Barbara J Mason1, John M Light, Tobie Escher, David J Drobes. 1. The Pearson Center for Alcoholism and Addiction Research and Laboratory of Clinical Psychopharmacology, The Scripps Research Institute, 10550 North Torrey Pines Road, TPC-5, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA. mason@scripps.edu
Abstract
RATIONALE: Laboratory paradigms are useful for investigating mechanisms of human alcohol cue reactivity in a highly controlled environment. A number of studies have examined the effects of beverage exposure or negative affective stimuli on cue reactivity independently, but only a few have reported on interaction effects between beverage cue and affective stimuli, and none have evaluated the effects of positive stimuli on beverage cue reactivity. OBJECTIVES: To assess independent and interactive effects of both positive and negative affective stimuli and beverage cue on psychophysiological and subjective measures of reactivity in alcohol dependence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 47 non-treatment-seeking paid volunteers with current alcohol dependence participated in a within-subjects trial where each was exposed to a standardized set of pleasant, neutral, or unpleasant visual stimuli followed by alcohol or water cues. Psychophysiological cue-reactivity measures were obtained during beverage presentation, and subjective reactivity measures were taken directly following beverage presentation. RESULTS: Mixed-effect models revealed a significant main effect of beverage and positive (but not negative) affective stimuli on subjective strength of craving and significant main effects of both positive and negative affective stimuli on ratings of emotionality. Despite the power to detect relatively small interaction effects, no significant interactions were observed between affect and beverage conditions on any reactivity measure. CONCLUSIONS: A key finding of this study is that positive affective stimuli commonly associated with drinking situations can induce craving in the absence of alcohol cues. Main effects of beverage cue replicated results from previous studies. Beverage and affective cues showed no interaction effects.
RATIONALE: Laboratory paradigms are useful for investigating mechanisms of humanalcohol cue reactivity in a highly controlled environment. A number of studies have examined the effects of beverage exposure or negative affective stimuli on cue reactivity independently, but only a few have reported on interaction effects between beverage cue and affective stimuli, and none have evaluated the effects of positive stimuli on beverage cue reactivity. OBJECTIVES: To assess independent and interactive effects of both positive and negative affective stimuli and beverage cue on psychophysiological and subjective measures of reactivity in alcohol dependence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 47 non-treatment-seeking paid volunteers with current alcohol dependence participated in a within-subjects trial where each was exposed to a standardized set of pleasant, neutral, or unpleasant visual stimuli followed by alcohol or water cues. Psychophysiological cue-reactivity measures were obtained during beverage presentation, and subjective reactivity measures were taken directly following beverage presentation. RESULTS: Mixed-effect models revealed a significant main effect of beverage and positive (but not negative) affective stimuli on subjective strength of craving and significant main effects of both positive and negative affective stimuli on ratings of emotionality. Despite the power to detect relatively small interaction effects, no significant interactions were observed between affect and beverage conditions on any reactivity measure. CONCLUSIONS: A key finding of this study is that positive affective stimuli commonly associated with drinking situations can induce craving in the absence of alcohol cues. Main effects of beverage cue replicated results from previous studies. Beverage and affective cues showed no interaction effects.
Authors: George R Breese; Kathleen Chu; Christopher V Dayas; Douglas Funk; Darin J Knapp; George F Koob; Dzung Anh Lê; Laura E O'Dell; David H Overstreet; Amanda J Roberts; Rajita Sinha; Glenn R Valdez; Friedbert Weiss Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Suzanne E Thomas; Amy K Bacon; Patrick K Randall; Kathleen T Brady; Ronald E See Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2011-01-28 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Robert Miranda; Stephanie S O'Malley; Hayley Treloar Padovano; Ran Wu; Daniel E Falk; Megan L Ryan; Joanne B Fertig; Thomas H Chun; Srinivas B Muvvala; Raye Z Litten Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Amanda E Higley; Natania A Crane; Andrea D Spadoni; Susan B Quello; Vivian Goodell; Barbara J Mason Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Sarah W Feldstein Ewing; Francesca M Filbey; Lindsay D Chandler; Kent E Hutchison Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2009-12-17 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Robert C Schlauch; Daniel Gwynn-Shapiro; Paul R Stasiewicz; Danielle S Molnar; Alan R Lang Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2012-12-08 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Frederick X Gibbons; John H Kingsbury; Thomas A Wills; Stephanie D Finneran; Sonya Dal Cin; Meg Gerrard Journal: Psychol Addict Behav Date: 2016-04-21