Effects of stimulant medication under varied motivational operations.

Mace et al. (2009) asked a simple question. Does stimulant medication work the same when kids want different things?

They gave pills to children with ADHD and intellectual disability. Then they watched the kids work under three test moods: easy tasks, hard tasks, and tasks with prizes.

The team used a single-case design. Each child served as their own control.

Pills helped most of the time. Kids stayed on task longer and hit or yelled less.

Yet the pills did not wipe out problem behavior. When work got tough or prizes looked juicy, trouble still popped up.

Motivation mattered. The same dose worked better on easy days than on prize days.

Cameron et al. (1996) saw the same pattern years earlier. DRA plus guided compliance matched methylphenidate for kids with severe ID. Behavior alone can equal meds.

Pickering et al. (1985) went further. Contingency management beat dextroamphetamine in a reversal design. Pills were shaky; rewards were steady.

LeBlanc et al. (2003) added a twist. Risperidone only helped escape-maintained behavior. Charles now shows stimulants also bend under different motivational operations. Both drugs share a rule: check the function first.

You can’t write a script and walk away. Pills give a boost, but the context still drives behavior. Run a quick functional analysis before you refill. Pair the dose with a DRA or guided-compliance plan. When motivation spikes—think hard tasks or shiny prizes—lean heavier on your behavior tools. The medicine sets the stage; your teaching writes the play.