A comprehensive evaluation of the neurocognitive predictors of problematic alcohol use, eating, pornography, and internet use: A 6-month longitudinal study

Erynn Christensen,Lucy Albertella,Samuel R Chamberlain,Chao Suo,Maja Brydevall,Jon E Grant,Murat Yücel,Rico Sze Chun Lee
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2024.00041
2024-08-14
Abstract:Background and aims: Cognitive control and reward-related abnormalities are centrally implicated in addiction. However, findings from longitudinal studies addressing neurocognitive predictors of addictive behaviors are mixed. Further, little work has been conducted predicting non-substance-related addictive behaviors. Our study aimed to assess predictors of substance and non-substance addictive behaviors in a community sample, systematically evaluating each neurocognitive function's independent influence on addictive behavior. Methods: Australians (N = 294; 51.7% female; M[SD] age = 24.8[4.7] years) completed online neurocognitive tasks and surveys at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Self-report scales assessed problematic alcohol use, addictive eating (AE), problematic pornography use (PPU), and problematic internet use (PUI) at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Linear regressions with bootstrapping assessed neurocognitive predictors for each addictive behavior across a 6-month period. Results: Neurocognition at baseline did not predict AE or PUI severity at 6-month follow-up. Less delay discounting at baseline predicted higher PPU at 6-month follow-up (β = -0.16, p = 0.005). Poorer performance monitoring at baseline predicted higher AE at 3-month follow-up (β = -0.16, p = 0.004), and more reward-related attentional capture at 3-months predicted higher AE at 6-month follow-up (β = 0.14, p = 0.033). Less reward-related attentional capture (β = -0.14, p = 0.003) and less risk-taking under ambiguity (β = -0.11, p = 0.029) at baseline predicted higher PUI at 3-month follow-up. All findings were of small effect size. None of the neurocognitive variables predicted problematic alcohol use. Discussion and conclusions: We were unable to identify a core set of specific neurocognitive functions that reliably predict multiple addictive behavior types. However, our findings indicate both cognitive control and reward-related functions predict non-substance addictive behaviors in different ways. Findings suggest that there may be partially distinct neurocognitive mechanisms contributing to addiction depending on the specific addictive behavior.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?