Role of Mood and Implicit Cognition in the Social Anxiety-Problematic Drinking Risk Pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relation between Social Anxiety (SA) and problematic drinking has received mixed empirical support. Theory suggests implicit, automatically activated, alcohol cognitions are central to drinking risk. In the context of SA, the cognitions evoked in response to an anxious mood are relevant. The SA-alcohol use literature to date has not examined implicit cognition. Moreover, the influence of mood on drinking has been explored using performance-based mood manipulations, which may inhibit alcohol use for fear of impairing performance. The present study aimed to develop an ecologically valid socially-relevant mood manipulation and examine its effects on implicit alcohol cognitions and drinking outcomes. It was hypothesized that SA would influence the automatic activation of tension reduction alcohol cognitions and drinking behaviour, only for those in an anxious mood. Undergraduates (N = 132; 86% women) completed self-reports of SA and alcohol use/problems, were randomly assigned to an anxious or control mood condition, completed an implicit task, and self-reported urge to drink. Results revealed that mood moderated the effect of SA on urge to drink. When in an anxious mood, those high in SA reported an elevated urge to drink for negative and positive reinforcement purposes. There was little support for the role of implicit alcohol cognition. The activation of implicit cognition in the lab was not associated with drinking status. While the role of implicit cognition in the SA-drinking risk pathway did not receive much support, the current study incorporated a socially-relevant lab-based mood manipulation that was effective in eliciting the urge to drink.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".