Affective impulsivity moderates the relationship between disordered gambling severity and attentional bias in electronic gaming machine (EGM) players

Abstract

Background and aims Attentional bias to gambling-related stimuli is associated with increased severity of gambling disorder. However, the addiction-related moderators of attentional bias among those who gamble are largely unknown. Impulsivity is associated with attentional bias among those who abuse substances, and we hypothesized that impulsivity would moderate the relationship between disordered electronic gaming machine (EGM) gambling and attentional bias. Methods We tested whether facets of impulsivity, as measured by the UPPS-P (positive urgency, negative urgency, sensation seeking, lack of perseverance, lack of premeditation) and the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 (cognitive, motor, non-planning) moderated the relationship between increased severity of gambling disorder, as measured by the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), and attentional bias. Seventy-five EGM players participated in a free-viewing eye-tracking paradigm to measure attentional bias to EGM images. Results Attentional bias was significantly correlated with Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 (BIS-11) motor, positive urgency, and negative urgency. Only positive and negative urgency moderated the relationship between PGSI scores and attentional bias. For participants with high PGSI scores, higher positive and negative urgency were associated with larger attentional biases to EGM stimuli. Discussion The results indicate that affective impulsivity is an important contributor to the association between gambling disorder and attentional bias.

Decomposition of Reinforcement Learning Deficits in Disordered Gambling via Drift Diffusion Modeling and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

“…Attenuated deliberation during decision-making is also reminiscent of previous findings of impaired goal-directed control during RL in disordered gambling ( Bruder et al, 2021 ; Wyckmans et al, 2019 ). Similar effects have been shown to contribute to gambling behavior in laboratory settings ( Kim et al, 2022 ; Shao et al, 2013 ). However, further work is required to more directly link such processes to maladaptive gambling behavior as it occurs in real life settings.…”

The influence of negative urgency and mood inductions on alcohol cognitions

“…These authors found NU predicted greater activation (i.e., faster reaction times towards stimuli) for global positive and tension reduction implicit alcohol expectancies, following both positive and negative mood inductions. Further, NU is associated with greater attentional bias toward gambling stimuli (Kim et al., 2022), greater cognitive inflexibility during reward‐based attentional capture tasks (Albertella et al., 2020), and inefficient cortical processing for cognitive control and salience attribution (Rawls et al., 2021). Thus, manifestations of NU on alcohol‐related learning could also develop at the state‐level via more automatic, implicit processes.…”

“…These authors found NU predicted greater activation (i.e., faster reaction times towards stimuli) for global positive and tension reduction implicit alcohol expectancies, following both positive and negative mood inductions. Further, NU is associated with greater attentional bias toward gambling stimuli (Kim et al, 2022), greater cognitive inflexibility during rewardbased attentional capture tasks (Albertella et al, 2020), and inefficient cortical processing for cognitive control and salience attribution (Rawls et al, 2021) Abbreviations: CI, confidence intervals for respective coefficients; Cond., Condition; DF, degrees of freedom estimated using Satterthwaite method; ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient; NU, negative urgency (mean-centered); SAB, sex-assigned-at-birth (female = reference coded); SE, standard error for respective coefficients. a Fully-standardized coefficient.…”