An Inspection of our Working Hypotheses in the Study of Pain and other Subjective Responses in Man^[*)]

The working hypotheses of primary importance in our laboratory effort over the past 15 years have been set down. These hypotheses have been credited with playing a considerable part in the opening up of a new field in pharmacology: The quantitative study of the effects ;of drugs on the mind. Since this work has been carried out in man, usually sick man, it provides another example of the fundamental importance of the clinic in the advancement of special basic areas in pharmacology and psychology.

Die wichtigsten Arbeitshypothesen für die Laboratoriumsuntersuchungen, die Vortragender während der letzten 15 Jahre durchgeführt hat, werden dargelegt. Diesen Hypothesen wird ein beträchtlicher Anteil eingeräumt an der Erschließung eines neuen Bereichs der Pharmakologie: der quantitativen Erforschung der Wirkung von Arzneimitteln auf die Psyche. Die Ergebnisse wurden im allgemeinen an kranken Menschen gewonnen und zeigen erneut die fundamentale Bedeutung der Klinik für die Grundlagenforschung in der Pharmakologie und Psychologie.

^*) Paper presented at the International Seminar on Medical Documentation and Statistics, Oct. 10-28, 1901, Berlin, Germany.

• Bibliography

• 1 Adrian E. D.. Pain and its problems. I. The physiology of pain. Practitioner, 158: 76-82 1947;
• 2 Anliker J. E.. Unpublished work in this laboratory. 1961
• 3 Beecher H. K.. Pain in men wounded in battle. Ann. Surg 123: 96-105 1946;
• 4 Beecher H. K.. The powerful placebo. J. Amer. med. Ass 159: 1602-1606 1955;
• 5 Beecher H. K.. Relationship of significance of wound to the pain experienced.. J. Amer. med. Ass. 161 1609-1613 1956 a.
• 6 Beecher H. K.. Evidence for increased effectiveness of placebos with increased stress.. Amer. J. Physiol. 187: 163-169 1956; b.
• 7 Beecher H. K.. Measurement of Subjective Responses: Quantitative Effects of Drugs.. Oxford University Press; New York: 1959
• 8 Beecher H. K.. Increased stress and effectiveness of’placebos and “active” drugs. Science 132: 91-92 1960;
• 9 Beecher H. K.. Surgery as placebo. A quantitative study of bias. J. Amer. .med. Ass 176: 1102-1107 1961;
• 10 Bishop G. H.. Personal communication. August 6 1956
• 11 Cleghorn R. A., Graham B. F., Campbell R. B., Rublee N. K., Elliott F. H., and Saffran M.. Anxiety states: Their response to ACTH and to isotonic saline. Proc. First Clin. ACTH Ponf.. Blakis-ton Co.; Philadelphia: 1950. pp. 561-585.
• 12 Dupuytren. In Lescellière F. G.. Histoire de la cicatrisation, de ses modes de formation, et des considérations pathologiques et thérapeutiques qui en découlent.. Castel, Montpellier, France: 1836. p. 29.
• 13 Gravenstein J. S., Devloo R. A., and Beecher H. K.. Effect of antitussive agents on experimental and pathological cough in man. J. Appl. Physiol 7: 119-139 1954;
• 14 Guthrie G. J.. A treatise on gunshot wounds. Burgess & Hill; London: 1827. p. 3.
• 15 Hardy J. D.. Letter of August 30. 1956
• 16 Houde R. W., and Wallenstein S. L.. A method for evaluating analgesics in patients with chronic pain.. Drug Addiction & Narcotics Bull.; Appendix F.: 000-082, 1953
• 17 Keats A. S., and Beecher H. K.. Pain relief with hypnotic doses of barbiturates and a hypothesis. J. Pharmacol 103: 1-13 1950;
• 18 Keats A. S., Beecher H. K., and Mosteller F. C.. Measurement of pathological pain in distinction to experimental pain. J. Appl. Physiol 1: 35-44 1950;
• 19 Lasagna L., and Beecher H. K.. The optimal dose of morphine. J. Amer. med. Ass 150: 230-234 1954;
• 20 Marshall H. R.. Pain, Pleasure, and Aesthetics. Macmillan, London: 1894
• 21 Smith G. M., and Beecher H. K.. Amphetamine sulfate and athletic performance. I. Objective effects. J. Amer. med. Ass 170: 542-557 1959;
• 22 Smith G. M., and Beecher H. K.. Amphetamine, secobarbital, and athletic performance. II. Subjective evaluations of performances, mood states, and physical states. J. Amer. med. Ass 172: 1502-1514 1900;
• 23 Smith G. M., and Beecher H. K.. Amphetamine, secobarbital and athletic performance. III. Quantitative effects on judgment. J. Amer. med. Ass 172: 1023-1629 1960;
• 24 Strong G. A.. The psychology of pain. Psychol. Rev 2: 329-347 1895;
• 25 von Felsinger J. M., Lasagna L., and Beecher H. K.. Drug-induced mood changes in man. 2. Personality and reactions to drugs. J. Amer. med. Ass 157: 1113-1119 1955;