Psychopharmacology

, Volume 120, Issue 1, pp 1–9 | Cite as

Concurrent self-administration of ethanol and an alternative nondrug reinforcer in monkeys: effects of income (session length) on demand for drug

  • M. E. Carroll
  • J. S. Rodefer
  • J. M. Rawleigh
Original Investigation

Abstract

Eight rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulata) were trained to self-administer orally delivered ethanol (8%) and saccharin (0.03 or 0.3% wt/vol) or water under concurrent fixed-ratio (FR) schedules. The FR requirement for saccharin was fixed at 32, while the FR for ethanol was varied (4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128) in a nonsystematic order to assess demand for drug. Demand was defined as consumption plotted as a function of price (FR). Income was defined as the duration of access to available resources. Income was varied by allowing access to the concurrently available liquids 20, 60 or 180 min per day. Order of testing was counter-balanced across monkeys. Saccharin deliveries were much higher than ethanol deliveries under the 180-min income condition; however, they were lower than ethanol deliveries when income was reduced to 20 min and the ethanol FR was 4, 8 or 16. Thus, when the price of drug was relatively low, consumption of drug exceeded that of the nondrug reinforcer, and that relationship was reversed as income decreased. Saccharin deliveries sustained a proportionally greater reduction due to decreased income compared to ethanol deliveries. As income decreased from 180 to 20 min, saccharin deliveries were reduced by an average of 79.1% (across ethanol FR conditions) while ethanol deliveries were reduced by an average of 41.2 and 40.8% when concurrent saccharin or water were available, respectively; thus, drug self-administration was more resistant to income changes than saccharin. The demand for ethanol was shifted downward in a parallel fashion as income decreased. As ethanol cost (FR) increased, there were proportionately greater decreases in ethanol intake when saccharin was concurrently available compared to when water was available. There was a 35–50% reduction in ethanol deliveries due to concurrent saccharin (versus water) at FR 4, compared to a 55–75% reduction at FR 128. Cost of ethanol (FR), income level and the availability of a nondrug reinforcer are all variables that modify ethanol-reinforced behavior, and income alters the relative preference for a drug versus nondrug reinforcer.

Key words

Behavioral economics Demand Ethanol Income Oral Rhesus monkeys Saccharin Self-administration 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carroll ME (1985) Concurrent phencyclidine and saccharin access: presentation of an alternative reinforcer reduces drug intake. J Exp Anal Behav 43:131–144Google Scholar
  2. Carroll ME, Meisch RA (1984) Increased drug-reinforced behavior due to food deprivation. In: Thompson T, Dews PB, Barrett JE (eds) Advances in behavioral pharmacology, vol. 4. Academic Press, New York, pp 47–88Google Scholar
  3. Carroll ME, Rodefer JS (1993) Income alters choice between drug and an alternative nondrug reinforcer in monkeys. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 1:110–120Google Scholar
  4. Carroll ME, Santi PA, Rudell RL (1981) A microcomputer system for the control of behavioral experiments. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 4:415–417Google Scholar
  5. Carroll ME, Lac ST, Nygaard SL (1989) A concurrently available nondrug reinforcer prevents the acquisition or decreases the maintenance of cocaine-reinforced behavior. Psychopharmacology 91:23–29Google Scholar
  6. Carroll ME, Carmona GN, May SA (1991) Modifying drug-reinforced behavior by altering the economic conditions of the drug and nondrug reinforcer. J Exp Anal Behav 56:361–376Google Scholar
  7. DeGrandpre RJ, Bickel WK, Rizvl SAT, Hughes JR (1993) The behavioral economics of drug self-administration: VII. Effects of income on drug choice in humans. J Exp Anal Behav 59:483–500Google Scholar
  8. Dworkin SI, Mirkis S, Smith JE (1990) Reinforcer interactions under concurrent schedules of food, water and intravenous cocaine. Behav Pharmacol 1:327–338Google Scholar
  9. Elsmore TF, Fletcher GV, Conrad DG, Sodetz FJ (1980) Reduction of heroin intake in baboons by an economic constraint. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 12:729–731Google Scholar
  10. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (1985) NIH Publication No. 85-23, US Government Printing Office, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Hastjarjo T, Silberberg A (1992) Effects of reinforcer delays on choice as a function of income level. J Exp Anal Behav 57:119–125Google Scholar
  12. Henningfield JE, Meisch RA (1976) Drinking device for rhesus monkeys. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 4:609–610Google Scholar
  13. Hursh SK (1991) Behavioral economics of drug self-administration and drug abuse policy. J Exp Anal Behav 56:377–393Google Scholar
  14. Hursh SK, Bauman RA (1987) The behavioral analysis of demand. In: Green L, Kagel JH (eds) Advances in behavioral economics, vol. 1. Advances in Behavioral Sciences Series, Ablex Publishing Corp., Norwood, N.J., pp 117–165Google Scholar
  15. Lea SEG, Tarpy RM, Webley P (1987) The individual in the economy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. Macenski MJ, Cutrell EB, Meisch RA (1993) Concurrent pentobarbital-and saccharin-maintained responding: effects of saccharin concentration and schedule conditions. Psychopharmacology 112:204–210Google Scholar
  17. Meisch RA, Henningfield JE (1977) Drinking of ethanol as a reinforcer for rhesus monkeys via the oral route: Initial results. In: Gross MM (ed) Advances in experimental medicine and biology, vol. 85B: Alcohol intoxication and withdrawal-IIIb: studies in alcohol dependence. Plenum Press, New York, pp 443–463Google Scholar
  18. Nader MA, Woolverton WL (1991) Effects of increasing the magnitude of an alternative reinforcer on drug choice in a discretetrail choice procedure. Psychopharmacology 105:169–174Google Scholar
  19. Samson HH, Roehrs TA, Tolliver GA (1982) Ethanol reinforced responding in the rat: a concurrent analysis using sucrose as the alternate choice. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 17:333–339Google Scholar
  20. Schwarz-Stevens K, Samson HH, Tolliver GA, Lumeng L, Li TK (1991) The effects of ethanol initiation procedures on ethanol reinforced behavior in the alcohol-preferring rat. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 15:277–285Google Scholar
  21. Shurtleff D, Warren-Boulton FR, Asano T (1987) Income and choice between different goods. J Exp Anal Behav 48:263–275Google Scholar
  22. Silberberg A, Warren-Boulton FR, Asano T (1987) Inferior-good and Giffen-good effects in monkey choice behavior. J Exp Psychol [Anim Behav] 13:292–301Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. E. Carroll
    • 1
  • J. S. Rodefer
    • 1
  • J. M. Rawleigh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of Minnesota Medical School, Box 392, UMHCMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations