CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 276Coffee research and impactsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Caffeine physical dependence: a review of human and laboratory animal studies

Griffiths, Roland R., Woodson, Phillip P.·1988·Psychopharmacology
DOI 10.1007/bf00212836
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Although caffeine is the most widely used behaviorally active drug in the world, caffeine physical dependence has been poorly characterized in laboratory animals and only moderately well characterized in humans. In humans, a review of 37 clinical reports and experimental studies dating back to 1833 shows that headache and fatigue are the most frequent withdrawal symptoms, with a wide variety of other signs and symptoms occurring at lower frequency (e.g. anxiety, impaired psychomotor performance, nausea/vomiting and craving). When caffeine withdrawal occurs, severity can vary from mild to extreme (i.e. incapacitating). The withdrawal syndrome has an onset at 12-24 h, peak at 20-48 h, and duration of about 1 week. The pharmacological specificity of caffeine withdrawal has been established. The proportion of heavy caffeine users who will experience withdrawal symptoms has been estimated from experimental studies to range from 25% to 100%. Withdrawal symptoms have been documented after relatively short-term exposure to high doses of caffeine (i.e. 6-15 days of greater than or equal to 600 mg/day). Although animal and human studies suggest that physical dependence may potentiate the reinforcing effects of caffeine, human studies also demonstrate that a history of substantial caffeine intake is not a necessary condition for caffeine to function as a reinforcer. The similarities and differences between caffeine and classic drugs of abuse are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00212836

Cites

120 of 120 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 121 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Griffiths, R. R., & Woodson, P. P.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
ORCID
Griffiths, Roland R.
Venue
Psychopharmacology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1988-04
Volume
94
Issue
4
Pages
437-451
ISSN
  • 0033-3158 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2072
DOI
10.1007/bf00212836
OpenAlex
W2086032851
Cited by
276
References
121
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01da001147-28)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA01147, R01DA003890)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
caffeine, physical dependence, caffeine withdrawal, withdrawal symptoms, headache, fatigue, craving, psychomotor performance
MeSH terms
Animals, Caffeine, Humans, Risk Factors, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Substance-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review