Acute sensitization of the P3 event-related potential response to beverage images and the risk for alcohol use disorder

Predictive utility of the P3 event‐related potential (ERP) response to alcohol cues for ecologically assessed alcohol craving and use

“…P3 mean amplitudes were quantified at nine parietal/occipital electrodes over which the P3 was maximal (see Figure S1 ), which improves psychometrics. 26 As enhanced P3 reactivity to alcohol cues relative to non‐drug reward cues is maximal at the start of the picture viewing task and decreases as the task unfolds, 39 P3 mean amplitudes were scored using only EEG data from the first half of the task. ‡ The time‐window used for P3 quantification is indicated on the grand average ERP waveforms shown in Figure 1 .…”

Mesocorticolimbic system reactivity to alcohol use-related visual cues as a function of alcohol sensitivity phenotype: A pilot fMRI study

“…Inclusion criteria for the parent study were: age 18 to 20 years at enrollment, ability to read and write English, normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity, and regular alcohol use (at least monthly alcohol use in the past year and at least 1 binge-drinking episode in the past 6 months). Exclusion criteria for the parent study included a history of unsuccessful attempts to quit or moderate alcohol use and considerations related to EEG recording (for more details, see [ 23 ]). Exclusion criteria for the current study included: no longer residing in the community (Columbia, MO); moderate alcohol sensitivity phenotype (see 2.3.1 Self-Reported Alcohol Use and Alcohol Sensitivity for details), current or past psychosis (including manic episodes) as evidenced by current or past use of certain medications (e.g., haloperidol, lamotrigine, lithium, risperidone); history of neurological disease (e.g., epilepsy); history of prior head injuries that resulted in a loss of consciousness; non-removable electronics or metal; anxiety or claustrophobia in the MR scanner bore; body size that prevents comfortable fit in the MR scanner bore; and for female participants: currently pregnant, nursing, or trying to become pregnant.…”

“…Similar BOLD-ERP correlations have been found for measures of reward anticipation [ 70 ] and reward receipt [ 71 ]. Since participants’ scores on the EEG-ERP measure of differential incentive salience attribution to alcohol cues were part of a previous publication [ 23 ], confirmatory analyses of ACR in the EEG-ERP measure for the current subsample of participants are presented in Supplemental Information alongside a summary of the EEG-ERP method. To examine the main effects of between-person differences in the EEG-ERP measure on BOLD-ACR as well as potential moderation effects on the alcohol sensitivity group difference in BOLD-ACR, the MLR model testing strategy described above was applied.…”

“…This incentive sensitization manifests as heightened cue-elicited attentional biases, behavioral approach, and subjective craving. In keeping, among individuals with LS compared to peers with higher sensitivity (HS), alcohol-related cues: (i) spontaneously capture visual attention [ 17 , 18 ]; (ii) elicit stronger event-related potential (ERP) responses indicative of attention to cues due to their affective-motivational significance [ 19 - 23 ]; (iii) activate a behavioral disposition to approach to the cue (e.g., promoting physical proximity to the alcohol beverage container) [ 24 , 25 ]; and (iv) elicit greater levels of subjective craving for alcohol in the laboratory [ 21 ] and the natural environment ([ 26 ], but see: [ 27 ]).…”

Risk-promoting effects of reward-paired cues in human sign- and goal-trackers

“…The role of cue reactivity in the maintenance of substance-related and addictive disorders is well-recognized, as its different forms, including cue-induced craving, attentional biases, and neural reactivity to addiction-related cues, have been found to predict treatment outcome, duration of abstinence, and relapse [2,7,8]. However, it remains unclear whether cue reactivity observed in addictive disorders is primarily a consequence of the powerful cue-reward associations established in the course of the addition process, or if a pre-existing trait-like propensity to forming, or being influenced by, cue-reward associations may facilitate this process, as some initial evidence suggests [9,10].…”