Dataset Information

Subjective Effects of Alcohol Predict Alcohol Choice in Social Drinkers.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Alcohol is among the most commonly used psychoactive drugs, yet it can produce markedly different subjective effects in different people. Certain effects, including both heightened stimulatory effects and lesser sedative effects, are thought to predict repeated or excessive use. However, we do not fully understand the nature of these individual differences or their relationships to alcohol consumption. This controlled laboratory study examined subjective and physiologic responses to a moderate dose of alcohol in social drinkers in relation to the subjects' decision to consume alcohol.

Methods

Healthy adult volunteers (N = 95) participated in a 5-session double-blind alcohol choice study. On the first 4 sessions, they received alcohol (0.8 g/kg) and placebo in alternating order, and on the fifth session, they chose and consumed whichever of the 2 they preferred. During each session, participants completed the Profile of Mood States (POMS) and Biphasic Alcohol Effects Scale (BAES) questionnaires and had their vitals recorded every 30 minutes. We compared subjective and physiologic response to alcohol during the sampling sessions in participants who chose alcohol or placebo on session 5.

Results

Of the 95 participants, 55 chose alcohol (choosers) and 40 chose placebo (nonchoosers). In the full sample, alcohol produced its expected effects (e.g., increased friendliness, elation, and vigor (POMS), and stimulation and sedation (BAES)). The chooser and nonchooser groups did not differ in demographic characteristics, blood alcohol levels, or cardiovascular measures. However, the choosers experienced greater alcohol-induced increases in positive mood (POMS) and liked the drug more, whereas the nonchoosers experienced greater anger, anxiety (POMS), and sedation (BAES) after alcohol.

Conclusion

Both greater positive mood effects and lesser sedative effects after alcohol predicted preference under controlled conditions, suggesting that both factors can predict future consumption of alcohol.

SUBMITTER: Li J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8076998 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe preference for immediate rewards and high sensation seeking are both potent risk factors for alcohol use disorder (AUD), but how they interact during intoxication is poorly understood. To model decision making linked to AUD risk, we tested heavy drinkers for impulsive choice (delay discounting with alcohol:money or money:money) and behavioral sensation seeking using a novel odor choice task. Laboratory tasks measured actual behavior with real contingencies. Our goals were to determine, in heavy drinkers, (i) alcohol's effects on delay discounting, and (ii) how AUD risk factors relate to delay discounting, and (iii) how delay discounting with alcohol choices compares with strictly monetary choices.MethodsThirty-five heavy drinkers (≥2 binges per month; age = 22.8 ± 2.2; 20 male; 5.8 ± 2.3 drinks/drinking day) performed cross-commodity discounting (CCD) of immediate alcohol vs. delayed money, a monetary delay discounting (DD), and behavioral sensation-seeking tasks. CCD and DD were performed while sober and during controlled alcohol infusion targeting 0.08 g/dl. The behavioral sensation-seeking task presented binary choices of odorants varying in intensity and novelty, and the risk of exposure to a malodorant.ResultsCCD and DD behaviors were highly correlated across conditions, mean r = 0.64. Alcohol increased delayed reward preference in DD, p = 0.001, but did not alter mean CCD, p > 0.16. However, alcohol-induced changes in CCD correlated with behavioral sensation seeking, such that higher sensation seekers' immediate alcohol preference increased when intoxicated, p = 0.042; self-reported sensation seeking was uncorrelated, ps > 0.08. Behavioral sensation seeking also correlated with "want" alcohol following a priming dose targeting 0.035 g/dl, p = 0.021. CCD and DD did not correlate with self-reported drinking problems or other personality risk traits.ConclusionsAlcohol increased impulsive alcohol choice in high sensation seekers, suggesting an interaction that may underlie impaired control of drinking, at least in a subset of heavy drinkers-consistent with models highlighting high novelty/sensation-seeking AUD subtypes. Discounting behavior overall appears to be a generalized process, and relatively stable across methods, repeated testing, and intoxication. These findings further support the utility of behavioral tasks in uncovering key behavioral phenotypes in AUD.

Project description:AimsTo test whether non-dependent drinkers show place preference for a location paired with alcohol, and to test if the amount of time spent in the alcohol-paired location is related to self-reported subjective alcohol effects experienced in that environment.DesignTwo groups of subjects completed six conditioning sessions: three with alcohol (0.8 g/kg) and three without alcohol. Individuals were assigned randomly to two groups, paired and unpaired, in a 2 : 1 ratio. The paired group (n = 78) received alcohol in one testing room and no-alcohol in another testing room (biased assignment). The unpaired group (n = 30) received alcohol and no-alcohol in each testing room.SettingHuman Behavioral Pharmacology Laboratory, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA (single site).ParticipantsHealthy male and female social drinkers (n = 108) aged 21-40 years participated in the study (consisting of 10 separate laboratory visits) between March 2012 and August 2014 (an average of 36 separate subject visits per month).MeasurementsThe primary outcome measure was the pre- to post-conditioning change in the percentage of time spent in the least preferred room (obtained during drug-free exploration tests conducted at separate visits before and after the six conditioning sessions were completed). Secondary measures included self-reported subjective mood and drug effects obtained during the conditioning sessions.FindingsThe groups differed in the change in the percentage of time spent in the initially least preferred room, from pre- to post-conditioning; paired group = 11.0%, unpaired group = -1.4%, mean difference = 12.4%, 95% confidence interval = 1.9-23.0, P = 0.02. The change in the percentage of time spent in the least-preferred room was related to the self-reported sedative effects of alcohol during conditioning sessions among paired group participants only.ConclusionsNon-dependent consumers of alcohol appear to develop a behavioral preference for locations paired with alcohol consumption, more so for those who experience sedative effects from alcohol in those locations.

Project description:BackgroundPharmacotherapies for alcohol use disorder have been shown to reduce hazardous drinking and improve overall health. The effect sizes for the effectiveness of these medications, however, are small, underscoring the need to expand the range of therapeutics and develop personalized treatment approaches. Recent studies have suggested that varenicline, an α4β2-nicotinic partial agonist widely used for smoking cessation, can help alcoholics reduce drinking, but the neurocognitive underpinnings of its effectiveness remain largely unexplored.MethodsIn this double-blind study, 32 heavy drinkers were randomized to receive varenicline (2 mg/d) or placebo. After 2 weeks of dosing, participants underwent functional MRI scans, during which they viewed images of faces with either neutral or fearful expressions at baseline and following an intravenous alcohol infusion to a target breath alcohol concentration of 80 mg%. Blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) response was analyzed with Analysis of Functional Neuroimaging software. Linear mixed-effects models were used to examine the effects of facial expression (fearful vs. neutral) and medication (placebo vs. varenicline) on BOLD response. The effect of medication on measures of subjective response to alcohol was also examined.ResultsResults indicated a significant facial expression-by-medication interaction in the left amygdala. The groups showed equivalent activation to neutral faces, but, whereas the placebo group showed increased activation to fearful faces, the varenicline group showed no change in activation. Amygdala activation to fearful faces correlated with number of drinks in the previous 90 days and Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale scores. There was no effect of varenicline on subjective response to alcohol.ConclusionsOur results indicate that varenicline may disrupt amygdala response to fearful faces in heavy drinkers. Further, amygdala activation correlated with alcohol consumption, suggesting that the effects of varenicline may be related to aspects of drinking behavior. These results suggest that amygdala response to fearful faces may be developed as a biomarker of the effectiveness of medications being developed for the treatment of alcohol use disorder.

Project description:Motivational models of alcohol use suggest that individual differences in sensitivity to the acute subjective effects of alcohol play an important role in motivational pathways to alcohol use. However, few studies have examined the link between drinking motives and subjective responses to alcohol. This study investigated the associations of coping and enhancement drinking motives with subjective stimulant and sedative effects during a laboratory alcohol administration session. We also examined whether stimulation and sedation following alcohol administration mediated the relationships between drinking motives and postalcohol ratings of alcohol wanting and liking.Heavy episodic drinkers (n = 147, ages 19 to 25) at 2 sites participated in an intravenous alcohol administration session in which blood alcohol concentration was raised to a target of 80 mg% over 20 minutes. Participants completed measures of stimulation and sedation at baseline and 20 minutes and also rated alcohol liking and wanting at 20 minutes. Drinking motives and alcohol use were assessed during a previous laboratory visit.A path analysis controlling for baseline stimulation and sedation showed that enhancement motives were positively associated with postalcohol stimulation and negatively associated with postalcohol sedation. In contrast, coping motives were positively associated with postalcohol sedation. In turn, postalcohol stimulation, but not sedation, was associated with alcohol wanting and liking. Further, indirect pathways from enhancement motives to postalcohol wanting and liking mediated through postalcohol stimulation were statistically significant. Coping motives, on the other hand, were directly associated with increased postalcohol wanting and liking.The results demonstrate that drinking motives are linked with individual differences in sensitivity to the effects of alcohol, which may serve as a mechanism underlying alcohol reinforcement and the motivation to consume more alcohol during a drinking episode.