Cited by 72Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Differences in impulsivity on a delay-discounting task predict self-administration of a low unit dose of methylphenidate in rats

Open access
Marusich, Julie A., Bardo, Michael T.·2009·Behavioural Pharmacology

Abstract

There is controversy about the abuse liability of methylphenidate (MPH) in humans, and MPH has yet to be established fully as a reinforcer in rats. The present experiment examined whether intravenous MPH served as a reinforcer in rats, and how individual differences in impulsivity impacted MPH self-administration. Rats were exposed to a delay-discounting procedure, and then were implanted with an intravenous catheter to assess self-administration of 0.56 mg/kg/infusion MPH at different fixed ratio values. Self-administration rates of different MPH doses (0.03-1.0 mg/kg/infusion) were also examined. Both high and low impulsive rats acquired MPH self-administration at the same rate. All rats pressed more on the active lever than the inactive lever regardless of MPH dose, and pressed more for MPH than for saline. High impulsive rats self-administered more MPH than low impulsive rats at a low unit dose (0.1 mg/kg/infusion), though not at higher doses, indicating that individual differences in impulsive choice influence the dose-dependent reinforcing effects of MPH.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/fbp.0b013e328330ad6d

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marusich, J. A., & Bardo, M. T.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
Corresponding author
Bardo, Michael T.
Venue
Behavioural Pharmacology
Published
2009-09
Volume
20
Issue
5-6
Pages
447-454
ISSN
0955-8810 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2066412185
Cited by
72
References
62
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
3.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioural Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA012964, T32DA007304, P50DA005312, P50 DA05312)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
methylphenidate, impulsivity, delay discounting, self-administration, abuse liability, individual differences, reinforcers, dose dependence, rats
MeSH terms
Central Nervous System Stimulants, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Choice Behavior, Conditioning, Operant, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Extinction, Psychological, Impulsive Behavior, Male, Methylphenidate, Reaction Time, Reinforcement Schedule, Self Administration, Time Factors, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Rats

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