Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, UK; UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of Liverpool, UK.
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, UK; UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of Liverpool, UK.
Appetite. 2018 Sep 1;128:271-282. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2018.06.024. Epub 2018 Jun 20.
Inhibitory control refers to the ability to stop, change or delay a response, and is often used in order to protect higher order goals. Theoretical models suggest that appetitive cues such as pictures of alcoholic drinks or food evoke strong automatic appetitive responses which lead to transient impairments in inhibitory control, and that these effects of cues may be related to individual differences (e.g. in body mass index, or alcohol consumption). In order to investigate these claims we conducted a random effects meta-analysis of 66 effect sizes (35 alcohol, 31 food) from 37 articles that tested the effect of exposure to appetitive (alcohol/food) cues on indices of inhibitory control. The overall effect of cue exposure was small, but robust (SMD = -0.12 [95% CI -0.23, -0.02]; Z = 2.34, p = .02, I = 84%). Exposure to alcohol-related cues significantly impaired inhibitory control (SMD = -0.21 [95% CI = -0.32, -0.11]; Z = 4.17, p < .001), however exposure to food-related cues did not lead to impairments (SMD = -0.03 [95% CI = -0.21, 0.15]; Z = 0.36, p = .720). There was no evidence that drinking or weight status significantly moderated the effects of cues on inhibitory control. Similarly, cue modality (words, pictures, or smells) did not significantly moderate the effects. Trim and Fill analysis suggested bias in the literature, which when corrected, made the overall effect of cues non-significant. Overall, these findings provide some tentative support for theoretical claims that exposure to appetitive cues prompts transient impairments in inhibitory control. Further research is required to determine the clinical significance of these observations. However, care should be taken when drawing conclusions from a potentially biased evidence base.
抑制控制是指停止、改变或延迟反应的能力，通常用于保护更高阶的目标。理论模型表明，如酒精饮料或食物的图片等诱人线索会引发强烈的自动诱人反应，从而导致抑制控制的短暂受损，并且这些线索的影响可能与个体差异（例如，体重指数或饮酒量）有关。为了验证这些说法，我们对 37 篇测试诱人（酒精/食物）线索对抑制控制指标影响的文章中的 66 个效应量（35 个酒精，31 个食物）进行了随机效应荟萃分析。线索暴露的总体效应较小，但稳健（SMD= -0.12[95%CI-0.23，-0.02]；Z=2.34，p=0.02，I=84%）。暴露于与酒精相关的线索显著损害了抑制控制（SMD= -0.21[95%CI-0.32，-0.11]；Z=4.17，p<0.001），然而，暴露于与食物相关的线索并不会导致损害（SMD= -0.03[95%CI-0.21，0.15]；Z=0.36，p=0.720）。没有证据表明饮酒或体重状况显著调节线索对抑制控制的影响。同样，线索模式（单词、图片或气味）也没有显著调节作用。Trim and Fill 分析表明文献中存在偏差，纠正后，线索的总体效应变得不显著。总的来说，这些发现为理论上的说法提供了一些初步支持，即暴露于诱人线索会导致抑制控制的短暂受损。需要进一步的研究来确定这些观察结果的临床意义。然而，在从潜在有偏差的证据基础中得出结论时应谨慎行事。
