A person-centered approach to understanding negative reinforcement drinking among first year college students [post-print]

The current study used a person-centered approach (i.e. latent profile analysis) to identify distinct types of college student drinkers based on the predictions of motivational, social learning, and stress and coping theories of maladaptive drinking. A large sample (N = 844; 53% female) of first-year undergraduates from two institutions, public and private, who reported consuming one or more drinks in the last three months completed measures of depressive and anxiety symptoms, positive alcohol-outcome expectancies, negative life events, social support, drinking motives, drinking level and drinking-related problems. Latent profile analysis revealed a small subgroup of individuals (n = 81, 9%) who conformed to the anticipated high-risk profile; specifically, this group demonstrated high levels of negative affect, coping motives, drinks per week, and drinking-related problems. However, additional groups emerged that showed patterns inconsistent with the proposed vulnerability profile (e.g., high negative affect, positive expectancies, and negative life events, but relatively low drinking levels). Findings from our person-centered approach showing the presence of groups both consistent and inconsistent with the predictions of motivational, social learning, and stress and coping theories highlight the need to identify and target certain college students for prevention and intervention of negative affect-related drinking

fMRI Response During Figural Memory Task Performance in College Drinkers [pre-print]

Rationale: 18-25-year-olds show the highest rates of alcohol use disorders (AUD) and heavy drinking, which may have critical neurocognitive implications. Regions subserving memory may be particularly susceptible to alcohol-related impairments. Objective: We used blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine the neural correlates of visual encoding and recognition among heavy drinking college students. We predicted that heavy drinkers would show worse memory performance and increased frontal/parietal activation and decreased hippocampal response during encoding. Methods: Participants were 23 heavy drinkers and 33 demographically matched light drinkers, ages 18-20, characterized using quantity/frequency of drinking and AUD diagnosis. Participants performed a figural encoding and recognition task during fMRI. BOLD response during encoding was modeled based on whether each stimulus was subsequently recognized or forgotten (i.e., correct vs. incorrect encoding). Results: There were no group differences in behavioral performance. Compared to light drinkers, heavy drinkers showed: 1) greater BOLD response during correct encoding in right hippocampus/medial temporal, right dorsolateral prefrontal, left inferior frontal, and bilateral posterior parietal cortices; 2) less left inferior frontal activation and greater bilateral precuneus deactivation during incorrect encoding; and 3) less bilateral insula response during correct recognition (clusters \u3e10,233ul, p Conclusions: This is the first investigation of the neural substrates of figural memory among heavy drinking older adolescents. Heavy drinkers demonstrated compensatory hyperactivation of memory-related areas during correct encoding, greater deactivation of default mode regions during incorrect encoding, and reduced recognition-related response. Results could suggest use of different encoding and recognition strategies among heavy drinkers

Reward-Related Dorsal Striatal Activity Differences between Former and Current Cocaine Dependent Individuals during an Interactive Competitive Game

Cocaine addiction is characterized by impulsivity, impaired social relationships, and abnormal mesocorticolimbic reward processing, but their interrelationships relative to stages of cocaine addiction are unclear. We assessed blood-oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) signal in ventral and dorsal striatum during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in current (CCD; n = 30) and former (FCD; n = 28) cocaine dependent subjects as well as healthy control (HC; n = 31) subjects while playing an interactive competitive Domino game involving risk-taking and reward/punishment processing. Out-of-scanner impulsivity-related measures were also collected. Although both FCD and CCD subjects scored significantly higher on impulsivity-related measures than did HC subjects, only FCD subjects had differences in striatal activation, specifically showing hypoactivation during their response to gains versus losses in right dorsal caudate, a brain region linked to habituation, cocaine craving and addiction maintenance. Right caudate activity in FCD subjects also correlated negatively with impulsivity-related measures of self-reported compulsivity and sensitivity to reward. These findings suggest that remitted cocaine dependence is associated with striatal dysfunction during social reward processing in a manner linked to compulsivity and reward sensitivity measures. Future research should investigate the extent to which such differences might reflect underlying vulnerabilities linked to cocaine-using propensities (e.g., relapses)

<i>A.</i> Statistical parametric <i>F</i>-maps (sagittal, coronal and axial) of the <i>Gain-Loss</i> contrast for one-way ANOVA between-group main effect (masked with the Reward mask).

<p>Crosshairs overlaid on brain slices are at located at <i>x,y,z</i>  = 18,18,9 (peak voxel). Glass brain at top right shows that the cluster in the right dorsal caudate is only surviving cluster. Threshold was set at <i>p</i><0.05 uncorrected, minimum cluster size <i>k</i> = 10 voxels. <i>B.</i> Effect sizes for <i>Gain</i> (red), <i>Loss</i> (blue) and <i>Gain-Loss</i> (green) contrasts for HC, FCD and CCD groups at <i>x,y,z  = </i>18,18,9. Black bar represents standard error of the mean.</p

Statistical group comparisons for responses to four attitude statements (AS).

<p>From the Domino Debriefing Questionnaire (DDQ) regarding absolute and relative gains and losses during the ‘Response to Outcome’ interval. Responses are Likert scale for agreement with each statement: 1 = ’Not at all’ through 5 = ’Very much’. <i>Top</i>, Table values are the response mean and standard deviation for each group. <i>Bottom</i>, Kruskal-Wallis test results for group differences.</p>†<p> = Null hypothesis, mean response ≤3.</p

<i>A</i>. Statistical parametric <i>F</i>-maps (coronal slices; <i>y-</i>dimension shown) of the one-way between-groups ANOVA multiple regression analysis of Factor 2 scores versus <i>Gain-Loss</i> contrast.

<p>Block white arrow points to the right dorsal caudate cluster that overlaps with the right dorsal caudate cluster shown in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0034917#pone-0034917-g004" target="_blank">Figure 4</a>, panel A. <i>B</i>. Statistical parametric <i>t</i>-maps (coronal slices; <i>y-</i>dimension shown) for the <i>post hoc</i> FCD group multiple regression analysis of Factor 2 scores versus <i>Gain-Loss</i> contrast. Threshold was set at <i>q</i><0.05 FDR corrected; minimum cluster size <i>k</i> = 10 voxels (masked with the Reward mask). <i>C</i>. Plot of the <i>Gain-Loss</i> effect size versus Factor 2 score regression analysis, with each <i>Gain-Loss</i> contrast value being the mean value in a 5 mm radius sphere centered at peak voxel <i>x,y,z  = </i>18,18,0 for each subject in the FCD group. The correlation coefficient of the fitted line was <i>R</i> = −0.641 (<i>p</i> = 0.0002 uncorrected).</p

The Domino game task. The Domino game sequence and corresponding consequences are depicted.

<p>At the beginning of each round of the game the player must decide (mentally choose) what chip he/she will play next (i.e., ‘Choose’, the decision-making interval) and move the cursor to the selected chip when instructed (‘Ready’ interval). The chip can either match the opponent’s chip (<i>i.e.</i>, have one of the two numbers on the chip match one of those on the opponent’s chip, 6∶3 in this example; upper panel, 6∶1) or not (lower panel, 5∶2). After placing the selected chip face down next to the opponent’s chip, he/she awaits the opponent’s response (‘Go’ or ‘Anticipation of Outcome’ interval). The opponent can either challenge the player’s choice (‘show’) or not (‘no-show’). Based on the player’s choice and the opponent’s response, there are four possible consequences for each round during the ‘Response to Outcome’ interval: show match (<i>overt gain</i>); no-show match (<i>relative loss</i>, as the player could have been rewarded if challenged); show non-match (<i>overt loss</i>) and no-show non-match (<i>relative gain</i>, as the player successfully “bluffed”, that is, avoided punishment). The opponent’s chip and samples of matching and non-matching chips are highlighted (in yellow) for demonstration purposes only. In the actual scan, the game board and all chips are in color, not in grayscale as depicted in the figure. Also, all chips are the same size and color.</p

Between-group ANOVA multiple regression results: <i>Gain-Loss</i> contrast versus impulsivity-related Factor 2 scores.

<p>Threshold: <i>p</i><0.05 uncorrected, minimum cluster size, <i>k</i> = 10 voxels; masked with Reward mask.</p><p>IFG, inferior frontal gyrus.</p

FCD group <i>post-hoc</i> multiple regression results for <i>Gain-Loss</i> contrast versus impulsivity Factor 2 scores.

<p>Threshold: <i>q</i><0.05 FDR correction, minimum cluster size, <i>k</i> = 10 voxels; masked with Reward mask.</p

Demographics, Drug Usage and Axis-I SCID data for HC, FCD and CCD groups.

<p>The DSM-IV diagnosis for current or past drug dependence or abuse is demarcated by a forward slash (e.g., 27/3 indicates 27 diagnosed with dependence and 3 with abuse of the given drug).</p><p>A, Asian; B, Black; F, female; H, Hispanic; M, male; <i>N/A</i>, not applicable; ns, non-significant; SD, standard deviation; W, white.</p>1<p>Day of scan only; ²two-sample <i>t</i>-test CCD versus FCD only.</p><p>C, Current; P, Past; USD, United States dollars; <i>N/A</i>, not applicable; PCP, phencyclidine; PTSD, post traumatic stress disorder; SI, substance induced.</p