The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Delay discounting is associated with treatment response among cocaine-dependent outpatients
Open accessAbstract
Delay discounting (DD) describes the rate at which reinforcers lose value as the temporal delay to their receipt increases. Steeper discounting has been positively associated with vulnerability to substance use disorders, including cocaine use disorders. In the present study, we examined whether DD of hypothetical monetary reinforcers is associated with the duration of cocaine abstinence achieved among cocaine-dependent outpatients. Participants were 36 adults who were participating in a randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy of voucher-based contingency management (CM) using low-magnitude (N = 18) or high-magnitude (N = 18) voucher monetary values. DD was associated with the number of continuous weeks of cocaine abstinence achieved, even after adjusting for treatment condition during the initial 12-week, t(33) = 2.48, p = .045 and entire recommended 24-week of treatment, t(33) = 2.40, p = .022. Participants who exhibited steeper discounting functions achieved shorter periods of abstinence in the Low-magnitude voucher condition (12-week: t(16) = 2.48, p = .025; 24-week: t(16) = 2.68, p = .017), but not in the High-magnitude voucher condition (12-week: t(16) = 0.51, p = .618; 24-week: t(16) = 1.08, p = .298), although the interaction between DD and treatment condition was not significant (12-week: t(32) = -1.12, p = .271; 24-week: t(32) = -0.37, p = .712). These results provide further evidence on associations between DD and treatment response and extend those observations to a new clinical population (i.e., cocaine-dependent outpatients), while also suggesting that a more intensive intervention like the High-magnitude CM condition may diminish this negative relationship between DD and treatment response.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 with lower rates of delay discounting tend to be more responsive to treatment for nicotine dependence (Krishnan-Sarin et al., 2007; MacKillop & Kahler, 2009; Yoon et al., 2007), or cocaine dependence (Washio et al., 2011).”
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 Washio et al., 2011
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
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
Impulsivity and cigarette smoking: delay discounting in current, never, and ex-smokers
Bickel, W. K., Odum, A. L., & Madden, G. J. (1999) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/pl00005490 · Cited by 1,433
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
Toward a behavioral economic understanding of drug dependence: delay discounting processes
Bickel, W. K., & Marsch, L. A. (2001) · Addiction · doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.2001.961736.x · Cited by 1,117
WITHIN‐SUBJECT COMPARISON OF REAL AND HYPOTHETICAL MONEY REWARDS IN DELAY DISCOUNTING
Johnson, M. W., & Bickel, W. K. (2002) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.2002.77-129 · Cited by 991
Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting.
(2010) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/12069-000 · Cited by 754
Hyperbolic temporal discounting in social drinkers and problem drinkers.
Vuchinich, R. E., & Simpson, C. A. (1998) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037/1064-1297.6.3.292 · Cited by 624
Bickel, W. K., Miller, M. L., Yi, R., Kowal, B. P., Lindquist, D. M., & Pitcock, J. A. (2007) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.09.016 · Cited by 571
Krishnan-Sarin, S., Reynolds, B., Duhig, A. M., Smith, A., Liss, T., McFetridge, A., Cavallo, D. A., Carroll, K. M., & Potenza, M. N. (2007) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.09.006 · Cited by 436
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The behavioral economics of substance use disorders: reinforcement pathologies and their repair
Bickel, W. K., Johnson, M. W., Koffarnus, M. N., MacKillop, J., & Murphy, J. G. (2014) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153724 · Cited by 655
Bickel, W. K., Jarmolowicz, D. P., Mueller, E. T., Koffarnus, M. N., & Gatchalian, K. M. (2012) · Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2012.02.004 · Cited by 604
Bickel, W. K., Koffarnus, M. N., Moody, L., & Wilson, A. G. (2014) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2013.06.013 · Cited by 386
Rung, J. M., & Madden, G. J. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000462 · Cited by 358
Bickel, W. K., Jarmolowicz, D. P., Mueller, E. T., Gatchalian, K. M., & McClure, S. M. (2012) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-012-2689-x · Cited by 338
Metadata
- Authors
- Washio, Y., Higgins, S. T., Heil, S. H., McKerchar, T. L., Badger, G. J., Skelly, J. M., & Dantona, R. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Vermont (US)
- Jacksonville State University (US)
- Venue
- Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
- Published
- 2011-06
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 243-248
- ISSN
- 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-2293
- PMC
- PMC3476946
- OpenAlex
- W2020394900
- Cited by
- 206
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 9.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA009378;T32 DA07242)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
- Keywords
- delay discounting, cocaine dependence, contingency management, treatment response, cocaine abstinence, treatment intensity, outpatients
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Outpatients, Reinforcement, Psychology, Time Factors, Token Economy, Treatment Outcome, Cocaine-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
