Variations in affect following amphetamine and placebo: Markers of stimulant drug preference

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 91-101

  Gabbay, Frances H ^a  

^a UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMPHETAMINE; PLACEBO;

ADULT; AFFECT; ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG PREFERENCE; DYSPHORIA; ENERGY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; RATING SCALE; RISK FACTOR; SEDATION; TECHNIQUE; WELLBEING;

EID: 0037326923     PISSN: 10641297     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1064-1297.11.1.91     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed., rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
2. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Bishop, C., Roehrs, T., Rosenthal, L., & Roth, T. (1997). Alerting effects of methylphenidate under basal and sleep-deprived conditions. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 5, 344-352.
4. Carmody, T. (1989). Affect regulation, nicotine addiction, and smoking cessation. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 21, 331-342.
5. Chutuape, M. A., & de Wit, H. (1995). Preferences for ethanol and diazepam in anxious individuals: An evaluation of the self-medication hypothesis. Psychopharmacology, 121, 91-103.
6. Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1988). Mood and the mundane: Relations between daily life events and self-reported mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 296-308.
7. de Wit, H. (1998). Individual differences in acute effects of drugs in humans: Their relevance to risk for abuse. In C. L. Wetherington & J. L. Falk (Eds.), Laboratory behavioral studies of vulnerability to abuse (NIDA Research Monograph No. 169, pp. 176-187). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
8. de Wit, H., Pierri, J., & Johanson, C. E. (1989). Reinforcing and subjective effects of diazepam in nondrug-abusing volunteers. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 33, 205-213.
9. de Wit, H., Uhlenhuth, E. H., Hedeker, D., McCracken, S. G., & Johanson, C. E. (1986). Lack of preference for diazepam in anxious volunteers. Archives of General Psychiatry, 43, 533-541.
10. de Wit, H., Uhlenhuth, E. H., & Johanson, C. E. (1985). Drug preference in normal volunteers: Effects of age and time of day. Psychopharmacology, 87, 186-193.
11. de Wit, H., Uhlenhuth, E. H., & Johanson, C. E. (1986). Individual differences in the reinforcing and subjective effects of amphetamine and diazepam. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 16, 341-360.
12. de Wit, H., Uhlenhuth, E. H., Pierri, J., & Johanson, C. E. (1987). Individual differences in behavioral and subjective response to alcohol. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 11, 52-59.
13. Dews, P. B. (1984). Behavioral effects of caffeine. In P. B. Dews (Ed.), Caffeine: Perspectives from recent research (pp. 86-103). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
14. Goldsmith, R. J. (1993). An integrated psychology for the addictions: Beyond the self-medication hypothesis. Journal of the Addictive Diseases, 12, 139-154.
15. Haertzen, C. A. (1966). Development of scales based on patterns of drug effects using the Addiction Research Center Inventory (ARCI). Psychological Reports, 18, 163-194.
16. Huynh, H., & Feldt, L. S. (1980). Performance of traditional F tests in repeated measures designs under covariance heterogeneity. Communications in Statistical Theory and Methods, A9, 61-74.
17. Jennings, J. R., & Wood, C. C. (1976). Letter: The epsilon-adjustment procedure for repeated measures analyses of variance. Psychophysiology, 13, 277-278.
18. Johanson, C. E., & de Wit, H. (1989). The use of choice procedures for assessing the reinforcing properties of drugs in humans. In M. W. Fischman & N. K. Mello (Eds.), Testing the abuse liability of drugs in humans (NIDA Research Monograph No. 92, pp. 171-210). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
19. Johanson, C. E., Kilgore, K., & Uhlenhuth, E. H. (1983). Assessment of dependence potential of drugs in humans using multiple indices. Psychopharmacology, 81, 144-149.
20. Johanson, C. E., & Uhlenhuth, E. H. (1980). Drug preference and mood in humans: d-Amphetamine. Psychopharmacology, 71, 275-279.
21. Johanson, C. E., & Uhlenhuth, E. H. (1981). Drug preference and mood in humans: Repeated assessment of d-amphetamine. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 14, 159-163.
22. Kaplan, H. B., & Johnson, R. J. (1992). Relationships between circumstances surrounding initial illicit drug use and escalation of drug use: Moderating effects of gender and early adolescent experiences. In M. Glantz & R. W. Pickens (Eds.), Vulnerability to drug abuse (pp. 299-355). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23. Khantzian, E. J. (1990). Self-regulation and self-medication factors in alcoholism and the addictions: Similarities and differences. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism: Vol. 8. Combined alcohol and other drug dependence (pp. 255-271). New York: Plenum.
24. Koelega, H. S. (1993). Stimulant drugs and vigilance performance: A review. Psychopharmacology, 111, 1-16.
25. Martin, W. R., Sloan, J. W., Sapira, J. D., & Jasinski, D. R. (1971). Physiologic, subjective, and behavioral effects of amphetamine, methamphetamine, ephedrine, phenmetrazine, and methylphenidate in man. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 12, 245-258.
26. McNair, D. M., Lorr, M., & Droppleman, L. F. (1971). Manual for the Profile of Mood States. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
27. Norcross, J. C., Guadagnoli, E., & Prochaska, J. O. (1984). Factor structure of the Profile of Mood States (POMS): Two partial replications. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40, 1270-1277.
28. Pandina, R. J., Johnson, V., & Labouvie, E. W. (1992). Affectivity: A central mechanism in the development of drug dependence. In M. Glantz & R. W. Pickens (Eds.), Vulnerability to drug abuse (pp. 179-209). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
29. Robins, L., Helzer, J., Cottler, L., & Goldring, E. (1989). NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule, Version III Revised (DIS-III-R). St. Louis, MO: Washington University.
30. Simes, R. J. (1986). An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika, 73, 751-754.
31. 2 dopamine receptor TaqI B1 restriction fragment length polymorphism appears more frequently in polysubstance abusers. Archives of General Psychiatry, 49, 723-727.
32. Uhlenhuth, E. H., Johanson, C. E., Kilgore, K., & Kobasa, S. C. (1981). Drug preference and mood in humans: Preference for d-amphetamine and subject characteristics. Psychopharmacology, 74, 191-194.
33. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 465-490.
34. Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219-235.
35. Weiss, B., & Laties, V. G. (1962). Enhancement of human performance by caffeine and the amphetamines. Psychological Review, 14, 1-36.