Literature DB >> 8826542

Interaction of expectancy and the pharmacological effects of d-amphetamine: subjective effects and self-administration.

S H Mitchell1, C L Laurent, H de Wit.   

Abstract

The study examined the effects of expectation on the subjective effects and oral self-administration of 15 mg d-amphetamine (AMP) and placebo in 40 volunteers who reported no prior use of stimulants other than caffeine. A balanced placebo design was used to create four groups: told Placebo/got Placebo (P/P), told Placebo/got Stimulant (P/S), told Stimulant/got Placebo (S/P), told Stimulant/got Stimulant (S/S). There were three sessions. On one session (INFO), participants received a capsule containing AMP or placebo and were given information about the contents of the capsule according to the balanced placebo design. On another session (NO INFO), participants received no information about the capsule's contents and were given placebo. On the final session, participants were allowed to choose either the INFO or NO INFO capsule. Participants came to the laboratory to ingest their capsules, and then returned to their normal environments where they completed subjective effects questionnaires every 2 h for 8 h. Expectancies influenced the subjective effects reported during the INFO session, regardless of whether subjects actually received AMP or placebo: subjects who expected a stimulant had higher ratings of "feel drug" and "like drug". The pharmacological effects of AMP were also evident on the INFO sessions: AMP produced its prototypic subjective effects regardless of subjects' expectancies. Significant interactions between drug and expectancy were obtained on self-report measures of anxiety and arousal: anxiety was higher for groups who received substances that did not match their expectations (P/S and S/P) and arousal increased most in volunteers who expected placebo but received stimulant. Choice of drug was determined primarily by pharmacology: participants who received AMP on the INFO session usually chose that capsule, regardless of information about its identity (P/S: 8/10; S/S: 9/10). In contrast, participants who received placebo on the INFO session chose this capsule at chance levels, regardless of information about its identity (S/P: 3/10; P/P: 6/10). Thus, expectancy influenced some of the subjective effects of AMP and placebo, but the pharmacological effects of the AMP were instrumental in determining whether volunteers would self-administer the drug.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8826542     DOI: 10.1007/bf02246020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)        ISSN: 0033-3158            Impact factor:   4.530


  23 in total

1.  DRUGS AND PLACEBOS: THE EFFECTS OF INSTRUCTIONS UPON PERFORMANCE AND MOOD UNDER AMPHETAMINE SULPHATE AND CHLORAL HYDRATE.

Authors:  S B LYERLY; S ROSS; A D KRUGMAN; D J CLYDE
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  1964-03

2.  Some boundary conditions for effective use of alcohol placebos.

Authors:  C S Martin; M Earleywine; P R Finn; R D Young
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol       Date:  1990-11

3.  The balanced placebo design: effects of alcohol and beverage instructions cannot be independently assessed.

Authors:  M F Lyvers; I Maltzman
Journal:  Int J Addict       Date:  1991-09

4.  Placebo responses to cocaine administration in humans: effects of prior administrations and verbal instructions.

Authors:  C Muntaner; N G Cascella; K M Kumor; C Nagoshi; R Herning; J Jaffe
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  Expectancy and tolerance: a study of acute alcohol intoxication using the balanced placebo design.

Authors:  J C Laberg; T Löberg
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol       Date:  1989-09

6.  Loss of control drinking in alcoholics: an experimental analogue.

Authors:  G A Marlatt; B Demming; J B Reid
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  1973-06

7.  The expected drug and its expected effect interact to determine placebo responses to alcohol and caffeine.

Authors:  M T Fillmore; L E Mulvihill; M Vogel-Sprott
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 4.530

8.  Dextroamphetamine. Its cognitive and behavioral effects in normal and hyperactive boys and normal men.

Authors:  J L Rapoport; M S Buchsbaum; H Weingartner; T P Zahn; C Ludlow; E J Mikkelsen
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1980-08

9.  Alcohol and expectancy: subjective, psychophysiological and behavioral responses to alcohol stimuli in severely, moderately and non-dependent drinkers.

Authors:  J C Laberg
Journal:  Br J Addict       Date:  1986-12

10.  Forced-choice versus free-choice procedures: caffeine self-administration in humans.

Authors:  A H Oliveto; J R Hughes; S T Higgins; W K Bickel; S L Pepper; P J Shea; J W Fenwick
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.530

View more
  28 in total

1.  Expectations and placebo response: a laboratory investigation into the role of somatic focus.

Authors:  Andrew L Geers; Suzanne G Helfer; Paul E Weiland; Kristin Kosbab
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2005-12-23

Review 2.  Experimental designs and brain mapping approaches for studying the placebo analgesic effect.

Authors:  Luana Colloca; Fabrizio Benedetti; Carlo Adolfo Porro
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 3.  Pharmacogenetic treatments for drug addiction: cocaine, amphetamine and methamphetamine.

Authors:  Colin N Haile; Thomas R Kosten; Therese A Kosten
Journal:  Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.829

Review 4.  Placebo effects: clinical aspects and neurobiology.

Authors:  Barry S Oken
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2008-06-21       Impact factor: 13.501

5.  Beliefs modulate the effects of drugs on the human brain.

Authors:  Nora D Volkow; Ruben Baler
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-02-11       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Altered placebo and drug labeling changes the outcome of episodic migraine attacks.

Authors:  Slavenka Kam-Hansen; Moshe Jakubowski; John M Kelley; Irving Kirsch; David C Hoaglin; Ted J Kaptchuk; Rami Burstein
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 17.956

7.  The acetylcholinesterase inhibitor rivastigmine does not alter total choices for methamphetamine, but may reduce positive subjective effects, in a laboratory model of intravenous self-administration in human volunteers.

Authors:  R De La Garza; J J Mahoney; C Culbertson; S Shoptaw; T F Newton
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 3.533

8.  Caffeine expectancies influence the subjective and behavioral effects of caffeine.

Authors:  Paul T Harrell; Laura M Juliano
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2009-09-17       Impact factor: 4.530

9.  Expectation enhances the regional brain metabolic and the reinforcing effects of stimulants in cocaine abusers.

Authors:  Nora D Volkow; Gene-Jack Wang; Yemin Ma; Joanna S Fowler; Wei Zhu; Laurence Maynard; Frank Telang; Paul Vaska; Yu-Shin Ding; Christopher Wong; James M Swanson
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-12-10       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 10.  Reinforcing effects of stimulants in humans: sensitivity of progressive-ratio schedules.

Authors:  William W Stoops
Journal:  Exp Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.157

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.