Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jan:88:129-136.
doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.08.023. Epub 2018 Aug 23.

Attentional bias to cannabis cues in cannabis users but not cocaine users

Joseph L Alcorn 3rd  1 , Katherine R Marks  1 , William W Stoops  2 , Craig R Rush  2 , Joshua A Lile  3
Affiliations

Attentional bias to cannabis cues in cannabis users but not cocaine users

Joseph L Alcorn 3rd et al. Addict Behav. 2019 Jan.

Abstract

Attentional bias to drug cues has been associated with the problematic use of drugs, including cannabis. The cognitive mechanisms underlying this bias are not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to determine whether cannabis-cue attentional bias is associated with disruptions in attentional processing. To this end, a novel cannabis-cue visual probe task that incorporated eye tracking technology and attention-based metrics derived from signal detection theory was administered to seventeen individuals who reported daily/near-daily cannabis use. Seventeen individuals with cocaine use disorder were also enrolled as a clinical-control group. Cannabis and neutral images were briefly presented side-by-side on a computer screen, followed by the appearance of a "go" or "no-go" target upon offset of both images to permit assessment of attention-based performance. Cannabis users exhibited attentional bias to cannabis cues, as measured by fixation time and response time, but not cue-dependent disruptions on subsequent attentional performance. Cocaine users did not display an attentional bias to cannabis cues but did display poorer attentional performance relative to cannabis users. These results indicate that attentional bias to cannabis cues is selective to cannabis use history and not associated with impaired attentional processing.

Keywords: Attentional bias; Cannabis; Cocaine; Signal detection; Substance use.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this work. This manuscript represents original research and all applicable subject protection guidelines and regulations were followed in the conduct of the research.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Trial sequences of the Visual-Probe Task. “Go” trials are presented on the left and “no-go” trials are presented on the right. SOA = stimulus-onset asynchrony. An inter-trial interval of 750 ms was used (not shown).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Mean Fixation Time (Y-axis; left panel) and Response Time (Y-axis; right panel) in ms on cannabis images (filled bars) and neutral images (open bars) in cannabis users (X-axis; left side) and cocaine users (X-axis; right side). Bars show means of 17 Cannabis Users and 17 Cocaine Users. Uni-directional brackets indicate 1 SEM. The pound-sign indicates significantly greater fixation time to both cue types in cannabis users compared to cocaine users (main effect of group). The asterisks indicate a significant attentional bias to cannabis cues in cannabis users reflected by increased fixation time and decreased response time, as determined from post-hoc tests.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Mean d’ (Y-axis; left panel) and criterion c (Y-axis; right panel) values associated with “go” and “no-go” visual probe targets following cannabis images (filled bars) and neutral images (open bars) in cannabis users (X-axis; left side) and cocaine users (X-axis; right side). Bars show means of 17 Cannabis Users and 17 Cocaine Users. Uni-directional brackets indicate 1 SEM. Pound-signs indicate significantly worse attentional control in cocaine users compared to cannabis users, regardless of cue type (main effect of group).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Mean ratings of pleasantness of cannabis images (filled bars) and neutral images (open bars) on the valence-rating task in cannabis users (X-axis; left side) and cocaine users (X-axis; right side). Bars show means of 17 Cannabis Users and 17 Cocaine Users. Uni-directional brackets indicate 1 SEM. The pound-sign indicates significantly greater pleasantness ratings to both cue types in cannabis users compared to cocaine users (main effect of group). The asterisk indicates significantly higher ratings of pleasantness of cannabis images compared to neutral images in cannabis users, as determined from post-hoc tests.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Adamson SJ, Kay-Lambkin FJ, Baker AL, Lewin TJ, Thornton L, Kelly BJ, Sellman JD, 2010. An improved brief measure of cannabis misuse: the Cannabis Use Disorders Identification Test-Revised (CUDIT-R). Drug Alcohol Depend. July 1;110(1-2):137–43. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.02.017. - DOI - PubMed
    1. American Psychiatric Association, 2000. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth ed. American Psychiatric Association, Washington D.C. Text Revision.
    1. Ataya AF, Adams S, Mullings E, Cooper RM, Attwood AS, Munafò MR, 2012. Internal reliability of measures of substance-related cognitive bias. Drug Alcohol Depend. February 1;121(1–2):148–51. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.08.023. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y, 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Roy Statist Soc, Ser B. 57(1):289–300.
    1. Bradley B, Field M, Mogg K, De Houwer J, 2004. Attentional and evaluative biases for smoking cues in nicotine dependence: component processes of biases in visual orienting. Behav Pharmacol February;15(1):29–36. - PubMed

Publication types