Bruce Alexander and colleagues at Simon Fraser University built Rat Park, an enriched, socially housed environment for laboratory rats, to test whether earlier addiction studies using isolated caged rats had overstated how purely chemical drug addiction is. The studies, published between 1978 and 1981, remain widely cited outside psychology and are also a standard example of a landmark finding whose own methodology has drawn sustained scrutiny.
Facts
Disputed
Key FindingRats housed in Rat Park drank far less morphine-laced water than rats housed alone in standard cages, with isolated males in one condition consuming roughly nineteen times more morphine, suggesting environment and social contact strongly shape drug-seeking behavior rather than the drug alone determining it. 1 The reported difference in morphine consumption is not disputed within Alexander's own data; what is contested is how far the result generalizes, given the study's own small group sizes and a failed 1996 replication attempt. Method
Study DesignRandomized Controlled Trial 1 Participants Connections
Associated With
Conducted By
In Branch
Open Questions
Source Wikipedia: Rat Park
In the Other Atlases
Found In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject is found.
Source Wikipedia: Rat Parktier 2
Sources
1. Wikipedia: Rat Park
Wikimedia FoundationFindings
The rats in Rat Park resisted the morphine water. They would try it occasionally-with the females trying it more often than the males-but they showed a statistically significant preference for the plain water.
Rat Park experiments section
The caged rats (Groups CC and PC) took to the morphine instantly, even with relatively little sweetener, with the caged males drinking 19 times more morphine than the Rat Park males in one of the experimental conditions.
Replication section
There has been little subsequent interest in replicating the studies due to several methodological issues present in the originals.
lead section, study-design
To test this hypothesis, Alexander and his colleagues built Rat Park, a large housing colony 200 times the floor area of a standard laboratory cage. There were 16-20 rats of both sexes in residence, food, balls and wheels for play, and enough space for mating.
- Open Questions: Did later attempts to replicate the Rat Park experiment support Alexander's original findings?
View the Source Open Questions (1 open question)
Did later attempts to replicate the Rat Park experiment support Alexander's original findings?
Bruce Petrie, a graduate student of Alexander's, attempted a replication correcting for methods issues in the originals and could not replicate the results. Subsequent researchers have shown little interest in replicating the studies further, citing methodological problems in the originals themselves: a small number of subjects, oral morphine dosing that does not mimic real use and introduces a bitterness confound, inconsistent measurement of morphine consumption between conditions, plus equipment failures, lost data and rat deaths.
What would resolve this A modern, adequately powered replication using a consistent, non-oral dosing method and standardized morphine-consumption measurement across all housing conditions, addressing the equipment and data-loss problems that undermined the original series.
Behavioral pharmacology and addiction researchWikipedia: Rat Park
Dissenting Readings (1 dissenting reading)
Key Finding
Bruce Petrie's 1996 replication attempt could not reproduce the original Rat Park results. Critics have also pointed to the small group sizes (eight rats per condition), the use of orally administered, sweetened morphine that does not mirror typical drug-use patterns, and equipment failures and lost data in the original studies. Researchers now generally treat environment as a contributing factor in addiction rather than the sole determinant the study is popularly credited with proving.
A dissenting reading, from Bruce PetrieWikipedia: Rat Park, Wikimedia Foundation
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.