Learning to resist the urge: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial investigating alcohol-specific inhibition training in abstinent patients with alcohol use disorder

Raphaela M Tschuemperlin, Maria Stein, Hallie M Batschelet, Franz Moggi, Leila M Soravia, Raphaela M Tschuemperlin, Maria Stein, Hallie M Batschelet, Franz Moggi, Leila M Soravia

Abstract

Background: Alcohol use disorder (AUD) leads to a significant individual and societal burden. To achieve higher therapy success rates, therapeutic interventions still need to be improved. Most current neuroscientific conceptualizations of AUD focus on the imbalance between an enhanced automatic reaction to alcohol cues and impaired inhibition. Complementary to traditional relapse prevention strategies, novel computerized training interventions aim to directly alter these processes. This study tests a computerized alcohol-specific inhibition training in a large clinical sample and investigates its effects on behavioral, experimental and neurophysiological outcomes. It also analyzes whether variations in inhibition difficulty and/or endogenous cortisol levels during training impact these effects.

Methods: This is a double-blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 246 inpatients with AUD participating. After baseline assessment, participants are randomly assigned to one of three computerized Go-NoGo-based inhibition training interventions (two alcohol-specific versions with different Go/NoGo ratios, or neutral control training) and one of two intervention times (morning/afternoon), resulting in six study arms. All patients perform six training sessions within 2 weeks. Endogenous cortisol is measured in 80 patients before and after the first training session. Inhibitory control and implicit associations towards alcohol are assessed pre and post training, at which point electroencephalography (EEG) is additionally measured in 60 patients. Patients' alcohol consumption and relevant psychological constructs (e.g., craving, self-efficacy, treatment motivation) are measured at discharge and at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Fifty healthy participants are assessed (20 with EEG) at one time point as a healthy control group.

Discussion: This study investigates the effects of a computerized, alcohol-specific inhibition training for the first time in patients with AUD. Results should give insight into the effectiveness of this potential add-on to standard AUD treatment, including proximal and distal measures and effects on behavioral, experimental and neurophysiological measures. Information about working mechanisms and potential optimizations of this training are gathered through variations regarding difficulty of inhibition training and training time. This study may thus contribute to a deepened understanding of AUD and the improvement of its evidence-based treatment.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02968537 . Registered on 18 November 2016.

Keywords: Alcohol use disorder; Alcohol-specific inhibition training; Cortisol; Drinking outcome; EEG; Go-NoGo Task (GNG); Implicit Association Test (IAT); Residential treatment; Stop-Signal Task (SST).

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design of the INTRA study. Note that for the cortisol substudy, salvia-cortisol samples will be collected before and after the first training session. Alc-IT alcohol-inhibition training, EEG electroencephalography, GNG Go-NoGo Task, IAT Implicit Association Test, INTRA Abbreviation of the study name: INhibition TRaining in Alcohol use disorder, n sample size, SST Stop-Signal Task, TLFB Timeline-follow-back, Q questionnaire
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Enrollment, interventions and assessments at each time point for patients in the INTRA study. A schematic outline of the enrollment, interventions and assessments that each participant of the main INTRA study will undergo. AASE-G Alcohol Abstinence Self-efficacy Scale – German version, Alc-IT alcohol-inhibition training, ASPD antisocial personality disorder, ASRS-V1.1 Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale, AUDIT Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, AUD-S Alcohol Use Disorders Scale, BAI Beck Anxiety Inventory, BDI-ll Beck’s Depression Inventory, BIS/BAS Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Approach System Scale, BSCL Brief Symptom Check List, CAEQ Comprehensive Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire; Craving (Likert scales), DIA-X Diagnostic Expert System for Psychiatric Disorders, Emo-Check Assessment of Emotion and Emotion regulation, GNG Go-NoGo Task, HDL Health and Daily Living Form, IAT Implicit Association Test, IT inhibition training, I-8 Scale for Impulsive Behavior, Motivation (Likert scales), NISS Need Inventory of Sensation Seeking, OCDS-G Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale – German version, PSS PTSD Symptom Scale, SCI Stress and Coping Inventory, SOCRATES Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale, SST Stop-Signal Task, TLFB Timeline Follow-back, TMT Trail Making Test A and B, WHOQOL-BREF WHO Quality of Life Scale (brief version), −T1 before treatment admission, T1 baseline, T2 pre-training, T3 post training, T4 discharge, T5 3-month follow-up, T6 6-month follow-up, T7 12-month follow-up

References

    1. Rehm J. The risks associated with alcohol use and alcoholism. Alcohol Res Health. 2011;34:135–143.
    1. Rehm J, Mathers C, Popova S, Thavorncharoensap M, Teerawattananon Y, Patra J. Global burden of disease and injury and economic cost attributable to alcohol use and alcohol-use disorders. Lancet. 2009;373:2223–2233. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60746-7.
    1. Nutt DJ, King LA, Phillips LD. Drug harms in the UK: a multicriteria decision analysis. Lancet. 2010;376:1558–1565. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61462-6.
    1. Morgan CJ, Muetzelfeldt L, Muetzelfeldt M, Nutt DJ, Curran HV. Harms associated with psychoactive substances: findings of the UK National Drug Survey. J Psychopharmacol. 2010;24:147–153. doi: 10.1177/0269881109106915.
    1. McKay JR. Is there a case for extended interventions for alcohol and drug use disorders? Addiction. 2005;100:1594–1610. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01208.x.
    1. McLellan AT, Lewis DC, O'Brien CP, Kleber HD. Drug dependence, a chronic medical illness implications for treatment, insurance, and outcomes evaluation. JAMA. 2000;284:1689–1695. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.13.1689.
    1. O’Brien C. A.T M. Myths about the treatment of addiction. Lancet. 1996;347:237–240. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90409-2.
    1. Miller WR, Andrews NR, Wilbourne P, Bennett ME. A wealth of alternatives: effective treatments for alcohol problems. In: Miller WR, Heather N, editors. Applied clinical psychology. Treating addictive behaviors. New York: Plenum Press; 1998. pp. 203–216.
    1. Mann K, Hermann D. Individualised treatment in alcohol-dependent patients. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010;260(Suppl 2):S116–S120. doi: 10.1007/s00406-010-0153-7.
    1. Robinson TE, Berridge KC. The neural basis of drug craving: an incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res Rev. 1993;18:247–291. doi: 10.1016/0165-0173(93)90013-P.
    1. Kalivas PW, Volkow ND. The neural basis of addiction: a pathology of motivation and choice. Am J Psychiatry. 2005;162:1403–1413. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.8.1403.
    1. Schultz W, Tremblay L, Hollerman JR. Reward processing in primate orbitofrontal cortex and basal ganglia. Cereb Cortex. 2000;20:272–283. doi: 10.1093/cercor/10.3.272.
    1. Wiers RW, Teachman BA, De Houwer J. Implicit cognitive processes in psychopathology: an introduction. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2007;38:95–104. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2006.10.002.
    1. Volkow ND, Li T-K. Drug addiction: the neurobiology of behaviour gone awry. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;5:963–970. doi: 10.1038/nrn1539.
    1. Wiers RW, Bartholow BD, van den Wildenberg E, Thush C, Engels RC, Sher KJ, et al. Automatic and controlled processes and the development of addictive behaviors in adolescents: a review and a model. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2007;86:263–283. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2006.09.021.
    1. Wiers RW, Gladwin TE, Hofmann W, Salemink E, Ridderinkhof KR. Cognitive bias modification and cognitive control training in addiction and related psychopathology. Clin Psychol Sci. 2013;1:192–212. doi: 10.1177/2167702612466547.
    1. Volkow ND, Baler RD. Addiction science: uncovering neurobiological complexity. Neuropharmacology. 2014;76:235–349. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2013.05.007.
    1. Schacht JP, Anton RF, Myrick H. Functional neuroimaging studies of alcohol cue reactivity: a quantitative meta-analysis and systematic review. Addict Biol. 2013;18:121–133. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-1600.2012.00464.x.
    1. Fillmore MT. Drug abuse as a problem of impaired control: current approaches and findings. Behav Cogn Neu Rev. 2003;2:179–197. doi: 10.1177/1534582303257007.
    1. Fillmore MT, Rush CR. Impaired inhibitory control of behavior in chronic cocaine users. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2002;66:265–273. doi: 10.1016/S0376-8716(01)00206-X.
    1. Lubman DI, Yucel M, Pantelis C. Addiction, a condition of compulsive behaviour? Neuroimaging and neuropsychological evidence of inhibitory dysregulation. Addiction. 2004;99:1491–1502. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00808.x.
    1. Garavan H, Hester R. The role of cognitive control in cocaine dependence. Neuropsychol Rev. 2007;17:337–345. doi: 10.1007/s11065-007-9034-x.
    1. Kaufman JN, Ross TJ, Stein EA, Garavan H. Cingulate hypoactivity in cocaine users during a go-nogo task as revealed by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci. 2003;23:7839–7843. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23-21-07839.2003.
    1. Hester R, Garavan H. Executive dysfunction in cocaine addiction: evidence for discordant frontal, cingulate, and cerebellar activity. J Neurosci. 2004;24:11017–11022. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3321-04.2004.
    1. Stein M, Fey W, Koenig T, Oehy J, Moggi F. Context-specific inhibition is related to craving in alcohol use disorders: a dangerous imbalance. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2018;42:69–80. doi: 10.1111/acer.13532.
    1. Petit G, Kornreich C, Noel X, Verbanck P, Campanella S. Alcohol-related context modulates performance of social drinkers in a visual Go/No-Go task: a preliminary assessment of event-related potentials. PLoS One. 2012;7:e37466. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037466.
    1. Ames SL, Wong SW, Bechara A, Cappelli C, Dust M, Grenard JL, et al. Neural correlates of a Go/NoGo task with alcohol stimuli in light and heavy young drinkers. Behav Brain Res. 2014;274:382–389. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2014.08.039.
    1. Czapla M, Baeuchl C, Simon JJ, Richter B, Kluge M, Friederich HC, et al. Do alcohol-dependent patients show different neural activation during response inhibition than healthy controls in an alcohol-related fMRI go/no-go-task? Psychopharmacology. 2017;234:1001–1015. doi: 10.1007/s00213-017-4541-9.
    1. Veling H, Aarts H. Unintentional preparation of motor impulses after incidental perception of need-rewarding objects. Cogn Emot. 2011;25:1131–1138. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2010.524053.
    1. Veling H, Aarts H, Papies EK. Using stop signals to inhibit chronic dieters’ responses toward palatable foods. Behav Res Ther. 2011;49:771–780. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2011.08.005.
    1. Veling H, Aarts H, Stroebe W. Stop signals decrease choices for palatable foods through decreased food evaluation. Front Psychol. 2013;4:875. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00875.
    1. Houben K, Havermans RC, Nederkoorn C, Jansen A. Beer a no-go: learning to stop responding to alcohol cues reduces alcohol intake via reduced affective associations rather than increased response inhibition. Addiction. 2012;107:1280–1287. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03827.x.
    1. Houben K, Nederkoorn C, Wiers RW, Jansen A. Resisting temptation: decreasing alcohol-related affect and drinking behavior by training response inhibition. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;116:132–136. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.12.011.
    1. Smith JL, Dash NJ, Johnstone SJ, Houben K, Field M. Current forms of inhibitory training produce no greater reduction in drinking than simple assessment: a preliminary study. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;173:47–58. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.12.018.
    1. Bowley C, Faricy C, Hegarty B, Johnstone SJ, Smith JL, Kelly JP, et al. The effects of inhibitory control training on alcohol consumption, implicit alcohol-related cognitions and brain electrical activity. Int J Psychophysiol. 2013;89:342–348. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.04.011.
    1. Di Lemma LCG, Field M. Cue avoidance training and inhibitory control training for the reduction of alcohol consumption: a comparison of effectiveness and investigation of their mechanisms of action. Psychopharmacology. 2017;234:2489–2498. doi: 10.1007/s00213-017-4639-0.
    1. Kilwein TM, Bernhardt KA, Stryker ML, Looby A. Decreased alcohol consumption after pairing alcohol-related cues with an inhibitory response. J Subst Use. 2017;23:154–161. doi: 10.1080/14659891.2017.1378736.
    1. Veling H, Holland RW, van Knippenberg A. When approach motivation and behavioral inhibition collide: behavior regulation through stimulus devaluation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2008;44:1013–1019. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.03.004.
    1. Smith JL, Johnstone SJ, Barry RJ. Response priming in the Go/NoGo task: the N2 reflects neither inhibition nor conflict. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007;118:343–355. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2006.09.027.
    1. Demmel R, Hagen J. The comprehensive alcohol expectancy questionnaire: II. Prediction of alcohol use and clinical utility. SUCHT. 2003;49:300–305. doi: 10.1024/suc.2003.49.5.300.
    1. Ludwig F, Tadayon-Manssuri E, Strik W, Moggi F. Self-efficacy as a predictor of outcome after residential treatment programs for alcohol dependence: simply ask the patient one question! Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2013;37:663–667. doi: 10.1111/acer.12007.
    1. Bauer S, Strik W, Moggi F. Motivation as a predictor of drinking outcomes after residential treatment programs for alcohol dependence. J Addict Med. 2014;8:137–142.
    1. Wapp M, Burren Y, Znoj H, Moggi F. Association of alcohol craving and proximal outcomes of a residential treatment program for patients with alcohol use disorders. J Subst Use. 2015;20:11–15. doi: 10.3109/14659891.2013.858782.
    1. Lass-Hennemann J, Michael T. Endogenous cortisol levels influence exposure therapy in spider phobia. Behav Res Ther. 2014;60:39–45. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2014.06.009.
    1. Kirschbaum C, Hellhammer DH. Salivary cortisol in psychobiological research: an overview. Neuropsychobiology. 1989;22:150–169. doi: 10.1159/000118611.
    1. Soravia LM, Heinrichs M, Winzeler L, Fisler M, Schmitt W, Horn H, et al. Glucocorticoids enhance in vivo exposure-based therapy of spider phobia. Depress Anxiety. 2014;31:429–435. doi: 10.1002/da.22219.
    1. Berman AH, Bergman H, Palmstierna T, Schlyter F. Evaluation of the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test (DUDIT) in criminal justice and detoxification settings and in a swedish population sample. Eur Addict Res. 2005;11:22–31. doi: 10.1159/000081413.
    1. Voluse AC, Gioia CJ, Sobell LC, Dum M, Sobell MB, Simco ER. Psychometric properties of the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test (DUDIT) with substance abusers in outpatient and residential treatment. Addict Behav. 2012;37:36–41. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.07.030.
    1. Babor TF, Higgins-Biddle JC, Saunders JB, Monteiro MG. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. guidelines for use in primary care. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
    1. Wechsler H, Davenport A, Dowdall G, Moeykens B, Castillo S. Health and behavioral consequences of binge drinking in college. A national survey of students at 140 campuses. JAMA. 1994;272:1672–1677. doi: 10.1001/jama.1994.03520210056032.
    1. Derogatis LR. Brief Symptom Inventory: administration, scoring, and procedures manual. Minneapolis: MN, National Computer Systems; 1993.
    1. Franke GH. Brief Symptom Inventory von L.R. Derogatis—Deutsches Manual. [Brief Symptom Inventory of L.R. Derogatis—German Manual] Göttingen: Beltz; 2000.
    1. Fey W, Moggi F, Rohde KB, Michel C, Seitz A, Stein M. Development of stimulus material for research in alcohol use disorders. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2017;26:e1527. doi: 10.1002/mpr.1527.
    1. Eberl C, Wiers RW, Pawelczack S, Rinck M, Becker ES, Lindenmeyer J. Implementation of approach bias re-training in alcoholism-how many sessions are needed? Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2014;38:587–594. doi: 10.1111/acer.12281.
    1. Wittchen HU, Pfister H. Instruktionsmanual zur Durchführung von DIA-X-Interviews. Frankfurt: Swets Test Services; 1997.
    1. Moos RH, Cronkite RH, Finney JW. Health and Daily Living Form Manual. Palo Alto: Mind Garden; 1990.
    1. Moggi F, Giovanoli A, Strik W, Moos BS, Moos RH. Substance use disorder treatment programs in Switzerland and the USA: program characteristics and 1-year outcomes. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007;86:75–83. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.05.017.
    1. Moggi F, Giovanoli A, Buri C, Moos BS, Moos RH. Patients with substance use and personality disorders: a comparison of patient characteristics, treatment process, and outcomes in Swiss and U.S. substance use disorder programs. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2010;36:66–72. doi: 10.3109/00952990903575806.
    1. Sobell LC, Follow-back SMBT. a technique for assessing self-reported ethanol consumption. In: Allen J, Litten RZ, editors. Measuring alcohol consumption: psychosocial and biological methods. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press ed. Totowa: Humana Press; 1992. pp. 41–72.
    1. Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Alcohol Timeline Followback users’ manual. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation; 1995.
    1. Mann K, Ackermann K. Die OCDS-G: Psychometrische Kennwerte der deutschen Version der Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale. SUCHT. 2000;46:90–100. doi: 10.1024/suc.2000.46.2.90.
    1. Miller WR, Tonnigan JS. Assessing drinker's motivation for change: the Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES) Psychol Addict Behav. 1996;10:81–89. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.10.2.81.
    1. Demmel R. Motivational interviewing. In: Linden M, Hautzinger M, editors. Verhaltenstherapiemanual 8ed. Heidelberg: Springer; 2005. pp. 228–233.
    1. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivierende Gesprächsführung. 2. Freiburg im Preisgau: Lambertus-Verlag; 2002.
    1. Bott KE, Rumpf H-J, Bischof G, Meyer C, Hapke U, John U. Alcoholabstinenz-Selbstwirksamkeitsfragebogen; Deutsche Version (AASE-G); deutsche Version der Alcohol abstinence Self-efficacy-Scale, German Version. In: Glöckner-Rist A, Rist F, Küfner H, editors. Elektronisches Handbuch zu Erhebungsinstrumenten im Suchtbereich (EHES) 3. Mannheim: Zentrum für Umfragen, Methoden und Analysen; 2003.
    1. Demmel R, Hagen J. The comprehensive alcohol expectancy questionnaire: I. Scale development. SUCHT. 2003;49:292–299. doi: 10.1024/suc.2003.49.5.292.
    1. Nicolai J, Demmel R, Moshagen M. The comprehensive alcohol expectancy questionnaire: confirmatory factor analysis, scale refinement, and further validation. J Pers Assess. 2010;92:400–409. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2010.497396.
    1. Beck AT, Steer RA. Beck Anxiety Inventory Manual San Antonio The Psychological Corporation. 1993.
    1. Margraf J, Ehlers A. BAI: Beck-Angst-Inventar. Manual. Deutsche Bearbeitung. Frankfurt/Main: Harcourt Test Services; 2007.
    1. Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK. BDI-II Beck Depressions-Inventar 2. Auflage. Frankfurt/Main: Harcourt; 2006.
    1. Hautzinger M, Keller F, Kühner C. Beck Depressions-Inventar (BDI-II). Revision. Frankfurt/Main: Harcourt Test Services; 2006.
    1. Lauth GW, Minsel W-R. KATE. Kölner ADHS-Test für Erwachsene. Göttingen: Hoegrefe; 2014.
    1. Kessler RC, Adler L, Ames M, Demler O, Faraone S, Hiripi EVA, et al. The World Health Organization adult ADHD Self-report Scale (ASRS): a short screening scale for use in the general population. Psychol Med. 2005;35:245–256. doi: 10.1017/S0033291704002892.
    1. Foa EB, Cashman L, Jaycox L, Perry K. The validation of a self-report measure of posttraumatic stress disorder: The Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale. Psychol Assess. 1997;9:445–451. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.9.4.445.
    1. Stieglitz E-D, Frommberger U, Foa EB, Berger M. Evaluation of the german version of the PTSD Symptom Scale (PSS) Psychopathology. 2001;34:128–133. doi: 10.1159/000049295.
    1. Satow L. Stress- und Coping-Inventar (SCI): Test- und Skalendokumentation. 2012.
    1. Angermeyer MC, Kilian R, Matschinger H. WHOQOL-100 und WHOQOL-BREF. Handbuch für die deutschsprachige Version der WHO Instrumente zur Erfassung von Lebensqualität. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2000.
    1. WHOQOL group Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychol Med. 1998;28:551–558. doi: 10.1017/S0033291798006667.
    1. Kovaleva A, Beierlein C, Kemper CJ, Rammstedt B. Eine Kurzskala zur Messung von Impulsivität nach dem UPPS-Ansatz: Die Skala Impulsives-Verhalten-8 (I-8) Working Papers. 2012;20:5–31.
    1. Roth M, Hammelstein P. The Need Inventory of Sensation Seeking (NISS) EJPA. 2012;28:11–18.
    1. Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E, et al. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59:22–33.
    1. Foster S, Held L, Estevez N, Gmel G, Mohler-Kuo M. Liberal alcohol legislation: does it amplify the effects among Swiss men of person-related risk factors on heavy alcohol use? Addiction. 2015;110:1746–1756. doi: 10.1111/add.13032.
    1. Carver CS, White TL. Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: the BIS/BAS scales. JPSP. 1994;67:319–333.
    1. Studer J, Baggio S, Mohler-Kuo M, Daeppen J-B, Gmel G. Factor structure and psychometric properties of a French and German shortened version of the behavioural inhibition system/behavioural activation system scales. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2016;25:44–54. doi: 10.1002/mpr.1486.
    1. Strobel A, Beauducel A, Debener S, Brocke B. Eine deutschsprachige Version des BIS/BAS-Fragebogens von Carver und White. ZDDP. 2001;22:216–227.
    1. Berking M, Wupperman P, Reichardt A, Pejic T, Dippel A, General ZH. emotion-regulation skills as a treatment target in psychotherapy. Behav Res Ther. 2008;46:1230–1237. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2008.08.005.
    1. Berking M, Znoj H. Entwicklung und Validierung eines Fragebogens zur standardisierten Selbsteinschätzung emotionaler Kompetenzen (SEK-27) Z Klin Psychol Psychiatr Psychother. 2008;56:141–152.
    1. Reitan RM. Trail Making Test. Indianapolis: Indiana University Medical Center; 1959.
    1. Houben K, Wiers RW. Response inhibition moderates the relationship between implicit associations and drinking behavior. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2009;33:626–633. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2008.00877.x.
    1. Peeters M, Wiers RW, Monshouwer K, van de Schoot R, Janssen T, Vollebergh WAM. Automatic processes in at-risk adolescents: the role of alcohol-approach tendencies and response inhibition in drinking behavior. Addiction. 2012;107:1939–1946. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03948.x.
    1. Greenwald AG, McGhee DE, Schwartz JLK. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the Implicit Association Test. JPSP. 1998;74:1464–1480.
    1. Egenolf Y, Stein M, Koenig T, Grosse Holtforth M, Dierks T, Caspar F. Tracking the implicit self using event-related potentials. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2013;13:885–899. doi: 10.3758/s13415-013-0169-3.
    1. Greenwald AG, Nosek BA, Banaji MR. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. JPSP. 2003;85:197–216.
    1. Stein M, Dierks T, Brandeis D, Wirth M, Strik W, Koenig T. Plasticity in the adult language system: a longitudinal electrophysiological study on second language learning. Neuroimage. 2006;33:774–783. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.07.008.
    1. Rohde KB, Caspar F, Koenig T, Pascual-Leone A, Stein M. Neurophysiological traces of interpersonal pain: how emotional autobiographical memories affect event-related potentials. Emotion. 2018;18:290–303. doi: 10.1037/emo0000356.
    1. Wirth M, Horn H, Koenig T, Razafimandimby A, Stein M, Mueller T, et al. The early context effect reflects activity in the temporo-prefrontal semantic system: evidence from electrical neuroimaging of abstract and concrete word reading. Neuroimage. 2008;42:423–436. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.03.045.
    1. Lehmann D, Skrandies W. Reference-free identification of components of checkerboard-evoked multichannel potential fields. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1980;48:609–621. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(80)90419-8.
    1. Koenig T, Kottlow M, Stein M, Melie-Garcia L. Ragu: a free tool for the analysis of EEG and MEG event-related scalp field data using global randomization statistics. Comput Intell Neurosci. 2011;2011:938925. doi: 10.1155/2011/938925.
    1. Habermann M, Weusmann D, Stein M, Koenig T. A student’s guide to randomization statistics for multichannel event-related potentials using Ragu. Front Neurosci. 2018;12:355. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00355.
    1. Koenig T, Melie-Garcia L, Stein M, Strik W, Lehmann C. Establishing correlations of scalp field maps with other experimental variables using covariance analysis and resampling methods. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008;119:1262–1270. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2007.12.023.
    1. Pascual-Marqui RD. Standardized low resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA): technical details. Meth Find Exp Clin Pharmacol. 2002;24:5–12.
    1. Koenig T, Stein M, Grieder M, Kottlow M. A tutorial on data-driven methods for statistically assessing ERP topographies. Brain Topogr. 2014;27:72–83. doi: 10.1007/s10548-013-0310-1.
    1. Schiller B, Gianotti LR, Baumgartner T, Nash K, Koenig T, Knoch D. Clocking the social mind by identifying mental processes in the IAT with electrical neuroimaging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016;113:2786–2791. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1515828113.
    1. Williams JK, Themanson JR. Neural correlates of the implicit association test: evidence for semantic and emotional processing. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2011;6:468–476. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsq065.
    1. Fleischhauer M, Strobel A, Diers K, Enge S. Electrophysiological evidence for early perceptual facilitation and efficient categorization of self-related stimuli during an Implicit Association Test measuring neuroticism. Psychophysiology. 2014;51:142–151. doi: 10.1111/psyp.12162.
    1. Coates MA, Campbell KB. Event-related potential measures of processing during an Implicit Association Test. Neuroreport. 2010;21:1029–1033. doi: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32833f5e7d.
    1. Lindgren KP, Neighbors C, Teachman BA, Wiers RW, Westgate E, Greenwald AG. I drink therefore I am: validating alcohol-related implicit association tests. Psychol Addict Behav. 2013;27:1–13. doi: 10.1037/a0027640.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj