Psychopharmacology

, Volume 217, Issue 2, pp 177–187 | Cite as

Single- and cross-commodity discounting among cocaine addicts: the commodity and its temporal location determine discounting rate

  • Warren K. Bickel
  • Reid D. Landes
  • Darren R. Christensen
  • Lisa Jackson
  • Bryan A. Jones
  • Zeb Kurth-Nelson
  • A. David Redish
Original Investigation

Abstract

Rationale

Intertemporal choice has provided important insights into understanding addiction, predicted drug-dependence status, and outcomes of treatment interventions. However, such analyses have largely been based on the choice of a single commodity available either immediately or later (e.g., money now vs. money later). In real life, important choices for those with addiction depend on making decisions across commodities, such as between drug and non-drug reinforcers. To date, no published study has systematically evaluated intertemporal choice using all combinations of a drug and a non-drug commodity.

Objectives

In this study, we examine the interaction between intertemporal choice and commodity type in the decision-making process of cocaine-dependent individuals.

Methods

This study of 47 treatment-seeking cocaine addicts analyzes intertemporal choices of two commodities (equated amounts of cocaine and money), specifically between cocaine now vs. cocaine later (C-C), money now vs. money later (M-M), cocaine now vs. money later (C-M), and money now vs. cocaine later (M-C).

Results

Cocaine addicts discounted significantly more in the C-C condition than in M-M (P = 0.032), consistent with previous reports. Importantly, the two cross-commodity discounting conditions produced different results. Discounting in C-M was intermediate to the C-C and M-M rates, while the greatest degree of discounting occurred in M-C.

Conclusions

These data indicate that the menu of commodities offered alter discounting rates in intertemporal choice and that the greatest rate is obtained when the drug is the later available commodity. Implications for understanding intertemporal choices and addiction are addressed.

Keywords

Addiction Cocaine Delay-discounting Behavioral economics Single-commodity discounting Cross-commodity discounting Competing neurobehavioral decision systems theory 

References

  1. Baker F, Johnson MW, Bickel WK (2003) Delay discounting in current and never-before cigarette smokers: similarities and differences across commodity, sign, and magnitude. J Abnorm Psychol 112:382–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernoulli D (1954) Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk. Econometrica 22:23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bickel WK, Marsch LA (2001) Toward a behavioral economic understanding of drug dependence: delay discounting processes. Addiction 96:73–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bickel WK, Mueller ET (2009) Toward the study of trans-disease processes: a novel approach with special reference to the study of co-morbidity. J Dual Diagn 5:131–138PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bickel WK, Amass L, Higgins ST, Badger GJ, Esch RA (1997) Effects of adding behavioral treatment to opioid detoxification with buprenorphine. J Consult Clin Psychol 65:803–810PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bickel WK, Odum AL, Madden GJ (1999) Impulsivity and cigarette smoking: delay discounting in current, never, and ex-smokers. Psychopharmacology 146:447–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bickel WK, Miller ML, Yi R, Kowal BP, Lindquist DM, Pitcock JA (2007) Behavioral- and neuron-economics of drug addiction: competing neural systems and temporal discounting processes. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 90:85–91Google Scholar
  8. Bickel WK, Pitcock JA, Yi R, Angtuaco EJ (2009) Congruence of BOLD response across intertemporal choice conditions: fictive and real money gains and losses. J Neurosci 29(27):8839–8846PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bickel WK, Jones BA, Landes RD, Christensen DR, Jackson L, Mancino M (2010) Hypothetical intertemporal choice and real economic behavior: delay discounting predicts voucher redemptions during contingency-management procedures. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 18:546–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bickel WK, Yi R, Landes RD, Hill P, Baxter C (2011) Remember the future: working memory training decreases temporal discounting among stimulant addicts. Biol Psychiatry 69:260–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bjork JM, Hommer DW, Grant SJ, Danube C (2004) Impulsivity in abstinent alcohol-dependent patients: relation to control subjects and type 1-/type 2 like traits. Alcohol 34:133–150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Budney AJ, Higgins ST, Sigmon SC (2003) Contingency management in the substance abuse treatment clinic. In: Rotgers F, Morgenstern J, Walters S (eds) Treating substance abuse: theory and technique. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Charlton SR, Fantino E (2008) Commodity specific rates of temporal discounting: does metabolic function underlie differences in rates of discounting? Behav Process 77:334–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chopra MP, Landes RD, Gatchalian KM, Jackson LC, Buchhalter AR, Stitzer ML, Marsch LA, Bickel WK (2009) Buprenorphine medication versus voucher contingencies in promoting abstinence from opioids and cocaine. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 17:226–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coffey SF, Gudleski GD, Saladin ME, Brady KT (2003) Impulsivity and rapid discounting of delayed hypothetical rewards in cocaine-dependent individuals. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 11:18–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dom G, D’haene P, Hulstijn W, Sabbe B (2006) Impulsivity in abstinent early- and late-onset alcoholics: differences in self-report measures and a discounting task. Addiction 101:50–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Du W, Green L, Myerson J (2002) Cross-cultural comparisons of discounting delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychol Rec 52:479–492Google Scholar
  18. Estle SJ, Green L, Myerson J, Holt DD (2007) Discounting of monetary and directly consumable rewards. Psychol Sci 18:58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glimcher PW (2008) Understanding risk: a guide for the perplexed. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 8:348–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glimcher PW (2010) Foundations of Neuroeconomic Analysis. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  21. Green L, Myerson J (1996) Exponential versus hyperbolic discounting of delayed outcomes: risk and waiting time. Am Zool 36:496–505Google Scholar
  22. Heil SH, Johnson MW, Higgins ST, Bickel WK (2006) Delay discounting in currently using and currently abstinent cocaine-dependent outpatients and non-drug-using matched controls. Addict Behav 31:1290–1294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Higgins ST, Budney AJ, Bickel WK, Foerg FE, Donham R, Badger GJ (1994) Incentives improve outcome in outpatient behavioral treatment of cocaine dependence. Arch Gen Psychiatry 51:568–576PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hoffman WF, Moore M, Templin R, McFarland B, Hitzemann RJ, Mitchell SH (2006) Neuropsychological function and delay discounting in methamphetamine-dependent individuals. Psychopharmacol Berl 188:162–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson MW, Bickel WK (2002) Within-subject comparison of real and hypothetical money rewards in delay discounting. J Exp Anal Behav 77:129–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kable JW, Glimcher PW (2009) The neurobiology of decision: consensus and controversy. Neuron 63:733PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect Theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kirby KN (1997) Bidding on the future: evidence against normative discounting of delayed rewards. J Exp Psychol Gen 126:54–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kirby KN, Petry NM (2004) Heroin and cocaine abusers have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than alcoholics or non-drug-using controls. Addiction 99:461–471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kirby KN, Petry NM, Bickel WK (1999) Heroin addicts discount delayed rewards at higher rates than non-drug using controls. J Exp Psychol Gen Process 128:78–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Landes RD, Pitcock JP, Yi R, Bickel WK (2010) Analytical methods to detect within-individual changes in discounting. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 18:175–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD, Schabenberger O (2006) SAS® for Mixed Models, 2nd edn. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
  33. Logue AW (1988) Research on self-control: an integrating framework. Behav Brain Sci 11:665–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Madden GJ, Petry NM, Badger GJ, Bickel WK (1997) Impulsive and self-control choices in opioid-dependent patients and non-drug-using control participants: drug and monetary rewards. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 5:256–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Madden GJ, Bickel WK, Jacobs EA (1999) Discounting of delayed rewards in opioid-dependent outpatients: exponential or hyperbolic discounting functions? Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 7:284–293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitchell SH (1999) Measures of impulsivity in cigarette smokers and nonsmokers. Psychopharmacology 146:455–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mitchell SH (2004) Effects of short-term nicotine deprivation on decision-making: delay, uncertainty, and effort discounting. Nicotine Tob Res 6:819–828PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mitchell SH, Reeves JM, Li N, Phillips TJ (2006) Delay discounting predicts behavioral sensititation to ethanol in outbred WSC mice. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 30:429–437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Odum AL, Baumann AA (2007) Cigarette smokers show steeper discounting of both food and cigarettes than money. Drug Alcohol Depend 91:293–296PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Odum AL, Madden GJ, Bickel WK (2002) Discounting of delayed health gains and losses by current, never-and ex-smokers of cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res 4:295–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Petry NM (2001) Pathological gamblers, with and without substance use disorders, discount delayed rewards at high rates. J Abnorm Psychol 110:482–487PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tiffany ST (1990) A cognitive model of drug urges and drug-use behavior: role of automatic and nonautomatic processes. Psychol Rev 97:147–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211:453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weller RE, Cook EW III, Avsar KB, Cox JE (2008) Obese women show greater delay discounting than healthy-weight women. Appetite 51:563–569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yoon JH, Higgins ST, Bradstreet MP, Badger GJ, Thomas CS (2009) Changes in the relative reinforcing effects of cigarette smoking as a function of initial abstinence. Psychopharmacology 205:305–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Warren K. Bickel
    • 1
  • Reid D. Landes
    • 3
  • Darren R. Christensen
    • 4
  • Lisa Jackson
    • 2
  • Bryan A. Jones
    • 2
  • Zeb Kurth-Nelson
    • 5
  • A. David Redish
    • 5
  1. 1.Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute and Department of Psychology Virginia TechRoanokeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychiatry, Center for Addiction ResearchUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesLittle RockUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiostatisticsUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesLittle RockUSA
  4. 4.Problem Gambling Research and Treatment CentreUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  5. 5.Department of NeuroscienceUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations