Ben Lewis1, Christian C Garcia2, Riley Bohan3, Sara Jo Nixon4. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA; Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA; Center for Addiction Research & Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. Electronic address: benlewis@ufl.edu. 2. Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA; Center for Addiction Research & Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. 3. Center for Addiction Research & Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA; Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA; Center for Addiction Research & Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD) display deficits across a range of cognitive processes. Decrements in social cognition may be particularly important for interpersonal functioning and post-treatment adaptation. Although social cognitive deficits are associated with chronic use of numerous substances, the role of polysubstance use in AUD-associated deficits remains largely unaddressed. METHODS: Community volunteers (n = 49; 22 men) and inpatient treatment-seekers with AUD were administered neurocognitive tasks indexing emotion processing and non-affective cognitive functioning. Tasks included an emotion discrimination task, a working memory task with affective stimuli, a general face processing (control) task, two measures of executive function, and two measures of visual spatial function. AUD subgroups included individuals with no recent (6-month) polysubstance use (AUD-Only; n = 22; 15 men), and those with at least weekly use (Poly-SU; n = 22; 18 men). RESULTS: Poly-SU individuals evinced disadvantaged performance relative to other groups on the emotion discrimination task [ps ≤ 0.001], affective working memory task [ps ≤ 0.050], and two executive function measures [ps ≤ 0.051]. No differences were observed for visual spatial functioning [ps ≥ 0.498] or general face processing [ps ≥ 0.190]. No performance differences between AUD-Only and community volunteers were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Results extend the emerging literature exploring emotion processing in AUD and add to the established literature regarding cognitive deficits in this population. The data suggest that among individuals with AUD, those with polysubstance use may be particularly vulnerable to deficits in decoding emotional face content. The current work highlights the need to incorporate more nuanced and careful considerations of polysubstance use in the design and analysis for future investigations of alcohol-associated deficits in emotion processing.
BACKGROUND: Individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD) display deficits across a range of cognitive processes. Decrements in social cognition may be particularly important for interpersonal functioning and post-treatment adaptation. Although social cognitive deficits are associated with chronic use of numerous substances, the role of polysubstance use in AUD-associated deficits remains largely unaddressed. METHODS: Community volunteers (n = 49; 22 men) and inpatient treatment-seekers with AUD were administered neurocognitive tasks indexing emotion processing and non-affective cognitive functioning. Tasks included an emotion discrimination task, a working memory task with affective stimuli, a general face processing (control) task, two measures of executive function, and two measures of visual spatial function. AUD subgroups included individuals with no recent (6-month) polysubstance use (AUD-Only; n = 22; 15 men), and those with at least weekly use (Poly-SU; n = 22; 18 men). RESULTS:Poly-SU individuals evinced disadvantaged performance relative to other groups on the emotion discrimination task [ps ≤ 0.001], affective working memory task [ps ≤ 0.050], and two executive function measures [ps ≤ 0.051]. No differences were observed for visual spatial functioning [ps ≥ 0.498] or general face processing [ps ≥ 0.190]. No performance differences between AUD-Only and community volunteers were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Results extend the emerging literature exploring emotion processing in AUD and add to the established literature regarding cognitive deficits in this population. The data suggest that among individuals with AUD, those with polysubstance use may be particularly vulnerable to deficits in decoding emotional face content. The current work highlights the need to incorporate more nuanced and careful considerations of polysubstance use in the design and analysis for future investigations of alcohol-associated deficits in emotion processing.
Authors: Pierre Maurage; Salvatore Campanella; Pierre Philippot; Ian Charest; Sophie Martin; Philippe de Timary Journal: Alcohol Alcohol Date: 2009-06-17 Impact factor: 2.826
Authors: Pierre Maurage; Delphine Grynberg; Xavier Noël; Frédéric Joassin; Catherine Hanak; Paul Verbanck; Olivier Luminet; Philippe de Timary; Salvatore Campanella; Pierre Philippot Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2011-07-13 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: P Maurage; S Campanella; P Philippot; P de Timary; E Constant; S Gauthier; M-L Miccichè; C Kornreich; C Hanak; X Noel; P Verbanck Journal: Neurophysiol Clin Date: 2008-03-03 Impact factor: 3.734
Authors: Pierre Maurage; Fabien D'Hondt; Philippe de Timary; Charlotte Mary; Nicolas Franck; Elodie Peyroux Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2016-07-18 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Helen V Laitano; Amanda Ely; Anne O Sordi; Felipe B Schuch; Flavio Pechansky; Thiago Hartmann; Juliana B Hilgert; Eliana M Wendland; Lisia Von Dimen; Juliana N Scherer; Alessandra Mendes Calixto; Joana C M Narvaez; Felipe Ornell; Félix H P Kessler Journal: Braz J Psychiatry Date: 2022 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.697