Impulsivity and rapid discounting of delayed hypothetical rewards in cocaine-dependent individuals.

By S. Coffey, G. Gudleski, M. Saladin, K. Brady. Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology, 2003

651 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, General Decision Sciences

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8e44a032ee410564795c674fd8c74df9ed5f10fb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In General Decision Sciences

Citations in the corpus

Delayed reward discounting and addictive behavior: a meta-analysis (2011, background): “Compared with controls, higher levels of impulsive discounting has been found in individuals with varying levels of alcohol misuse and dependence (e.g., Petry 2001; Vuchinich and Simpson 1998), nicotine dependence (e.g., Bickel et al. 1999), stimulant dependence (e.g., Coffey et al. 2003 ), opiate ”
A review of delay-discounting research with humans: relations to drug use and gambling (2006, background): “A study by Coffey et al. (2003) compared cocaine-dependent individuals to matched nondependent control participants on a question-based hypothetical measure of delay discounting ($1000 delayed standard).”
Remember the future: working memory training decreases delay discounting among stimulant addicts (2010, positive): “Frequent or heavy users of stimulants have been shown to exhibit neurocognitive deficits, including deficiencies in working memory (21,22) and high rates of delay discounting (23,24).”
Neural systems implicated in delayed and probabilistic reinforcement (2006, background): “, 1999), as well as discounting money more than controls; opiate abusers discount opiates more than money (Madden, Bickel, & Jacobs, 1999), and cocaine users discount cocaine more than money (Coffey et al., 2003).”
Insights into the neural basis of response inhibition from cognitive and clinical neuroscience. (2009, positive): “Cocaine users show higher delayed discounting rates (Coffey et al., 2003; Simon et al., 2007), are slower or poorer at motor inhibition (Fillmore and Rush, 2002; Hester and Garavan, 2004; Colzato et al., 2007), make riskier decisions on various gambling tasks (Bartzokis et al., 2000; Monterosso et…”
Neurocognitive Effects of Methamphetamine: A Critical Review and Meta-analysis (2007, result): “Similar to other stimulant using populations (e.g., Coffey et al. 2003), MA dependent individuals evidence risky decision-making and impulsivity, as assessed by their sensitivity to delayed versus immediate rewards (Hoffman et al. 2006; Monterosso et al. 2006), selection of disadvantageous and/or…”
A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. (2004, background): “(2002), and Coffey et al. (2003) studies all tried to control for possible effects of amount when comparing the monetary and drug rewards. For example, Madden et al. (1997) compared hypothetical choices between amounts of money available immediately and $1,000 available after a delay with choices be”
Impulsivity as a vulnerability marker for substance-use disorders: review of findings from high-risk research, problem gamblers and genetic association studies. (2008, background): “Cocaine and methamphetamine users show steeper rates of delay-discounting on hypothetical tests with delays in the order of weeks to months (Coffey et al., 2003; Hoffman et al., 2006; Kirby and Petry, 2004; Monterosso et al., 2001) as well as on experiential discounting test with delays in the order”
Impulsivity as a determinant and consequence of drug use: a review of underlying processes (2008, background): “1997; Kirby, Petry & Bickel 1999), cocaine users (Coffey et al. 2003), alcohol abusers (Vuchinich & Simpson 1998), cigarette smokers (Bickel, Odum & Madden 1999; Mitchell 1999) and individuals with unspecified histories of drug dependence (Allen et al.”