Three male volunteers lived for six successive days within a laboratory environment programmed for continuous residence. During days when subjects' work on a multiple task performance battery had the effect of preventing reductions in accumulated group earnings, all subjects complained, one subject stopped working, and another subject's productivity declined. When identical work had the effect of incrementing group earnings, such byproducts of aversive control were absent. These results extend the generality of previous analyses of reinforcement schedule effects on behavior and thereby demonstrate their reliability. The reactions of the subjects to the aversive reinforcement schedule were similar to the reactions of the crew manning the last Skylab mission.
Journal Article Performance-Based Testing for Drugs of Abuse: Dose and Time Profiles of Marijuana, Amphetamine, Alcohol, and Diazepam Get access Thomas H. Kelly, Thomas H. Kelly * 1Department of Behavioral Science, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, 109 College of Medicine Office Building, Lexington, KY 40536-0086 *Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic PubMed Google Scholar Richard W. Foltin, Richard W. Foltin 2Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians & Surgeons of Columbia University/New York State Psychiatric Institute, 722 W. 168 Street, Unit 66, New York, NY 10032 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic PubMed Google Scholar Cleeve S. Emurian, Cleeve S. Emurian 1Department of Behavioral Science, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, 109 College of Medicine Office Building, Lexington, KY 40536-0086 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic PubMed Google Scholar Marian W. Fischman Marian W. Fischman 2Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians & Surgeons of Columbia University/New York State Psychiatric Institute, 722 W. 168 Street, Unit 66, New York, NY 10032 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic PubMed Google Scholar Journal of Analytical Toxicology, Volume 17, Issue 5, September 1993, Pages 264–272, https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/17.5.264 Published: 01 September 1993 Article history Received: 24 March 1992 Revision received: 16 February 1993 Published: 01 September 1993
Five groups of three subjects resided for 10 or 15 days within a continuously programmed environment. Subjects followed a programmatic arrangement of required and optional private and social activities that determined the individual and group baseline behaviors into which experimental operations were introduced and withdrawn. A cooperation condition was in effect when all three subjects were required to select simultaneous access to a group area before it became available for use. A noncooperation condition was in effect when access to a group area could be selected by individual subjects, without regard to the other subjects' selections. For all groups, the effects of these two conditions on individual and group behaviors were investigated in reversal designs where several successive days occurred under each condition. Groups 1, 4, and 5 had the noncooperation condition interposed between cooperation conditions. Groups 2 and 3 had the cooperation condition interposed between noncooperation conditions. Durations of triadic activities, per cent of time in triadic activities, intercom use, and intersubject program synchronization were greater during cooperation conditions than during noncooperation conditions. These data show that a cooperation contingency within the behavioral program affected both social behavior and the collateral individual behavior necessary to execute the cooperation response.
The effects of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content on choice marijuana, number of marijuana cigarettes smoked, and ratings of marijuana's effects were examined in 6 adult male marijuana smokers during a residential study consisting of four 3-day blocks of 2 sample days and 1 choice day. Days were divided into 6.5-hr work and social-access periods, beginning at 1000 and 1700. On sample days, marijuana cigarettes containing different THC concentrations (0.0% vs. 3.5% and 2.0% vs. 3.5% THC) were smoked at least once during each period. On choice days, independent choices between previously sampled marijuana cigarettes were made during each period. A maximum of 8 cigarettes could be smoked per day, and drug ratings were obtained after each period. Only choice behavior was sensitive to changes in THC content, whereas only the number of smoked marijuana cigarettes was related to context (i.e., work and social-access period).
The popularity and reported success of biofeedback treatment for neuromuscular disorders has occurred despite a lack of research identifying the critical variables responsible for therapeutic gain. In this study, we assessed the degree to which severe neurological dysfunction could be improved by using one of the components present in all biofeedback treatment, contingency management. Three cases of orofacial dysfunction were treated by reinforcing specific improvements reliably detectable without the use of biofeedback equipment. The results showed that contingency management procedures alone were sufficient to improve overt motor responses but, unlike biofeedback treatment, did not produce decreases in the hypertonic muscle groups associated with the trained motor behavior. The findings suggest that sophisticated, expensive biofeedback equipment may not be necessary in treating some neuromuscular disorders and that important clinical gains may be achieved by redesigning the patient's daily environment to be contingently therapeutic, rather than only accommodating the disabilities of the physically handicapped.
Three-person groups, either of males or of females, resided for 6 to 12 days in a continuously programmed environment. Subjects followed a behavioral program that determined the sequential and contingent relations within an inventory of activities. The program consisted of positive reinforcement days and avoidance days. During a positive reinforcement day, each work unit completed by a subject incremented a group account. The account was divided evenly among the three participants at the conclusion of the study. During a negative reinforcement day, no money was earned, and the group was assigned work unit criterion that, if completed, prevented a reduction in accumulated earnings. During negative reinforcement days, subjects made aggressive verbal responses, which differed in magnitude among the four groups. These differences were evident in several distinct behavioral measures. Performances on components of the work unit were not demonstrably affected by the reinforcement schedules in effect, although during the avoidance condition one subject stopped working and another subject's productivity declined.
