Different measures of Behavioural Activation System (BAS) sensitivity uniquely predict problem drinking among college students

A Multimethod Examination of Sensitivity to Reward and Sensitivity to Punishment in Bipolar Disorder and Alcohol Dependence: Results from a 2 × 2 Factorial Design

INTRODUCTION

Shared neurobehavioral characteristics of bipolar disorder (BD) and alcohol dependence (AD), including heightened sensitivity to reward (SR), may account for high rates of BD and AD co-occurrence (BD + AD). However, empirical research is lacking. The present multimethod investigation examined SR and sensitivity to punishment (SP) among these patient groups using a reliable and well-validated self-report questionnaire of SR and SP along with a laboratory task specifically designed to distinguish SR and SP activation.

METHODS

One-hundred participants formed 4 groups: BD + AD (n = 40), BD (n = 18), AD (n = 25), and healthy controls (n = 17). Clinical interviews were administered, and participants completed the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSR-Q) and the Point Score Reaction Test behavioral task. Pearson correlations, hierarchical linear regression, and 2 × 2 factorial general linear modeling with Bonferroni-corrected pairwise comparisons were performed.

RESULTS

BD and AD main effects were significant on self-reported SR and SP; however, BD × AD interactions were not. BD + AD individuals were significantly higher on self-reported SR than BD and AD individuals, yet all clinical groups were similar on SP. Behavioral response times did not distinguish groups nor did they associate with self-report data.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

BD and AD had additive, rather than interactive, effects on self-reported SR and SP. The methods employed, paired with their application to the present sample, may account for a lack of positive findings with behavioral data.

Are hazardous drinkers more impulsive than light drinkers? A comprehensive assessment in young adults

Those with alcohol dependence are characteristically impulsive. It is unclear whether the same is true of hazardous drinkers (i.e., women routinely drinking more than 14 units in a typical week but fewer than 35, and men drinking more than 14 units but fewer than 50). Yet, it is important to understand the mechanisms involved in such drinking, since it places the drinker at risk for future harm. The present study thus comprehensively assessed whether impulsivity was elevated in hazardous drinkers, compared to lighter drinkers. An opportunity sample of 57 light and 49 hazardous drinkers was assessed on the following impulsivity subdomains (via the measures in parentheses): (i) trait impulsivity (the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, Version 11); (ii) temporal impulsivity (the Monetary Choice Questionnaire); (iii) stopping impulsivity (the Stop-Signal Task); (iv) waiting impulsivity (the Continuous Performance Task or CPT); (v) reward-sensitivity (the Behavioural Activation Scales); and (vi) risk-taking (the Balloon Analogue Risk Task). Alcohol- and other drug-dependent individuals were excluded from the study, while socio-demographics (age, gender, and socio-economic status), mood, binge drinking, and nicotine intake were all controlled for. The groups were compared via a series of Bonferroni-corrected, independent-measures t tests. The results revealed that hazardous drinkers were more impulsive than light drinkers on the CPT; there were no other statistically significant group differences. Consistent with the above, a logistic regression, with drinking group as the dependent variable and the impulsivity indices as independent variables, revealed that only CPT performance was a significant predictor of drinking status. Other than gender, none of the control variables significantly correlated with CPT performance. A sequential linear regression revealed that drinking status continued to predict CPT performance, after first accounting for gender. Thus, from a battery of impulsivity measures, only waiting impulsivity (i.e., CPT score) was elevated in hazardous drinkers, relative to lighter drinkers. Waiting impulsivity may thus be important in the maintenance of hazardous drinking.

Testing a model of reward sensitivity, implicit and explicit drinker identity and hazardous drinking

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate both implicit and explicit drinker identity as mediators of reward sensitivity and problematic drinking. University students engage in problematic levels of alcohol consumption, exposing them to increased negative health outcomes. Although personality traits (e.g. reward sensitivity) and social-cognitive variables (e.g. implicit and explicit drinker identity) have been used to investigate drinking behaviour, few studies link personality and multiple indices of drinker identity to problematic drinking. Design: University students (N = 136) completed a drinker identity implicit association test, and questionnaires measuring reward sensitivity, explicit binge drinker identity and problematic drinking as part of a lab-based correlational study. Main Outcome Measures: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test was the main outcome measure with participants self-reporting drinking frequency, quantity and negative physical and psychological outcomes of drinking over the past 3-months. Results: A mediation model revealed that reward sensitivity was significantly associated with explicit, but not implicit, binge drinker identity. Explicit binge drinker identity mediated the reward sensitivity and problematic drinking association. Conclusion: This research provides an evidence base for identity-based drinking interventions for students characterised by high reward sensitivity, by promoting identities that do not idealise problematic drinking behaviour.

Intentions to Cheat: Ajzen's Planned Behavior and Goal-Related Personality Facets

This study sought to test antecedents to college students' intentions to cheat by utilizing Ajzen's ( 1991 ) theory of planned behavior (TPB), and four goal-related personality facets. Those facets were behavioral approach, behavioral inhibition, need for achievement-hope of success, and need for achievement-fear of failure. As hypothesized, perceived friends' and parents' attitudes toward academic dishonesty (two subjective norms) and perceived ease of cheating (perceived behavioral control) all positively predicted overall intentions to cheat. Perceived friends' attitudes seemed to play a more influential role than perceived parents' attitudes. Interestingly, male students reported greater parental acceptance of academic misconduct than female students reported. Among the personality facets, behavioral approach and need for achievement-hope of success were positive and negative predictors of cheating intentions, respectively. A more fine-grained examination of take-home assignments revealed that students considered them easier to cheat on and reported greater intentions to cheat on them in comparison to other forms of academic work (e.g., exams and papers). Also, need for achievement-fear of failure positively predicted intentions to cheat on take-home assignments, but not other cheating intentions. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.