4.4 Article

Risk-taking but not response inhibition or delay discounting predict alcohol consumption in social drinkers

Journal

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
Volume 112, Issue 1-2, Pages 54-61

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.05.011

Keywords

Alcohol; Impulsivity; Response inhibition; Delay discounting; Risk-taking

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [GO601070]
  2. MRC [G0601070] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [G0601070] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Impulsivity and risk-taking are multi-dimensional constructs that have been implicated in heavy drinking and alcohol problems. Our aim was to identify the specific component of impulsivity or risk-taking that explained the greatest variance in heavy and problem drinking among a sample of young adults recruited from a university population. Participants (N = 75) completed a test battery comprising two commonly used response inhibition tasks (a Go/No-Go task and a Stop signal task), a delay discounting procedure, and the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) as a measure of risk-taking. Participants also completed the Barratt Impulsivity Scales (BIS) as a measure of trait impulsivity. In a hierarchical multiple regression model, risk-taking was identified as the only behavioural measure that predicted alcohol use and problems. In a secondary analysis, we demonstrated that risk-taking predicted unique variance in alcohol use and problems over and above that explained by trait impulsivity. Results suggest that among young adults, a behavioural measure of risk-taking predicts variance in alcohol consumption and alcohol problems, even when individual differences in trait impulsivity are statistically controlled. However, behavioural measures of response inhibition and delay discounting do not predict unique variance in alcohol use in young adult social drinkers. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available