Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1007 W. Harrison Street, MC 285, Chicago, IL 60607, USA.
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012 Oct;20(5):382-9. doi: 10.1037/a0029261. Epub 2012 Aug 6.
A fundamental goal of double-blind alcohol challenge studies is to reduce alcohol expectancies, though there is little research on the effectiveness of blinding procedures and their relationship to acute alcohol responses. This study examined social drinkers' perception of beverage content and related alcohol response during 3 separate double-blind experimental sessions with placebo, low-dose alcohol (0.4 g/kg), and high-dose alcohol (0.8 g/kg). Using the alternative substance paradigm, participants (N = 182) were informed that the beverage they consumed might contain alcohol, a stimulant, a sedative, or a placebo. At several time points, subjective and objective measures were obtained, and participants were asked to identify which substance they received. During both placebo and low-dose alcohol sessions, 33% and 50% of participants, respectively, did not correctly identify the beverage content; during the high-dose alcohol session, 20% did not correctly identify the beverage. Although correct and incorrect identifiers at any dose level did not differ on major background variables, drinking characteristics, or psychomotor performance during these sessions, they did differ on self-reported subjective responses, with greater sedation reported by incorrect identifiers in the placebo and high-dose conditions. In summary, results suggest that the alternative substance paradigm may be a viable option for alcohol laboratory studies, particularly for repeated sessions in within-subject designs and in cases in which the experimenter wants to reduce expectancy by not revealing a priori that alcohol is being administered.
双盲酒精挑战研究的一个基本目标是降低酒精预期,但对于盲法程序的有效性及其与急性酒精反应的关系的研究甚少。本研究在 3 个单独的双盲实验中检查了社交饮酒者在接受安慰剂、低剂量酒精(0.4 g/kg)和高剂量酒精(0.8 g/kg)时对饮料内容的感知和相关的酒精反应,使用替代物质范式,参与者(N=182)被告知他们所饮用的饮料可能含有酒精、兴奋剂、镇静剂或安慰剂。在多个时间点获取主观和客观测量值,并要求参与者识别他们所接受的物质。在安慰剂和低剂量酒精组中,分别有 33%和 50%的参与者没有正确识别饮料内容;在高剂量酒精组中,有 20%的参与者没有正确识别饮料。尽管在任何剂量水平上正确和错误的识别者在主要背景变量、饮酒特征或这些组中进行的精神运动表现上没有差异,但他们在自我报告的主观反应上有所不同,安慰剂和高剂量条件下错误识别者报告的镇静作用更大。总之,结果表明,替代物质范式可能是酒精实验室研究的可行选择,特别是对于在个体内设计中重复进行的研究,以及在实验者希望通过不事先透露正在给予酒精来降低预期的情况下。