A Review of Alcohol-related Cognitions in the IAT Case Study

Transcription

1 Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 35 (2004) Implicit alcohol-related cognitions in a clinical sample of heavy drinkers Jan De Houwer*, Geert Crombez, Ernst H.W. Koster, Natalie De Beul Department of Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, Ghent B9000, Belgium Received 5 December 2003; received in revised form 31 March 2004; accepted 12 May 2004 Abstract Patients undergoing treatment in an alcohol-rehabilitation clinic performed an Extrinsic Affective Simon Task (EAST) and two Implicit Association Tests (IATs) that were designed to measure implicit attitudes toward alcohol or implicit alcohol-arousal associations. The EAST and IAT data indicated that patients had a more negative implicit attitude toward alcohol than toward softdrinks and possessed strong implicit alcohol-arousal associations. Our results replicate and extend those of Wiers et al. (J. Abnormal Psychol 111 (2002) 648). r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Alcohol abuse; Implicit cognition; Attitudes; Arousal For many years now, researchers have looked at the role of alcohol-related cognitions (such as outcome expectancies and attitudes regarding alcohol) in alcohol use and abuse (e.g., Jones, Corbin, & Fromme, 2001; Burden & Maisto, 2000). In virtually all of these studies, only self-report measures were used. Recently, some researchers have started using indirect measures of alcohol-related cognitions. The most important advantage of these indirect measures is that they are less susceptible to self-presentation or deception and might reveal cognitions that are not available to conscious awareness. As such, indirect measures could lead to an important advance in the study of alcohol-related cognitions (also see Stacy & Ames, 2001). We will refer to cognitions that are measured by self-report measures as explicit cognitions and to those that are measured by indirect measures as implicit cognitions. *Corresponding author. address: jan.dehouwer@ugent.be (J. De Houwer) /$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi: /j.jbtep

2 276 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) In a recent study, Wiers, van Woerden, Smulders, and de Jong (2002) used the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) to examine implicit alcohol-related cognitions in students who report to drink a lot of alcohol (heavy drinkers: mean number of 32 standard servings per week) and students who report to drink little alcohol (light drinkers: mean number of 5 standard servings per week). In a typical IAT, stimuli that belong to one of four possible categories are presented one by one on a computer screen. On each trial, participants categorize the presented stimulus by pressing one of two keys. The logic underlying the IAT is that performance should be better in a task where associated categories are assigned to the same response than in a task where associated categories are assigned to different responses. For instance, when classifying names of flowers, names of insects, positive words, and negative words, people are faster when flowers and positive words are assigned to one key and insects and negative words to the second key than when the first key is assigned to insects and positive words and the second key to flowers and negative words (e.g., Greenwald et al., 1998). Therefore, if one observes that performance depends on which categories are assigned to the same response, this provides information about the relative strength of the associations between the concepts (see De Houwer, 2002, and Greenwald & Nosek, 2001, for reviews). In a first IAT, Wiers et al. examined whether light and heavy drinkers differ in their implicit attitude toward alcohol, that is, the extent to which they implicitly associate alcohol with positive or negative valence. To this end, they presented positive words, negative words, names of alcoholic drinks, and names of sodas, and asked participants to categorize the stimuli that appeared on the screen by pressing one of two keys. In a first task, positive words and names of alcoholic drinks were assigned to one key whereas negative words and names of sodas were assigned to the second key. In the second task, participants were instructed to press the first key for positive words and sodas and the second key for negative words and alcoholic drinks. Both the heavy and light drinkers performed better in Task 2 than in Task 1. The results of Wiers et al. therefore indicate that both heavy and light drinkers have a more negative implicit attitude toward alcoholic drinks than toward sodas. In a second IAT, positive and negative words were replaced by active (e.g., exited) or passive words (e.g., relaxed). Results showed that performance was better when heavy drinkers were asked to give one response for active words and alcoholic drinks, and the second response for passive words and sodas (Task 1) than when passive words and alcoholic drinks were assigned to the first key and active words and sodas to the second key (Task 2). This effect was not found in light drinkers. Wiers et al. therefore concluded that an implicit alcohol-arousal association is present only in heavy drinkers. The findings of Wiers et al. (2002) are in line with the incentive-sensitization theory of Robinson and Berridge (1993) according to which addiction is related more to wanting (sensitized arousal) than to liking (attitudes). Importantly, because associations were measured indirectly, it is unlikely that the results were due to demand or social desirability effects. Moreover, the results suggest that arousal associations may exert an automatic influence on addictive behaviour (as was hypothesized by Robinson & Berridge, 1993; see Wiers et al., 2002).

3 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) The aim of the present research was to conceptually replicate and extend the findings of Wiers et al. (2002). First, whereas Wiers et al. examined students, we recruited a group of patients who were undergoing treatment at an alcoholrehabilitation clinic. This allowed us to verify whether such patients also have a more negative implicit attitude toward alcohol than toward sodas and also possess implicit alcohol-arousal associations. There are theoretical and empirical reasons to believe that arousal-associations increase in strength with increased use of alcohol (e.g., Dunn & Goldman, 1998; Robinson & Berridge, 1993, 2003). Because our adult patients most likely have had more experience with alcohol than even the heavy drinkers in the study Wiers et al., we thus expected to observe clear evidence for implicit alcohol-arousal associations. The predictions regarding implicit attitudes were less straightforward. On the one hand, there is evidence that positive outcome expectancies are positively correlated with the amount of alcohol used (see Jones et al., 2001, for a review) and one could argue that our patients have had many experiences in which the consumption of alcohol was followed immediately by positive feelings or the removal of negative feelings. On the other hand, negative outcome expectancies also appear to increase with increases in alcohol use (e.g., Jones et al., 2001; Jones & McMahon, 1998) and drinking might often have been associated with such negative outcomes (e.g., marital problems). Moreover, factors such as these could have a different impact on implicit attitudes than on explicit attitudes (e.g., immediate affective consequences might be more important for implicit than explicit attitudes; Rudman, Ashmore, & Gary, 2001). Apart from the fact that this study allowed us to empirically verify the presence and nature of implicit alcohol-related cognitions in adult patients, it can also inform us about whether the (often complex) tasks that are used to measure such cognitions can also be employed with adult patients in a real-life clinical setting. A second important difference with the study of Wiers et al. (2002) was that we used not only the IAT but also another measure of implicit associations, namely the Extrinsic Affective Simon Task (EAST; De Houwer, 2003a). Like the standard affective Simon task (De Houwer & Eelen, 1998; De Houwer, Crombez, Baeyens, & Hermans, 2001), the EAST relies on the principle that it is easier to give a response that is associated with positive valence to positive items than to negative items and to give a response that is associated with negative valence to negative items than to positive items, even when the valence of the items is irrelevant. In a typical EAST study, participants see words that are colored white, green, or blue. They are told that only the valence of the white words and the color of the colored words is important. For instance, they might be asked to press a left key for negative white words and for green words and a right key for positive white words and for blue words. Because negative white words are assigned to the left key and positive white words to the right key, a left key press is associated with negative valence and a right key press with positive valence. The crucial trials are those on which a colored word is presented. When a green word is presented, the correct response (i.e., press the left key) is associated with negative valence. Therefore, it should be easier to respond to negative green words than to positive green words because the valence of the

4 278 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) stimulus and response match in the former but not latter case. Likewise, because the correct response for blue words (i.e., press the right key) is in this example associated with positive valence, it should be easier to respond to positive blue words than to negative blue words. These predictions have been verified repeatedly (e.g., De Houwer, 2003a), which attests to the fact that the EAST is able to indirectly register differences in the valence of stimuli. Although the EAST is a relatively new indirect measure of attitudes, it has already been successfully used to indirectly measure experimentally induced changes and individual differences in attitudes toward various objects (e.g., Callan & Ellard, 2003; De Raedt, Schacht, & De Houwer, 2004; Huijding, de Jong, & ter Hart, 2003). In order to do so, one needs to present stimuli that represent the attitude object on the colored trials of the EAST. If, for instance, reaction times are slower and/or the percentage of errors is higher when participants respond to these items with the response that is associated with negative valence (e.g., because the items are presented in green) than with the response that is associated with positive valence (e.g., because the items are presented in blue), then one can infer that the attitude toward the object is positive. An important potential advantage of the EAST is that it allows one to examine attitudes toward one particular object or toward several objects simultaneously. For each attitude object, one needs to present items that represent this object and compare the speed or accuracy of positive and negative responses for each set of items separately. The IAT, on the other hand, at best provides only a relative measure of attitudes (De Houwer, 2002; Greenwald & Nosek, 2001). For instance, the fact that IAT performance is better when alcohol and negative items are assigned to the first key and softdrink and positive items are assigned to the second key (Wiers et al., 2002) could indicate that participants have a negative attitude toward alcohol and a positive attitude toward softdrinks. It could, however, also mean that participants have a positive attitude toward both alcohol and softdrinks but that the attitude toward softdrinks is more positive than the attitude toward alcohol. In order to examine the attitude toward alcohol and softdrinks separately, we conducted an EAST study in which we presented names of alcoholic drinks and names of softdrinks on the colored trials. For each set of names, we compared performance on trials with a positive response and trials with a negative response. Another advantage of the EAST is that it does not require one to label the attitude objects of interest. In the study of Wiers et al. (2002), participants were asked to respond on the basis of whether the presented stimulus belonged to the category ALCOHOL, SODA, POSITIVE or NEGATIVE. Research has shown that IAT effects are at least in part based on the particular category labels that one uses (e.g., De Houwer, 2001). It is therefore possible that Wiers et al. (2002) found a more negative attitude toward alcohol than toward sodas not because the participants disliked the particular alcohol items (e.g., beer, whisky) but because the label ALCHOL has a negative connotation (also see Wiers & de Jong, in press). Because the labels ALCOHOL and SODA were not used in our EAST, we could examine the attitudes toward the actual alcoholic drinks rather than to the label ALCOHOL.

5 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) Method 1.1. Participants We recruited 21 men and 16 women between 29 and 64 years old (M=48.46 years) who were either hospitalised (N ¼ 18) or undergoing follow-up treatment after being hospitalised (N ¼ 19) at the alcohol-rehabilitation clinic of the General Psychiatric Hospital St.-Lucia (Sint Niklaas, Belgium). When asked about their drinking habits during the time before they were admitted, one patient said (s)he used to drink alcohol between two and four times a month, three other patients said they drank two to three times a week, and the remaining patients said they drank four or more times a week. The average reported number of standard units of alcohol consumed during a single drinking episode was units. While being hospitalised, the treatment consisted of individual and group therapy. Therapy was targeted at specific topics like cravings and urges, crisis management, alcohol-refusal, problem solving, planning for emergencies, coping with relapse, resocialization, and maintaining changes in drinking behaviour. This treatment was mainly based upon cognitive-behavioral therapy (e.g., Beck, Wright, Newman, & Liese, 1993; Kadden et al., 1992). During their stay at the clinic, consumption of alcohol was not allowed. Patients who were undergoing aftercare had restrained from drinking alcohol for a minimum of one month and a maximum of 111 months (M ¼ 21:58, SD ¼ 27:01). All participants were native Dutch speakers and completed an informed consent form before taking part in the study Stimuli and apparatus Three Dutch names of alcoholic drinks (bier [beer], whisky, vodka) and three Dutch names of softdrinks (water, cola, fruitsap [orange juice]) were presented in all three tasks. The liked and disliked items that were presented during the EAST and attitude IAT, were selected individually by asking participants to give the names of three foods they liked and three foods they disliked. The results of a recent study by Olson and Fazio (2004) suggests that selecting items in such a personalized manner could increase the validity of the IAT. In the arousal IAT, the active words were opgewonden (exited), vrolijk (cheerful), levendig (lively), and the passive words were ontspannen (relaxed), kalm (calm), and rustig (quiet). In both IATs, stimuli were always presented in white letters. In the EAST, the names of the liked and disliked foods were also presented in white but the names of alcoholic and softdrinks were presented in green (red green blue values of 0, 150, and 125) or blue (red green blue values of 0, 124, and 150). All words were written in upper-case letters (Arial Black font, size 36) and were presented on a screen that was connected to a P166 PC. Participants responded by pressing the m or q key on the AZERTY keyboard. An Inquisit program (Inquisit 1.32, 2001) was used to control the presentation of the instructions and stimuli and the registration of the responses.

6 280 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) Procedure Upon entering, participants were informed that, during a session of approximately 45 min, they would be asked to perform three speeded classification tasks. After signing an informed consent, each participant was asked to give the name of three foods that he or she liked and three foods that he or she disliked. Next, the instructions for the EAST task were given on the computer screen. Participants were informed that white and colored words would be presented one by one on the screen. Only the valence of the white words and the color of the colored words was important. Participants were asked to press the left key for white words that referred to something they disliked and the right key for white words that referred to something they liked. Twenty-one participants pressed the left key for green words and the right key for blue words. The reverse was true for the other participants. The EAST started with a practice block of 24 trials during which each of the three individually selected liked and disliked items were presented four times. A second practice block of 12 trials followed in which each of the alcohol and softdrink items was presented once in each color. Finally, four test blocks of 36 trials were presented. In each block, each liked and disliked item was presented twice (12 white test trials) and each alcohol and softdrink item was presented twice in each color (24 colored test trials). A test block was always preceded by two warm up trials, one with a randomly selected liked item and one with a randomly selected disliked item. Before each block, the relevant stimulus response assignments were presented on the screen until the participants pressed a key. During each block, the label GRAAG (liked) was presented in the top right corner and the label NIET GRAAG (disliked) in the top left corner of the screen. The order in which the items were presented was randomised for each block and participant separately. Each trial started with a fixation cross for 300 ms, followed by the word presented at the screen centre until the participants pressed the m or q key. If the response was incorrect, a red X appeared beneath the word for 400 ms. The next trial started 1200 ms after the response or after the red X disappeared. The attitude IAT always came after the EAST. Participants were told that names of liked foods, disliked foods, alcoholic drinks, and softdrinks would be presented one by one on the screen. The task was to press a left or right key based on the category to which the presented word belonged (liked, disliked, alcohol, or softdrink). Which category was assigned to which response varied from phase to phase. Phase 1 consisted of 12 trials. Each liked and disliked item was presented twice. During Phase 2, each alcohol and softdrink item was presented twice, resulting also in 12 trials. Phase 3 consisted of two blocks of 36 trials during which each item was presented three times. Phases 4 and 5 were identical to Phases 2 and 3 respectively, except that the response assignments for the alcohol and softdrink items were reversed. All participants pressed the left key for disliked items and the right key for liked items. Twenty participants pressed the left key for alcohol items and the right key for softdrink items during Phases 2 and 3. These assignments were reversed for the other participants. During each phase, the labels of the categories that were assigned to the left key were presented in the top left corner whereas the labels of the

7 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) categories that were assigned to the right key were printed in the top right corner of the screen. The order of the trials was randomized for each block of trials and each participant separately. Each trial started with the presentation of an item at screen centre until a valid response was given. An incorrect response resulted in the presentation of a red X underneath the word for 400 ms. The next trial started 400 ms after a correct response or after the red X disappeared. All participants completed the arousal IAT after the attitude IAT. Both IATs were identical except that the liked and disliked items were replaced by active and passive items respectively. The instructions and labels were also adjusted accordingly. 2. Results 2.1. EAST Only test trials with colored words were taken into account. The data of three participants who gave an incorrect response on more than 20% of the colored test trials were excluded from the analyses. The reaction time and error data were treated and analysed in the same way as in the original studies of De Houwer (2003a). Reaction times shorter than 300 ms or longer than 3000 ms were recorded as 300 and 3000 ms, respectively (1.59% of all data) and all reaction times were log-transformed. For the analyses of the reaction time data, test trials on which an incorrect response was given, were also excluded (2.54%). The mean reaction times and percentage of errors (see Table 1) were analysed using Assignment (press left for green or for blue words) Item Type (alcohol or softdrink) Response Type (positive or negative) ANOVAs with repeated measures on the last two variables. The crucial Item Type Response Type interaction was not significant in the analysis of the reaction times, Fo1; but was significant in the analysis of the error data, F(1, 32)=5.05, p ¼ 0:03: A priori t-tests showed that on trials with a softdrink item, positive responses were more accurate than negative Table 1 Mean untransformed reaction times in ms and percentage of errors on colored test trials of the EAST as a function of item type, and response type Response type Item Type Softdrink Alcohol M SD M SD Positive Mean reaction time Percentage of errors Negative Mean reaction time Percentage of errors

8 282 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) responses, t(33)=3.20, p ¼ 0:003; whereas on trials with an alcohol item, the accuracy of positive and negative responses did not differ, to1: These results suggest that participants had a more favourable attitude toward softdrinks than toward alcoholic drinks and that this was due to a positive attitude toward softdrinks and a neutral attitude toward alcohol. The t-tests on the reaction time data did not reveal an effect of response type, both tso1: The ANOVAs did not reveal any other effects, all Fso2:51; except for a main effect of response, F(1, 32)=5.67, p ¼ 0:02; and a marginally significant three-way interaction in the analysis of the error data, F(1, 32)=3.48, p ¼ 0:07: 2.2. IATs We calculated IAT effects using the improved scoring algorithm that was recently proposed by Greenwald, Nosek, and Banaji (2003) who showed that it increases the power, reliability, and validity of IAT effects. The main features of this scoring algorithm are that it takes into account the variability of the reactions times, includes trials from both blocks of Phases 3 and 5, and combines reaction time and error data. A one-sample t-test showed that the attitude IAT effect was significant, t(36)=3.79, p ¼ 0:001; and was moderate to strong, d ¼ 0:62: The mean reaction times on trials with correct responses before taking into account variability was 1202 (SD ¼ 314) in Task 1 (press right for alcohol and positive; press left for softdrink and negative) and 1013 (SD ¼ 249) in Task 2 (press right for softdrink and positive; press left for alcohol and negative). One can thus conclude that participants had a more favourable attitude toward softdrinks than towards alcohol. Note that the attitude IAT effect was not correlated with the EAST effects for alcohol and softdrinks (all rso0:13). Such a lack of correlation between various indirect measures is not uncommon and could be related to problems with the reliability of inter-individual differences or structural differences between the tasks (e.g., Bosson, Swann, & Pennebaker, 2000; De Houwer, 2003b). The arousal IAT effect was also significant, tð36þ ¼ 5:11; po0:001; and large in size, d ¼ 0:84: The mean reaction time was shorter in Task 1 (press right for alcohol and active; press left for softdrink and passive; M ¼ 1016; SD ¼ 209) than in Task 2 (press right for softdrink and active; press left of alcohol and passive; M ¼ 1172; SD ¼ 268), thus providing evidence for strong alcohol-arousal associations Discussion Wiers et al. (2002) asked students who drink little (light drinkers) or a lot of alcohol (heavy drinkers) to perform IATs that could be used to measure implicit 1 We also analysed the results separately for patients who were hospitalised and patients who were undergoing after-care. The EAST and IAT effects did not, however, differ between these two groups. Moreover, all EAST and IAT effects that were significant for the total group were also significant in each of the two groups separately.

9 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) attitudes toward alcohol or alcohol-arousal associations. They found evidence for negative implicit attitudes toward alcohol compared to softdrinks in both groups and evidence for stronger alcohol-arousal associations in heavy drinkers only. Our results attest to the reliability and generality of these findings. First, we replicated their main results in a group of adults who were being treated for alcohol abuse. One can thus conclude such patients also have a more negative implicit attitude toward alcohol than toward softdrinks and that they possess implicit alcohol-arousal associations. As Wiers et al. pointed out, these results are in line with the model of Robinson and Berridge (1993). Second, the fact that implicit attitudes toward alcohol were more negative than those toward softdrinks was evidenced not only by the results of an IAT but also by the results of an EAST. This suggests that the results of Wiers et al. were not due to the specific nature of the IAT (e.g., use of the label ALCOHOL ). Moreover, the EAST allowed us to estimate the implicit attitude for softdrinks and alcohol separately. These additional analyses suggested that, at least in our sample, the relative preference for softdrinks resulted from the fact that the attitude toward softdrinks was positive whereas the attitude toward alcoholic drinks was neutral. It is interesting to note that de Jong, Wiers, and van de Braak (2003) recently came to the same conclusion on the basis of an EAST study with students. The neutral attitude toward alcohol might reflect the fact that alcohol is associated both to positive and negative valence. The results of a recent IAT study by Jajodia and Earlywine (2003) indeed suggest that both of these associations exist. Nevertheless, more research is needed before strong conclusions can be drawn with regard to the direction of the attitude toward alcohol in heavy drinkers. For instance, given that implicit attitudes tend to be highly context-dependent (e.g., Blair, 2002), it would be interesting to investigate the implicit attitude toward alcohol in a task in which the attitude toward softdrinks is not assessed. Finally, the present study is one of the first in which indirect measures of alcoholrelated cognitions are used in a clinical sample. It illustrates that such measures can be used in a meaningful way with such populations. This provides a first step toward a broader use of these techniques in clinical practice. There were, however, some limitations to our study that need to be mentioned explicitly. First, the order of the tasks was fixed. That is, all participants started with the EAST, then completed the attitude IAT, and ended with the arousal IAT. We decided to always start with the EAST because this task had two potential benefits compared to the attitude IAT: First, it provided us with an estimate of both the attitude toward alcohol and the attitude toward softdrinks. Second, it did not involve the labels ALCOHOL and SOFTDRINK and thus provided an estimate of the attitude toward the actual alcohol drinks that were used as alcohol items. If participants would have completed the attitude IAT before the EAST, these potential benefits of the EAST could have been compromised because the attitude IAT does measure attitudes in a relative manner and does involve the use of the labels ALCOHOL and SOFTDRINK. Our decision to administer the attitude IAT before the arousal IAT was based on the consideration that the arousal IAT tapped other associations than the other tasks (EAST and the attitude IAT) and

10 284 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) might thus be least affected by carry-over effects from those other tasks. The fact that the results of the attitude and arousal IAT were highly similar to those that were found by Wiers et al. (2002) indeed suggests that carry-over effects were minimal. Nevertheless, one must take into account that the fixed order of the tasks could have biased the IAT results. In addition, one should note that the key assignments were not fully counterbalanced. For all participants, the right key was assigned to positive and active words and the left key to negative and passive words. This could also have biased the results to some extent. But again one can point out that the results of the present experiment were in line with those of other studies (e.g., de Jong et al., 2003; Wiers et al., 2002). A second important limitation of our study was that we did not include direct measures (e.g., questionnaires) of alcohol-related cognitions. As such, we cannot determine whether indirect measures such as the EAST and IAT provide information about alcohol cognitions or problematic drinking behaviour over and above the information that is provided by direct measures. One should note, however, that the main aim of the present studies was to examine implicit alcoholattitudes and alcohol-arousal associations in a clinical group of heavy drinkers. In this context, our research is important because it provides the first evidence that heavy drinkers who are treated for alcohol abuse (a) have more negative implicit attitudes toward alcohol than toward softdrinks, (b) that this probably reflects the existence of positive implicit attitudes toward softdrinks and neutral or ambiguous implicit attitudes toward alcohol, and (c) that the patients implicitly associate arousal more with alcohol than with softdrinks. Acknowledgements We thank the staff and management of the Psychiatric Hospital St. Lucia, Sint Niklaas, Belgium, for their co-operation, and Reinout Wiers and Peter de Jong for their helpful comments on an earlier draft. References Beck, A. T., Wright, F. D., Newman, C. F., & Liese, B. S. (1993). Cognitive therapy of substance abuse. New York/London: The Guilford Press. Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, Bosson, J. K., Swann, W. B., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2000). Stalking the perfect measure of implicit selfesteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, Burden, J. L., & Maisto, S. A. (2000). Expectancies, evaluations, and attitudes: Prediction of college student drinking behavior. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 61, Callan, M. J., & Ellard, J. H. (February, 2003). The Effects of Justice Outcome on Implicit Victim Derogation. Paper presented at the Justice Preconference of the 4th annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Universal City/Los Angeles, USA.

11 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) De Houwer, J. (2001). A structural and process analysis of the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, De Houwer, J. (2002). The implicit association test as a tool for studying dysfunctional associations in psychopathology: Strengths and limitations. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 33, De Houwer, J. (2003a). The extrinsic affective Simon task. Experimental Psychology, 50, De Houwer, J. (2003b). A structural analysis of indirect measures of attitudes. In J. Musch, & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The Psychology of Evaluation: Affective Processes in Cognition and Emotion (pp ). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. De Houwer, J., Crombez, G., Baeyens, F., & Hermans, D. (2001). On the generality of the affective Simon effect. Cognition and Emotion, 15, De Houwer, J., & Eelen, P. (1998). An affective variant of the Simon paradigm. Cognition and Emotion, 12, de Jong, P., Wiers, R. W., & van de Braak, M. (2003). Using the extrinsic affective Simon test as a measure of implicit alcohol associations: Relationship with drinking behavior and alcohol problems, submitted for publication. De Raedt, R., Schacht, R., & De Houwer, J. (2004). Depressed patients have positive implicit self-esteem, submitted for publication. Dunn, M. E., & Goldman, M. S. (1998). Age and drinking-related differences in the memory organization of alcohol expectancies in 3rd-, 6th-, 9th-, and 12th-grade children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, Greenwald, A. G., & Nosek, B. A. (2001). Health of the Implicit Association Test at age 3. Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle Psychologie, 48, Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, Huijding, J., de Jong, P. J., & ter Hart, L. (2003). Specific Predictive Power of Implicit Associations for Automatic Fear Behavior, submitted for publication. Inquisit 1.32 (2001). Computer software. Seattle, WA: Millisecond Software. Jajodia, A., & Earlywine, M. (2003). Measuring alcohol expectancies with the Implicit Association Test. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17, Jones, B. T., Corbin, W., & Fromme, K. (2001). A review of expectancy theory and alcohol consumption. Addiction, 96, Jones, B. T., & McMahon, J. (1998). Alcohol motivations as outcome expectancies. In W. R. Miller, & N. Heather (Eds.), Treating addictive behaviors: Applied clinical psychology (2nd ed.)) (pp ). New York: Plenum. Kadden, R., Caroll, K. M., Donovan, D., Cooney, N., Monti, P., Abrams, D., Litt, M., & Hester, R. (1992). Cognitive-behavioral coping skills therapy manual: A clinical research guide for therapists treating individuals with alcohol abuse and dependence. Washington: Government Printing Office. Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2004). Reducing the influence of extra-personal associations on the Implicit Association Test: Personalizing the IAT. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (1993). The neural basis of drug craving: An incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Research Reviews, 18, Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2003). Addiction. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, Rudman, L. A., Ashmore, R. D., & Gary, M. L. (2001). Unlearning automatic biases: The malleability of implicit prejudice and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, Stacy, A. W., & Ames, S. L. (2001). Implicit cognition theory in drug use and driving under the influence interventions. In S. Sussman (Ed.), Handbook of program development in health behavior research and practice (pp ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

12 286 J. De Houwer et al. / J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiat. 35 (2004) Wiers, R. W., & de Jong, P. J. Implicit and explicit alcohol, smoking, and drug-related cognitions and emotions. In F. Columbus (Ed.), Progress in social psychology. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, in press. Wiers, R. W., van Woerden, N., Smulders, F. T. Y., & de Jong, P. J. (2002). Implicit and explicit alcoholrelated cognitions in heavy and light drinkers. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111,