Nicholas Van Dyke1, Mark T Fillmore2. 1. University of Kentucky, Department of Psychology, 171 Funkhauser Dr., Lexington, KY 40506-0044, USA. 2. University of Kentucky, Department of Psychology, 171 Funkhauser Dr., Lexington, KY 40506-0044, USA. Electronic address: fillmore@uky.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cue reactivity paradigms have found that alcohol-related cues increase alcohol consumption in heavy drinkers and alcoholics. However, evidence of this relationship among non-alcohol dependent "social" drinkers is mixed, suggesting that individual differences must be considered when examining cue-induced drinking behavior. One important individual difference factor that might contribute to cue-induced drinking in the laboratory is the amount of alcohol that participants typically drink during occasions outside the laboratory. That is, those who typically consume more alcohol per occasion could display greater cue-induced drinking than those who typically drink less. The present study examined this hypothesis in healthy, non-dependent beer drinkers. METHODS: The drinkers were exposed to either a series of beer images intended to prime their motivation to drink beer or to a series of non-alcoholic images of food items that served as a control condition. Following cue exposure, motivation to drink was measured by giving participants an opportunity to work for glasses of beer by performing an operant response task. RESULTS: Results indicated that drinkers exposed to alcohol cues displayed greater operant responding for alcohol and earned more drinks compared with those exposed to non-alcohol (i.e., food) cues. Moreover, individual differences in drinking habits predicted subjects' responding for alcohol following exposure to the alcohol cues, but not following exposure to food cues. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that cue-induced drinking in non-dependent drinkers likely results in consumption levels commensurate with their typical consumption outside the laboratory, but not excessive consumption that is sometimes observed in alcohol-dependent samples.
INTRODUCTION: Cue reactivity paradigms have found that alcohol-related cues increase alcohol consumption in heavy drinkers and alcoholics. However, evidence of this relationship among non-alcohol dependent "social" drinkers is mixed, suggesting that individual differences must be considered when examining cue-induced drinking behavior. One important individual difference factor that might contribute to cue-induced drinking in the laboratory is the amount of alcohol that participants typically drink during occasions outside the laboratory. That is, those who typically consume more alcohol per occasion could display greater cue-induced drinking than those who typically drink less. The present study examined this hypothesis in healthy, non-dependent beer drinkers. METHODS: The drinkers were exposed to either a series of beer images intended to prime their motivation to drink beer or to a series of non-alcoholic images of food items that served as a control condition. Following cue exposure, motivation to drink was measured by giving participants an opportunity to work for glasses of beer by performing an operant response task. RESULTS: Results indicated that drinkers exposed to alcohol cues displayed greater operant responding for alcohol and earned more drinks compared with those exposed to non-alcohol (i.e., food) cues. Moreover, individual differences in drinking habits predicted subjects' responding for alcohol following exposure to the alcohol cues, but not following exposure to food cues. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that cue-induced drinking in non-dependent drinkers likely results in consumption levels commensurate with their typical consumption outside the laboratory, but not excessive consumption that is sometimes observed in alcohol-dependent samples.
Authors: Alexandra R Hershberger; Amanda Studebaker; Zachary T Whitt; Mark Fillmore; Christopher W Kahler; Melissa A Cyders Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2021-03-21 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Andrew Jones; Emily Button; Abigail K Rose; Eric Robinson; Paul Christiansen; Lisa Di Lemma; Matt Field Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2015-12-18 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Nason Maani Hessari; May Ci van Schalkwyk; Sian Thomas; Mark Petticrew Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Bernadett I Gál; Tünde Kilencz; Anita Albert; Ildikó Demeter; Klára Mária Hegedűs; Zoltán Janka; Gábor Csifcsák; Péter Z Álmos Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 5.810