Drug-intake regulation and the interplay between economic costs and benefits: comment on Lynch and Carroll (2001).
W. J. Lynch and M. E. Carroll's (2001) review argues against aversive effects and for satiation and direct effects as the mechanisms responsible for the descending limb of the dose-response function. Analysis is provided that suggests they may prematurely dispose of the aversive-effects account. Further analysis of the evidence for satiation and direct effects supports the authors' contention that neither can be exclusively supported. A brief behavioral-economic analysis of drug-intake regulation and the descending limb of the dose-response function is presented.
Madden
G J
GJ
Department of Psychology,University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire 54702-4004, USA. maddengj@uwec.edu
D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D064420:Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; D017850:Economics, Pharmaceutical; D006801:Humans; D004364:Pharmaceutical Preparations / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D012054:Reinforcement, Psychology; D012107:Research Design; D012527:Satiation
D004364:Pharmaceutical Preparations