Cox W Miles, Fadardi Javad S, Hosier Steven G, Pothos Emmanuel M
School of Psychology, Bangor University.
Department of Clinical Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2015 Dec;23(6):445-54. doi: 10.1037/pha0000038. Epub 2015 Sep 7.
Two cognitive-motivational variables that help to solidify drinkers' intentions to drink are their alcohol attentional bias and their maladaptive motivation. The Alcohol Attention Control Training Programme (AACTP) was designed to rectify the former, and the Life Enhancement and Advancement Programme (LEAP) was designed to rectify the latter. The present study used a factorial design to compare the individual and combined effects of the 2 interventions on mean weekly drinking and atypical weekly drinking of 148 harmful drinkers (49% males, mean age = 28.8 years). A variety of other cognitive-motivational and demographic measures were also taken at baseline, and the drinking measures were reassessed at posttreatment and 3 and 6 months later. In comparison with LEAP, the effects of AACTP were less enduring. Combining AACTP and LEAP had few incremental benefits. These results suggest that AACTP would be more effective for achieving short-term reductions in drinking, whereas LEAP would be more effective for alleviating problematic drinking.
有助于强化饮酒者饮酒意愿的两个认知动机变量是他们对酒精的注意偏向和适应不良动机。酒精注意力控制训练计划(AACTP)旨在纠正前者,而生活提升与进步计划(LEAP)旨在纠正后者。本研究采用析因设计,比较了这两种干预措施对148名有害饮酒者(49%为男性,平均年龄 = 28.8岁)平均每周饮酒量和非典型每周饮酒量的个体及综合影响。在基线时还采取了各种其他认知动机和人口统计学测量方法,并在治疗后、3个月和6个月后重新评估饮酒测量指标。与LEAP相比,AACTP的效果持续时间较短。将AACTP和LEAP结合起来几乎没有额外益处。这些结果表明,AACTP在实现短期饮酒量减少方面更有效,而LEAP在缓解问题饮酒方面更有效。