AIMS: Theoretical models suggest that attentional bias for alcohol-related cues develops because cues signal the availability of alcohol, and the expectancy elicited by alcohol cues is responsible for the maintenance of attentional bias among regular drinkers. We investigated the moderating role of alcohol expectancy on attentional bias for alcohol-related cues. DESIGN: Within-subjects experimental design. SETTING: Psychology laboratories. PARTICIPANTS: Adult social drinkers (n=58). MEASUREMENTS: On a trial-by-trial basis, participants were informed of the probability (100%, 50%, 0%) that they would receive beer at the end of the trial before their eye movements towards alcohol-related and control cues were measured. FINDINGS: Heavy social drinkers showed an attentional bias for alcohol-related cues regardless of alcohol expectancy. However, in light social drinkers, attentional bias was only seen on 100% probability trials, i.e. when alcohol was expected imminently. CONCLUSIONS: Attentional bias for alcohol-related cues is sensitive to the current expectancy of receiving alcohol in light social drinkers, but it occurs independently of the current level of alcohol expectancy in heavy drinkers.
AIMS: Theoretical models suggest that attentional bias for alcohol-related cues develops because cues signal the availability of alcohol, and the expectancy elicited by alcohol cues is responsible for the maintenance of attentional bias among regular drinkers. We investigated the moderating role of alcohol expectancy on attentional bias for alcohol-related cues. DESIGN: Within-subjects experimental design. SETTING: Psychology laboratories. PARTICIPANTS: Adult social drinkers (n=58). MEASUREMENTS: On a trial-by-trial basis, participants were informed of the probability (100%, 50%, 0%) that they would receive beer at the end of the trial before their eye movements towards alcohol-related and control cues were measured. FINDINGS: Heavy social drinkers showed an attentional bias for alcohol-related cues regardless of alcohol expectancy. However, in light social drinkers, attentional bias was only seen on 100% probability trials, i.e. when alcohol was expected imminently. CONCLUSIONS: Attentional bias for alcohol-related cues is sensitive to the current expectancy of receiving alcohol in light social drinkers, but it occurs independently of the current level of alcohol expectancy in heavy drinkers.
Authors: Simon Zhornitsky; Jaime S Ide; Wuyi Wang; Herta H Chao; Sheng Zhang; Sien Hu; John H Krystal; Chiang-Shan R Li Journal: Brain Connect Date: 2018-10
Authors: Benjamin Rolland; Fabien D'Hondt; Solène Montègue; Mélanie Brion; Eric Peyron; Julia D'Aviau de Ternay; Philippe de Timary; Mikaïl Nourredine; Pierre Maurage Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2019-01-03 Impact factor: 7.444
Authors: Jaime S Ide; Sheng Zhang; Sien Hu; David Matuskey; Sarah R Bednarski; Emily Erdman; Olivia M Farr; Chiang-Shan R Li Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 4.280
Authors: Jaime S Ide; Simon Zhornitsky; Sien Hu; Sheng Zhang; John H Krystal; Chiang-Shan R Li Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2017-03-31 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Charlotte R Pennington; Adam W Qureshi; Rebecca L Monk; Katie Greenwood; Derek Heim Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 4.530