ArticlePsychopharmacology2017
Choice between variable and fixed cocaine injections in male rhesus monkeys.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unpredictable Drug Access and its Relevance for Substance Use Disorders: A Critical Review.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Review
- Enhancing translation: A need to leverage complex preclinical models of addictive drugs to accelerate substance use treatment options.Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior · 2024Review
- Choice between food and cocaine or fentanyl reinforcers under fixed and variable schedules in female and male rhesus monkeys.Psychopharmacology · 2023Article
- Environmental Uncertainty and Substance Use Disorders: A Behavior Analytic Perspective.Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences · 2023Article
- Choice between food and cocaine reinforcers under fixed and variable schedules in female and male rhesus monkeys.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2023Article
- Unpredictability as a modulator of drug self-administration: Relevance for substance-use disorders.Behavioural processes · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleThe schedule of drug availability may enhance choice of a drug. In non-human subjects, reinforcers are chosen more often when available under variable schedules of reinforcement relative to fixed schedules.
objectiveTo determine whether variable-drug access is an important determinant of cocaine choice by manipulating the schedule, drug dose, and combination of schedule + dose.
methodFour male rhesus monkeys chose between cocaine doses (0.025-0.4 mg/kg/injection). In control conditions, the schedule and dose of each drug delivery were fixed. In other conditions, the reinforcement schedule (i.e., variable-ratio schedule), dose of each cocaine delivery, or both were variable on one lever while all aspects on the other lever remained fixed.
resultsWhen cocaine dose was equal on average (0.1 mg/kg/injection), 2 of 4 subjects chose cocaine associated with the variable schedule more than the fixed schedule. All subjects chose the variable dose that was equal on average to the fixed dose, and this difference was statistically significant. Three of 4 subjects chose cocaine associated with the variable combination over the fixed option (when the dose was equal on average). During dose-response determinations (when dose on the variable and fixed options were not equal), making the schedule, dose, or both variable generally did not alter cocaine's potency as a reinforcer.
conclusionWhile many factors contribute to drug choice, unpredictable drug access is a feature that may be common in the natural environment and could play a key role in the allocation of behavior to drug alternatives by patients with substance-use disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.