Term Paper on "Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies"

Home > Topics > Drugs & Alcohol My Account

Term Paper 41 pages (11354 words) Sources: 1+

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Contingency Management

ALCOHOL & MARIJUANA STUDIES

The purposes of this review are to gain an understanding of the controlled studies using contingency management (CM) in the substance abuse field, and where applicable emphasize those studies that incorporate CM with community reinforcement approach (CRA). This paper should offer a critical review of the literature with an eye toward identifying important and unresolved theoretical and research questions. Logan (1972) holds that there is much evidence that animals also respond to operant contingencies with psychoactive substances.

The New York Times reports in the work entitled: "Toward a Behavioral Economic Understanding of Drug Dependence: Delay Discounting Processes" (2006) states that many times those who are addicted to alcohol or drugs do not stay clean because they either "won't go to or won't stay in treatment." The work of "Scott Kellogg, Ph.D., and Mary Jeanne Kreek, M.D., at the Rockefeller University, and colleagues at the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (HHC) and at Johns Hopkins University, show that a treatment approach called contingency management improves patients' motivation to stay in treatment and increases their therapeutic progress." (New York Times, 2006) According to the report "Contingency management is designed to reinforce small steps, especially at the beginning, like celebrating each attendance at a group meeting or each drug-free test result. Later, patients can move on to larger achievements like stable housing. Easy-to-earn material goods, such as movie passes and food vouchers, help to both initiate and maintain positive changes. The program is not th

Continue scrolling to

download full paper ⤓

ought of as a substitute for counseling or pharmacotherapy, but something that adds to the therapy." (New York Times, 2006) According to Kellogg: "We did have some opposition at first from the staff, people who come from different therapeutic traditions...in general we tend to punish people for doing things that are wrong, so it's not necessarily intuitive to reinforce positive behavior when it does occur in our patients. But once the patients began to respond to the reinforcements, it changed the counselors. The counselors want the patients to get better, and when they saw the patients get better, it was really persuasive." (New York Times, 29006)

Key Terms

1. Contingency Management: "Contingency Management rewards abstinence or punishes drug taking (e.g. By notification of courts, employers or family members) as measured by random, supervised urine, saliva, or hair-follicle monitoring. Is inclusive of cue exposure and relaxation techniques to expose a patient to cues that induce craving while preventing actual substance abuse in order to facilitate extinction of classically conditioned craving. (Treating Substance Use Disorders, 2006; paraphrased)

2.. Vouchers: Awards given to participants that can be used for purchasing all types of merchandise.

3. CRs - Conditioned response.

4. ARCs - Alcohol related cues.

5. SDs - Discriminative Stimuli

Background of the Study

The work entitled "Pathways of Addiction: Opportunities in Drug Abuse Research" (1996) published by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) states that "A major contribution of behavioral research has been an understanding of the ways in which basic principles of learning and conditioning can be used to modify drug-taking behavior. These principles have been precisely defined so that they can be studied and replicated across conditions and species. For example, research on drug effect expectancies suggests that learned beliefs and attitudes may serve as risk factors for the initiation and use of drugs (Brown, 1993). Further, epidemiological research has pointed to the importance of social modeling and attitudes as having strong impacts on drug use and abuse. Research on learning and conditioning has led to successful treatment models for drug abusers, including relapse prevention, community reinforcement, and focused techniques such as extinction training, relaxation training, contingency management, and job skills training. Two well-studied behavioral interventions are discussed below: contingency management and relapse prevention." (1996) it is additionally stated that: "Contingency management research is based on the fact that, although drugs are potent reinforcers, there are non-drug reinforcers that can compete with drug use (see discussion of behavioral economics, below). Manipulation of the environment can shift the focus toward or away from drug reinforcers (e.g., Azrin et al., 1966; Barrett and Witkin, 1986). In the laboratory, monkeys will choose saccharine over phencyclidine if they are required to work substantially harder for the drug (Carroll and Rodefer, 1993)" (IOM, 1996)

Stitzer and Petry (2006) in the work entitled: "Contingency Management for Treatment of Substance Abuse" published in the Annual Review of Psychology state that: "Clinical research trials demonstrate the efficacy of contingency management procedures in treating substance use disorders. Usually, reinforcement, in the form of vouchers exchangeable for retail goods and services, is provided for drug abstinence in patients treated in psychosocial or methadone maintenance clinics. Recently, the types of reinforcers have been adapted to include lower cost alternatives, and reinforcement is being expanded to alter other target behaviors such as attendance at treatment, adherence to treatment goals, and compliance with medication."

The work of Kirby and Bickel (1995) entitled: "Implications of Behavioral Pharmacology Research for Applied Behavior Analyses: Jeab's Special Issue Celebrating the Contributions of Joseph V. Brady" states that: "Kelly et al. And other studies assessing the reinforcing effects of drugs (e.g., Chait & Zacny, 1992; Foltin & Fischman, 1992) have indicated that multiple dependent measures are necessary for a more complete understanding of a drug's function. The importance of this methodological consideration is underscored by understanding that assessment of a drug's reinforcing effects predicts its abuse liability, and this, in turn, can influence regulation and availability of new medication agents. If Kelly et al.'s data represented the results of an abuse liability assessment of a new medication, and number of self- administrations taken was the only dependent measure examined, one might conclude that the medication was unlikely to be abused. However, if drug choice and ratings of drug liking had been the only dependent measures collected, one could conclude that the medication had a high abuse potential. Abuse liability assessment research has only recently begun to appreciate the complex relations among different operant and to investigate their implications. Although assessment of abuse liability is a socially relevant application of multiple operant methodology, there are many nonpharmacological applications of equal social relevance." (1995) Additionally stated by Kirby and Bickel is: "DeGrandpre et al. studied the effects of different response requirements on two operants: self-administration of cigarette puffs and self-administration of money. The response requirement for these operants was also manipulated by systematically varying the fixed- ratio (FR) schedule for one operant (FR 100, FR 1,000, and FR 2,500) while keeping the schedule for the other operant stable (FR 100). Increasing the FR size for either operant decreased its consumption, with a greater decrease occurring for money. The effects of FR size also differed across the two operants. Although greater responding occurred for money at the lowest ratio employed, increases in FR size decreased responding for money and increased responding for cigarette puffs such that at the higher ratios examined, greater responding occurred for cigarette puffs. Finally, increasing the FR size for one reinforcer had little effect on the consumption of the other concurrently available reinforcer. This study has two important implications for applied research. First, it demonstrates the need to examine responding maintained in multiple contexts. If the two reinforcers employed in this study were examined only at the lowest ratio, one might conclude that money was a more potent reinforcer than cigarette puffs. However, the opposite conclusion would be reached if they were examined only at the higher ratio. As a concrete applied example, imagine that during the early spring, a manager determines that the employees on the loading dock maintain higher work rates when offered financial bonuses contingent on work rate than when offered time off. The manager implements bonuses as a standard procedure for reinforcing high work rates. This procedure works well until summer arrives and the temperature and humidity on the loading dock climb. Now the response cost of the work has increased and the financial bonuses do not seem to be working as well. In this new context, time off may serve as the more effective reinforcer for maintaining higher work rates. Besides evaluating the relative efficacy of reinforcers in different contexts, the procedure used by DeGrandpre et al. provides a useful context for evaluating interactions between concurrently available reinforcers. Such analysis may, for example, have some utility for studying treatments of drug dependence that engage patients in alternative activities to drug use (e.g., Higgins et al., 1993)." (1995) Kirby and Bickel (1995) state that "During discrimination training, subjects were administered 30 mg of d-amphetamine or placebo and told that they could earn extra money by pressing the green lever if they received Drug a (d-amphetamine) or by pressing the red lever if they did not receive Drug a. In addition to this nonverbal operant, subject report measures were collected before and after drug administration. These measures were computer administered and involved a well-established questionnaire (Addiction Research Center Inventory, ARCI) asking the subjects whether or not they were experiencing specific drug effects that have been found… READ MORE

Download Full Paper

Write a New Paper for Me

Quoted Instructions for "Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies" Assignment:

“

Please run the final version of this paper through your plagiarism software.

If additional time is required in order for this paper to be better researched and/or written, I can be flexible with the deadline, but please let me know as soon as possible.

There is no minimum or maximum number of references, though this paper should be comprehensive. I would expect, but have not fully researched, that there will be at least 30 references. Also, please make sure this paper is in APA format.

Please ensure that all citations are either from either peer-reviewed, scholarly journals or scholarly actual books (please, no citations from such internet sites as ‘Wikepedia’).

Literature Review Objectives

Contingency Management Studies

in the Treatment of Substance Dependence/Abuse

Objective

The purposes of this review are to gain an understanding of the controlled studies using contingency management (CM) in the substance abuse field, and where applicable emphasize those studies that incorporate CM with community reinforcement approach (CRA). This paper should offer a critical review of the literature with an eye toward identifying important and unresolved theoretical and research questions.

While there is much evidence that animals also respond to operant contingencies with psychoactive substances (Logan, 1972), this paper will emphasize studies conducted with human subjects, though a brief review of the animal literature will be included. To this end, I propose to review the available literature and achieve the following four goals:

1. Provide two pages total of background information on: animal studies involving operant conditioning and substance abuse (emphasize Logan’s research and whomever else is important); behavioral economics (emphasize Bickle’s research and whomever else is important); CRA (emphasize Meyers, 2005, and Hunt and Azrin); and, operant conditioning. Explain how these findings contributed to the successful treatment of substance abuse disorders, especially when in collaboration to shaping prosocial behaviors related to the use of community resources and coping skills.

2. Offer a comprehensive and coherent review (40+ pages) of all controlled studies published in peer review journals since 1990 that involve substance use and contingency management using any strategy (voucher-based and non-voucher based) that reinforces behaviors designed to achieve abstinence for the treatment of both alcohol and marijuana use and also studies related to alcohol or marijuana designed to achieve other targets than abstinence (e.g., attendance, medication compliance, productivity, positive lifestyle changes). (Higgins, 2004 review gives a partial list of voucher-based CM for alcohol and marijuana and other targets, include all of those as well as find those published since March, 2003) (non-voucher-based CM studies include non-monetary rewards for changes in behavior, and I have not compiled a list of these studies)--these should be two very distinct sections.

3. Offer a short review of any and all CRA studies that incorporate CM in an attempt to modify social behaviors in an attempt to modify alcohol and/or marijuana use.

4. Discuss how these findings can further inform the field of addictions research.

Preliminary List of References

***Immediately below are voucher based CM, Alcohol, Marijuana, and other behaviors studies conducted from 1990-2003 (from Higgins, S. T., Heil, S. H., & Lussier, J. P.2004. Clinical implications of reinforcement as a determinant of substance use disorders. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 55, 431-461), still need all of the controlled voucher based studies published through 2006). Also need all non-voucher based contingency management studies from 1990-2006.

Budney AJ, Higgins ST, Delaney DD, Kent L,

Bickel WK. 1991. Contingent reinforcement

of abstinence with individuals abusing cocaine

and marijuana. J. Appl. Behav. Anal.

24(4):657–65

Budney AJ, Higgins ST, Radonovich KJ, Novy

PL. 2000. Adding voucher-based incentives

to coping skills and motivational enhancement

improves outcomes during treatment

for marijuana dependence. J. Consult. Clin.

Psychol. 68(6):1051–61

Sigmon SC, Steingard S, Badger GJ, Anthony

SL, Higgins ST. 2000. Contingent reinforcement

of marijuana abstinence among individuals

with serious mental illness: a feasibility

study. Exp. Clin. Psychopharmacol.

8(4):509–17

Silverman K, Chutuape MA, Bigelow GE,

Stitzer ML. 1996a. Voucher-based reinforcement

of attendance by unemployed

methadone patients in a job skills training

program. Drug Alcohol Depend. 41(3):197–

207

Svikis DS, Lee JH, Haug NA, Stitzer ML.

1997. Attendance incentives for outpatient

treatment: effects in methadone- and

nonmethadone-maintained pregnant drugdependent

women. Drug Alcohol Depend.

48(1):33–41

Jones HE, Haug N, Silverman K, Stitzer ML,

Svikis D. 2001. The effectiveness of incentives

in enhancing treatment attendance and

drug abstinence in methadone-maintained

pregnant women. Drug Alcohol Depend.

61(3):297–306

Jones HE, Haug N, Stitzer ML, Svikis D.

2000. Improving treatment outcomes for

pregnant drug-dependent women using lowmagnitude

voucher incentives. Addict. Behav.

25(2):263–67

Petry NM. 2001a. Delay discounting of money

and alcohol in actively using alcoholics, currently

abstinent alcoholics, and controls. Psychopharmacology

154(3):243–50

Petry NM. 2001b. Pathological gamblers, with

and without substance use disorders, discount

delayed rewards at high rates. J. Abnorm.

Psychol. 110(3):482–87

Petry NM. 2002. Discounting of delayed rewards

in substance abusers: relationship to

REINFORCEMENT AND SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS 459

antisocial personality disorder. Psychopharmacology

162(4):425–32

Petry NM, Casarella T. 1999. Excessive discounting

of delayed rewards in substance

abusers with gambling problems. Drug Alcohol

Depend. 56(1):25–32

Preston KL, Silverman K, Umbricht A, De-

Jesus A, Montoya ID, Schuster CR. 1999.

Improvement in naltrexone treatment compliance

with contingency management. Drug

Alcohol Depend. 54(2):127–35

Wong CJ, Sheppard JM, Dallery J, Bedient

G, Robles E, et al. 2003. Effects of reinforcer

magnitude on data-entry productivity

in chronically unemployed drug abusers participating

in a therapeutic workplace. Exp.

Clin. Psychopharmacol. 11(1):46–55

Iguchi, M.Y., Belding, M. A., Moral, A. R., Lamb, R. J., & Husband, S. D. (1997). Reinforcing operants other than abstinence in drug abuse treatment: An effective alternative for reducing drug use. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 421-428.

Definitely use this CRA article along with any other you feel would be helpful.

The Community Reinforcement Approach: History and New Directions. Meyers, Robert J.; Villanueva, Michael; Smith, ***** Ellen; Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, Vol 19(3), Fal 2005. Special issue: State-of-the-art in behavioral interventions for substance use disorders. pp. 247-260.

These also seem appropriate in the review...

Budney, A. J., Higgins, S. T., Radonovich, K. J., & Novy, P. L. (2000). Adding voucher-based incentives to coping-skills and motivational enhancement improves outcomes during treatment for marijuana dependence. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 68, 1051-1061.

McRae, A. L., Budney, A. J., & Brady, K. T. (2003). Treatment of marijuana dependence: a review of the literature. J Subst Abuse Treat 2003; 24: 369-376

Petry, N.M, *****, B., Cooney, J.L., Kranzler, H.R. (2000). Give them prizes, and they will come: Contingency management for treatment of alcohol dependence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 250-257.

Include as many as these articles that pertain to this review as well as any and all that you find in your reserach to ensure this is a comprehensive review.

Alterman, L.R., Gottheil, T.E., Skoloda, T.E., & Grasberger, J.C. (1974). Social modification of drinking by alcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 35, 917-924.

Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Bickel, W. K., DeGrandpre, R. J., & Higgins, S. T. (1993). Behavioral economics: A novel experimental approach to the study of drug dependence. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 33, 173–192.

Bickel, W. K., DeGrandpre, R. J., & Higgins, S. T. (1995). The behavioral economics of concurrent drug reinforcers: A review and reanalysis of drug self-administration research. Psychopharmacology, 118, 250–259.

Bigelow, G.M., & Liebson, I. (1972). Cost factors controlling alcoholic drinking. Psychological Record, 22, 305-314.

Bigelow, G., Griffiths, R. R., & Liebson, I. A. (1975). Experimental models for the modification of human drug self-administration: Methodological developments in the study of ethanol self-administration by alcoholics, federation Proceedings, 34, 1785-1792.

Canter, F.M. (1968). The requirement of abstinence as a problem in institutional treatment of alcoholics. Psychiatric Quarterly, 42, 217-231.

Cheek, F.E., Franks, C.M., Laucius, J., & Burtle, V. (1971). Behavior modification training for wives of alcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 32, 456-461.

Childress A, McLellan A, O'Brien C. Behavioral therapies for substance abuse. International Journal of the Addictions [serial online]. 1985;20(6):947-969. Available from: PsycINFO, Ipswich, MA. Accessed September 2, 2006

Cohen, M., Liebson, I., & Faillace, L. (1972). A technique for establishing controlled drinking in chronic alcoholics. Diseases of the Nervous System, 33, 46-49.

Cohen, M., Liebson, I., & Faillace, L. (1973). Controlled drinking by chronic alcoholics over extended periods of free access. Psychological Reports, 32, 1107-1110.

Cohen, M., Liebson, I., Faillace, L. & Allen, R.P. (1971). Moderate drinking by chronic alcoholics. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 153, 434-444.

Cohen, M., Liebson, I., Faillace, L., & Speers, W. (1971). Alcoholism: Controlled drinking and incentives for abstinence. Psychological Reports, 28, 575-580.

Corby, E. A., Roll, J. M., Ledgerwood, D. M., & Schuster, C. R. (2000). Contingency management interventions for treating the substance abuse of adolescents: A feasibility study. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 8, 371-376.

Cutter, H.S.G., Schwaab, E.L. & Nathan, P.E. (1970). Effects of alcohol on its utility for alcoholics and nonalcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 31, 369-378.

Faillace, L.A., Flamer, R.N., Imber, S.D., & Ward, R.F. (1972). Giving alcohol to alcoholics: An evaluation. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 33, 85-90.

Gottheil, E., Corbett, L.O., Grasberger, J.C., & Cornelison, F.S. (1971). Treating the alcoholic in the presence of alcohol. American Journal of Psychiatry, 128, 475-480.

Gottheil, E., Corbett, L.O., Grasberger, J.C., & Cornelison, F.S. (1972). Fixed-interval drinking decisions: A research and treatment model. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 33, 311-324.

Griffiths, R., Bigelow, G., Liebson, I. (1974). Suppression of ethanol self-administration in alcoholics by contingent time-out from social interventions. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 12, 327-334.

Heather, N. & Robertson, I. (1983). Controlled Drinking. University Press, Cambridge.

Helmus, T.C., Saules, K.K., Schoener, E.P., & Roll, J.M. (2003) Reinforcement of counseling attendance and alcohol abstinence in a community-based dual-diagnosis treatment program: A feasibility study. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17, 249-251.

Higgins, S. T., & Petty, N. M. (1999). Contingency management: Incentives for sobriety. Alcohol Research and Health. 23, 122-127.

Hunt, G.M. & Azrin, N.H. (1973). The community-reinforcement approach to alcoholism. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 11, 91-104.

Iguchi, M.Y., Belding, M. A., Moral, A. R., Lamb, R. J., & Husband, S. D. (1997). Reinforcing operants other than abstinence in drug abuse treatment: An effective alternative for reducing drug use. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 421-428.

Iguchi, M., Stitzer, M. L., Bigelow, G. E., & Liebson, I. A. (1988). Contingency management in methadone maintenance: Effects of reinforcing and aversive consequences on illicit polydrug use. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 22, 1-7.

Kanfer, F.H. & Phillips, J.S. (1970). Learning foundations of behavior therapy. New York: Wiley.

Liebson, I.A., Cohen, M., Faillace, L.A., & Ward, R.F. (1971). The token economy as a research method in alcoholism. Psychiatric Quarterly, 45, 574-581.

Logan, F.A. (1972). Experimental psychology of animal learning and now. American Psychologist, 27, 1055-1062.

Miller, P.M., Hersen, M., Eisler, R.M., & Watts, J.G. (1974). Contingent reinforcement of lowered blood/alcohol levels in an outpatient chronic alcoholic. Behaviour Research and Therapy,12, 261-263.

Miller, P.M, Stanford, A.G., & Hemphill, D.P. (1974). A social-learning approach to alcoholism treatment. Social Casework, 55, 279-284.

Miller, W.R. (1980). The Addictive Behaviors: Treatment of alcoholism, drug abuse, smoking, and obesity. Pergamon Press, NY.

Miller, W.R., Brown, J. M., Simpson, T. L., Handmaker, N. S., Bien, T. H., Luckie, L. P., Montgomery, H. A., Hester, R. K., & Tonigan, J. S. (1995). A methodological analysis of the alcohol treatment outcome literature. In R. K. Hester & W. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of alcoholism treatment approaches (pp. 12-44). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Miller, W.R. & Munoz, R.F. (1976). How to Control Your Drinking. Prentice-Hall, NJ.

Nathan, P.E. & O’Brien, J.S. (1971). An experimental analysis of the behavior of alcoholics and nonalcoholics during prolonged experimental drinking. Behavior Therapy, 2, 455-476.

Nathan, P.E., Titler,N.A., Lowenstein, L.M., Solomon, P., & Rossi, A.M. (1970). Behavioral analysis of chronic alcoholism. Archives of General Psychiatry, 22, 419-430.

Peele S. What works in addiction treatment and what doesn't: Is the best therapy no therapy?. International Journal of the Addictions [serial online]. 1990;25:1409-1419. Available from: PsycINFO, Ipswich, MA. Accessed September 2, 2006.

Petry, N.M, *****, B., Cooney, J.L., Kranzler, H.R. (2000). Give them prizes, and they will come: Contingency management for treatment of alcohol dependence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 250-257.

Petry, N. M. (2000). A comprehensive guide to the application of contingency management procedures in clinical settings. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 58, 9–25.

Petry, N. M., & Sincic, F. (2002). Recent advances in the dissemination of contingency management techniques: Clinical and research perspectives. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 23, 81–86.

Petry, N. M., Tedford, J., & *****, B. (2001). Reinforcing compliance with non-drug-related activities. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 20, 33–44.

Sisson, R. W., & Azrin, N. (1989). The community reinforcement approach. In R. Hester & W. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of alcoholism treatment approaches: Effective alternatives (pp. 242-258). New York: Pergamon Press.

Skinner, B. F. (1961). Teaching machines. Scientific American, 205, 91-102.

Sobell, M.B. & Sobell, L.C. (1973). Individualized behavior therapy for alcoholics. Behavior Therapy, 4, 49-72.

Stitzer, M. L., Bickel, W. K., Bigelow, G. E., & Liebson, I. A. (1986). Effects of methadone dose contingencies on urinalysis test results of polydrug-abusing methadone-maintenance patients. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. IS, 341-348.

Stitzer, M. L., & Bigelow. G. E. (1984). Contingent reinforcement for carbon monoxide reduction: Within-subjects effects of pay amounts. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 477-483.

Stitzer, M. L., Bigelow, G. E., & Gross, J. (1989). Behavioral treatment of drug abuse. In T. B. Karusu (Ed.), American Psychiatric Association treatment manual (pp. 1430-1447). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Sulzer, E.S. (1965). Behavior modification in adult psychiatric patients.

How to Reference "Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies" Term Paper in a Bibliography

“Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies.” A1-TermPaper.com, 2006, https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936. Accessed 19 May 2024.

Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies (2006). Retrieved from https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936

A1-TermPaper.com. (2006). Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies. [online] Available at: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936 [Accessed 19 May, 2024].

”Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies” 2006. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936.

”Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies” A1-TermPaper.com, Last modified 2024. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936.

[1] ”Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies”, A1-TermPaper.com, 2006. [Online]. Available: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936. [Accessed: 19-May-2024].

1. Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies [Internet]. A1-TermPaper.com. 2006 [cited 19 May 2024]. Available from: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936

1. Contingency Management Alcohol Marijuana Studies. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/contingency-management-alcohol-marijuana/62936. Published 2006. Accessed May 19, 2024.

Related Term Papers: