Journal article
E. Grodin, S. Bujarski, A. Venegas, Wave-Ananda Baskerville, Steven J. Nieto, J. Jentsch, L. Ray
Alcohol and alcoholism, 2019
Alcohol and alcoholism, 2019
Semantic Scholar
DOI
PubMed
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
Grodin, E., Bujarski, S., Venegas, A., Baskerville, W.-A., Nieto, S. J., Jentsch, J., & Ray, L. (2019). Reward, Relief and Habit Drinking: Initial Validation of a Brief Assessment Tool. Alcohol and Alcoholism.
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Grodin, E., S. Bujarski, A. Venegas, Wave-Ananda Baskerville, Steven J. Nieto, J. Jentsch, and L. Ray. “Reward, Relief and Habit Drinking: Initial Validation of a Brief Assessment Tool.” Alcohol and alcoholism (2019).
MLA
Click to copy
Grodin, E., et al. “Reward, Relief and Habit Drinking: Initial Validation of a Brief Assessment Tool.” Alcohol and Alcoholism, 2019.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{e2019a,
title = {Reward, Relief and Habit Drinking: Initial Validation of a Brief Assessment Tool.},
year = {2019},
journal = {Alcohol and alcoholism},
author = {Grodin, E. and Bujarski, S. and Venegas, A. and Baskerville, Wave-Ananda and Nieto, Steven J. and Jentsch, J. and Ray, L.}
}
Abstract
AIMS Alcohol use disorder is highly heterogeneous. One approach to understanding this heterogeneity is the identification of drinker subtypes. A candidate classification consists of reward and relief subtypes. The current study examines a novel self-report measure of reward, relief, and habit drinking for its clinical correlates and subjective response (SR) to alcohol administration.
METHODS Non-treatment-seeking heavy drinkers (n = 140) completed the brief reward, relief, habit drinking scale (RRHDS). A subset of this sample (n = 67) completed an intravenous alcohol administration. Individuals were classified into drinker subtypes. A crowdsourced sample of heavy drinkers (n = 187) completed the RRHDS and a validated reward relief drinking scale to compare drinking classification results.
RESULTS The majority of the sample was classified as reward drinkers (n = 100), with fewer classified as relief (n = 19) and habit (n = 21) drinkers. Relief and habit drinkers reported greater tonic alcohol craving compared to reward drinkers. Reward drinkers endorsed drinking for enhancement, while relief drinkers endorsed drinking for coping. Regarding the alcohol administration, the groups differed in negative mood, such that relief/habit drinkers reported a decrease in negative mood during alcohol administration, compared to reward drinkers. The follow-up crowdsourcing study found a 62% agreement in reward drinker classification between measures and replicated the tonic craving findings.
CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that reward drinkers are dissociable from relief/habit drinkers using the brief measure. However, relief and habit drinkers were not successfully differentiated, which suggests that these constructs may overlap phenotypically. Notably, measures of dysphoric mood were better at detecting group differences than measures capturing alcohol's rewarding effects.
