Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Latent structure of facets of alcohol reinforcement from a behavioral economic demand curve

  • Original Investigation
  • Published:
Psychopharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rationale

Behavioral economic demand curves are quantitative representations of the relationship between consumption of a drug and its cost. Demand curves provide a multidimensional assessment of reinforcement, but the relationships among the various indices of reinforcement have been largely unstudied.

Objectives

The objective of the study is to use exploratory factor analysis to examine the underlying factor structure of the facets of alcohol reinforcement generated from an alcohol demand curve.

Materials and methods

Participants were 267 weekly drinkers [76% female; age M = 20.11 (SD = .1.51); drinks/week M = 14.33 (SD = 11.82)] who underwent a single group assessment session. Alcohol demand curves were generated via an alcohol purchase task, which assessed consumption at 14 levels of prices from $0 to $9. Five facets of demand were generated from the measure [intensity, elasticity, P max (maximum inelastic price), O max (maximum alcohol expenditure), and breakpoint], using both observed and derived calculations. Principal components analysis was used to examine the latent structure among the variables.

Results

The results revealed a clear two-factor solution, which were interpreted as “Persistence,” reflecting sensitivity to escalating price, and “Amplitude,” reflecting the amount consumed and spent. The two factors were generally quantitatively distinct, although O max loaded on both.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that alcohol reinforcement as measured via a demand curve is binary in nature, with separate dimensions of price-sensitivity and volumetric consumption. If supported, these findings may contribute theoretically and experimentally to a reinforcement-based approach to alcohol use and misuse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arnold JM, Roberts DC (1997) A critique of fixed and progressive ratio schedules used to examine the neural substrates of drug reinforcement. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 57:441–447

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bickel WK, Marsch LA, Carroll ME (2000) Deconstructing relative reinforcing efficacy and situating the measures of pharmacological reinforcement with behavioral economics: a theoretical proposal. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 153:44–56

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins RL, Parks GA, Marlatt GA (1985) Social determinants of alcohol consumption: the effects of social interaction and model status on the self-administration of alcohol. J Consult Clin Psychol 53:189–200

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg LR, Velicer WF (2006) Principles of exploratory factor analysis. In: S. Strack (ed.), Differentiating normal and abnormal personality: Second edition. New York, NY: Springer 209–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald MK, Hursh SR (2006) Behavioral economic analysis of opioid consumption in heroin-dependent individuals: effects of unit price and pre-session drug supply. Drug Alcohol Depend 85:35–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths RR, Brady JV, Bradford LD (1979) Predicting the abuse liability of drugs and animal drug self-administration procedures: psychomotor stimulants and hallucinogens. In: T. Thompson and P.B. Dews (eds.), Advances in behavioral pharmacology. Academic Press: New York 2:163–208

  • Griffiths RR, Findley JD, Brady JV, Dolan-Gutcher K, Robinson WW (1975) Comparison of progressive-ratio performance maintained by cocaine, methylphenidate and secobarbital. Psychopharmacologia 43:81–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grimes JA, Shull RL (2001) Response-independent milk delivery enhances persistence of pellet-reinforced lever pressing by rats. J Exp Anal Behav 76(2):179–194

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hursh SR, Raslear TG, Shurtleff D, Bauman R, Simmons L (1988) A cost-benefit analysis of demand for food. J Exp Anal Behav 50:419–440

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hursh SR, Galuska CM, Winger G, Woods JH (2005) The economics of drug abuse: a quantitative assessment of drug demand. Mol Interv 5:20–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs EA, Bickel WK (1999) Modeling drug consumption in the clinic using simulation procedures: demand for heroin and cigarettes in opioid-dependent outpatients. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 7:412–426

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johanson CE, Schuster CR (1975) A choice procedure for drug reinforcers: cocaine and methylphenidate in the rhesus monkey. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 193:676–688

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MW, Bickel WK (2002) Within-subject comparison of real and hypothetical money rewards in delay discounting. J Exp Anal Behav 77:129–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MW, Bickel WK (2006) Replacing relative reinforcing efficacy with behavioral economic demand curves. J Exp Anal Behav 85:73–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby KN (1997) Bidding on the future: evidence against normative discounting of delayed rewards. J Exp Psychol: General 126:54–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby KN, Maracovic NN (1995) Modeling myopic decisions: evidence for hyperbolic delay-discounting within subjects and amounts. Org Behav Human Decis Proc 64:22–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivlahan DR, Marlatt GA, Fromme K, Coppel DB, Williams E (1990) Secondary prevention with college drinkers: evaluation of an alcohol skills training program. J Consult Clin Psychol 58:805–810

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ko MC, Terner J, Hursh S, Woods JH, Winger G (2002) Relative reinforcing effects of three opioids with different durations of action. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 301:698–704

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • MacKillop J, Murphy JG (2007) A behavioral economic measure of demand for alcohol predicts brief intervention outcomes. Drug Alcohol Depend 89:227–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MacKillop J, Murphy JG, Ray LA, Eisenberg DT, Lisman SA, Lum JK, Wilson DS (2008) Further validation of a cigarette purchase task for assessing the relative reinforcing efficacy of nicotine in college smokers. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 16:57–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Madden GJ, Bickel WK (1999) Abstinence and price effects on demand for cigarettes: a behavioral-economic analysis. Addiction 94:577–588

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mattox AJ, Carroll ME (1996) Smoked heroin self-administration in rhesus monkeys. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 125:195–201

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy JG, MacKillop J (2006) Relative reinforcing efficacy of alcohol among college student drinkers. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 14:219–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nevin JA (1995) Behavioral economics and behavioral momentum. J Exp Anal Behav 64(3):385–395

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nevin JA, Grace RC (2000) Behavioral momentum and the law of effect. Behav Brain Sci 23:73–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nevin JA, Tota ME et al (1990) Alternative reinforcement increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? J Exp Anal Behav 53(3):359–379

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson NR, Roberts DC (1996) Progressive ratio schedules in drug self-administration studies in rats: a method to evaluate reinforcing efficacy. J Neurosci Methods 66:1–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shahan TA, Burke KA (2004) Ethanol-maintained responding of rats is more resistant to change in a context with added non-drug reinforcement. Behav Pharmacol 15(4):279–285

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spiga R, Martinetti MP, Meisch RA, Cowan K, Hursh S (2005) Methadone and nicotine self-administration in humans: a behavioral economic analysis. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 178:223–231

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2001) Using Multivariate statistics, 4th edn. Allyn & Bacon, Allyn & Bacon

  • Wechsler H, Kuo M, Lee H, Dowdall GW (2000) Environmental correlates of underage alcohol use and related problems of college students. Am J Prev Med 19:24–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • White HR, Labouvie EW (1989) Towards the assessment of adolescent problem drinking. J Stud Alcohol 50:30–37

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Winger G, Galuska CM, Hursh SR, Woods JH (2006) Relative reinforcing effects of cocaine, remifentanil, and their combination in rhesus monkeys. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 318:223–229

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Winger G, Galuska CM, Hursh SR (2007) Modification of ethanol’s reinforcing effectiveness in rhesus monkeys by cocaine, flunitrazepam, or gamma-hydroxybutyrate. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 193:587–598

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was partially supported by grants from the Alcohol Beverage Medical Research Foundation (ABMRF), the U.S. Department of Education, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (AA 07850, AA 07459), and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 022386). The authors gratefully acknowledge the editorial feedback of Lauren Wier, BA, on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

    James MacKillop

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA

    James G. Murphy

  3. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University, Providence, RI, 02912, USA

    Jennifer W. Tidey & Christopher W. Kahler

  4. Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA

    Lara A. Ray

  5. Center for Addiction Research, Department of Psychiatry, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AK, 72205, USA

    Warren K. Bickel

Authors
  1. James MacKillop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James G. Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer W. Tidey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christopher W. Kahler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lara A. Ray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Warren K. Bickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James MacKillop.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

MacKillop, J., Murphy, J.G., Tidey, J.W. et al. Latent structure of facets of alcohol reinforcement from a behavioral economic demand curve. Psychopharmacology 203, 33–40 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-008-1367-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-008-1367-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation