Compelled to consume: The Implicit Association Test and automatic alcohol motivation.

Abstract

The Implicit Association Test (IAT; A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, & J. L. K. Schwartz, 1998) has recently been used to assess the role of alcohol-affect associations in drinking behavior. The current study examined the validity of an alcohol IAT with 88 hazardous-drinking college students who completed measures of drinking behavior, an explicit measure of alcohol motivation, and an IAT that assessed alcohol-motivation associations. Regression analyses indicated that IAT scores correlated with binge drinking and cue reactivity, replicating T. P. Palfai and B. D. Ostafin's (2003) results. Results also indicated convergent validity (the IAT was related to an explicit measure of alcohol motivation) and incremental validity (IAT scores were correlated with alcohol behavior after controlling for the explicit measure). Implications for understanding the self-regulation of drinking are discussed.

On the predictive validity of automatically activated approach/avoidance tendencies in abstaining alcohol-dependent patients

“…Light drinkers, on the other hand, did not show such an effect. Similar findings were reported by several other researchers (e.g., Palfai and Ostafin, 2003;Ostafin and Palfai, 2006;Wiers et al, 2009). …”

“…Second, whereas explicit measures of alcohol problems failed to predict relapse, logistic regression analyses revealed a clear relationship between relapse and R-SRC performance: Relapse rates increased rather than decreased as alcohol patients were faster to avoid alcohol-related pictures compared to alcohol-unrelated pictures. Both observations are at odds with prior work showing that alcohol-related stimuli elicit approach tendencies rather than avoid tendencies (e.g., Palfai and Ostafin, 2003;Ostafin and Palfai, 2006;Wiers et al, 2009Wiers et al, , 2010. They are also at odds with the more general assumption that addiction is mediated or maintained by automatic approach tendencies towards alcohol (e.g., Deutsch and Strack, 2006;Robinson and Berridge, 1993;Stacy and Wiers, 2010;Tiffany, 1990;Wiers and Stacy, 2006).…”

“…Although several studies did indeed reveal an approach bias in heavy drinkers (e.g., Palfai and Ostafin, 2003;Ostafin and Palfai, 2006), there is also evidence showing that abstaining alcohol-dependent patients are sometimes inclined to avoid rather than to approach alcohol (e.g., Breiner et al, 1999;Smith-Hoerter et al, 2004). A similar pattern can be found in research on attentional bias towards alcohol-related cues.…”

“…It has also been demonstrated that substance-related stimuli can activate valence and arousal associations from memory in an automatic fashion (e.g., Houben et al, 2010;Wiers et al, 2002). Finally, there is also evidence showing that substance-related stimuli can trigger automatic approach/avoidance tendencies (e.g., Palfai and Ostafin, 2003;Ostafin and Palfai, 2006;Wiers et al, 2009). …”

The IRAP Is Nonrelative but not Acontextual: Changes to the Contrast Category Influence Men’s Dehumanization of Women

“…Such work pivoted on two central questions: (a) whether the necessity of a contrast category is inherently problematic; and (b) if so, how to overcome it (e.g., De Houwer, 2006;Houben & Wiers, 2006;Huijding, de Jong, Wiers, & Verkooijen, 2005;Karpinski, 2004;Nosek, Greenwald, & Banaji, 2005;Ostafin & Palfai, 2006;Palfai & Ostafin, 2003;Pinter & Greenwald, 2005;Robinson, Meier, Zetocha, & McCaul, 2005;Swanson, Rudman, & Greenwald, 2001). Such research has -either tacitly or explicitly -treated the requirement of a contrast category as a procedural "nuisance" that serves to limit the ability to interpret results.…”