Effects of ethanol on anti-saccade task performance

Khan, Sarah; Ford, Kristen A.; Timney, Brian; Everling, Stefan

doi:10.1007/s00221-003-1400-1

Cited by 17 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is worth noting that another study exploring pharmacological manipulation of antisaccade performance found results that are difficult to interpret within the general model of antisaccade performance outlined in the introduction. Khan et al (2003) administered ethanol to healthy participants and found that it increased correct antisaccade latency, but reduced the number of errors. Activation models would predict that if the correct response is slowed, the erroneous response has a greater likelihood of reaching threshold first, and therefore errors should increase.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The antisaccade task as an index of sustained goal activation in working memory: modulation by nicotine

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Article (Unspecified) http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Rycroft, Nicola, Hutton, Samuel B. and Rusted, Jennifer M. (2006) The antisaccade task as an index of sustained goal activation in working memory: modulation by nicotine. Psychopharmacology, 188 (4). pp. [521][522][523][524][525][526][527][528][529] This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/738/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse:Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Recent models of antisaccade performance suggest that errors are more likely to occur when the intention to initiate an antisaccade is insufficiently activated within working memory. Nicotine has been shown to enhance specific working memory processes in healthy adults. We explored the effect of nicotine on antisaccade performance in a large sample (N=44) of young adult smokers. Minimally abstinent participants attended two test sessions and were asked to smoke one of their own cigarettes between baseline and retest during one session only.Nicotine reduced antisaccade errors and correct antisaccade latencies if delivered before optimum performance levels are achieved, suggesting that nicotine supports the activation of intentions in working memory during task performance. The implications of this research for current theoretical accounts of antisaccade performance, and for interpreting the increased rate of antisaccade errors found in some psychiatric patient groups are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The antisaccade task as an index of sustained goal activation in working memory: modulation by nicotine

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alcohol has also been shown to increase inhibition errors on the antisaccade task, but only in individuals with no family history of alcoholism (Ramchandani et al, 1999). By contrast, several studies have found no effect of alcohol on antisaccade errors (e.g., Blekher et al, 2002;Vorstius, Radach, Lang, and Riccardi, 2008), and some studies have reported that alcohol actually decreases inhibitory errors on these tasks (Khan, Ford, Timney, and Everling, 2003;Roche and King, 2010;Vassallo and Abel, 2002). Although these latter studies appear to provide evidence for a facilitating effect of alcohol on attentional inhibition, it is more likely that these results are due to a speed-accuracy trade-off in task performance.…”

Section: Examination Of Acute Drug Effectsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Behavioral Inhibition and Addiction

Fillmore¹,

Weafer²

2013

The Wiley‐Blackwell Handbook of Addiction Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This is broadly consistent with some previous reports of acute effects of alcohol on saccadic inhibitory control tasks. For example, more studies report a lack of alcohol effect or even a positive alcohol effect on anti-saccade task performance (Blekher et al, 2002;Khan et al, 2003;Vassallo et al, 2002;Vorstius et al, 2008) than report an impairment (Crevits et al, 2000;Marinkovic et al, 2013). Nonetheless, studies considering the effect of alcohol on the delayed ocular response task find significant effects of alcohol on premature saccades (e.g., Abroms et al, 2006;Weafer and Fillmore, 2012).…”

Section: Alcohol Does Not Affect Saccadic Ssrtmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While two studies found alcohol to increase anti-saccade error rates in either head-injured participants (Crevits et al, 2000; blood alcohol levels between 1.89 and 3.84 g/l) or healthy participants (Marinkovic et al, 2013; alcohol dose 0.6 g/kg for males and 0.55 g/kg for females), two studies found no effect (healthy participants, Blekher et al, 2002; breath alcohol concentration 80 mg/dl; Vorstius et al, 2008; breath alcohol concentration 65 mg/dl). Counter-intuitively, two studies even found decreases in error rates (healthy participants, Khan et al, 2003; blood alcohol concentration 0.08%; Vassallo et al, 2002; blood alcohol concentration 0.044%), which may be due to alcohol attenuating the reflexive response rather than the inhibitory control process (Fillmore and Weafer, 2013). Similarly, in a saccade interference task in which saccade latency is slowed by large interfering stimuli, alcohol produced no significant effect (healthy participants, Abroms et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impairment of manual but not saccadic response inhibition following acute alcohol intoxication

Campbell

Chambers

Allen

et al. 2017

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TBackground: Alcohol impairs response inhibition; however, it remains contested whether such impairments affect a general inhibition system, or whether affected inhibition systems are embedded in, and specific to, each response modality. Further, alcohol-induced impairments have not been disambiguated between proactive and reactive inhibition mechanisms, and nor have the contributions of action-updating impairments to behavioural 'inhibition' deficits been investigated. Methods: Forty Participants (25 female) completed both a manual and a saccadic stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) task before and after a 0.8 g/kg dose of alcohol and, on a separate day, before and after a placebo. Blocks in which participants were required to ignore the signal to stop or make an additional 'dual' response were included to obtain measures of proactive inhibition as well as updating of attention and action. Results: Alcohol increased manual but not saccadic SSRT. Proactive inhibition was weakly reduced by alcohol, but increases in the reaction times used to baseline this contrast prevent clear conclusions regarding response caution. Finally, alcohol also increased secondary dual response times of the dual task uniformly as a function of the delay between tasks, indicating an effect of alcohol on action-updating or execution. Conclusions: The modality-specific effects of alcohol favour the theory that response inhibition systems are embedded within response modalities, rather than there existing a general inhibition system. Concerning alcohol, saccadic control appears relatively more immune to disruption than manual control, even though alcohol affects saccadic latency and velocity. Within the manual domain, alcohol affects multiple types of action updating, not just inhibition.

show abstract

Effects of ethanol on anti-saccade task performance

Abstract: Effects of ethanol on anti-saccade task performance. Effects of ethanol on anti-saccade task performance.

Cited by 17 publications

References 42 publications

The antisaccade task as an index of sustained goal activation in working memory: modulation by nicotine

The antisaccade task as an index of sustained goal activation in working memory: modulation by nicotine

Behavioral Inhibition and Addiction

Impairment of manual but not saccadic response inhibition following acute alcohol intoxication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About