Cargando…

Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling

INTRODUCTION: Impulsivity is a central feature of drug addiction and may arise as a result of impaired inhibitory control. The extent to which inhibitory deficits arise as a consequence of drug exposure or relate to pre-existing addiction vulnerability is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lawrence, Andrew J., Luty, Jason, Bogdan, Nadine A., Sahakian, Barbara J., Clark, Luke
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2764851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19727677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00213-009-1645-x
_version_ 1782173128738209792
author Lawrence, Andrew J.
Luty, Jason
Bogdan, Nadine A.
Sahakian, Barbara J.
Clark, Luke
author_facet Lawrence, Andrew J.
Luty, Jason
Bogdan, Nadine A.
Sahakian, Barbara J.
Clark, Luke
author_sort Lawrence, Andrew J.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Impulsivity is a central feature of drug addiction and may arise as a result of impaired inhibitory control. The extent to which inhibitory deficits arise as a consequence of drug exposure or relate to pre-existing addiction vulnerability is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study compared measures of impulsivity in outpatients with alcohol dependence (n = 23) and problem gambling (n = 21), a putative behavioural addiction where direct effects of drug exposure may be minimal. Healthy controls (n = 27) were also tested, in a cross-sectional design. Subjects completed the stop-signal test as a neurocognitive probe of response inhibition, alongside self-report ratings of impulsivity, adult ADHD and OCD. RESULTS: On the stop-signal test, Go reaction time and stop-signal reaction time were significantly slower in the alcohol-dependent group, compared with healthy controls. Healthy controls slowed their responding after successful and failed stop trials. Slowing after failed stop trials was significantly attenuated in the alcohol-dependent subjects. Go reaction time and post-error slowing were correlated with chronicity and severity, respectively, in the alcohol-dependent subjects. Problem gamblers did not differ significantly from controls on the stop-signal test, despite trait elevations in impulsivity ratings. CONCLUSION: Inhibitory control is impaired in alcohol dependence but occurs in the context of psychomotor slowing. In addition, alcohol-dependent individuals failed to show behavioral adjustment following failed stops. These deficits may represent direct effects of chronic alcohol administration on fronto-striatal circuitry.
format Text
id pubmed-2764851
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27648512009-10-23 Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling Lawrence, Andrew J. Luty, Jason Bogdan, Nadine A. Sahakian, Barbara J. Clark, Luke Psychopharmacology (Berl) Original Investigation INTRODUCTION: Impulsivity is a central feature of drug addiction and may arise as a result of impaired inhibitory control. The extent to which inhibitory deficits arise as a consequence of drug exposure or relate to pre-existing addiction vulnerability is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study compared measures of impulsivity in outpatients with alcohol dependence (n = 23) and problem gambling (n = 21), a putative behavioural addiction where direct effects of drug exposure may be minimal. Healthy controls (n = 27) were also tested, in a cross-sectional design. Subjects completed the stop-signal test as a neurocognitive probe of response inhibition, alongside self-report ratings of impulsivity, adult ADHD and OCD. RESULTS: On the stop-signal test, Go reaction time and stop-signal reaction time were significantly slower in the alcohol-dependent group, compared with healthy controls. Healthy controls slowed their responding after successful and failed stop trials. Slowing after failed stop trials was significantly attenuated in the alcohol-dependent subjects. Go reaction time and post-error slowing were correlated with chronicity and severity, respectively, in the alcohol-dependent subjects. Problem gamblers did not differ significantly from controls on the stop-signal test, despite trait elevations in impulsivity ratings. CONCLUSION: Inhibitory control is impaired in alcohol dependence but occurs in the context of psychomotor slowing. In addition, alcohol-dependent individuals failed to show behavioral adjustment following failed stops. These deficits may represent direct effects of chronic alcohol administration on fronto-striatal circuitry. Springer-Verlag 2009-09-03 2009 /pmc/articles/PMC2764851/ /pubmed/19727677 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00213-009-1645-x Text en © The Author(s) 2009 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Lawrence, Andrew J.
Luty, Jason
Bogdan, Nadine A.
Sahakian, Barbara J.
Clark, Luke
Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling
title Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling
title_full Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling
title_fullStr Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling
title_full_unstemmed Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling
title_short Impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling
title_sort impulsivity and response inhibition in alcohol dependence and problem gambling
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2764851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19727677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00213-009-1645-x
work_keys_str_mv AT lawrenceandrewj impulsivityandresponseinhibitioninalcoholdependenceandproblemgambling
AT lutyjason impulsivityandresponseinhibitioninalcoholdependenceandproblemgambling
AT bogdannadinea impulsivityandresponseinhibitioninalcoholdependenceandproblemgambling
AT sahakianbarbaraj impulsivityandresponseinhibitioninalcoholdependenceandproblemgambling
AT clarkluke impulsivityandresponseinhibitioninalcoholdependenceandproblemgambling