ABA Fundamentals

Concurrent phencyclidine and saccharin access: presentation of an alternative reinforcer reduces drug intake.

Carroll (1985) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1985
★ The Verdict

A powerful, immediately available alternative reinforcer can steal response strength from drug taking or other problem behaviors.

✓ Read this if BCBAs crafting interventions for substance use or severe problem behavior in any setting.
✗ Skip if Practitioners working only on skill acquisition with no competing reinforcers present.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Monkeys could press one lever to give themselves the drug PCP. They could also press a second lever to get sweet saccharin water.

The researchers made the saccharin stronger and sweeter across sessions. They watched how drug taking changed when the good drink got better.

02

What they found

When the sweet drink became tastier, monkeys took far fewer drug hits. The better the alternative, the less they used PCP.

Strong saccharin acted like a competing magnet for their lever pressing.

03

How this fits with other research

Derenne et al. (2002) saw the same tug-of-war. Rats paused longer before pressing a lever when saccharin was richer, showing the alternative reinforcer was pulling responses away.

Rooker et al. (2022) moved the idea into a clinic. Dense food reinforcement for a simple task slashed treatment-resistant self-injury in nine children, proving the competition effect works with humans and a different problem behavior.

Galuska et al. (2017) added a twist. They first gave rats rich food, then cut it to lean. That negative shift made the rats gulp more sucrose, again showing that reinforcer value is relative and changeable.

04

Why it matters

You can shrink a harmful behavior by making a safe behavior pay better. Pick a reinforcer the client already loves, deliver it thick and fast for an easy response, and watch the problem drop. No extra punishment needed.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Identify one high-preference edible or activity, set a rich fixed-ratio 1 schedule for a simple alternative response, and collect data on the target behavior.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
single case other
Sample size
6
Population
not specified
Finding
positive
Magnitude
large

03Original abstract

Six monkeys self-administered orally delivered phencyclidine ("angel dust") and saccharin under concurrent fixed-ratio 16 schedules during daily three-hour sessions. Liquid deliveries were contingent upon lip-contact responses on solenoid-operated drinking spouts. Three saccharin concentrations (0.003%, 0.03% and 0.3%, wt/vol) were tested in a nonsystematic order. For each saccharin concentration, the following series of phencyclidine concentrations (mg/ml) was presented: 0.25, 0.5, 1, 0.25 (retest), 0.125, 0.0625, 0.0312, 0.25 (retest) and 0 (water with stimuli signaling phencyclidine). As the saccharin concentration increased, the number of drug deliveries decreased, and the peaks of the concentration-response functions were shifted to the right. The lowest saccharin concentration (0.003%, wt/vol) maintained responding in excess of phencyclidine levels in only one monkey. The two higher saccharin concentrations maintained behavior far in excess of phencyclidine, but saccharin deliveries decreased in some monkeys as phencyclidine concentration and intake (mg/kg) increased. The time course and patterns of phencyclidine-reinforced responding were also altered when saccharin was concurrently available. The results are discussed in terms of strategies to reduce drug-reinforced behavior, preference between different reinforcers, and measures of reinforcing efficacy.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1985 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1985.43-131