When Habits Are Dangerous: Alcohol Expectancies and Habitual Decision Making Predict Relapse in Alcohol Dependence

Sebold, Miriam; Nebe, Stephan; Garbusow, Maria; Guggenmos, Matthias; Schad, Daniel J.; Beck, Anne; Kuitunen‐Paul, Sören; Sommer, Christian; Frank, Robin; Neu, Peter; Zimmermann, U.; Rapp, Michael A.; Smolka, Michael N.; Huys, Quentin J. M.; Schlagenhauf, Florian; Heinz, Andreas

doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2017.04.019

Cited by 143 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bayes factor supported the null hypothesis in all group comparisons, suggesting that under the current experimental conditions, drug users have comparable capacity for goal‐directed action to control participants. The absence of a significant group differences is consistent with previous human studies that have reported either no difference between addict vs. control groups, or no difference across dependence severity within a drug user group, in sensitivity to outcome‐devaluation (Hogarth & Chase, ; Hogarth et al ., ; Ersche et al ., ), the specific PIT effect (Hogarth & Chase, ; Hogarth, ; Hogarth & Chase, ; Martinovic et al ., ; Hogarth et al ., ; Hardy et al ., ), or goal‐directed control in the two‐stage task (Deserno et al ., ; Voon et al ., ; Reiter et al ., ; Nebe et al ., ; Sebold et al ., ). However, the current null group differences are inconsistent with previous human studies that have reported a positive association between addict group status or dependence level and impaired goal‐directed control in the two‐stage task (Sebold et al ., ; Voon et al ., ; Gillan et al ., ) and the instructed outcome‐devaluation task (Sjoerds et al ., ; Ersche et al ., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The sixth study found no reduction in goal‐directed control in children of alcoholic father compared to controls (Reiter et al ., ). Finally, the seventh study found no reduction in goal‐directed control in alcohol‐dependent participants compared to healthy controls (Sebold et al ., ). In sum, the two‐stage task has yielded five human studies against habit theory and three studies in favour, giving a ratio of 5 : 3 against.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intact goal‐directed control in treatment‐seeking drug users indexed by outcome‐devaluation and Pavlovian to instrumental transfer: critique of habit theory

Hogarth

Lam-Cassettari

Pacitti

et al. 2018

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal studies have demonstrated that chronic exposure to drugs of abuse impairs goal-directed control over action selection indexed by the outcome-devaluation and specific Pavlovian to instrumental transfer procedures, suggesting this impairment might underpin addiction. However, there is currently only weak evidence for impaired goal-directed control in human drug users. Two experiments were undertaken in which treatment-seeking drug users and non-matched normative reference samples (controls) completed outcome-devaluation and specific Pavlovian to instrumental transfer procedures notionally translatable to animal procedures (Experiment 2 used a more challenging biconditional schedule). The two experiments found significant outcome-devaluation and specific Pavlovian to instrumental transfer effects overall and there was no significant difference between groups in the magnitude of these effects. Moreover, Bayes factor supported the null hypothesis for these group comparisons. Although limited by non-matched group comparisons and small sample sizes, the two studies suggest that treatment-seeking drug users have intact goal-directed control over action selection, adding uncertainty to already mixed evidence concerning the role of habit learning in human drug dependence. Neuro-interventions might seek to tackle goal-directed drug-seeking rather than habit formation in drug users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Intact goal‐directed control in treatment‐seeking drug users indexed by outcome‐devaluation and Pavlovian to instrumental transfer: critique of habit theory

Hogarth

Lam-Cassettari

Pacitti

et al. 2018

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, substance use may be associated with a tendency toward using bottom-up reward-based feedback to make decisions, rather than effective model-based strategies and reward devaluation. Two recent studies have demonstrated that compulsive substance use behaviors are perpetuated by a shift from model-based to model-free control that is mediated by reduced activation in the medial prefrontal cortex (Reiter et al, 2016;Sebold et al, 2017). This decreased activation is associated with deficits in updating information for alternative options during decisionmaking (Reiter et al, 2016).…”

Section: Neurobiological Mechanisms Of Substance Abuse and Habitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Substance use is associated with reduced devaluation sensitivity

Byrne

Otto

Pang

et al. 2018

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substance use has been linked to impairments in reward processing and decision-making, yet empirical research on the relationship between substance use and devaluation of reward in humans is limited. We report findings from two studies that tested whether individual differences in substance use behavior predicted reward learning strategies and devaluation sensitivity in a nonclinical sample. Participants in Experiment 1 (N = 66) and Experiment 2 (N = 91) completed subscales of the Externalizing Spectrum Inventory and then performed a two-stage reinforcement learning task that included a devaluation procedure. Spontaneous eye blink rate was used as an indirect proxy for dopamine functioning. In Experiment 1, correlational analysis revealed a negative relationship between substance use and devaluation sensitivity. In Experiment 2, regression modeling revealed that while spontaneous eyeblink rate moderated the relationship between substance use and reward learning strategies, substance use alone was related to devaluation sensitivity. These results suggest that once reward-action associations are established during reinforcement learning, substance use predicted reduced sensitivity to devaluation independently of variation in eyeblink rate. Thus, substance use is not only related to increased habit formation but also to difficulty disengaging from learned habits. Implications for the role of the dopaminergic system in habitual responding in individuals with substance use problems are discussed.

show abstract

“…Alternatively, it may be that brain responses to alcohol-related rewards simply do not differentiate different types of drinkers and that other factors may be more relevant in explaining individual differences in drinking behaviour. Such factors include impaired prefrontal-based self-control (Luijten et al, 2014; Tang et al, 2015), diminished goal-directed behaviour (Reiter et al, 2016b; Sebold et al, 2017), and impaired decision-making and learning (Huys et al, 2016b; Reiter et al, 2016a). A less often studied factor is the social aspect of alcohol use; it is known that alcohol is most often consumed in social settings and for social reasons (Dallas et al, 2014; Smit et al, 2015), with peer influences and imitation of drinking behavior acting as powerful predictors of use (Larsen et al, 2009; Larsen et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain responses to anticipating and receiving beer: Comparing light, at-risk, and dependent alcohol users

Groefsema¹,

Engels

Voon

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Impaired brain processing of alcohol-related rewards has been suggested to play a central role in alcohol use disorder. Yet, evidence remains inconsistent, and mainly originates from studies in which participants passively observe alcohol cues or taste alcohol.Here we designed a protocol in which beer consumption was predicted by incentive cues and contingent on instrumental action, closer to real life situations. We predicted that anticipating and receiving beer (compared with water) would elicit activity in the brain reward network, and that this activity would correlate with drinking level across participants. Methods:The sample consisted of 150 beer-drinking males, aged 18-25 years. Three groups were defined based on AUDIT scores: light drinkers (n=40), at-risk drinkers (n=63), and dependent drinkers (n=47). fMRI measures were obtained while participants engaged in the Beer Incentive Delay task involving beer-and water-predicting cues, followed by real sips of beer or water.Results: During anticipation, outcome notification and delivery of beer compared with water, higher activity was found in a reward-related brain network including the medial prefrontal cortex, orbitofrontal cortex and amygdala. Yet, no activity was observed in the striatum, and no differences were found between the groups. Conclusions:Our results reveal that anticipating, obtaining and tasting beer activates parts of the brain reward network, but that these brain responses do not differentiate between different drinking levels. We speculate that other factors, such as cognitive control or sensitivity to social context, may be more discriminant predictors of drinking behaviour in young adults. ). This task, that we refer to as the Beer Incentive Delay task, used alcohol instead of monetary rewards. Specifically, participants were exposed to abstract cues predicting the delivery of either beer or water (latter being used as a control condition) and had to react fast enough to a visual target in order to receive the predicted reward in the mouth via a tube. Brain responses reflecting motivation or "wanting" were measured during the period preceding the motor action (cue + delay), while brain responses reflecting pleasure or "liking" were measured at the time of reward outcome notification and reward delivery, separately.Importantly, we recruited a large cohort of 150 participants spanning the whole spectrum from light to dependent drinkers. In order to validate our novel task design, we first tested whether beer anticipation, outcome notification and delivery would elicit higher brain responses in the reward-related network compared with water. Then we hypothesized that these brain responses, in particular in the VS, would differentiate light, at-risk and dependent alcohol drinkers. Material and methodsParticipants Participants were recruited via flyers distributed throughout the Radboud University campus and Nijmegen city, as well as via online advertisement including the University recruitment website. Potential participants com...

show abstract

When Habits Are Dangerous: Alcohol Expectancies and Habitual Decision Making Predict Relapse in Alcohol Dependence

Cited by 143 publications

References 71 publications

Intact goal‐directed control in treatment‐seeking drug users indexed by outcome‐devaluation and Pavlovian to instrumental transfer: critique of habit theory

Intact goal‐directed control in treatment‐seeking drug users indexed by outcome‐devaluation and Pavlovian to instrumental transfer: critique of habit theory

Substance use is associated with reduced devaluation sensitivity

Brain responses to anticipating and receiving beer: Comparing light, at-risk, and dependent alcohol users

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About