title: Contingency management in cocaine abusers: a dose-effect comparison of goods-based versus cash-based incentives.
abstract: Goods-based contingency management interventions (e.g., those using vouchers or prizes as incentives) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing cocaine use, but cost has limited dissemination to community clinics. Recent research suggests that development of a cash-based contingency management approach may improve treatment outcomes while reducing operational costs of the intervention. However, the clinical safety of providing cash-based incentives to substance abusers has been a concern. The present 16-week study compared the effects of goods-based versus cash-based incentives worth $0, $25, $50, and $100 on short-term cocaine abstinence in a small sample of cocaine-dependent methadone patients (N = 12). A within-subject design was used; a 9-day washout period separated each of 8 incentive conditions. Higher magnitude ($50 and $100) cash-based incentives (checks) produced greater cocaine abstinence compared with the control ($0) condition, but a magnitude effect was not seen for goods-based incentives (vouchers). A trend was observed for greater rates of abstinence in the cash-based versus goods-based incentives at the $50 and $100 magnitudes. Receipt of $100 checks did not increase subsequent rates of cocaine use above those seen in control conditions. The efficacy and safety data provided in this and other recent studies suggest that use of cash-based incentives deserves consideration for clinical applications of contingency management, but additional confirmation in research using larger samples and more prolonged periods of incentive delivery is needed.
authors: Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA. rvandrey@jhmi.edu
authors: Ryan
authors: R
authors: Vandrey
authors: George E
authors: GE
authors: Bigelow
authors: Maxine L
authors: ML
authors: Stitzer
mesh_terms: D001521:Behavior Therapy / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods*; D019970:Cocaine-Related Disorders / Q000523:psychology / Q000628:therapy*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008691:Methadone / Q000627:therapeutic use; D009042:Motivation; D009294:Narcotics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D012054:Reinforcement, Psychology; D014040:Token Economy; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D009294:Narcotics; D008691:Methadone
references: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2000 Feb 1;58(1-2):205-12
references: 10669073
references: Behav Pharmacol. 2000 Feb;11(1):87-91
references: 10821213
references: J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000 Apr;68(2):250-7
references: 10780125
references: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2001 Aug;9(3):317-25
references: 11534542
references: J Consult Clin Psychol. 2002 Apr;70(2):398-405
references: 11952198
references: Addict Behav. 2002 Nov-Dec;27(6):887-910
references: 12369474
references: Am J Psychiatry. 1993 May;150(5):763-9
references: 8480823
references: Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1994 Jul;51(7):568-76
references: 8031230
references: Addiction. 1997 Jun;92(6):717-27
references: 9246799
references: Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1999 Sep;146(2):128-38
references: 10525747
references: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2005 Feb;13(1):41-7
references: 15727502
references: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005 Jun 1;78(3):275-81
references: 15893158
references: J Appl Behav Anal. 2005 Fall;38(3):359-72
references: 16270845
references: J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005 Dec;73(6):1005-14
references: 16392974
references: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006 Oct 15;85(1):19-27
references: 16650657
references: J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000 Feb;68(1):64-72
references: 10710841