Neurocognitive Determinants of Novelty and Sensation-Seeking in Individuals with Alcoholism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Sober alcoholic abusers exhibit personality traits such as novelty-seeking (NS) and sensation-seeking, which overlap to a limited extent. In parallel, they also show impaired executive and decision-making processes. However, little is known about the specific and common cognitive processes associated with NS and sensation-seeking personality traits in detoxified sober alcoholic abusers. METHODS: In these present studies, we have investigated the relationships between executive functioning/central executive of working memory (pre-potent response inhibition, manipulation stored in working memory), and decision-making under uncertainty and NS/sensation-seeking traits in such alcoholics. RESULTS: Compared with healthy controls (n = 30, mean age = 40.2), and in agreement with previous studies, alcoholics (n = 30, mean age = 40.4) showed higher levels of both NS and sensation-seeking traits. Alcoholics were also disadvantaged with respect to (a) gambling tasks, as reported previously, and (b) a poor ability to manipulate information stored in working memory and inhibit pre-potent responses. Most importantly, regression analyses and mediation analyses measures showed that poor response inhibition and decision-making were associated with high NS behaviour. In addition, impaired decision-making and manipulation of stored information in working memory were associated with a high sensation-seeking trait. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these results support the existence of specific links between cognitive executive functioning, decision-making under uncertainty and NS/sensation-seeking personality traits in individuals with alcoholism.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".