Retraining automatic action tendencies and attentional bias in individuals with alcohol dependency problems

Retraining automatic action tendencies and attentional bias in individuals with alcohol dependency problems - Alcoholtraining

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

NL-OMON

Registry ID

NL-OMON31772

Enrollment

102

Registered

2008-04-24

Start date

2008-05-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2024-05-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

alcoholisme alcohol dependence alcoholism

Interventions

Participants are allocated to one of the training varieties, either focussing on an attentional bias or on an approach bias or to a placebo-training. These different forms of training consist of com

pull all the pictures presented in landscape format toward you, and push all pictures presented in portrait format away). The automatic tendency from the participants to approach alcohol will be in

Eligibility

Age

18 Years to 99 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: alcoholism

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: very low intellectual ability, psychotic disorders, dependence to other psychoactive substances, other than nicotine, other Axis-1 (DSM-IV) disorder which requires immediate treatment

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
We hypothesize that the attentional bias training will mainly affect the attentional bias for alcohol, which will be measured both with the task used during the training (Stroop), and with scores on another task to assess attentional bias (Flicker task). Accordingly, it is expected that training the automatic action tendencies will mainly affect the automatic approach bias, which will be measured with the same test as used during the training (ATT) and with another computer task (SRC). Further, we investigate whether there are cross over effect for both varieties of training (whether attentional bias training also changes automatic action tendencies and vice versa). Generalization will always be studied within the task (comparing stimuli which were presented in during the training with stimuli that have not been presented during the training) and between tasks (comparing the task which is trained versus the task which has not been trained). Next to these effects of the training on automatic processes, we will also measure several clinically relevant variables, such as: craving, motivation to change the addictive behavior, self-efficacy and risk of relapse. In order to measure craving, questionnaires will be used, and relapse risk will be calculated with the aid of interviews and information from the treating clinicians.	—

Measure

Time frame

We hypothesize that the attentional bias training will mainly affect the attentional bias for alcohol, which will be measured both with the task used during the training (Stroop), and with scores on another task to assess attentional bias (Flicker task). Accordingly, it is expected that training the automatic action tendencies will mainly affect the automatic approach bias, which will be measured with the same test as used during the training (ATT) and with another computer task (SRC). Further, we investigate whether there are cross over effect for both varieties of training (whether attentional bias training also changes automatic action tendencies and vice versa). Generalization will always be studied within the task (comparing stimuli which were presented in during the training with stimuli that have not been presented during the training) and between tasks (comparing the task which is trained versus the task which has not been trained). Next to these effects of the training on automatic processes, we will also measure several clinically relevant variables, such as: craving, motivation to change the addictive behavior, self-efficacy and risk of relapse. In order to measure craving, questionnaires will be used, and relapse risk will be calculated with the aid of interviews and information from the treating clinicians.

—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
craving (AAAQ).	—

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)