Browsing by Subject "problematic alcohol use"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Mechanisms Underlying the Relationship between Negative Affectivity and Problematic Alcohol Use
    (Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2013-04-05) Coskunpinar, Ayca; Dir, Allyson L.; Karyadi, Kenny A.; Koo, ChungSeung
    Research has long supported the role of negative affectivity for problematic alcohol consumption (Bechara, 2005; Dolan, 2007; Larsen, 2000; Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000; Tice, Bratslavsky, & Baumeister, 2001). However, the mechanisms that underlie how negative affective traits influence problematic alcohol use and attentional biases are not well understood. These inconsistencies can be attributed to three possible reasons: (1) research has often utilized broad measures of negative affective traits that can mask the effect of specific underlying unidimensional traits (Smith, Fischer & Fister, 2003), (2) research has tended to utilize only the valence of traits and has often failed to consider how activation of traits might predict behavioral outcomes, and (3) research has not fully incorporated other aspects of affective traits (e.g. affective lability and emotion-based rash action) that could be serving as mechanisms in predicting problematic alcohol use. The current study sought to characterize mechanisms that drive problematic alcohol use and attentional biases. Three undergraduate student studies were conducted (n = 510, 429, and 38). Negative urgency partially mediated the effects of negative affectivity (B for indirect effect = .119, CI = .09 – .16) and affect lability (B for indirect effect = .928, CI = .47 – 1.45) on problematic alcohol use. Activation level of hostility predicted increased variance in problematic alcohol consumption (R2 change = .01, β = .16, p = .02) above trait valence. Negative urgency predicted alcohol attentional biases over and above valence and activation (β = 2.23, p = .05). Negative urgency is a prime mechanism by which negative affective traits influence problematic alcohol consumption. This suggests that the relationship between negative urgency or lack of planning and problematic alcohol consumption could be driven, in part, by increases in attentional biases when cued with alcohol stimuli, although this was not directly tested in the current study.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Positive and Negative Urgency Predict Problematic Alcohol Consumption for Subjects with Positive Family History of Alcohol Dependency
    (Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2013-04-05) Lopossa, Alyssa M.; Dir, Allyson L.; Cyders, Melissa A.
    Impulsivity is an established predictor of alcohol use outcomes and thus is an important construct to investigate (Clark, Vanyukov & Cornelius 2002; Dawes, Tarter & Kirisci 1997; Dick et al. 2010). Impulsivity is a multi-faceted trait, which includes multiple dispositions toward rash action including positive and negative urgency (acting rashly in response to extreme positive and negative emotional states, respectively; Cyders & Smith, 2007), which appear to be the impulsivity-related traits most highly associated with problematic alcohol use (Coskunpinar et al., under review). Furthermore, a family history of alcoholism predicts higher alcohol use in offspring of alcoholics, although this relationship is inconsistent (Dick et al. 2010), suggesting a moderator, perhaps PUR/NUR, which might change the effect of family history on problematic alcohol use. 68 undergraduates (33% male, mean age = 25), 34 of which were family history positive for problematic alcohol consumption, completed the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavioral Scale (UPPS-P), the Alcohol Use Disorders Test (AUDIT) and a family history questionnaire. Multiple regression analyses and independent t-tests were used to test study hypotheses: (1) those with a family history of alcoholism (FHP) would have higher levels of NUR and PUR and (2) the relationship between these traits and AUDIT would be moderated by family history. Those with a positive family history of alcoholism (FHP) are significantly higher in PUR than those without a family history of alcoholism (FHN) (t = 1.523, p < .134), although the groups did not differ on NUR or AUDIT. There was a marginally significant interaction between NUR and family history (Beta = 2.958, p < .040), with a positive relationship between NUR and AUDIT only for those who are FHP. There was no significant interaction with PUR. These findings suggest that genetic differences in problematic alcohol use could be driven in part by the urgency traits.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Role of Positive and Negative Urgency and Social Context on Problematic Alcohol Use Behaviors
    (Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2015-04-17) Entezari, Andree B.; Karyadi, Kenny A.; Cyders, Melissa A.
    Social context influences drinking behaviors; in particular, problematic alcohol use among adolescents and young adults is more frequent in those who drink in more social contexts or who drink for social reasons. Moreover, although positive and negative urgency (i.e., the tendency to act rashly in response to extreme positive or negative emotional states, respectively) also relate to problematic alcohol use, it is unclear whether these impulsivity traits affect problematic alcohol use through social context. As such, the current study examined how positive and negative urgency influence problematic alcohol consumption through the social context of drinking. Participants (n = 348, n = 70 men; Mean age = 20 (SD= 4.5); 78.2% Caucasian) were recruited from the Introduction to Psychology course from IUPUI and received course credit for the completion of an online survey. A series of correlation and mediation analyses were conducted. Problematic alcohol use was significantly related to positive urgency (r=0.33, p<.001) and negative urgency (r= 0.29, p<.001). Although contextual drinking factors did not mediate the relationship between urgency and problematic alcohol use, the relationship between urgency and problematic alcohol use was significantly mediated by the endorsement of social drinking motives (e.g., I drink in order to be more social) (indirect effect of positive urgency b = 1.85, indirect effect of negative urgency b =2.02). Even though social drinking context was not a significant mediator, likely due to very few people reporting drinking in isolation in the current sample, the endorsement of drinking for social reasons might partially explain how urgency influences problematic alcohol use. In this way, intervening on social drinking motives might mitigate the effects of urgency on problematic alcohol use, particularly among college students at risk for alcohol use problems.