Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41758356›Full record

ReviewPsychopharmacology2026

Decoding behavioral economics vs. traditional dose response functions in rodent intravenous drug self-administration procedures.

Yorkiris Marmol Contreras, Sindhuja Earagolla, Chaitra Takle, Alyssa K Thomas, Erik J Garcia, Thomas A Green

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Psychopharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yorkiris Marmol ContrerasDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
Sindhuja EaragollaJohn Sealy School of Medicine, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
Chaitra Takle *John Sealy School of Medicine, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
Alyssa K ThomasDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
Erik J GarciaNeuroscience and Behavior, Department of Psychology, The University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA. ejgarcia@unomaha.edu.
Thomas A GreenDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA. thgreen@utmb.edu.

Funding

Translational Explorations in Substance Use DisordersT32DA007287 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BR GALVESTON · PI Kathryn A. Cunningham, Jonathan Dean Hommel · 1994 to 2026
$4.7M
Frustration effects on drug takingR01DA060221 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MED BR GALVESTON · PI Thomas Arthur Green · 2024 to 2026
$1.2M
National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) DA059721National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) DA060221NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA060221NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA007287
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Behavioral economics (BE), as applied to intravenous drug self-administration (IVSA) procedures in animals, has been hailed as an advancement in the psychopharmacology of substance use disorders because it evaluates demand intensity and demand elasticity, crucial determinants of addiction-related phenotypes. However, there is still a disconnect in our understanding of BE analyses within the context of traditional analytical strategies for IVSA data for dose response curves. It is important to understand the fundamentals of BE analysis and its relationship to the classic analytical approach, as well as identify relative strengths and weaknesses of each strategy. To address this, the current manuscript presents identical data sets analyzed using traditional dose response curves (DRCs) and the newer BE framework to decode how simulated differences in one analysis relate to the other. First, the fundamentals of each approach are discussed to set a solid foundation for comparison. Then, simulated data sets are analyzed by both procedures to draw correlations and distinctions. Strengths, weaknesses, and caveats of each analysis are discussed, and the lessons learned are used to set best practices for BE study design. The primary fundamental conclusion is that traditional DRCs or BE effort curves should always be presented along with BE demand curves.

Indexed as

AddictionHabitIncentive motivationRatRodentSubstance use disorderTranslational psychopharmacology

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.