Assessment & Research

Comparing single and cumulative dosing procedures in human triazolam discriminators.

Smith et al. (1999) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1999
★ The Verdict

You can finish a full drug-discrimination curve in one long session instead of four short ones.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who run single-case lab studies or teach graduate methods courses.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only work with children and never use drug-discrimination tasks.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Adults without disabilities learned to tell when they had taken the sleep drug triazolam.

Each person tried two ways of testing. In one way they took single doses across four separate days. In the other way they took small added doses in one long session.

The team compared how well each method taught the adults to say, "Yes, I feel the drug."

02

What they found

The one-session method worked just as well as the four-day method.

Adults could still feel the drug and report it correctly.

Some rating scales shifted a little, but the main drug cue stayed strong.

03

How this fits with other research

Mellitz et al. (1983) saw a different story in rats. Cumulative dosing made some drugs look stronger and others weaker. The rat study warned that stacking doses can change the numbers.

The new human study keeps the drug effect the same, so the rat warning may not apply to human drug-discrimination work.

Capriotti et al. (2017) and Chesbrough et al. (2024) also used alternating-treatments designs. Like the drug study, they showed that faster methods can match the old way without hurting results.

04

Why it matters

If you run drug-discrimination or other single-case studies, you can save three sessions by using cumulative dosing. Fewer sessions mean less time, lower cost, and happier participants. Just check that the shortcut does not change your target effect, especially when you switch species or tasks.

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

Try an alternating-treatments design to test any shortcut you wonder about—run both old and new ways in the same participants.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
alternating treatments
Sample size
4
Population
neurotypical
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

This study evaluated a cumulative dosing procedure for drug discrimination with human participants. Four participants learned to discriminate triazolam (0.35 mg/70 kg) from placebo. A crossover design was used to compare the results under a single dosing procedure with results obtained under a cumulative dosing procedure. Under the single dosing procedure, a dose of triazolam (0, 0.05, 0.15, or 0.35 mg/70 kg) or secobarbital (0, 25, 75, or 175 mg/70 kg) was administered 45 min before assessment. Determining each dose-effect curve thus required four sessions. Under the cumulative dosing procedure, four doses of triazolam (0, 0.05, 0.10, and 0.20 mg/70 kg) or secobarbital (0, 25, 50, and 100 mg/70 kg) were administered approximately 55 min apart, producing a complete dose-effect curve in one four-trial session. Regardless of procedure, triazolam and secobarbital produced discriminative stimulus and self-reported effects similar to previous single dosing studies in humans. Shifts to the right in cumulative dose-effect curves compared to single dose-effect curves occurred on several self-report measures. When qualitative stimulus functions rather than quantitative functions are of interest, application of cumulative dosing may increase efficiency in human drug discrimination.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1999 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1999.71-417