↓ Skip to main content

Alcohol-Related Memory Associations in Positive and Negative Affect Situations: Drinking Motives, Working Memory Capacity, and Prospective Drinking

Overview of attention for article published in Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Alcohol-Related Memory Associations in Positive and Negative Affect Situations: Drinking Motives, Working Memory Capacity, and Prospective Drinking
Published in
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, March 2014
DOI 10.1037/a0032806
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elske Salemink, Reinout W. Wiers

Abstract

Although studies on explicit alcohol cognitions have identified positive and negative reinforcing drinking motives that are differentially related to drinking indices, such a distinction has received less attention in studies on implicit cognitions. An alcohol-related Word-Sentence Association Task was used to assess implicit alcohol-related memory associations in positive and negative affect situations in 92 participants. Results revealed that enhancement motives were specifically associated with the endorsement of alcohol words in positive affect situations and coping motives were associated with the endorsement of alcohol words in negative affect situations. Furthermore, alcohol associations in positive affect situations predicted prospective alcohol use and number of binges, depending on levels of working memory capacity. The current findings shed more light on the underpinnings of alcohol use and suggest that implicit memory processes and working memory capacity might be important targets for intervention.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 75 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 27%
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 45 58%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 10%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 16 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 May 2013.
All research outputs
#6,569,702
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
#343
of 1,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,125
of 236,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 236,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.