How research in behavioral pharmacology informs behavioral science

Behavioral pharmacology is a maturing science that has made significant contributions to the study of drug effects on behavior, especially in the domain of drug-behavior interactions. Less appreciated is that research in behavioral pharmacology can have, and has had, implications for the experimental analysis of behavior, especially its conceptualizations and theory. In this article, I outline three general strategies in behavioral pharmacology research that have been employed to increase understanding of behavioral processes. Examples are provided of the general characteristics of the strategies and of implications of previous research for behavior theory. Behavior analysis will advance as its theories are challenged.     

Rat AA-26: behavioral pharmacology science pioneer.

Rat AA-26, despite 1950s "state of the art," nonetheless generated the first set of behavioral pharmacology cumulative records to appear in the weekly journal Science, the century-old publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The laboratory exploits of this dedicated animal called early attention to the methodological fruits of a marriage between pharmacology and the experimental analysis of behavior.     

Rate dependency, behavioral mechanisms, and behavioral pharmacology.

Behavioral pharmacology has become increasingly independent of the experimental analysis of behavior. At its beginning, behavioral pharmacology was closely related to the experimental analysis of behavior, with developments in each field aiding the other. Early attempts to systematize data in behavioral pharmacology culminated with the development of the rate-dependency concept, but as this principle was found to have more limited generality than originally was hoped, a theoretical void developed. This circumstance was followed by increased reliance on pharmacological theory as a basis for experimentation and interpretation, with an attendant decrease in emphasis on environmental variables and behavioral interpretations. Lack of interplay between behavioral pharmacology and the experimental analysis of behavior is detrimental to both disciplines because each could contribute significantly to the other. The current trend might be reversed if more research were directed at elucidating behavioral mechanisms of drug action.     

Behavior analysis and the growth of behavioral pharmacology

Psychologists, particularly those influenced by the work of B. F. Skinner, played a major part in the development of behavioral pharmacology in the 1950s and 1960s. Revolutionary changes in pharmacology and psychiatry, including the discovery of powerful therapeutic agents such as chlorpromazine and reserpine, had produced a surge of interest in drug research. Pharmaceutical companies began hiring psychologists with operant conditioning backgrounds so as to compete successfully in the search for new drugs. Psychologists, most of whom were skilled in the behavior-analytic approach, started to assume prominent positions as authors and editors for the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics as its emphasis on behavior increased. This also proved true with the other publications founded to deal with the popularity of behavioral pharmacology. Especially important were contributions by B. F. Skinner, Peter B. Dews, and Joseph V. Brady.     

The behavioral pharmacology of effort-related choice behavior: dopamine, adenosine and beyond

For many years, it has been suggested that drugs that interfere with dopamine (DA) transmission alter the "rewarding" impact of primary reinforcers such as food. Research and theory related to the functions of mesolimbic DA are undergoing a substantial conceptual restructuring, with the traditional emphasis on hedonia and primary reward yielding to other concepts and lines of inquiry. The present review is focused upon the involvement of nucleus accumbens DA in effort-related choice behavior. Viewed from the framework of behavioral economics, the effects of accumbens DA depletions and antagonism on food-reinforced behavior are highly dependent upon the work requirements of the instrumental task, and DA-depleted rats show a heightened sensitivity to response costs, especially ratio requirements. Moreover, interference with accumbens DA transmission exerts a powerful influence over effort-related choice behavior. Rats with accumbens DA depletions or antagonism reallocate their instrumental behavior away from food-reinforced tasks that have high response requirements, and show increased selection of low reinforcement/low cost options. Nucleus accumbens DA and adenosine interact in the regulation of effort-related functions, and other brain structures (anterior cingulate cortex, amygdala, ventral pallidum) also are involved. Studies of the brain systems regulating effort-based processes may have implications for understanding drug abuse, as well as symptoms such as psychomotor slowing, fatigue or anergia in depression and other neurological disorders.     

I. V. Zavadskii and the beginnings of behavioral pharmacology: an historical note and translation.

I. V. Zavadskii, who worked in Pavlov's laboratory between 1907 and 1909, performed a study that has many of the characteristics of modern behavioral pharmacology. He studied the effects of alcohol, morphine, cocaine and caffeine on the conditioned salivary reflex. A translation of his paper and some brief comments on his life are presented.     

Lamotrigine in psychiatry: pharmacology and therapeutics

Following the introduction of lamotrigine in 1994 as a treatment for epilepsy in the United States, the drug has seen progressively greater application in psychiatry, particularly as a treatment for bipolar disorder. This review critically evaluates the support for lamotrigine use across a broad range of psychiatric disorders as well as discuss its pharmacology, side-effect profile, and interactions with other medications.     

Intimacy: A behavioral interpretation

This paper proposes that intimacy is a process that emerges from a sequence of events in which behavior vulnerable to interpersonal punishment is reinforced by the response of another person. These intimate events result in an increase in the probability of behavior vulnerable to interpersonal punishment in the presence of the reinforcing partner. The process results in intimate partnership formation and reports of feeling intimate. In addition to positing an operant process integrating the various components of intimacy, the theory also posits that the punishment of interpersonally vulnerable behavior is an integral aspect of intimate partnership formation and that intimate partnerships can develop that reinforce behavior that may be destructive both to the individual and to others.     

Competition: Some behavioral issues

Conclusions drawn from research in the social sciences comparing the quality or quantity of performance under cooperation and competiton stress the advantages of cooperation. This generalization may be premature, however, because of the paucity of experimental analyses investigating variations in competitive conditions. Neglected in particular have been variables that affect reinforcement conditions among competitors. These include performance differences, the basis of reinforcement, reinforcer distribution, and stimuli that indicate the performances of other competitors. These variables provide the basis for a behavioral interpretation of performance under competition. The result is a clearer understanding of the options that are available in instituting competitive contingencies and the areas in which experimental analyses are needed.     

Applying behavioral theory to practice: an examination of the behavioral momentum metaphor

This paper discusses some of the difficulties that arise in the practical applications of theories derived from specific experimental settings. Nevin's metaphoric extension of the physical concept of momentum to modifying behavior (i.e., behavioral momentum) is used as a recent example. Problems in the application of behavioral momentum are discussed, alternative analyses are offered, and methods for further testing the process are suggested. ©1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Hypertension: Cognitive and behavioral considerations

This article reviews literature concerning functional changes resulting from elevated blood pressure, from reduction of blood pressure, and as a result of the medications used to treat high blood pressure. The research reviewed includes the areas of psychomotor speed, intelligence and cognitive processing, sensory and perceptual processes, and emotional and interpersonal behaviors. The conclusions reached are that the deficits noted to date in hypertensive individuals are not extreme nor are they specific. The greatest disadvantage, however, appears in the area of response speed.     

Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation

Social psychologists have extensively researched behavioral intention and its relation to future behavior, usually within the framework of M. Fishbein and I. Ajzen's (1975, Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley) theory of reasoned action. However, the field has confounded two separate constructs while investigating intention: behavioral intention (BI) and what P. R. Warshaw, B. H. Sheppard, and J. Hartwick (in press, in R. Bagozzi (Ed.), Advances in marketing communication, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press) have coined behavioral expectation (BE), which is the individual's self-prediction of his or her future behavior. In this paper we define both constructs and explain how they differ in terms of the processes by which they are formed, their roles in determining behavior, and their utilities as behavioral predictors. We propose that behavioral expectation is the more accurate overall predictor since many common behaviors are unreasoned (i.e., mindless or habitual) behaviors, goal-type actions, or behaviors where the individual expects his or her intention to change in a foresseable manner. These are all cases where present intention (BI) is not the direct determinant of behavior but where the individual may be capable of appraising whatever additional determinants exist and of including them within his or her behavioral expectation. A study (N = 197) is reported in which student subjects received either a BE (n = 113) or a BI (n = 84) version of a questionnaire pertaining to their performance of 18 common behaviors. Overall, behavioral expectation was the better predictor of self-reported performance.