| Title |
Smells like inhibition: The effects of olfactory and visual alcohol cues on inhibitory control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychopharmacology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00213-016-4221-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. L. Monk, J. Sunley, A. W. Qureshi, D. Heim |
| Abstract |
How the smell of alcohol impacts alcohol-related thoughts and behaviours is unclear, though it is well-documented that alcohol-related stimuli and environments may trigger these. The current study, therefore, aimed to investigate the priming effects of both visual and olfactory alcohol cues on inhibitory control. Forty individuals (M age = 23.65, SD = 6.52) completed a go/no-go association task (GNAT) which measured reaction times, response accuracy and false alarm rates whilst being exposed to alcohol-related (or neutral) olfactory and visual cues. Alcohol-related visual cues elicited lower false alarm rates, slower reaction times and higher accuracy rates relative to neutral pictorial cues. False alarm rates were significantly higher for those exposed to alcohol as opposed to neutral olfactory cues. By highlighting that exposure to alcohol-related olfactory cues may impede response inhibition, the results indicate that exposure to such stimuli may contribute to the activation of cognitive responses which may drive consumption. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 20% |
| United States | 2 | 20% |
| Austria | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 25 | 45% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 278. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 December 2022.
All research outputs
#120,234
of 24,366,830 outputs
Outputs from Psychopharmacology
#31
of 5,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,165
of 304,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychopharmacology
#2
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,366,830 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 304,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.