Cited by 92Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Behavioral components of impulsivity predict alcohol consumption in adults with ADHD and healthy controls

Open access
Weafer, Jessica, Milich, Richard, Fillmore, Mark T.·2011·Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Abstract

Background The degree to which distinct behavioral components of impulsivity predict alcohol consumption is as yet not well-understood. Further, the possibility that this relation might be more pronounced in groups characterized by heightened impulsivity (i.e., individuals with ADHD) has not been tested.Methods The current study examined the degree to which three specific behavioral components of impulsivity (i.e., poor response inhibition, poor attentional inhibition, and increased risk-taking) were associated with quantity and frequency of alcohol consumption in a group of young adult social drinkers with ADHD (n = 33) and in a comparison control group (n = 21). Participants performed the delayed ocular return task (attentional inhibition), the cued go/no-go task (behavioral inhibition), and the balloon analogue risk task (risk-taking).Results Both poor behavioral inhibition and greater risk-taking were related to greater quantity of consumption in the entire sample, whereas poor attentional inhibition was related to greater quantity specifically among those with ADHD. By contrast, only risk-taking was associated with frequency of consumption, and this was found specifically in the control group.Conclusions These findings provide important information regarding the potential role of distinct behavioral components of impulsivity in drinking behavior, and highlight unique relevance of attentional impairments to drinking behavior in those with ADHD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.07.027

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Two studies investigated the performance of adults with ADHD on the BART and neither revealed significant differences in risky performance between adults with ADHD and NCs.

    “Two studies investigated the performance of adults with ADHD on the BART and neither study revealed significant differences in risky performance between adults with ADHD and NCs [64], [65].”
  • Weafer et al. did not find any group differences in the total number of pumps on the BART between adults with ADHD and NCs (Cohen's d = 0.14).

    “Similarly, Weafer et al. [65] did not find any group differences in the total number of pumps on the BART between adults with ADHD and NCs (Cohen’s d = 0.14).”
  • It is unlikely that age contributed meaningfully to the outcomes of the studies, because all studies except one controlled for age by group matching or statistical correction (24/25 = 96%).

    “In terms of the effect of age within the individuals studies, it is unlikely that age contributed meaningfully to the outcomes of the studies, because all studies except one [65] controlled for age by group matching or statistical correction (24/25 = 96% of studies controlled for age as an alternate explanatory factor).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Gray JA Feldman M Broadhurst A 1976 The behavioral inhibition system: A possible substrate for anxiety Theoretical and Experimental Bases of the Behavior Therapies Wiley London 3 41

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weafer, J., Milich, R., & Fillmore, M. T.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
Corresponding author
Fillmore, Mark T.
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
113
Issue
2-3
Pages
139-146
ISSN
0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2003692825
Cited by
92
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UKnowledge (University of Kentucky) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01 AA012874, R01AA012895, R01AA018274, F31AA018584)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R21DA021027, DA005312)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
impulsivity, alcohol consumption, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, behavioral inhibition, attentional inhibition, risk-taking, response inhibition, alcohol quantity, young adults, social drinkers, attentional impairment
MeSH terms
Alcohol Drinking, Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Risk-Taking, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review