Experimental manipulations of behavioral economic demand for addictive commodities: a meta‐analysis.

Background and Aims: Reinforcing value, an index of motivation for a drug, is commonly measured using behavioral economic purchase tasks. State‐oriented purchase tasks are sensitive to phasic manipulations, but with heterogeneous methods and findings. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to characteriz...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Addiction Vol. 115; no. 5; pp. 817 - 832
Autores principales: Acuff, Samuel F., Amlung, Michael, Dennhardt, Ashley A., MacKillop, James, Murphy, James G.
Formato: meta analysis research systematic review tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell May2020
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=142705002&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 142705002
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09652140
        AIO
      jtl: Addiction
      issn: 09652140
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: May2020
      vid: 115
      iid: 5
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        142705002
        142705002
        145769142
        142705002
        10.1111/add.14865
        142705002
      ppf: 817
      ppct: 15
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: C
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: Experimental manipulations of behavioral economic demand for addictive commodities: a meta‐analysis.
      aug:
        au:
          Acuff, Samuel F.
          Amlung, Michael
          Dennhardt, Ashley A.
          MacKillop, James
          Murphy, James G.
        affil: Department of Psychology, The University of Memphis, Memphis TN,, USA
      sug:
        subj:
          Substance Abuse
          Product Acquisition
          Shopping
          Task Performance and Analysis
          Behavior, Addictive
          Motivation
          Reinforcement (Psychology)
          Human
          Descriptive Statistics
          Systematic Review
          Meta Analysis
          Psycinfo
          PubMed
          Medline
          Cues
          Behavior Therapy
          Drug Therapy
          Confidence Intervals
          Stress, Psychological
          Affect
          Craving
          Alcohol Drinking
      ab: Background and Aims: Reinforcing value, an index of motivation for a drug, is commonly measured using behavioral economic purchase tasks. State‐oriented purchase tasks are sensitive to phasic manipulations, but with heterogeneous methods and findings. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to characterize the literature examining manipulations of reinforcing value, as measured by purchase tasks and multiple‐choice procedures, to inform etiological models and treatment approaches Methods: A random‐effects meta‐analysis of published findings in peer‐reviewed articles. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA) protocol, studies were gathered through searches in PsycINFO and PubMed/MEDLINE (published 22 May 2018). Searches returned 34 unique studies (aggregate sample n = 2402; average sample size = 68.94) yielding 126 effect sizes. Measurements included change (i.e. Cohen's d) in six behavioral economic indices (intensity, breakpoint, Omax, Pmax, elasticity, cross‐over point) in relation to six experimental manipulations (cue exposure, stress/negative affect, reinforcer magnitude, pharmacotherapy, behavioral interventions, opportunity cost). Results: Cue exposure (d range = 0.25–0.44, all Ps < 0.05) and reinforcer magnitude [d = 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.18, 1.01; P < 0.005] manipulations resulted in significant increases in behavioral economic demand across studies. Stress/negative affect manipulations also resulted in a small, significant increase in Omax (d = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.34; P = 0.03); all other effect sizes for negative affect/stress were non‐significant, albeit similar in size (d range = 0.14–0.18). In contrast, pharmacotherapy (d range = −0.37 to −0.49; Ps < 0.04), behavioral intervention (d = −0.36 to −1.13) and external contingency (d = −1.42; CI = −2.30, −0.54; P = 0.002) manipulations resulted in a significant decrease in intensity. Moderators (substance type) explained some of the heterogeneity in findings across meta‐analyses. Conclusions: In behavioral economic studies, purchase tasks and multiple‐choice procedures appear to provide indices that are sensitive to manipulations found to influence motivation to consume addictive substances in field experiments.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        meta analysis
        research
        systematic review
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N