Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA.
Addiction. 2012 Dec;107(12):2109-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03974.x. Epub 2012 Aug 10.
Although drink drivers exhibit higher levels of trait impulsivity, no studies have tested the hypothesis that drink drivers experience increased impulsivity while intoxicated. We tested this hypothesis for two impulsivity constructs: delay discounting and behavioral inhibition.
A within-subjects study comparing performance of drink drivers and non-drink drivers on behavioral measures of impulsivity in alcohol and no-beverage sessions.
A laboratory setting at the University of Missouri.
Twenty-nine young adults who were at least moderate drinkers were recruited from the local community and the University of Missouri.
Impulsivity was assessed using the Two Choice Impulsivity Paradigm (TCIP) and the Stop-Signal Task. Participants also completed self-report measures of binge drinking and trait impulsivity.
In the no-beverage session, TCIP impulsive choices did not differ between drinking and driving groups (P = 0.93). In the alcohol session, drink drivers made more TCIP impulsive choices on both the ascending (P < 0.01) and descending limb (P < 0.01) of the blood alcohol concentration curve than their peers who did not drink and drive. Drinking and driving groups did not differ on the Stop-Signal Task. Supplementary analyses indicated that effects for the TCIP were not explained by individual differences in trait impulsivity.
Individuals who report having three or more drinks before driving show greater impulsivity when under the influence of alcohol than those who do not report heavy drinking before driving.
尽管酒驾者表现出更高水平的特质冲动性,但尚无研究检验过酒驾者在醉酒时是否会表现出更高的冲动性这一假设。我们针对两种冲动性结构:延迟折扣和行为抑制,检验了这一假设。
一项在酒精和无酒精环境下,比较酒驾者和非酒驾者在行为冲动性测量上表现的被试内研究。
密苏里大学的实验室。
29 名至少是中度饮酒者的年轻人从当地社区和密苏里大学招募而来。
使用双选择冲动性范式(TCIP)和停止信号任务评估冲动性。参与者还完成了关于 binge drinking 和特质冲动性的自我报告测量。
在无酒精环境中,酒驾组和非酒驾组在 TCIP 冲动选择上没有差异(P=0.93)。在酒精环境中,与不饮酒且不酒驾的同龄人相比,酒驾者在酒精浓度曲线的上升(P<0.01)和下降(P<0.01)阶段做出了更多的 TCIP 冲动选择。在停止信号任务上,酒驾组和非酒驾组没有差异。补充分析表明,TCIP 的影响不能用特质冲动性的个体差异来解释。
与不报告大量饮酒后驾车的人相比,报告在驾车前喝了三杯或更多酒的人在受酒精影响时表现出更高的冲动性。