3):419–440. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.50-419. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Johanson C. E. Pharmacological and environmental variables affecting drug preference in rhesus monkeys. Pharmacol Rev. 1975 Sep;27(3):343–355. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Johanson C. E., Schuster C. R. A choice procedure for drug reinforcers: cocaine and methylphenidate in the rhesus monkey. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1975 May;193(2):676–688. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Nader M. A., Woolverton W. L. Effects of increasing the magnitude of an alternative reinforcer on drug choice in a discrete-trials choice procedure. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1991;105(2):169–174. doi: 10.1007/BF02244304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Skjoldager P., Winger G., Woods J. H. Analysis of fixed-ratio behavior maintained by drug reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Sep;56(2):331–343. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-331. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Spealman R. D., Goldberg S. R. Drug self-administration by laboratory animals: control by schedules of reinforcement. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1978;18:313–339. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pa.18.040178.001525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Williams B. A. Stimulus control and associative learning. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Nov;42(3):469–483. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Zacny J. P., Stitzer M. L., Brown F. J., Yingling J. E., Griffiths R. R. Human cigarette smoking: effects of puff and inhalation parameters on smoke exposure. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1987 Feb;240(2):554–564. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES