These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The manipulation of alcohol-related interpretation biases by means of Cognitive Bias Modification--Interpretation (CBM-I).
    Author: Woud ML, Hutschemaekers MH, Rinck M, Becker ES.
    Journal: J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry; 2015 Dec; 49(Pt A):61-8. PubMed ID: 25818001.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a large body of evidence demonstrating that alcohol abuse and misuse is characterized by alcohol-related interpretation biases (IBs). The present study tested whether alcohol-related IBs can be trained, and whether this has an effect on alcohol-related associations and drinking behavior. A newly developed alcohol Cognitive Bias Modification - Interpretation (CBM-I) training was employed. The potential moderating effect of executive control on CBM-I training effects was tested. METHOD: Participants were hazardously male drinking students. A classical Stroop was used to assess levels of executive control. Half of the sample was trained to interpret ambiguous alcohol-related scenarios in an alcohol-related manner (alcohol training group), whereas the other half was trained to interpret ambiguous alcohol-related scenarios in a neutral manner (neutral training group). A Single Target Implicit Association Test (STIAT) was used to test whether the training would generalize to implicit alcohol-related associations (target words: alcohol, attributes: positive vs. neutral). To test the training's effect on drinking behavior, a bogus taste test and a one week follow-up measure assessing participant's real life drinking behavior were used. RESULTS: The CBM-I training was partly successful: When presented with novel ambiguous alcohol-related scenarios, participants of the alcohol training group interpreted these scenarios as more alcohol-related after the training. However, there was no reduction in alcohol-related IBs in the neutral training group. Results of the STIAT demonstrated that both training groups showed stronger positive than neutral alcohol-related associations. However, there were no between-group differences in alcohol-related associations. Moreover, the CBM-I training's effect was not moderated by levels of executive control. Finally, no group differences were found on levels of alcohol consumption (bogus taste test and at one week follow-up). LIMITATIONS: The neutral training might have been operationalized sub-optimally. A multi-session training might have resulted in stronger effects. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are the first to show that alcohol-related IBs can be trained. However, the training effect only partly generalized so more research is needed to advance our understanding of alcohol CBM-I effects.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]