Predictive cues and spatial attentional bias for alcohol: Manipulations of cue-outcome mapping

Gladwin, Thomas E.; Banic, Milena; Figner, Bernd; Vink, Matthijs · 2020 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.106247

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the reliability and underlying mechanisms of anticipatory spatial attentional bias for alcohol using the cued Visual Probe Task (cVPT). While previous research indicated that the cVPT yields reliable bias scores correlated with risky drinking, concerns remained that this reliability might stem from the visual features of the cues rather than their predictive value regarding alcohol outcomes. The authors conducted four online studies to determine whether the bias depends on cue-outcome mapping consistency and whether it reflects automatic associative processes or conscious awareness. Participants completed variations of the cVPT, where predictive cues signaled the location of subsequent alcoholic or non-alcoholic beverage images. Study 1 used non-predictive cues to test if visual features alone generated reliable bias. Studies 2 and 3 manipulated cue-outcome mappings by introducing multiple cue pairs simultaneously and sequentially, respectively. Study 4 reversed the cue-outcome mapping halfway through the task to assess the flexibility of the bias. All participants completed the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) to measure risky drinking. Bias was calculated as the difference in reaction times to probes appearing at predicted alcohol versus non-alcohol locations. The results demonstrated that non-predictive cues produced near-zero split-half reliability, confirming that previous reliability findings were not artifacts of cue visual features. However, reliability significantly decreased when cue-outcome mappings were complex or inconsistent. In Study 2 (simultaneous multiple cues), reliability was low, and bias scores for different cue pairs were uncorrelated, though an overall bias toward alcohol persisted. Study 3 (sequential cues) showed modest reliability but no correlation between bias scores across the two cue pairs. Study 4 revealed that reversing the mapping eliminated reliability and produced a negative correlation between pre- and post-reversal bias scores, indicating that the bias did not adapt to the new mapping. Notably, only the simultaneous multiple-cue condition replicated the association between bias and risky drinking; other conditions showed an overall bias toward alcohol regardless of individual drinking risk. The findings suggest that alcohol-related anticipatory attentional bias relies on simple, consistent cue-outcome mappings to achieve high reliability. The bias appears to involve automatic, rigid associative processes where specific cues acquire salience, rather than flexible attentional shifts based on conscious awareness of the mapping. This distinguishes alcohol-related bias from threat-related bias, which adapts to mapping reversals. The study concludes that while the cVPT is a valid measure of anticipatory bias, its psychometric properties are sensitive to experimental design, and future research should prioritize simple mappings to ensure reliability.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• attention selective divided