Abstract
Several measures of extinction responding were observed following responding for one of several doses of either dextro or levo amphetamine or dextro or levo methylamphetamine to compare reinforcement magnitudes. After daily 6-h sessions of intravenous self-administration of drug, the drug was replaced by saline and extinction behavior observed. The number of responses to extinction did not differ significantly between drugs and doses used, but extinction times were greater for the larger doses and the dextro isomers. Response rate during extinction appeared to be a function of response rate during drug access, suggesting that the rate of responding was conditioned during drug self-administration. Response rate during extinction and time to complete extinction do not appear to be reliable indicators of reinforcement magnitude due to this conditioning effect.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Armus, H. L. Effect of magnitude of reinforcement on acquisition and extinction of a running response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959, 58, 61–63.
Deneau, G., Yanagita, T., & Seevers, M. H. Self-administration of psychoactive substances by the monkey. Psychopharmacologia, 1969, 16, 30–48.
Fitts, P. M. The effect of a large and a small reward as indicated by the resistance-to-extinction curves for the rat. Psychological Bulletin, 1940, 37, 429–430.
Guttman, N. Operant conditioning, extinction and periodic reinforcement in relation to concentration of sucrose used as reinforcing agent. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1953, 46, 213–224.
Hutt, P. J. Rate of bar pressing as a function of quality and quantity of food reward. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1954, 47, 235–239.
McCloskey, J. L., & Tombaugh, T. N. The effects of volume of sucrose reward on resistance to extinction. Psychological Record, 1971, 21, 53–57.
Milstead, J. R. Interactive effects of reward magnitude and inter-trial intervals on resistance to extinction. Dissertation Abstracts, 1970, 31, 1567.
Pickens, R., & Thompson, T. Cocaine-reinforced behavior in rats: Effects of reinforcement magnitude and fixed-ratio size. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 1968, 161, 122–129.
Pickens, R., & Thompson, T. Simple schedules of drug self-administration in animals. In J. M. Singh, L. H. Miller, & H. Lai (Eds.), Drug addiction: Experimental pharmacology (Vol. 1). Mount Kisco, N.Y: Future, 1972. Pp. 107–120.
Roberts, W. A. Resistance to extinction following partial and consistent reinforcement with varying magnitude of reward. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1969, 67, 395–400.
Schuster, C. R., & Thompson, T. Self-administration of and behavioral dependence on drugs. Annual Review of Pharmacology, 1969, 9, 483–502.
Stewart, J. Reinforcing effects of light as a function of intensity and reinforcement schedule. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1960, 53, 187–193.
Stretch, R., & Gerber, G. J. Drug induced reinstatement of amphetamine self-administration behaviour in monkeys. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1973, 27, 168–177.
Winer, B. J. Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
Yokel, R. A., & Pickens, R. Self-administration of optical isomers of amphetamine and methylamphetamine by rats: Acute and chronic effects. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 1973, 187, 27–33.
Yokel, R. A., & Pickens, R. Drug level of d- and 1-amphetamine during intravenous self-administration. Psychopharmacologia, 1974, 34, 255–264.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The authors wish to thank Abbott Laboratories for their generous donation of levomethylamphetamine and Drs. Jane Stewart and Roy Wise for their many helpful suggestions in preparing this manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yokel, R.A., Pickens, R. Extinction responding following amphetamine self-administration: Determination of reinforcement magnitude. Psychobiology 4, 39–42 (1976). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03326542
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03326542