Intoxication Effects on Impulsive Alcohol Choice in Heavy Drinkers: Correlation With Sensation Seeking and Differential Effects by Commodity

Abstract

Background The preference for immediate rewards and high sensation seeking are both potent risk factors for alcohol use disorder (AUD), but how they interact during intoxication is poorly understood. To model decision making linked to AUD risk, we tested heavy drinkers for impulsive choice (delay discounting with alcohol:money or money:money) and behavioral sensation seeking using a novel odor choice task. Laboratory tasks measured actual behavior with real contingencies. Our goals were to determine, in heavy drinkers, (i) alcohol’s effects on delay discounting, and (ii) how AUD risk factors relate to delay discounting, and (iii) how delay discounting with alcohol choices compares with strictly monetary choices. Methods Thirty‐five heavy drinkers (≥2 binges per month; age = 22.8 ± 2.2; 20 male; 5.8 ± 2.3 drinks/drinking day) performed cross‐commodity discounting (CCD) of immediate alcohol vs. delayed money, a monetary delay discounting (DD), and behavioral sensation‐seeking tasks. CCD and DD were performed while sober and during controlled alcohol infusion targeting 0.08 g/dl. The behavioral sensation‐seeking task presented binary choices of odorants varying in intensity and novelty, and the risk of exposure to a malodorant. Results CCD and DD behaviors were highly correlated across conditions, mean r = 0.64. Alcohol increased delayed reward preference in DD, p = 0.001, but did not alter mean CCD, p > 0.16. However, alcohol‐induced changes in CCD correlated with behavioral sensation seeking, such that higher sensation seekers’ immediate alcohol preference increased when intoxicated, p = 0.042; self‐reported sensation seeking was uncorrelated, ps > 0.08. Behavioral sensation seeking also correlated with “want” alcohol following a priming dose targeting 0.035 g/dl, p = 0.021. CCD and DD did not correlate with self‐reported drinking problems or other personality risk traits. Conclusions Alcohol increased impulsive alcohol choice in high sensation seekers, suggesting an interaction that may underlie impaired control of drinking, at least in a subset of heavy drinkers—consistent with models highlighting high novelty/sensation‐seeking AUD subtypes. Discounting behavior overall appears to be a generalized process, and relatively stable across methods, repeated testing, and intoxication. These findings further support the utility of behavioral tasks in uncovering key behavioral phenotypes in AUD.

Delay discounting and alcohol consumption correlate with dorsal anterior insula activation during choice in nontreatment‐seeking heavy drinkers

“…However, monetary choices appear to be a reasonable proxy for reward decision making for other commodities, as cross-commodity alcohol: money choices are strongly correlated with single-commodity monetary discounting, even while intoxicated (Oberlin et al, 2021), consistent with prior work suggesting a common underlying preference that underlies temporal discounting of many commodities (Odum, 2011).…”

“…Although DD tasks using monetary reinforcers have a strong record in detecting group differences between those with addictions and healthy controls, single‐commodity monetary DD does not precisely model alcohol‐specific AUD decision making (involving the choice between intoxication and other future rewards). However, monetary choices appear to be a reasonable proxy for reward decision making for other commodities, as cross‐commodity alcohol: money choices are strongly correlated with single‐commodity monetary discounting, even while intoxicated (Oberlin et al, 2021), consistent with prior work suggesting a common underlying preference that underlies temporal discounting of many commodities (Odum, 2011).…”

“… because I'm so drunk at the time, the last thing I'm going to think about is calories”: Strengthening the argument for Drunkorexia as a food and alcohol disturbance, evidence from a qualitative study

“…Viewed as a psychobiological personality trait, sensation‐seeking incorporates an individual’s desire for novelty, intensity, and complexity in their experiences (Arnett, 1994; Roberti, 2004). High sensation‐seeking is a well‐known predictor for increased alcohol use and hazardous drinking (Hirvelä, Sipilä, & Keski‐Rahkonen, 2022; Hittner & Swickert, 2006; Lac & Donaldson, 2021; Oberlin et al., 2021; Sznitman & Engel‐Yeger, 2017; Yanovitzky, 2006). Thus, it could be suggested that the ‘value for money' mentality is employed to achieve/experience the maximum sensation of intoxication effects.…”

Brain response in heavy drinkers during cross-commodity alcohol and money discounting with potentially real rewards: A preliminary study

“…The ACT quantifies sensation seeking behavior as the relative preference for a mild, safe odorant ‘Standard’ versus a more intense, novel, and variable option that may be aversive ‘Varied’ ( Oberlin et al., 2020 ). The manual sniff bottle version ( Oberlin et al., 2021 ) was used in the present study. The number of “Varied” choices selected divided by the total (40) yields the choice ratio, which ranges from 0 to 1, with larger values indicating a greater degree of behavioral sensation seeking.…”

“…Four additional control trials (magnitude discrimination) were randomly included to ensure attentive responding. To counter the strategy of avoiding alcohol choices to hasten release, subjects were instructed that they may not leave before 5:30PM ( Oberlin et al., 2021 ). We titrated delay to avoid fractional—and potentially unintuitive—units of ‘One Shot’ for the immediate reward ( Locey et al., 2023 ).…”