ABSTRACT
Behavioral and biological addictions can impair decision-making processes, mainly by means of a dysfunction in brain regions associated with reward and frontal areas that may lead to disadvantageous choices. Understanding these differences helps establish appropriate terminology and enhances our ability to recognize, prevent, and treat these disorders effectively. Thus, while behavioral and biological addictions share some common elements, their underlying mechanisms and impact on decision-making vary significantly. Moreover, decision-making can be measured through questionnaires (stable or "cold" measures) or dynamic tasks (hot decisions) such as the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), which can reflect different dimensions of this process. The aim of this study was to compare decision-making from different perspectives-stable and dynamic measures-in patients with gambling addiction (GA) (n = 42) and patients with biological addictions (BA) (n = 43). Decision-making was assessed using GDMS (Decisional Styles) and the LCT (Loss Aversion), as cold decision-making measures, as well as a hot or situational task called the IGT (Iowa Gambling Task). The results revealed that GA patients exhibited lower rational style scores compared to BA patients. Additionally, GA patients showed greater loss aversion according to the LCT questionnaire. On the other hand, when analyzing the IGT results, no differences were observed between groups in the overall IG index, learning curves, or the loss aversion parameter. However, GA patients showed higher sensitivity to feedback and less consistency in their decisions. These findings highlight the differences between different types of addictions and highlight the importance of considering the type of measure used to evaluate decision-making.
ABSTRACT
In 2019, 301 million people were living with an anxiety disorder. Recently, alexithymia and interoception has been considered to play a key role to understand anxiety symptoms. Both constructs are related to each other and together interfere with emotional regulation; however, its relationship has been much debated. A recent two-stage model proposed interoception as a moderator in the relation between alexithymia and anxiety symptoms. Therefore, the aim of the present research was to study how this model could explain the anxiety symptoms. Two hundred forty-one healthy participants completed the General Health Questionnaire, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale and the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness. Results verified that interoception moderates the association between alexithymia and anxiety symptoms, showing that, for alexithymia to be positively associated with the magnitude of these symptoms, at least a medium level of interoception is necessary. (AU)
En 2019, se estimaba que 301 millones de personas vivían con un trastorno de ansiedad. Recientemente, se ha considerado que tanto la alexitimia como la interocepción desempeñan un papel clave en la comprensión de los síntomas de ansiedad. Ambos constructos están relacionados entre sí y juntos interfieren en la regulación emocional; sin embargo, su relación ha sido objeto de mucho debate. Recientemente, un nuevo modelo de dos etapas propuso la interocepción como moderador en la relación entre la alexitimia y los síntomas de ansiedad. El objetivo de la presente investigación es estudiar cómo este modelo podría explicar los síntomas de ansiedad. 241 participantes sanos completaron el Cuestionario de Salud General, la Escala de Alexitimia de Toronto y la Evaluación Multidimensional de la Conciencia Interoceptiva. Los resultados verificaron que la interocepción modera la asociación entre la alexitimia y los síntomas de ansiedad, mostrando que, para que la alexitimia esté positivamente relacionada con la magnitud de estos síntomas, es necesario al menos un nivel medio de interocepción. (AU)
