Marijuana and behavioral contingencies

Twenty‐four adult male research volunteers, in groups of three subjects each, lived in a residential laboratory for up to 18 days. All contact with the experimenters was through a networked computer system, and subject behavior was continuously monitored and recorded. During the first part of each day, subjects remained in private rooms doing planned work activities, and during the remainder of each day they were allowed to socialize. One or two cigarettes containing active marijuana (1.8‐2.7% Δ9‐THC) or placebo were smoked during both the private work period and the period of access to social activities. Following the determination of baseline distributions of activities, contingency conditions requiring subjects to engage in a low‐probability activity (instrumental activity) in order to earn time that could be spent engaging in a high‐probability activity (contingent activity) were then introduced. Baseline and contingency conditions were studied under periods of placebo and active marijuana administration. Under placebo conditions, introduction of the contingency resulted in increases in instrumental activity and decreases in contingent activity under both placebo and active marijuana conditions. The response to combining marijuana administration with contingencies varied across private work and social access conditions. During work periods, active marijuana administration increased instrumental activity to a larger extent than was observed under placebo conditions. The decreases in contingent activity were similar to those seen under placebo conditions. During social periods, active marijuana administration increased instrumental activity to a smaller extent than observed under placebo conditions. The decreases in high‐probability contingent activity were similar across drug conditions. Smoking active marijuana was thus observed to produce increments in instrumental activity under motivational involving contingencies for “work activities” while producing instrumental decrements under motivational conditions involving recreational contingencies.

[1]  J V Brady,et al.  Motivational effects of smoked marijuana: behavioral contingencies and low-probability activities. , 1990, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[2]  J. Brady,et al.  Motivational effects of smoked marijuana: Behavioral contingencies and high-probability recreational activities , 1989, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[3]  R. Foltin,et al.  Effects of smoked marijuana on food intake and body weight of humans living in a residential laboratory , 1988, Appetite.

[4]  Richard W. Foltin,et al.  Effects of smoked marijuana on human social behavior in small groups , 1988, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[5]  G. Pearlson,et al.  Marijuana and cocaine interactions in humans: Cardiovascular consequences , 1987, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[6]  C. S. Emurian,et al.  Effects of smoked marijuana on social interaction in small groups. , 1987, Drug and alcohol dependence.

[7]  R. Schwartz,et al.  Marijuana: an overview. , 1987, Pediatric clinics of North America.

[8]  M. Vogel-Sprott,et al.  Reinforcement reduces behavioural impairment under an acute dose of alcohol , 1987, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[9]  J. Brady,et al.  Behavioral analysis of marijuana effects on food intake in humans , 1986, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[10]  David E. Greenway,et al.  Instructions, multiple schedules, and extinction: Distinguishing rule-governed from schedule-controlled behavior. , 1986, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  J. Mendelson,et al.  Operant acquisition of marihuana by women. , 1985, The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics.

[12]  J. Page The amotivational syndrome hypothesis and the Costa Rica study: relationships between methods and results. , 1983, Journal of psychoactive drugs.

[13]  Mark Galizio,et al.  Instructional control of human operant behavior. , 1983 .

[14]  B. A. Matthews,et al.  Instructed versus shaped human verbal behavior: Interactions with nonverbal responding. , 1982, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[15]  Daniel R. McLeod,et al.  An automated version of the digit symbol substitution test (DSST) , 1982 .

[16]  Daniel J. Bernstein,et al.  An interactive program for observation and analysis of human behavior in a long-term continuous laboratory , 1982 .

[17]  C. Stefanis,et al.  Hashish: Studies of Long-Term Use , 1977 .

[18]  C. Stefanis,et al.  SOCIAL TRAITS OF HEAVY HASHISH USERS AND MATCHED CONTROLS * , 1976, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[19]  L. Comitas,et al.  CANNABIS AND WORK IN JAMAICA: A REFUTATION OF THE AMOTIVATIONAL SYNDROME * , 1976, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[20]  R. H. Somers,et al.  THE AMOTIVATIONAL SYNDROME AND THE COLLEGE STUDENT , 1976, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[21]  D. L. Farnsworth INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR AN AMOTIVATIONAL SYNDROME IN CANNABIS USERS? , 1976, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[22]  J. Mendelson,et al.  Operant acquisition of marihuana in man. , 1976, The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics.

[23]  P. Devenyi,et al.  An experimental study of the effects of daily connabis smoking on behaviour patterns. , 2009, Acta pharmacologica et toxicologica.

[24]  N. Brill,et al.  Marihuana Use and Psychosocial Adaptation: Follow-up Study of a Collegiate Population , 1974 .

[25]  N. Brill,et al.  Personality factors in marihuana use: a preliminary report. , 1971, Archives of general psychiatry.

[26]  David E. Smith Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Marijuana , 1968 .

[27]  W. Mcglothlin,et al.  The marihuana problem: an overview. , 1968, The American journal of psychiatry.