Are all drug addicts impulsive? Effects of antisociality and extent of multidrug use on cognitive and motor impulsivity

Department of Psychiatry, University of Illinois - Chicago, Chicago, IL 60622, USA.
Addictive Behaviors (Impact Factor: 2.44). 01/2008; 32(12):3071-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2007.04.017
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this investigation was to examine the influence of antisociality and extent of multidrug use on cognitive and motor impulsivity among substance-dependent individuals (SDIs) that used primarily cocaine and/or heroin. One hundred currently abstinent male SDIs participated in the study. Extent of multidrug use and degree of antisociality, assessed with the Socialization Scale of the California Psychological Inventory (So-CPI), were used to classify participants into one of four groups: high antisocial/low multidrug use, high antisocial/high multidrug use, low antisocial/low multidrug use, and low antisocial/high multidrug use. All subjects completed the Iowa Gambling Task to assess cognitive impulsivity and the Stroop Task to measure motor impulsivity. Contrary to expectations, antisociality was associated with more advantageous performance on the Iowa Gambling Task, independent of extent of multidrug use. In contrast, greater multidrug use was associated with general psychomotor slowing on the Stroop Task. Results suggest that a subclinical form of antisociality may have a paradoxically facilitating effect on decision-making and cognitive impulsivity among SDIs.

Download full-text


Available from: Jasmin Vassileva, Aug 14, 2015
  • Source
    • "Decision-making is one of the neurocognitive domains on which SDI are commonly impaired. It is typically indexed in the laboratory with tasks that simulate real-life decision-making such as the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) (Bechara et al., 1994), on which SDI often select choices that yield high immediate gains but have higher future losses (Grant et al., 2000; Bechara et al., 2001; Bolla et al., 2003; Bechara and Martin, 2004; Gonzalez et al., 2007; Vassileva et al., 2007a; Verdejo-Garcia et al., 2007a). Decisionmaking deficits among SDI are of immediate practical concern, in light of their associations with HIV risk behaviors (Gonzalez et al., 2005) and clinical outcomes such as abstinence (Passetti et al., 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Substance dependent individuals (SDI) often exhibit decision-making deficits; however, it remains unclear whether the nature of the underlying decision-making processes is the same in users of different classes of drugs and whether these deficits persist after discontinuation of drug use. We used computational modeling to address these questions in a unique sample of relatively “pure” amphetamine-dependent (N = 38) and heroin-dependent individuals (N = 43) who were currently in protracted abstinence, and in 48 healthy controls (HC). A Bayesian model comparison technique, a simulation method, and parameter recovery tests were used to compare three cognitive models: (1) Prospect Valence Learning with decay reinforcement learning rule (PVL-DecayRI), (2) PVL with delta learning rule (PVL-Delta), and (3) Value-Plus-Perseverance (VPP) model based on Win-Stay-Lose-Switch (WSLS) strategy. The model comparison results indicated that the VPP model, a hybrid model of reinforcement learning (RL) and a heuristic strategy of perseverance had the best post-hoc model fit, but the two PVL models showed better simulation and parameter recovery performance. Computational modeling results suggested that overall all three groups relied more on RL than on a WSLS strategy. Heroin users displayed reduced loss aversion relative to HC across all three models, which suggests that their decision-making deficits are longstanding (or pre-existing) and may be driven by reduced sensitivity to loss. In contrast, amphetamine users showed comparable cognitive functions to HC with the VPP model, whereas the second best-fitting model with relatively good simulation performance (PVL-DecayRI) revealed increased reward sensitivity relative to HC. These results suggest that some decision-making deficits persist in protracted abstinence and may be mediated by different mechanisms in opiate and stimulant users.
    Frontiers in Psychology 08/2014; 5. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00849 · 2.80 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "PG participants were significantly slower on the Go/NoGo performance and slower and less accurate on the Stroop task (see Logan (1980) for discussion of mechanism of response slowness during the Stroop task). For example, the slow rate of performance in the Go/NoGo and the Stroop tasks seen in our PG patients is consistent with previous data regarding impulsive participants who show excessive slowness of performance on the inhibition tasks (Exposito and Andres-Pueyo, 1997; Keilp et al., 2005; Vassileva et al., 2007). It has been proposed that the response slowness in the situations which present a conflict between automatic and voluntary behavior might result from a deficit in the organization of stimulus-response schemata (Stuss et al., 2005) or impaired remapping process (van Holst et al., 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This work investigates whether inhibition impairments influence the decision making process in pathological gamblers (PGs). The PG (N=51) subjects performed the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT as the measure of the decision making process) and two tests of inhibition: the Stroop (interference inhibition), and the Go/NoGo (response inhibition), and were compared with demographically matched healthy subjects (N=57). Performance in the IGT block 1 and block 2 did not differ between the groups, but the differences between the PGs and healthy controls began to be significant in block 3, block 4 and block 5. PGs learned the IGT task more slowly than the healthy controls and had non-optimal outcomes (more disadvantageous choices). Impaired IGT performance in PGs was not related to an inhibition ability measured by the Stroop (interference response time) and the Go/NoGo (number of commission errors) parameters. Further controlled studies with neuroimaging techniques may help to clarify the particular brain mechanisms underlying the impaired decision making process in PGs.
    Psychiatry Research 03/2011; 188(1):71-7. DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2011.02.021 · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Bell et al. 2006). Additionally, SUDs are accompanied in turn by a spectrum of neuropsychiatric conditions, including mood disorders, anxiety disorders such as PTSD and social phobia, ADHD and learning disabilities, and personality disorders (Grant et al. 2004a, b; Chilcoat and Breslau 1998; Compton et al. 2007; Biederman et al. 1998); Neurobiological personality traits prevalent among SDIs, such as sensation-seeking and antisociality (Zuckerman 1996; Gonzalez et al. 2005a; Vassileva et al. 2007a, b) influence both neurocognitive function and risk behavior. Concurrent psychoactive medication and opioid substitution therapies such as methadone are associated with impaired cognitive performance (Mintzer and Stitzer 2002). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Substance abuse and co-infection with hepatitis C (HCV) are two highly relevant determinants of neurocognitive and neuroimaging abnormalities associated with HIV. Substance abuse and HCV are common in the HIV population and there is increasing evidence that the CNS is directly compromised by these comorbid conditions via additive or synergistic processes. In this article we review the current literature regarding mechanisms of neuronal injury as well as the neuropsychological and neuroimaging signatures associated with substance abuse and HCV status among HIV patients. We discuss specific methodological challenges and threats to validity associated with studies of HIV and comorbid substance use disorders or HCV and review potential strategies for minimizing their confounding effects. Efforts to understand the interactions between HIV, substance abuse and HCV co-infection will lead to more complete models of neuropathogenesis of HIV and a greater understanding of the variability in neuropsychological expression of HIV Associated Neurocognitive Disorder.
    Neuropsychology Review 07/2009; 19(2):215-31. DOI:10.1007/s11065-009-9101-6 · 5.40 Impact Factor
Show more