Psychopharmacology

, Volume 86, Issue 1–2, pp 90–95 | Cite as

The effect of methylphenidate on information processing

  • Hilary Naylor
  • Roy Halliday
  • Enoch Callaway
Original Investigations

Abstract

Models of information processing currently popular in cognitive psychology divide the reaction process into a series of discrete separable stages. The distinction between one stage and another is verified by the additive factors method (AFM) as defined by Sternberg (1969). Task factors that do not interact with each other are inferred to affect different stages. The distinction between stimulus evaluation stages and response selection stages has been supported by brain event related potential (ERP) studies. The latency of the P300 component of the ERP is sensitive to changes in stimulus complexity but not to to changes in response complexity. The focus of this research is to determine the effects of stimulant drugs on stages of information processing using both reaction time (RT) and P300 latency within an AFM framework. four doses of methylphenidate (MP) were used in a within-subjects design to examine the effects of MP on stimulus and response processing. We found that MP speeds RT, and that this effect does not interact with the effect of stimulus complexity on RT. MP dose interacts with response complexity, the dose for optimal speeding varying with the level of complexity. The latency of P300 is increased by stimulus complexity, and not by response complexity, nor is it affected by MP. These results show that the stimulant drug acts on processes involved in response selection, rather than in stimulus evaluation. Individual differences in drug response are dose dependent, but also point to an effect on response processing.

Key words

Information Processing Stimulants Event Related Potentials 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bostrum A (1979) RMEAS: A program for repeated measures analysis of variance (Version 5). University of California. San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  2. Callaway E (1983) The pharmacology of human information processing. Presidential address. Psychophysiology 20:359–370Google Scholar
  3. Callaway E (1984) Human information processing: Some effects of methylphenidate, age and scopolamine. Biol Psychiatry 19:649–662Google Scholar
  4. Callaway E, Halliday R, Herning RI (1983) A comparison of methods for measuring event-related potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 55:227–232Google Scholar
  5. Donchin E (1979) Event-related brain potentials: A tool in the study of human information processing. In: Begleiter H, (ed) Evoked potentials and behavior, Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Duncan-Johnson C, Donchin E (1982) The P300 component of the event-related brain potential as an index of information processing. Biol Psychol 14:1–52Google Scholar
  7. Fleiss JL (1973) Statistical methods for rates and proportions. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Frowein HW (1981a) Selective drug effects on information processing. Doctoral dissertation Institute of Perception TNO, Soesterberg, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  9. Frowein HW (1981b) Selective effects of barbiturate and amphetamine on information processing and response selection. Acta Psychol 47:105–115Google Scholar
  10. Halliday R, Callaway E, Naylor H (1983) Visual evoked potential changes induced by methylphenidate in hyperactive children: dose/response effects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophyiol 55:258–264Google Scholar
  11. McCarthy G, Donchin E (1981) A metric for thought: A comparison of P3 latency and reaction time. Science 211:77–80Google Scholar
  12. McClelland JL (1979) On the time relation of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. Psychol Rev 86:287–330Google Scholar
  13. Mirsky AF, Kornetsky C (1964) On the dissimilar effect of drugs on the digit substitution and continuous performance tests. Psychopharmacology 5:161–177Google Scholar
  14. Pachella RG (1974) The interpretation of reaction time in information processing research. In: Kantowitz BH (ed) Human information processing: Tutorials in performance and cognition. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  15. Sanders AF (1980), Stage analysis of reaction processes. In: Stelmach GE, Requin J (eds) Tutorials in motor behavior, Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  16. Sternberg S (1969) The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. In: Koster WG, (ed) Acta psychologica 30 attention and performance II. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hilary Naylor
    • 1
  • Roy Halliday
    • 1
  • Enoch Callaway
    • 1
  1. 1.Langley Porter Psychiatric InstituteSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations