Back to Search Start Over

Priming effects of a slot machine game and amphetamine on probabilistic risk-taking in people with gambling disorder and healthy controls.

Authors :
Zack M
Lobo D
Biback C
Fang T
Smart K
Tatone D
Kalia A
Digiacomo D
Kennedy JL
Source :
Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology [J Clin Exp Neuropsychol] 2023 Feb; Vol. 45 (1), pp. 31-60. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Mar 15.
Publication Year :
2023

Abstract

Introduction: The Game of Dice Task (GDT) captures probabilistic risk-taking, which is an important feature of addictions and integral to gambling disorder (GD). No research appears to have assessed effects of gambling-specific priming manipulations or the pharmacological basis of such effects on the GDT.<br />Aims: To investigate effects of slot machine gambling (Slots) and d-amphetamine (AMPH; 20 mg) on risk-taking in people with GD and healthy controls (HCs) (n = 30/group). The role of dopamine (DA) was assessed by pre-treating participants with the D2 receptor (D2R)-preferring antagonist, haloperidol (HAL; 3-mg) or mixed D1R-D2R antagonist, fluphenazine (FLU; 3-mg).<br />Hypotheses: Slots and AMPH will each increase risk-taking based on fewer (less probable) possible outcomes selected (POS) and poorer net monetary outcomes (NMO; gains minus losses) on the GDT, with stronger effects in Group GD. If DA mediates these effects, outcomes will vary with pre-treatment.<br />Method: Participants attended a pre-experimental baseline session and 4 test sessions. Antagonist Group (HAL, FLU) was manipulated between-participants. Pre-treatment (antagonist, placebo) was manipulated within-participants and counterbalanced over sessions for Slots and AMPH test phases. Moderator/mediator effects of trait and neuropsychological factors and GD severity (South Oaks Gambling Screen; SOGS) were explored via covariance.<br />Results: AMPH led to an escalation in risky POS over trial blocks in both groups, regardless of pre-treatment. Cognitive inflexibility (high perseveration-proneness) moderated this effect in Group HC. In Group GD, SOGS selectively predicted riskier POS on AMPH sessions. Group GD achieved poorer NMO vs. Group HC on the pre-experimental baseline and Placebo-Slots sessions. Group HC selectively displayed poorer NMO on the Antagonist-Slots session.<br />Conclusions: The GDT can detect behavioral and pharmacological priming effects. Cognitive inflexibility and symptom severity moderate AMPH-induced risk-taking in HC and GD participants, respectively. Sensitization-related "wanting" of risk may contribute to the latter effect in people with GD.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1744-411X
Volume :
45
Issue :
1
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
36919514
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2023.2187041