Components of behavioural impulsivity and automatic cue approach predict unique variance in hazardous drinking
- 1k Downloads
Hazardous drinking is associated with both increased impulsivity and automatic approach tendencies elicited by alcohol-related cues. However, impulsivity is a multi-factorial construct, and it is currently unclear if all components of impulsivity are associated with heavy drinking. Furthermore, emerging evidence suggests that the relationships between hazardous drinking and automatic alcohol cognitions may be moderated by individual differences in impulsivity.
The aim of this study was to investigate the independence of measures of impulsivity and their association with hazardous drinking, and to examine if the relationship between hazardous drinking and automatic alcohol approach tendencies would be moderated by individual differences in impulsivity.
Ninety-seven social drinkers (65 female) completed questionnaire measures of trait impulsivity, alcohol consumption and hazardous drinking. Participants also completed computerised measures of automatic alcohol approach tendencies (stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) task), and two behavioural measures of impulsivity (Go/No-go and delay discounting tasks).
Principal component analysis revealed that the two measures of behavioural impulsivity were distinct from each other and from self-reported trait impulsivity, although self-reported non-planning impulsivity loaded on to two factors (trait impulsivity and delay discounting). Furthermore, all measures of impulsivity predicted unique variance in hazardous drinking as did automatic alcohol approach tendencies, although the latter relationship was not moderated by impulsivity.
These results indicate that multiple components of impulsivity and automatic alcohol approach tendencies explain unique variance in hazardous drinking.
KeywordsAlcohol Cognitive bias Delay discounting Impulsivity Inhibitory control
- de Wit H, Richards JB (2004) Dual determinants of drug use in humans: reward and impulsivity. Nebr Symp Motiv Paper 50:19–55Google Scholar
- Du W, Green L, Myerson J (2002) Cross-cultural comparisons of discounting delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychol Rec 52:479–492Google Scholar
- Field M, Caren R, Fernie G & De Houwer J (2011) Alcohol approach tendencies in heavy drinkers: comparison of effects in a relevant stimulus–response compatibility task and an approach/avoidance Simon task. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors (in press)Google Scholar
- Hutcheson G, Sofroniou N (1999) The multivariate social scientist. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Jolliffe IT (1972) Discarding variables in a principal component analysis I: artificial data. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Jolliffe IT (1986) Principal component analysis. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- MacKillop J, Amlung MT, Few LR, Ray LA, Sweet LH, Munafò MR (2011) Delayed reward discounting and addictive behavior: a meta-analysis. Psychopharmacology (in press)Google Scholar
- Sobell LC, Sobell MB (1990) Self-report issues in alcohol abuse: state of the art and future directions. Behav Assess 12:77–90Google Scholar
- Stevens JP (2002) Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (fourth edition). Erlbaum, New JerseyGoogle Scholar