The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Is Talk “Cheap”? An Initial Investigation of the Equivalence of Alcohol Purchase Task Performance for Hypothetical and Actual Rewards
Open accessAbstract
Background: Behavioral economic alcohol purchase tasks (APTs) are self‐report measures of alcohol demand that assess estimated consumption at escalating levels of price. However, the relationship between estimated performance for hypothetical outcomes and choices for actual outcomes has not been determined. The present study examined both the correspondence between choices for hypothetical and actual outcomes, and the correspondence between estimated alcohol consumption and actual drinking behavior. A collateral goal of the study was to examine the effects of alcohol cues on APT performance. Methods: Forty‐one heavy‐drinking adults (56% men) participated in a human laboratory protocol comprising APTs for hypothetical and actual alcohol and money, an alcohol cue reactivity paradigm, an alcohol self‐administration period, and a recovery period. Results: Pearson correlations revealed very high correspondence between APT performance for hypothetical and actual alcohol (p s < 0.001). Estimated consumption on the APT was similarly strongly associated with actual consumption during the self‐administration period (r = 0.87, p < 0.001). Exposure to alcohol cues significantly increased subjective craving and arousal and had a trend‐level effect on intensity of demand, in spite of notable ceiling effects. Associations among motivational indices were highly variable, suggesting multidimensionality. Conclusions: These results suggest there may be close correspondence both between value preferences for hypothetical alcohol and actual alcohol, and between estimated consumption and actual consumption. Methodological considerations and priorities for future studies are discussed.
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.
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
SAUNDERS, J. B., AASLAND, O. G., BABOR, T. F., DE LA FUENTE, J. R., & GRANT, M. (1993) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x · Cited by 13,597 · cited 6×
“Typical Alcohol-related Behavior and Laboratory Performance Drinks/week was significantly correlated with AUDIT (r = .74, p <.001), and both were positively associated with intensity on all three APT assessments (rs > .39, ps .01), retaining all values.”
MethodInfluentialSobell, L. C., & Sobell, M. B. (1992) · Measuring Alcohol Consumption · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0357-5_3 · Cited by 4,110
POSNER, J., RUSSELL, J. A., & PETERSON, B. S. (2005) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579405050340 · Cited by 2,602 · cited 1×
“Affect was assessed using five 100-pt individual circumplex items: Tense↔Calm, Sad↔Happy, Nervous↔Relaxed, Bored↔Excited, Stressed↔Serene, and Depressed↔Elated (Posner et al., 2005).”
MethodHeroin addicts have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than non-drug-using controls.
Kirby, K. N., Petry, N. M., & Bickel, W. K. (1999) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.128.1.78 · Cited by 2,171
Meta‐analysis of cue‐reactivity in addiction research
Carter, B. L., & Tiffany, S. T. (1999) · Addiction · doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.1999.9433273.x · Cited by 1,638 · cited 1×
“N IH -PA Author M anuscript N IH -PA Author M anuscript N IH -PA Author M anuscript craving for alcohol (Carter and Tiffany, 1999) and also significant increases in behavioral economic indices of demand (MacKillop et al., 2010b).”
BackgroundThe measurement of drug craving
Sayette, M. A., Shiffman, S., Tiffany, S. T., Niaura, R. S., Martin, C. S., & Schadel, W. G. (2000) · Addiction · doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.95.8s2.8.x · Cited by 684
Bickel, W. K., Pitcock, J. A., Yi, R., & Angtuaco, E. J. C. (2009) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.5319-08.2009 · Cited by 278
MacKillop, J., Miranda, R., Monti, P. M., Ray, L. A., Murphy, J. G., Rohsenow, D. J., McGeary, J. E., Swift, R. M., Tidey, J. W., & Gwaltney, C. J. (2010) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0017513 · Cited by 278
Self-citationAnton, R. F., Drobes, D. J., Voronin, K., Durazo-Avizu, R., & Moak, D. (2004) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-003-1720-7 · Cited by 135
Cited by
Hogarth, L. (2020) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/s41386-020-0600-8 · Cited by 281
Identification and management of nonsystematic purchase task data: Toward best practice.
Stein, J. S., Koffarnus, M. N., Snider, S. E., Quisenberry, A. J., & Bickel, W. K. (2015) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037/pha0000020 · Cited by 281
Sze, Y. Y., Stein, J. S., Bickel, W. K., Paluch, R. A., & Epstein, L. H. (2017) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702617696511 · Cited by 165
The influence of episodic foresight on delay discounting and demand for alcohol
Bulley, A., & Gullo, M. J. (2017) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.11.003 · Cited by 95
Moskal, D., Maisto, S. A., De Vita, M., & Ditre, J. W. (2018) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037/pha0000170 · Cited by 76
Metadata
- Authors
- Amlung, M. T., Acker, J., Stojek, M. K., Murphy, J. G., & MacKillop, J.
- Venue
- Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-10-21
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 716-724
- ISSN
- 0145-6008 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-0277
- OpenAlex
- W1911378077
- Cited by
- 264
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 4.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is Talk “Cheap”? An Initial Investigation of the Equivalence of Alcohol Purchase Task Performance for Hypothetical and Actual Rewards. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2011.01656.x
- The paper
- Amlung, M. T., Acker, J., Stojek, M. K., Murphy, J. G., & MacKillop, J. (2012). Is Talk “Cheap”? An Initial Investigation of the Equivalence of Alcohol Purchase Task Performance for Hypothetical and Actual Rewards. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2011.01656.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.