Reward and Cognition: Integrating Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory and Social Cognitive Theory to Predict Drinking Behavior

Abstract

Background: Both Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory and Social Cognitive Theory have been applied to understanding drinking behavior. We propose that theoretical relationships between these models support an integrated approach to understanding alcohol use and misuse. Objectives: We aimed to test an integrated model in which the relationships between reward sensitivity and drinking behavior (alcohol consumption, alcohol-related problems, and symptoms of dependence) were mediated by alcohol expectancies and drinking refusal self-efficacy. Methods: Online questionnaires assessing the constructs of interest were completed by 443 Australian adults (M age = 26.40, sd = 1.83) in 2013 and 2014. Results: Path analysis revealed both direct and indirect effects and implicated two pathways to drinking behavior with differential outcomes. Drinking refusal self-efficacy both in social situations and for emotional relief was related to alcohol consumption. Sensitivity to reward was associated with alcohol-related problems, but operated through expectations of increased confidence and personal belief in the ability to limit drinking in social situations. Conversely, sensitivity to punishment operated through negative expectancies and drinking refusal self-efficacy for emotional relief to predict symptoms of dependence. Conclusions: Two pathways relating reward sensitivity, alcohol expectancies, and drinking refusal self-efficacy may underlie social and dependent drinking, which has implications for development of intervention to limit harmful drinking.

Keywords:

• alcohol
• BIS/BAS
• alcohol expectancies
• self-efficacy

THE AUTHORS

Penelope Hasking's research focus is on high-risk behaviors, particularly alcohol abuse and nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), exhibited by young people. Her focus has been on the socio-cognitive and emotional factors underlying these behaviors among adolescents and young adults.

Mark Boyes’ interests span the domains of health, developmental, and clinical psychology, with the overarching aim of understanding how both individual difference and social/community variables are related to psychological, social, and educational outcomes across the life-span.

Barbara Mullan is an Associate Professor with the Health Psychology & Behavioral Medicine Research Group, in the School of Psychology and Speech Pathology at Curtin University. She has worked in health psychology for more than 15 years. Her research interests include social cognition models in predicting and intervening to improve health, particularly food-related behaviors, physical health, and addiction. She has over 100 peer reviewed publications.

GLOSSARY

• Alcohol expectancies: Beliefs about the anticipated consequences of consuming alcohol.

• Behavioral Approach System (BAS): Biologically mediated motivational system proposed to underpin individual differences in sensitivity to reward.

• Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS): Biologically mediated motivational system proposed to underpin individual differences in sensitivity to punishment and situations of nonreward.

• Drinking refusal self-efficacy: An individual's belief in their own ability to resist consuming alcohol in a given situation.

Notes

¹ Dopamine is also activated in response to salient events (Franken, Booij, & van den Brink, 2005), supporting Gray's assertion that individuals highly sensitive to reward are likely to seek out such environments.

² As low reward sensitivity, weak positive expectancies and high levels of refusal self-efficacy may predict abstinence, and we were interested in the continuum of drinking behavior, these 19 participants were included in analyses.

³ The negative expectancies subscale assesses anticipated negative outcomes; all other scales are considered positive expectancies.

⁴ As a check, we did include age and gender in the model and there were no changes to the significance of any pathways or the percentage of variance explained.

⁵ All variables remained in the model, but nonsignificant pathways removed. Where remaining paths did not assist in interpretation of the proposed mediation, variables were excluded from Figure 2.