Skip to main content
. 2011 Nov 16;37(3):586–608. doi: 10.1038/npp.2011.276

Table 1. Acute Effects of Methamphetamine Studies.

Investigators Domain Methamphetamine route and dose Participants and design Cognitive findings Caveats
Comer et al (2001) Immediate and long-term memory (digit-recall task); visuospatial perception (DSST); reaction time, vigilance, and inhibitory control (DAT); sustained attention and inhibitory control (RIT); learning/memory (RAT) Oral: 0, 5, 10 mg Participants reported limited experience with stimulants, but did not meet the DSM-IV criteria for a MA-use disorder N=7 (within-subjects design) MA produced no consistent effects on task performance Doses examined were lower than those used recreationally Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Small number of participants studied
Hart et al (2001) Same as above Oral: 0, 5, 10 mg Participants reported previous experience with stimulants, but did not meet the DSM-IV criteria for a MA-use disorder N=8 (within-subjects design) MA produced no consistent effects on task performance Doses examined were lower than those used recreationally Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Small number of participants studied
Hart et al (2002) Same as above Oral: 0, 5, 10, 20 mg Participants reported previous experience with stimulants, but did not meet the DSM-IV criteria for a MA use disorder N=6 (within-subjects design) ↑ Visuospatial perception ↑ Reaction time ↑ Learning/memory ↔Immediate and long-term memory ↔Vigilance ↔Inhibitory control ↔Sustained attention Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated Small number of participants studied
Hart et al (2008) Same as above Intranasal: 0, 12, 25, 50 mg/70 kg Participants met the DSM-IV criteria for MA-use disorder N=11 (within-subjects design) ↑ Visuospatial perception ↑Reaction time ↑ Vigilance ↔Immediate and long-term memory ↔Inhibitory control ↔ Sustained attention ↔ Learning/memory Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Johnson et al (2000) Sustained attention (RVIPT); conceptual ability (LRT); psychomotor skill (FTT) Oral: 0, 0.21, 0.42 mg/kg (equivalent dose: ∼15, 30 mg) Drug-naïve participants N=18 (within-subjects design) ↑ Sustained attention ↑ Conceptual ability ↔ Psychomotor skill Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Johnson et al (2005) Sustained attention (RVIPT); visuospatial perception (DSST) Intravenous: 0, 15, 30 mg Participants met the DSM-IV criteria for MA-use disorder N=19 (within-subjects design) ↑ Sustained attention ↑ Visuospatial perception Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Johnson et al (2007) Same as above Intravenous: 0, 15, 30 mg Participants met the DSM-IV criteria for MA-use disorder N=10 (within-subjects design) ↑ Sustained attention ↑ Visuospatial perception Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Kirkpatrick et al (2008) Metacognition (Judgment of agency task) Intranasal: 0, 12, 25, 50 mg/70 kg Participants met the DSM-IV criteria for MA-use disorder N=10 (within-subjects design) ↑ Metacognition Repeated-dosing effects were not investigate
Kirkpatrick et al (in press) Immediate and long-term memory (digit-recall task); visuospatial perception (DSST); reaction time, vigilance and inhibitory control (DAT); sustained attention and inhibitory control (RIT); learning/memory (RAT) Oral: 0, 20, 40 mg Participants reported previous experience with MA, but did not meet the DSM-IV criteria for a MA-use disorder N=11 (within-subjects design) ↑ Visuospatial perception ↑ Reaction time ↑ Vigilance ↑ Learning/memory ↔Immediate and long-term memory ↔Inhibitory control ↔Sustained attention Repeated-dosing effects were not investigate
Marrone et al (2010) Speech (quantity, fluency); speech perception (ratings made by naïve listeners) Oral: 0, 20, 40 mg Participants reported previous experience with MA, but did not meet the DSM-IV criteria for a MA-use disorder N=11 (within-subjects design) ↑ Speech ↑ Speech perception Repeated-dosing effects were not investigate
Mohs et al (1978) Information processing (visual search task); Divided attention (DAT); Time estimation (Time production task) Oral: 0, 10 mg Participants' drug-use histories not reported N=24 (within-subjects design) ↑ Information processing ↔ Divided attention ↔ Time estimation Only one active dose studied Dose examined was lower than those used recreationally Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Mohs et al (1980) Learning/memory (Sternberg's memory scanning task, Buschke's selective reminding task); Time estimation (Time production task) Oral: 0, 10 mg Participants' drug-use histories not reported N=10 (within-subjects design) ↔ Learning/memory ↔ Time estimation Only one active dose studied Dose examined was lower than those used recreationally Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Rush et al (2011) Visuospatial perception (DSST) Intranasal: 0, 2.5, 5, 10, 20 mg Participants met the DSM-IV criteria for a stimulant-use disorder ↑ Visuospatial perception Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Sevak et al (2009) Visuospatial perception (DSST) Oral: 0, 2.5, 5, 10, 15 mg All participants reported previous stimulant use, but did not meet the DSM-IV criteria for a MA-use disorder N=10 (within-subjects design) ↔ Visuospatial perception Doses examined were lower than those used recreationally Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Silber et al (2006) Psychomotor function (Tracking task, TMT); working memory (Digit span forward and backward); sustained attention (Digit vigilance), simple attention (Movement estimation); visuospatial perception (DSST); Perceptual speed (Inspection time task) Oral: 0, 0.42 mg/kg (maximum dose: approximately 30 mg) All participants reported previous limited stimulant use, but did not meet the DSM-IV criteria for a MA-use disorder N=20 (within-subjects design) d,l-Methamphetamine: ↑ Sustained attention ↑ Visuospatial perception ↑ Psychomotor function (Tracking task) ↔ Psychomotor function (TMT) ↔ Working memory ↔ Perceptual speed ↔ Simple attention d-methamphetamine: ↑ Sustained attention ↑ Perceptual speed ↔ Working memory ↔ Visuospatial processing (performed worse than placebo in first session and better than placebo in second) ↔ Psychomotor function ↔ Simple attention Only one active dose studied Route of administration used is not typically associated with abuse Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated
Talland and Quarton (1965) Shifting attention (Running digit span task) Intravenous: 0, 15 mg/68 kg Participants' drug-use histories not reported N=18 (within-subjects design) ↔ Shifting attention Only one active dose studied Dose examined was lower than those used recreationally Repeated-dosing effects were not investigated

Abbreviations: DAT, divided attention task; DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition; DSST, digit-symbol substitution task; FTT, finger tapping task; LRT, logical reasoning task; MA, methamphetamine; RAT, repeated acquisition task; RIT, rapid information task; RVIPT, rapid visual information processing task; TMT, Trail making task.

Cognitive performance: ↑, MA improved performance; ↔, MA produced no effect on performance.