RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Executive cognitive functioning and emotional reactivity in abstinent substance dependent individuals with and without a history of alcohol abuse.
Fishbein Launse, D., Flannery, B., Hyde, C., London, E., Matochik, J., Ernst, M., & Isenberg, N. (2002). Executive cognitive functioning and emotional reactivity in abstinent substance dependent individuals with and without a history of alcohol abuse.Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 26(5 Suppl), 37A.
This study investigatad execulive cognilive fundoning (EFC) &
emotional reactivity in substance depndent individuals with & without a
hisstory of alcohol abuse abstinent for a minimum of 3 months. The study
examined whether alcohol abuse conferred an additive effect on ECF &
emotional reactivlty deficits previously shown to exist in substance
dependent individuals (Bolla, 1998, 1999). Thirty-five Ss participated, 17
controls (GR 1). 8 substance dependent Ss with a history of alcohol
abuse (GR 2) & 10 substance dependent only Ss (GR 3). On the
Dysregulation Inventory, a measure of emotional, behavioral. &
cognitive funtioning, the 3 groups differed in 2 componenls of
disregulation-irritability and aggression (means: GR 3 = 9.3 (sd 1.4) &
g.8 (sd.1.6), GR2=7.2 (sd 1.3) & 7.2 (sd 1.8), GR 1=5.0 (sd .84) & 3.4
(sd .65). In the Roger's Task, a computerized risk taking test, GR 2
differed f om GR 1 & GR 3 in number of risky choices made (means:
GR 2-32.75 (sd 2.7). GR 1-22.76 (sd 1.9), GR 3-27.7 (sd 1.9). These
dfferences were slgnificant between GR 1 & GR 2 (p = -009). In the
Gambling Task, a computerlzed measure of ability to develop a
decision-makng strategy involving risk, the groups showed differences
in number of high risk choices. GR2 & GR3 made more high risk
choices than GR 1 (means: GR 2-25.37 (sd 2.6), GR 3-23.50 (sd 2.3).
GR 1-17.05 (sd 1.7). Both GR 2's & GR 3's responses were significantly
different from GR 1's responses (p = .02 for GR 1 & GR 2 comparison,
p = .04 for GR 1 & GR 3 comparison). In the emotional reactivity test,
GR 2 differed from GR 1 in reaction times (RTs) lor incorrect responses
to emotional stimuli (p = .02). GR 2 also differed from GR 1 in number of
correct (p = .058) and lncorrect responses (p = .059) to neutral stimuli.
These preliminary findings suggest that alcohol abuse may compound
some ECF and emotlonal deficits present in substance dependent
individuals. Supported by Office of National Drug Control Policy,
DABT63-00-1014.