Reinforcer Pathology 1B: Decreasing the Temporal Window
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Enrollment
- 124
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Change in Alcohol Craving
Study Overview
Brief Summary
In the absence of sufficient monetary resources, individuals must attend to immediate, minimum needs (e.g., food, shelter). This constricts one's temporal window and engenders neglect of the future. In observational studies, scarcity is associated with higher rates of delay discounting. Additionally, socioeconomic status is inversely associated with alcohol use disorder and related problems. Experimentally, scarcity shortens attention, impedes cognitive function, and increases delay discounting in multiple populations. Moreover, scarcity increases demand for fast foods in the obese and increases craving for alcohol in problem drinkers. These data suggest that economic scarcity worsens both components of reinforcer pathology (delay discounting and alcohol overvaluation), thus increasing vulnerability to alcohol use disorder. However, studies investigating the effects of scarcity on alcohol demand discounting rate have been limited. The purpose of Aim 1b is to examine effects of decreasing the temporal window and its concomitant effects on alcohol valuation (demand, and craving) and delay discounting.
Detailed Description
Participants will be randomly assigned to experimental or control groups, balanced by discounting rates and sex. We plan to have 112 participants complete the study, based on our power analysis. Participants will complete two online sessions. During the first session, they will complete the baseline assessments. During the second session, they will complete the same assessments after being exposed to the scarcity or control narratives (both in audio format).
The assessment will include delay discounting and demand tasks, and measures of alcohol craving. Participants will also complete assessments of their stress and mood response to the narrative intervention, using the Stress Appraisal Measure (SAM) for two purposes. That is, 1) to monitor participant safety, 2) to measure the mediating ability of affect on changes in the temporal window.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Basic Science
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 21 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •High-risk or harmful drinking (AUDIT>15)
- •21 years of age or older
- •Desire to quit or cut down on their drinking, but do not have proximate plans to enroll in treatment for AUD during the study period
Exclusion Criteria
- •having a current unmanaged psychotic disorder
- •reporting current pregnancy or lactation
- •having dementia
Arms & Interventions
Scarcity Narrative
Participants assigned to the scarcity group will be asked to listen and consider a hypothetical narrative about a sudden loss of resources.
Intervention: Scarcity Narrative (Behavioral)
Neutral Narrative
Participants assigned to the neutral group will be asked to listen and consider a hypothetical narrative about a neutral change in resources.
Intervention: Neutral Narrative (Behavioral)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Change in Alcohol Craving
Time Frame: At the first session (S1; baseline measures) and Session 2 (S2; occurs approximately 2-3 days after S1)
A brief questionnaire (the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire) will be used to assess alcohol craving. The Alcohol Urges Questionnaire is an 8-item survey that produces scores between 8-56, where higher scores indicate greater craving. Change in alcohol craving will be compared within-subjects between Session 1 and Session 2. The scores will be compared between groups (arms) across sessions.
Delay Discounting (DD) Rates
Time Frame: At the first session (S1; baseline measures) and Session 2 (S2; occurs approximately 2-3 days after S1)
DD rates were measured using an adjusting amount task where participants were presented with hypothetical choices between smaller immediate or larger later amounts of money after a range of delays (1 day-25 years). Individual indifference points were calculated for each delay and then used to estimate DD rates for each participant using Mazur's (1987) equation: V = A/(1+kD), where V is the value of the indifference point, A is the amount of the larger delayed reward, k is the discounting rate, and D is the delay. Discounting rates (k) were then natural-logarithmically transformed (ln(k)). Higher ln(k) indicates steeper discounting and greater reward devaluation with increases in delay, while a lower ln(k) reflects shallower discounting and less reward devaluation with increases in delay. Changes in ln(k) were compared within-subjects between S1 and S2. Average ln(k) was calculated for each session (S1 and S2) in each condition (scarcity or neutral).
Intensity of Alcohol Demand
Time Frame: At the first session (S1; baseline measures) and Session 2 (S2; occurs approximately 2-3 days after S1)
Participants completed a hypothetical Alcohol Purchase Task where they had to indicate how many drinks they would purchase at different prices ($0 to $80 per drink). The number of drinks purchased at $0 was used to calculate the intensity of demand. Changes in intensity of alcohol demand were compared within-subjects between Session 1 and Session 2, and between narrative type (scarcity or neutral).
Change in Alcohol Craving
Time Frame: At the first session (S1; baseline measures) and Session 2 (S2; occurs approximately 2-3 days after S1)
A brief questionnaire (the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire) will be used to assess alcohol craving. The Alcohol Urges Questionnaire is an 8-item survey that produces scores between 8-56, where higher scores indicate greater craving. Change in alcohol craving will be compared within-subjects between Session 1 and Session 2. The scores will be compared between groups (arms) across sessions.
Secondary Outcomes
- Change in Stress Appraisal Measure(Session 2 (occurs approximately 2-3 days after baseline [S1]))
Investigators
Stephen LaConte
Professor
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University