The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impulsive and self-control choices in opioid-dependent patients and non-drug-using control patients: Drug and monetary rewards.
Abstract
Delay discounting was investigated in opioid-dependent and non-drug-using control participants. The latter participants were matched to the former on age, gender, education, and IQ. Participants in both groups chose between hypothetical monetary rewards available either immediately or after a delay. Delayed rewards were $1,000, and the immediate-reward amount was adjusted until choices reflected indifference. This procedure was repeated at each of 7 delays (1 week to 25 years). Opioid-dependent participants were given a second series of choices between immediate and delayed heroin, using the same procedures (i.e., the amount of delayed heroin was that which could be purchased with $1,000). Opioid-dependent participants discounted delayed monetary rewards significantly more than did non-drug-using participants. Furthermore opioid-dependent participants discounted delayed heroin significantly more than delayed money.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“individuals who suffer from reinforcement pathologies discount delayed rewards more than matched controls.”
From The behavioral economics and neuroeconomics of reinforcer pathologies: implications for etiology and treatment of addiction (2011) · cites this paper as [32]
In the citing paper
“those affected by reinforcement pathologies discount their pathological reinforcer to a greater extent than they discount other commodities.”
From The behavioral economics and neuroeconomics of reinforcer pathologies: implications for etiology and treatment of addiction (2011) · cites this paper as [32]
In the citing paper
“Because elevated discounting rates are associated with drug abuse [15, 22, 25–30, 32]”
From The behavioral economics and neuroeconomics of reinforcer pathologies: implications for etiology and treatment of addiction (2011) · cites this paper as [32]
In the citing paper
“Consistent with this conceptual analysis, individual differences in how steeply LLRs are discounted robustly correlates with the incidence and severity of problem substance use”
From Changing Delay Discounting and Impulsive Choice: Implications for Addictions, Prevention, and Human Health (2019) · cites this paper as Madden et al., 1997
In the citing paper
“one consistent finding is that substance-dependent individuals tend to discount delayed reinforcers more rapidly than do healthy controls.”
From Excessive discounting of delayed reinforcers as a trans-disease process contributing to addiction and other disease-related vulnerabilities: Emerging evidence (2012) · cites this paper as Madden et al. (1997)
In the citing paper
“significantly higher discounting rates for the opioid-dependent patients (k = 0.220) than for the control group (k = 0.027).”
From Excessive discounting of delayed reinforcers as a trans-disease process contributing to addiction and other disease-related vulnerabilities: Emerging evidence (2012) · cites this paper as Madden et al. (1997)
Citations
Cites
An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement.
Commons, M. L., Mazur, J., Nevin, J. A., & Rachlin, H. C. (1987) · doi:10.4324/9781315825502-11 · Cited by 1,842
New Data from the Addiction Severity Index Reliability and Validity in Three Centers
McLELLAN, A. T., LUBORSKY, L., CACCIOLA, J., GRIFFITH, J., EVANS, F., BARR, H. L., & OʼBRIEN, C. P. (1985) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-198507000-00005 · Cited by 1,503
SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITY AND DELAY
Rachlin, H., Raineri, A., & Cross, D. (1991) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1991.55-233 · Cited by 1,341
COMMITMENT, CHOICE AND SELF‐CONTROL1
Rachlin, H., & Green, L. (1972) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1972.17-15 · Cited by 1,204
Discounting of Delayed Rewards: A Life-Span Comparison
Green, L., Fry, A. F., & Myerson, J. (1994) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00610.x · Cited by 1,165
Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness: Their Position in a Dimensional System of Personality Description
Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1978.43.3f.1247 · Cited by 984
DISCOUNTING OF DELAYED REWARDS: MODELS OF INDIVIDUAL CHOICE
Myerson, J., & Green, L. (1995) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1995.64-263 · Cited by 843
Preference Reversals Due to Myopic Discounting of Delayed Reward
Kirby, K. N., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1995) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00311.x · Cited by 591
The effect of delay and of intervening events on reinforcement value.
Commons, M. L. (1987) · L. Erlbaum Associates Inc. eBooks · Cited by 359
When foragers discount the future: constraint or adaptation?
Kagel, J. H., Green, L., & Caraco, T. B. (1986) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/0003-3472(86)90032-1 · Cited by 255
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/002205102320161311 · Cited by 6,106
Steel, P. (2007) · Psychological bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65 · Cited by 3,417
Psychiatric Aspects of Impulsivity
Moeller, F. G., Barratt, E. S., Dougherty, D. M., Schmitz, J. M., & Swann, A. C. (2001) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.158.11.1783 · Cited by 2,747
Addiction motivation reformulated: an affective processing model of negative reinforcement
Baker, T. B., Piper, M. E., McCarthy, D. E., Majeskie, M. R., & Fiore, M. C. (2004) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.111.1.33 · Cited by 2,162
Inhibition and impulsivity: behavioral and neural basis of response control
Bari, A., & Robbins, T. W. (2013) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.06.005 · Cited by 1,921
Metadata
- Authors
- Madden, G. J., Petry, N. M., Badger, G. J., & Bickel, W. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Vermont (US)
- Venue
- Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
- Published
- 1997
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 256-262
- ISSN
- 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-2293
- OpenAlex
- W1989748592
- Cited by
- 911
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 49 · 2012: 61
- FWCI
- 8.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (5P50AA03510-19, R03-AA08731)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 06969, T32-DA-07242, DA-06526, T32DA007242)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Keywords
- opioid use disorder, heroin, delay discounting, impulsivity, self-control, drug reward, monetary rewards, delay of gratification, substance use disorders
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Heroin, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Male, Opioid-Related Disorders, Narcotics, Personality Tests, Reward
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
