Schaeffer K W, Parsons O A, Errico A L
Center for Alcohol and Drug-Related Studies, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City 73104.
J Subst Abuse. 1989;1(4):381-92.
This study tests the hypothesis that the performance deficits of alcoholics on tests of problem-solving abilities are due to impairment in motivation. The Conceptual Level Analogy Test and the Levine Hypothesis Test were administered to 40 sober middle-aged male alcoholic and 30 nonalcoholic individuals in a 2 x 2 [Group (alcoholic, nonalcoholic) by Monetary Incentive (incentive, no incentive)] between-subjects covariance design. The motivational manipulation was a performance-contingent monetary incentive. On the Levine test alcoholics performed less well than nonalcoholics but there were no incentive effects. On the analogy test, surprisingly, alcoholics did not differ from nonalcoholics in performance (probably due to the feedback necessitated by use of a performance-contingent incentive) although incentive effects were found across groups. However, there were no significant Group by Incentive interactions on either test or on self-report questionnaires of subjective states (e.g., effort expended) experienced during the tests. Thus, no evidence was found to support the impaired motivation hypothesis. The cognitive hypothesis remains as the most credible hypothesis to account for the performance deficits of alcoholics on tests of problem-solving ability.
本研究检验了这样一个假设,即酗酒者在解决问题能力测试中的表现缺陷是由于动机受损所致。在一项2×2[组(酗酒者、非酗酒者)×金钱激励(有激励、无激励)]被试间协方差设计中,对40名清醒的中年男性酗酒者和30名非酗酒者进行了概念水平类比测试和莱文假设测试。动机操纵是一种与表现挂钩的金钱激励。在莱文测试中,酗酒者的表现不如非酗酒者,但没有激励效应。令人惊讶的是,在类比测试中,酗酒者和非酗酒者在表现上没有差异(可能是由于使用与表现挂钩的激励措施需要反馈),尽管在各群体中都发现了激励效应。然而,在这两项测试以及关于测试期间经历的主观状态(如付出的努力)的自我报告问卷上,均未发现显著的组×激励交互作用。因此,没有证据支持动机受损假说。认知假说仍然是解释酗酒者在解决问题能力测试中表现缺陷的最可信假说。