Spatial anticipatory attentional bias for alcohol: A preliminary report on reliability and associations with risky drinking

T. Gladwin
{"title":"Spatial anticipatory attentional bias for alcohol: A preliminary report on reliability and associations with risky drinking","authors":"T. Gladwin","doi":"10.5114/AIN.2019.85769","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundAlthough risky drinking and alcohol dependence have been associated with spatial attentional biases, concerns have been raised about the reliability of the frequently-used dot-probe task. A form of anticipatory bias related to predictive cues has been found to be related to alcohol-related processes, and to have high reliability in the context of threat stimuli. It remains to be determined whether this anticipatory attentional bias also has good reliability for alcohol stimuli. Further, correlations with drinking-related individual differences need to be replicated.Methods83 healthy adult participants were included, who completed the task and questionnaires on risky drinking (AUDIT-C), drinking motives (DMQ-R), reasons to abstain from drinking (RALD), and alcohol craving (ACQ). The task used a 400 ms Cue-Stimulus Interval, based on previous work. The Spearman-Brown split-half reliability of reaction time-based bias scores was calculated. The within-subject effect of probe location (predicted-alcohol versus predicted-non-alcohol) was tested using a paired-sample t-test. Correlations were calculated between bias scores and questionnaire scales; tests were one-sided for predicted effects and two-sided for exploratory effects.ResultsA good reliability of .81 was found. There was no overall bias. A predicted correlation between risky drinking and anticipatory bias towards alcohol was found, but no other predicted or exploratory effects.ConclusionsThe anticipatory attentional bias for alcohol is a reliably measurable individual difference, with some evidence that it is associated with risky drinking. Implicit measure of spatial attentional bias can achieve high reliability. Further study of attentional biases using predictive cues would appear to be promising.","PeriodicalId":42147,"journal":{"name":"Alkoholizm i Narkomania-Alchoholism and Drug Addition","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5114/AIN.2019.85769","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alkoholizm i Narkomania-Alchoholism and Drug Addition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/AIN.2019.85769","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

BackgroundAlthough risky drinking and alcohol dependence have been associated with spatial attentional biases, concerns have been raised about the reliability of the frequently-used dot-probe task. A form of anticipatory bias related to predictive cues has been found to be related to alcohol-related processes, and to have high reliability in the context of threat stimuli. It remains to be determined whether this anticipatory attentional bias also has good reliability for alcohol stimuli. Further, correlations with drinking-related individual differences need to be replicated.Methods83 healthy adult participants were included, who completed the task and questionnaires on risky drinking (AUDIT-C), drinking motives (DMQ-R), reasons to abstain from drinking (RALD), and alcohol craving (ACQ). The task used a 400 ms Cue-Stimulus Interval, based on previous work. The Spearman-Brown split-half reliability of reaction time-based bias scores was calculated. The within-subject effect of probe location (predicted-alcohol versus predicted-non-alcohol) was tested using a paired-sample t-test. Correlations were calculated between bias scores and questionnaire scales; tests were one-sided for predicted effects and two-sided for exploratory effects.ResultsA good reliability of .81 was found. There was no overall bias. A predicted correlation between risky drinking and anticipatory bias towards alcohol was found, but no other predicted or exploratory effects.ConclusionsThe anticipatory attentional bias for alcohol is a reliably measurable individual difference, with some evidence that it is associated with risky drinking. Implicit measure of spatial attentional bias can achieve high reliability. Further study of attentional biases using predictive cues would appear to be promising.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
酒精的空间预期注意偏倚:可靠性及其与危险饮酒的相关性的初步报告
背景尽管危险饮酒和酒精依赖与空间注意偏差有关,但人们对常用的点探针任务的可靠性表示担忧。与预测线索相关的一种形式的预期偏见已被发现与酒精相关过程有关,并且在威胁刺激的背景下具有高可靠性。这种预期注意偏差对酒精刺激是否也有良好的可靠性还有待确定。此外,还需要复制与饮酒相关的个体差异之间的相关性。方法纳入83名健康成年参与者,他们完成了关于危险饮酒(AUDIT-C)、饮酒动机(DMQ-R)、戒酒原因(RALD)和酒精渴求(ACQ)的任务和问卷调查。该任务基于之前的工作,使用了400毫秒的提示刺激间隔。计算了基于反应时间的偏差得分的Spearman-Brown分半信度。使用配对样本t检验来测试探针位置的受试者内效应(预测的酒精与预测的非酒精)。计算偏倚得分和问卷量表之间的相关性;预测效果的测试是单侧的,探索效果的测试则是双侧的。结果信度为.81。没有总体偏见。风险饮酒和对酒精的预期偏见之间存在预测相关性,但没有其他预测或探索性影响。结论对酒精的预期注意偏差是一个可靠的可测量的个体差异,有证据表明它与危险饮酒有关。空间注意偏差的内隐测量可以获得高可靠性。使用预测线索对注意力偏差进行进一步研究似乎是有希望的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Hyperactive delirium as a complication of nicotine withdrawal: a case report Forgiveness and early maladaptive schemas and trauma among women with an alcohol-use disorder parent The impact of an excise tax increase on alcohol consumption: comparison of two surveys carried out before the tax increase in 2021 and another one year later Satisfaction and frustration of basic psychological needs and the risk of relapse in alcohol dependence Combatting stigma and bias in addiction research by working with patients as research-team partners
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1