One-hundred-thirty-one homeless substance-dependent MSM were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of a contingency management (CM) intervention for reducing substance use and Gsk3b increasing healthy behavior. for participant sociodemographics and condition assignment the magnitude of this predicted difference increases to 10% and reached statistical significance (p < .05). On average participants with ASPD earned fewer vouchers for health-promoting/prosocial behaviors than participants without ASPD ($10.21 [SD=$7.02] vs. $18.38 [SD=$13.60]; p < .01). Participants with ASPD displayed superior methamphetamine NSI-189 abstinence outcomes regardless of CM schedule; even with potentially unlimited positive reinforcement individuals with ASPD displayed suboptimal outcomes in achieving health-promoting/prosocial behaviors. = 8.7). Most participants were Caucasian/white (53.4%) followed by African American/black (22.9%) and Latino/Hispanic (16.8%). Among the participants who met criterion for ASPD these relative proportions were reversed as there were more Latino/Hispanic than African American/black participants who met criteria for an ASPD diagnosis. Participants with and without ASPD did show significant differences in terms of educational attainment with ASPD participants having on average one less 12 months of formal education (11.9 [SD = 2.0] vs. 12.9 [SD = 2.8]; p < 0.05). Full-time employment over the previous 3 years was uncommon among the ASPD participants (12.2%). There was no significant difference in the distribution of ASPD diagnoses across CM conditions. 2.2 NSI-189 Procedure Participants were recruited from April 2005 through February 2008 via flyers posted at the research institute’s community site and word of mouth. Following consent eligible participants completed a baseline assessment that included sociodemographic data recent and lifetime material use and psychiatric condition and history. Participants were then randomized into either the CM-Full or CM-Lite condition. Both conditions consisted of a 24-week intervention period followed by follow-up assessments at 7- 9 and 12-months post-randomization. As shown in Physique 1 all participants regardless of condition assignment received positive reinforcement (i.e. earned vouchers) for study compliance and attendance; participants could earn a maximum of 364 vouchers (each equal to $1 in spending power) if they completed all study and service program activities. In addition those randomized into the “CM-Full” condition could also generate escalating amounts of vouchers for material abstinence (as verified through biomarker assessments) as well as for engaging in verified health-promoting/prosocial behaviors. Participants earned 10 vouchers for each urine NSI-189 sample provided showing recent abstinence from methamphetamine amphetamines cocaine PCP and alcohol blood content of less than <0.05 with bonuses of 20 and 40 vouchers at 3- and 7-consecutive clean samples respectively. Acceptable health-promoting/prosocial behaviors ranged from low impact easily obtainable goals like scheduling an appointment with a interpersonal services agency (4 vouchers); to something more difficult like enrolling in a GED program (20 vouchers); to high impact complex actions like getting and maintaining a job for 30 days (50 vouchers). Participants reported their actions to study staff and once verified vouchers were added to the participant’s account. Health-promoting behaviors that could not be verified such as condom use were not rewarded. Voucher income through health-promoting/prosocial behaviors were potentially unlimited. Physique 1 Positive Reinforcement Schedule by CM Condition All study activities after enrollment occurred at the research institute’s community site which included an onsite store where participants NSI-189 could redeem their earned vouchers. The NSI-189 site was stocked with participants’ preferred items (as determined by focus groups) to ensure the incentivizing nature of the vouchers. The research institute’s Institutional Review Board provided oversight for all those study activities. Additional study procedures and primary outcomes are described elsewhere (Reback et al. 2010). 2.3 Steps 2.3 Participant Sociodemographics Participant sociodemographics (e.g. age race/ethnicity HIV status) were recorded at baseline through self-report. 2.3 Antisocial personality disorder diagnosis The (First Spitzer Gibbon & Williams 1996 was administered in paper and pencil form at.