Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1973 Sep;20(2):291–300. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-291

Drugs and punished responding II: d-amphetamine-induced increases in punished responding1

D D Foree, F H Moretz, D E McMillan
PMCID: PMC1334129  PMID: 4752089

Abstract

The effects of d-amphetamine on punished responding were studied in two experiments. In Experiment I, pigeons responded under a multiple fixed-ratio 30 response fixed-interval 5-min schedule of food presentation with 60-sec limited holds in both components. Each response was punished with electric shock, the intensity of which was varied systematically. In Experiment II, another group of pigeons responded under a multiple fixed-interval 5-min fixed-interval 5-min schedule of food presentation with 40-sec limited holds. Each response was punished with shock during one component, and every thirtieth response was punished in the other component. d-Amphetamine increased overall rates of punished responding only rarely under any of the punishment conditions; however, response rates within the fixed-interval when rates were low were increased by d-amphetamine when the shock intensity was low (Experiment I), or when responses produced shock intermittently (Experiment II). The data suggest that the effects of d-amphetamine on punished responding depend on the control rate of responding, the punishment intensity, the punishment frequency, and the schedule of food presentation.

Full text

PDF
291

Selected References

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

  1. AZRIN N. H. A technique for delivering shock to pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1959 Apr;2:161–163. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1959.2-161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Clark F. C., Steele B. J. Effects of D-amphetamine on performance under a multiple schedule in the rat. Psychopharmacologia. 1966;9(2):157–169. doi: 10.1007/BF00404720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. DEWS P. B. Analysis of effects of psychopharmacological agents in behavioral terms. Fed Proc. 1958 Dec;17(4):1024–1030. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. HENDRY D. P., VANTOLLER C. FIXED-RATIO PUNISHMENT WITH CONTINUOUS REINFORCEMENT. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Jul;7:293–300. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-293. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hanson H. M., Witoslawski J. J., Campbell E. H. Drug effects in squirrel monkeys trained on a multiple schedule with a punishment contingency. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967 Nov;10(6):565–569. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Kelleher R. T., Morse W. H. Determinants of the specificity of behavioral effects of drugs. Ergeb Physiol. 1968;60:1–56. doi: 10.1007/BFb0107250. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. McMillan D. E. Drugs and punished responding. I. Rate-dependent effects under multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jan;19(1):133–145. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. McMillan D. E. Effects of d-amphetamine on performance under several parameters of multiple fixed-ratio, fixed-interval schedules. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1969 May;167(1):26–33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. McMillan D. E. The effects of sympathomimetic amines on schedule-controlled behavior in the pigeon. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1968 Apr;160(2):315–325. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Morrison C. F. The effects of nicotine on punished behaviour. Psychopharmacologia. 1969;14(3):221–232. doi: 10.1007/BF00404220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. SMITH C. B. EFFECTS OF D-AMPHETAMINE UPON OPERANT BEHAVIOR OF PIGEONS: ENHANCEMENT BY RESERPINE. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1964 Nov;146:167–174. [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