Cited by 32Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsPain Management and Placebo Effect

Alternative substance paradigm: Effectiveness of beverage blinding and effects on acute alcohol responses

Open access
Conrad, Megan, McNamara, Patrick, King, Andrea·2012·Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

Abstract

A fundamental goal of double-blind alcohol challenge studies is to reduce alcohol expectancies, though there is little research on the effectiveness of blinding procedures and their relationship to acute alcohol responses. This study examined social drinkers' perception of beverage content and related alcohol response during 3 separate double-blind experimental sessions with placebo, low-dose alcohol (0.4 g/kg), and high-dose alcohol (0.8 g/kg). Using the alternative substance paradigm, participants (N = 182) were informed that the beverage they consumed might contain alcohol, a stimulant, a sedative, or a placebo. At several time points, subjective and objective measures were obtained, and participants were asked to identify which substance they received. During both placebo and low-dose alcohol sessions, 33% and 50% of participants, respectively, did not correctly identify the beverage content; during the high-dose alcohol session, 20% did not correctly identify the beverage. Although correct and incorrect identifiers at any dose level did not differ on major background variables, drinking characteristics, or psychomotor performance during these sessions, they did differ on self-reported subjective responses, with greater sedation reported by incorrect identifiers in the placebo and high-dose conditions. In summary, results suggest that the alternative substance paradigm may be a viable option for alcohol laboratory studies, particularly for repeated sessions in within-subject designs and in cases in which the experimenter wants to reduce expectancy by not revealing a priori that alcohol is being administered.

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 · 10.1037/a0029261

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • To reduce alcohol expectancy, the Alternative Substance Paradigm was used: participants were informed that their allocated beverage might contain a stimulant, sedative, alcohol, or a placebo, or a combination of these substances.

    “To reduce alcohol expectancy, the Alternative Substance Paradigm(51) was used: participants were informed that their allocated beverage might contain a stimulant, sedative, alcohol, or a placebo, or a combination of these substances.”

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: 3

  1. Breslin FC Sobell SL Alcohol administration methodology 1994-1995: What researchers do and do not report about subjects and dosing procedures. Addictive Behaviors 1999 24 509 520 10466846
  2. Carpenter JA Fox R Issues in research on alcohol. Ed.) Alcoholism: Behavioral Research, Therapeutic Approaches 1967 16 23 Springer Publishing Company, Inc. New York
  3. Frezza M di Padova C Pozzato G Terpin M Baraona E Lieber CS High blood alcohol levels in women. The role of decreased gastric alcohol dehydrogenase activity and first-pass metabolism. New England Journal of Medicine 1990 322 95 99 2248624

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Conrad, M., McNamara, P., & King, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
Venue
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
Published
2012-10
Volume
20
Issue
5
Pages
382-389
ISSN
  • 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-2293
OpenAlex
W2068905960
Cited by
32
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health/NIAAA (R01-AA013746)
  • Cancer Center (P30-CA14599)
  • University of Chicago Institute for Translational Medicine
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Science (M01-RR00055)
  • NIH Roadmap for Medical Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
Keywords
alcohol expectancies, placebo effect, sedation, social drinkers, within-subjects design
MeSH terms
Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Ethanol, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Research Design, 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