Excessive alcohol use and alcohol dependency has for many years been linked to the occurrence of structural and functional changes in the brain, mainly in the prefrontal cortex (Tarter, 1975; Gilrnan et al., 1996; Ratti et al., 2002; Oscar-Berman et al., 2004; Dirksen et al., 2006) the dorsomedial nucleus of thalamus connected to the basal ganglia (Tarter, 1975), and the area of the hippocampus, lirnbic structures and cerebellum (Harris et al., 1999; Beresford et al., 2006; Marinkovic et al., 2009).
Symptoms of structural and functional abnormalities of the brain include deficits of cognitive functions. The earlier studies have reported no reduction in general intelligence of alcohol-dependent persons, particularly on scales in which the verbal factor is dominant (Tarter, 1975, 1980; Parsons, 1987). Nonetheless, more detailed studies of cognitive processes have revealed deterioration in cognitive plasticity, problem-solving ability, visual-motor coordination, verbal and non-verbal abstraction, and also in memory and learning (Cala et al., 1978; Tarter, 1980; Bergman, 1985; Miller, 1985; Nicolas et al., 1993; Beatty et al., 1996; Nixon, Bowlby, 1996).
Most researchers have concentrated on the effects of long-term alcohol consumption. The literature best describes the effects of alcohol dependency in the form of deficits in executive functions (Sullivan et al., 1993; Nowakowska, Jabłkowska, Borkowska, 2007). A comprehensive evaluation of these in alcohol-dependent patients indicated disturbances of planning, working memory, response inhibition and multitasking (Kopera, Wojnar, Szelenberger, 2010). The tool most commonly used to evaluate executive functions is the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST). Research revealed that alcohol-dependent persons performed WCST worse than healthy controls (Lyvers, Malzmann, 1991; Sullivan et al., 1993; Nowakowska, Jabłkowska, Borkowska, 2007). They also exhibited disturbances of motor perceptual functions in relation to the location of stimuli and reaction times. Also frequently observed were deficits of visual-spatial functions, such as visual search, mental rotation, constructional praxis. With regard to memory and learning, research indicated significant disturbances of short-term and long-term memory, non-verbal episodic memory, and learning of visual-spatial material (Kopera, Wojnar, Szelenberger, 2010).
Another field of research is the direct effects of alcohol consumption. The mechanism by which alcohol affects the brain is still not fully understood. According to earlier studies based on resting-state neuroimaging, the consumption of alcohol was connected with an increase in blood flow (rCBF) in the frontal and temporal areas (Sano et al., 1993). However, the latest resting-state fMRI study (Zheng et al., 2015) indicated that alcohol influenced brain functions in healthy persons in the area of the upper frontal gyrus, cerebellum, hippocampus and basal ganglia, and in the structures of the right internal capsule. Alcohol also weakened functional connections in the default mode network (DMN) (Raichle, 2001). Neuroirnaging during simulation of car driving (Meda et al., 2009; Rzepecki-Smith et al., 2010) revealed that relatively large doses of alcohol (1.0%o) were linked with the changes in patterns of activity in cortical and subcortical circuits, i.e. the frontal-temporal-basal ganglia and the cerebellar circuits. Also, a study of brain activity during the performance of a Go/No Go task, evaluating the function of attention control (Anderson et al., 2011), demonstrated a decrease of brain activity in the cerebellum and basal ganglia.
Changes in the neurofunctional connections and activity of specific areas of the brain may be the basis of cognitive dysfunctions occurring immediately after the consumption of alcohol. Among the cognitive processes disturbed under the influence of an acute (single-instance) alcohol intoxication, the most commonly listed are processes of attention, learning, short-term memory, working memory, cognitive control, information processing, decision-making and visual-motor coordination, as well as reaction times (Holloway, 1995; Dougherty et al., 2000; Moskowit'z, Fiorentino, 2000; Schulte et al., 2001; Weissenbom, Duka, 2003; Marczinski et al., 2005; Abroms, Gottlob, Fillmore, 2006; Fillmore, 2007).
The quality and depth of cognitive deficits and dysfunctional behavioural reactions following alcohol consumption are linked to the blood alcohol concentration, BAC (Kinney, Leaton, 1996). In the case of cognitive functions, adverse effects following an acute alcohol intoxication were observed at BAC of 0.05-0.1%o for divided attention, 0.2-0.3%o for sustained attention (Kopera, Wojnar, Szelenberger, 2010), 0.4-0.5%o for perception, 0.4%o for visual functions and psychomotor speed (Moskowit'z, Fiorentino, 2000). Moreover, some studies have shown women to be more sensitive than men to the effects of alcohol, and thus to the deterioration of cognitive functioning under the influence of alcohol. These differences widened with an increase in the quantity of alcohol consumed (for review see: Mumenthaler et al., 1999). It has been found that not only the dose of alcohol and the sex, but also such factors as a level of task practice (Tarter et al., 1971), and even expectation of a deterioration in performance after moderate alcohol intake, may change the pattern of the cognitive functioning of persons after an acute alcohol intoxication (Fillmore, Vogel-Sprott, 1995).
Cognitive dysfunctions following alcohol consumption may be a serious problem not only in the context of the functioning of the individual, but also in social perspective. The consequences of these disturbances are particularly dangerous in the case of driving. Legally permitted BAC for drivers vary significantly between countries, and range from 0.0%o to 1.00%o (ICAP, 2002).
Most studies carried out to investigate drivers' cognitive performance following alcohol consumption concerned levels above the permitted BAC of the country in question, usually more than 0.5%o. In Poland there were very few such studies, and most data relating to the adverse effect of alcohol on driving ability are based on analysis of police data (Wiergowski, 2012). For example, in 2000-2006 between 136% and 16.3% of the total number of road accidents in Poland involved persons classed as intoxicated. The number of fatalities per 100 accidents caused by intoxicated road users was higher by 1-2 persons than the number of fatalities per 100 accidents caused by persons not classed as intoxicated (Kin-Dittmann, 2007).
Our study aimed to assess, in experimental model, the relationship between 0.1 to 0.25 mg per dm3 of breath alcohol content, BrAC (in Poland, the equivalent of 0.2-0.5%o of BAC) and cognitive functions such as attention, perception, psychomotor speed and visual-spatial functions, in alcohol-nondependent persons. The studied range of BrAC is the range defined in Polish law as a ”state after alcohol consumption”, in which the driving of vehicles constitutes a crirninal misdemeanour.
Material and methods
Fifty alcohol-nondependent volunteers aged 25i3.356 years participated in the study. The sample was selected randomly, and recruitment was carried out by means of an announcement on a social networking website. Alcohol dependency was excluded on the basis of an interview according to ICD-10 criteria. The sex variable was controlled by the inclusion in the sample of the same number of women (25) and men (25). A clear majority of the group were persons who had completed high-school (24) and university-level education (23). One subject had completed a vocational school, and two had completed technical education. All of the subjects gave their informed consent for participation in the study. The study was conducted at the Institute of Psychology of Kazimierz Wielki University in Bydgoszcz. The study was approved by Institute's Research Ethics Committee.
The following research methods were used:
It is suggested that subject's performance on this task reflects on his or her behaviour in a real difficult situation on the road, in which perceptual speed and immediate appropriate reactions are of extremely high importance (Rotter, 2003).
Each subject completed the D2 Test of Attention and performed set of tasks on the driver testing devices recommended by Polish Road Transport institute: the Cross Apparatus (free mode - number of variables 49; forced mode - number of variables 49, rate 50/min), the Stereometer (outside rods moving, programs 1 and 2), and the Reaction Time Tester (simple reaction - reaction with the right foot to every stimulus, number of stimuli 30, program 2; complex reaction (differentiated) - reaction with the right foot to a red light and with the right hand to a yellow light, while avoiding reacting to other stimuli, number of stimuli 30, program 2; complex reaction (choice) - reaction with the right foot to a red light, with the right hand to a yellow light, with the left foot to a green light and with the left hand to a sound, number of stimuli 30, program 2.
Participants performed the tests twice - once when sober, and once when under the influence of alcohol. In the latter case to reach the BrAC of 0.1-0.25 mg/dma, participants consumed a quantity of alcohol determined on the basis of their sex, weight and height . The content of BrAC of was measured using a certified semiconductor breathalyser, 30 minutes after finishing drinking, when the alcohol concentration is highest; and also after the end of the test. After performing the tests the subjects remained at the laboratory in the presence of the researcher until they were completely sober, or else were provided with safe transport to their home.
To diminish the learning effect, a three-week interval was left between the first and second series of tests, and the subjects were divided into two groups:
All statistical analysis were performed using STATISTICA 12.0. licenced package.
At the first stage of analysis, the performance of cognitive tasks in sober state and after alcohol consumption was compared using Student's t-test for dependent variables. We found sum of error in free mode measured by Cross Apparatus which is one of considered parameters of focus attention to be significantly higher in the participants under influence of alcohol. The analysis did not reveal any other effect of alcohol consumption on the level of focused and selective attention, the level of general perceptual ability, the efficiency of spatial perception or psychomotor reaction times (table 1).
Next, we correlated the level of BAC before and after testing with all cognitive parameters using r-Pearson test and found no significant relationship between those variables (mean BAC before testing was: 0.450%o ± 0.068%o and mean BAC after testing was: 0.439%o ± 0.072%o).
Table 1. The cognitive performance in a somber state and after alcohol consumption
Since in previous reports a learning effect, or else effect of familiarity with the testing situation in the repeated measurement was often observed, leading to an improvement in the results obtained in the second measurement, at the next step of analysis we assessed whether and how that effect was influenced by the consumption of alcohol. The tests were organised in such a way that at the second measurement one-half of the study group was under the influence of alcohol, while the other half was sober. Consequently, analysis of variance with repeated measurements and qualitative predictors was applied. The first of the qualitative predictors was the consumption of alcohol in the first vs. the second measurement. The second qualitative predictor, in accordance to previous research reports, was taken to be the sex of the subject.
The analysis showed the presence of a learning effect for the focused attention. The indicator of focused attention in the D2 Test of Attention (d2_ZK) increased significantly between the first and second measurements: F (1.46) = 155.451, p < 0.001, ŋ2p = 0.772 (figure 1). However, this effect proved to be independent of whether alcohol was consumed at the first or the second measurement: F(1.46) = 2.151, p < 0.149, ŋ2p = 0.045; and of sex: F(1.46) = 0.833, p = 0.366, ŋ2p = 0.018.
An analogous situation was found in the case of the number of correct responses in testing using the Cross Apparatus (CA_FoM sum of correct responses), where the results improved significantly in the second measurement: F (1.46) = 18. 5, p < 0.001, ŋ2p = 0. 84 (figure ), independently of whether alcohol was consumed at the first or the second measurement: F(1.46) = 0.005, p = 0.946, ŋ2p = 0.0001, and independently of sex: F(1.46) = 3.449, p = 0.070, ŋ2p = 0.070. The learning effect was also observed in sum of errors measured by free mode
in Cross Apparatus (CA_FrM sum of errors) F(1.46) = 7.173, p = 0.010, ŋ2p = 0.135.
The learning effect did not depend on the subject's sex: F(1.46) = 0.061, p = 0.806, ŋ2p = 0.001, although it proved to be dependent on whether alcohol was consumed at the first or second measurement: F(1.46) = 7.78 , p = 0.008, ŋ2p = 0.145 (figure 3). In the group of participants who did not consume alcohol at the second measurement, we revealed the significant decrease in the number of errors in that measurement. Such difference has not occurred in the subjects who in the first measurement were sober while intoxicated with alcohol during second measurement.
In case of last measures of focused attention (RTT_SR sum of errors) we found no change under the influence of repeated measurement: F(1.46) = 0.398, p = 0.531, ŋ2p = 0.009. However these results cannot be considered credible due to the very low changeability of this parameter in both measurements (90% in the first measurement and 92% in the second measurement of participants committed no error).
Figure 1. Performance on D2 Test of Attention (D2_ZK) in first and second measurement
Figure 2. Performance on Cross Apparatus (CA_FoM sum of correct responses) in first and second measurement
Figure 3. Performance on Cross Apparatus (CA_FrM sum of correct responses) in both mea surement, in the groups which were under influence of alcohol in the first and second measurement respectively
The level of selective attention measured by sum of errors for complex reaction in Reaction Time Tester (RTT_CR sum of errors) did not change under the influence of repeated measurement: F(1.46) = 0.367, p = 0.548, ŋ2p = 0.008, independently of whether alcohol was consumed at the first or second measurement: F (1.46) = 0.367, p = 0.548, ŋ2p = 0.008, and independently of sex: F(1.46) = 0.016, p = 0.00, ŋ2p = 0.0003. However these results cannot be considered credible due to the very low changeability of this parameter in both measurements (94% of participants in the first measurement, while 92% in second measurement achieved 90% of correct responses, i.e. made 3 errors).
The general perceptual ability assessed by WZ-B parameter in d2 Test of Attention (d2_WZ-B) increased significantly between the first and second measurements: F(1.46) = 151.134, p < 0.001, ŋ2p = 0.767 (figure 4). The effect of repeated measurement was not dependent on whether alcohol was consumed at the first or second measurement: F(1.46) = 2.517, p = 0.119, ŋ2p = 0.052; or on sex: F(1.46) = 0.108, p = 0.744, ŋ2p = 0.002.
Figure 4. Performance on D2 Test of Attention (D2_WZ-B) in first and second measurement
No learning effect was observed in the case of the efficiency of spatial perception: assessed by sum of distance deviations in both modes (m1 and m2) in Stereometer: F(1.46) = 0.039, p = 0.843, ŋ2p = 0.001, independently of when the alcohol was consumed (measurement 1 vs. measurement 2): F (1.46) = 1.232, p = 0.273, ŋ2p =0.026, and independently of the subject's sex: F(1.46) = 1.296, p =0.261, ŋ2p = 0.027.
As regards to the psychomotor reaction times, repeated measurement was found to produce a significant improvement in total time on the Cross Apparatus in free mode (CA_FrM total time): F(1.46) = 110.193, p < 0.001, ŋ2p = 0.705. The learning effect did not depend on the subject's sex: F(1.46) = 0.523, p = 0.473, ŋ2p = 0.011, although it proved to be dependent on whether alcohol was consumed at the first or second measurement: F(1.46) = 4.640, p = 0.036, ŋ2p = 0.092. The total reaction time decreased significantly at the second measurement, the decrease being greater in the case of those subjects who did not consume alcohol at that measurement (figure 5).
For the second indicator of psychomotor reaction time measured by Cross Apparatus - mean reaction time in forced mode (CA_FoM mean reaction time) the learning effect has not been revealed F(1.46) = 0.118, p = 0.733, eta = 0.002; independently of subject's sex F(1.46) = 1.398, p = 0.243, eta = 0.029 and alcohol consumption F(1.46) = 3.514, p = 0.067, eta = 0,071.
Similarly, the mean time for simple and mean time for complex reactions in Reaction Time Tester (RTT_SRT mean reaction time and RTT_CRT mean reaction time), did not change as a result of repeated measurement: F (1.46) = 0,521, p = 0,474, eta = 0.011 and F(1.46) = 1.236, p = 0.272, 17217 = 0.026 respectively. It was observed independently of when the alcohol was consumed: F (1.46) = 0.275, p = 0,602, eta = 0.006 (RTT_SRT mean reaction time) and F (1.46) = 0.458, p = 0.502, ŋ2p = 0.010 (RTT_CRT mean reaction time)„ and independently of sex: F (1.46) = 1.192, p = 0,281, eta = 0.025 and F(1.46) = 0.078, p = 0.781, ŋ2p = 0.002, respectively.
Figure 5. Performance on Cross Apparatus (CA_FrM total time) in both measurement in the groups which were under influence of alcohol in the first and second measurement respectively
The detrimental effects of alcohol consumption on human brain and behavior have been studied extensively for many years. However, the most often the research focused on the effects of long-term alcohol dependency. To date, very few studies have concentrated on the influence of acute, low-to-moderate alcohol intoxication on cognition, especially in young alcohol nondependent adults. Our study aimed to assess such a relationship. We have used an experimental model to observe the effect of 0.1-0.25 mg/dm3 of BrAC (in Poland equivalent of 0.2-0.5 of BAC) on cognitive functions reported to be alcohol-sensitive and also to be critical for complex behaviors, such as driving. Therefore, we used methods recommended by Polish Road Transport Institute for psychological assessment of drivers (Rotter, 2003).
In the first step of analysis we compared the performance of participants on cognitive tasks in alcohol-free state and following alcohol intoxication. We observed their efficiency in five cognitive domain: focused attention, selective attention, general perceptual ability, spatial perception and psychomotor reaction times. The results revealed the difference only in one parameter which assess focused attention. Participants made more errors in free mode on Cross Apparatus following alcohol consumption compared to their performance in sober state. This measure of focused attention is to large extent connected with a psychomotor coordination, thus it may be most sensitive to even minor changes in the level of performance, especially in free mode in which the presentation of stimuli is not at an even pace which requires larger involvement of attention. We also correlated the level of BAC before and after testing with results of all applied tests and found no relation between those parameters. Based on previous reports (Koelega, 1995; Moskowit'z, Fiorentino, 2000; Ogden, Moskowit'z, 2004; Kopera, Wojnar, Szelenberger, 2010) we expected the alcohol to influence all selected cognitive domains in dose-dependent pattern. However, our group consisted of young alcohol adults in whom the influence of alcohol on cognition may be slighter than in older adults. The period of early adulthood in developmental psychology is associated with the highest efficiency in different cognitive domains (Gurba, 2011) which may compensate the negative impact of alcohol on cognition. In addition, the results of Sklar et al. (2014) have revealed the interactions between alcohol and age, suggesting that older adults may be more susceptible to the effects of alcohol on some aspects of driving performance. Moreover, alcohol-induced cognitive impairment was demonstrated to some extent to be time-dependent, and is greatest during periods of sleepiness, i.e. the early afternoon and after midnight (Koelega, 1995). Our study was conducted during daytime and the participants declared not to be sleepy or tired prior to testing. Furthermore, our study group consisted of alcohol nondependent persons in whom the alcohol-induced cognitive impairment has been shown to be slighter than in those who are ”bingers” (Weissenbom, Duka, 2003).
The other field of our observation in the study was the influence of alcohol on learning effect. The repeated measurement using neuropsychological tools has been demonstrated to produce an occurrence of learning effect which needs to be controlled in the diagnosis of cognitive performance (Valdez, Ramirez, Garcia, 2012) The results of our study has also confirmed this phenomenon. We found three parameters to improve in the second testing, independently of alcohol intake and subject's sex. Two of them were the measures of focused attention (d2_ZK and CA_ FoM sum of correct responses) and one was a measure of general perceptual ability (d2_WZ-B). Moreover, in the case of two other parameters we observed learning effect to be influenced by alcohol consumption. In participants who were under influence of alcohol in the first measurement with Cross Apparatus in free mode, the learning effect was weakened. In the second testing the decrease in total time of performance and sum of errors was smaller than in the individuals who were sober in the first measurement and intoxicated in the second one. It appears that alcohol intake in the first testing adversely affected the ability to use prior experience in the second measurement of focused attention and psychomotor speed.
The learning process is based on explicit and implicit memory (Schacter 1987; Kirsner 1998). The study of Duka, Weissenborn and Dienes (2001) has shown that alcohol received prior to encoding reduced awareness of implicitly retrieved material. They also observed state-dependent retrieval effects on explicit memory. For explicitly retrieved information, recollective experience benefited from same drug state, whereas familiarity benefited from different drug state between encoding and retrieval. Moreover, Weissenborn and Duka (2000) found that in the case of encoding under influence of alcohol intoxication, alcohol may provide an internal or independent context to assist additional cues in retrieval process. Based on these findings we hypothesized that in our study the learning effect could be influenced by different drug state between first and second measurements or by alcohol-induced changes in encoding during first testing.
In conclusion, our study has revealed that 0.1-0.25 mg/dm3 of BrAC may lead to worse performance on focused attention task and decreased ability to benefit from previous experience in area of attention and psychomotor speed in young alcohol nondependent adults. These deficits may be critical while driving. We understand that our results obtained as an effect of testing in laboratory do not translate directly into efficiency of driving under the influence of alcohol dose tested. The laboratory setting did not take into account the real threats and cognitive demands that may appear on the road while driving. These results, however, allow to confidently look at the legal restrictions in Poland relating to permissible BAC for drivers and believe that compliance with these regulations increases the level of road safety.
Abroms, B.D., Gottlob, L.R., FillInore, M.T. (2006). Alcohol effects on inhibitory control of attention: distinguishing between intentional and automatic mechanisms. Psycho17harmacology, 188 (3), 324-334.
Anderson, B.M., Stevens, M.C., Meda, S.A., Jordan, K., Calhoun, V.D., Pearlson, G.D. (2011). Functional imaging of cognitive control during acute alcohol intoxication. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 35 (1), 156-165.
Beatty, W.W., Hames, K.A., Blanco, C.R., Nixon, S.J., Tivis, L.J. (1996). Visuospatial perception, construction and memory in alcoholism. Journal of S tudies on Alcohol, 57 (2), 136-143.
Beresford, T.P., Arciniegas, D.B., Alfers, J., Clapp, L., Martin, B., Du, Y., Liu, D., Shen, D., Davat'zikos, C. (2006). Hippocampus volume loss due to chronic heavy drinking. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 30 (11), 1866-1870.
Bergman, H. (1985). Cognitive deficits and morphological cerebral changes in a random sample of social drinkers. W: Recent developments in alcoholism (s. 265-276). Springer US.
Brickenkamp R. (2003). Test d2, Test badania uwagi. Podrecznik. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Erda.
Cala, L.A., Jones, B., Mastaglia, F.L., Wiley, B. (1978). Brain atrophy and intellectual irnpairment in heavy drinkers: A clinical, psychometric and computerized tomography study. Australian and New Zealand journal of medicine, 8 (2), 147-153.
Dajek E.R. (2003). Polska standaryzacja Testu d2, testu badania uwagi R. Brickenkampa. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Erda.
Dirksen, C.L., Howard, J.A., Cronin-Golomb, A., Oscar-Berman, M. (2006). Patterns of prefrontal dysfunction in alcoholics with and without Korsakoff's syndrome, patients with Parkinson's disease, and patients with rupture and repair of the anterior communicating artery. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 2 (3), 327.
Dougherty, D.M., Marsh, D.M., Moeller, F.G., Chokshi, R.V., Rosen, V.C. (2000). Effects of moderate and high doses of alcohol on attention, impulsivity, discriminability, and response bias in immediate and delayed memory task performance. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 24 (11), 1702-1711.
Duka, T., Weissenborn, R., Dienes, Z. (2001). State-dependent effects of alcohol on recollective experience, familiarity and awareness of memories. Psychopharmacology, 153 (3), 295-306.
Fillmore, M.T. (2007). Acute alcohol-induced impairment of cognitive functions: past and present findings. International Journal on Disability and Human Development, 6 (2), 115-126.
Fillmore, M.T., Vogel-Sprott, M. (1995). Expectancies about alcohol-induced motor impairment predict individual differences in responses to alcohol and placebo. Journal of S tudies on Alcohol, 56 (1), 90-98.
Gilman, S., Adams, K.M., Johnson-Greene, D., Koeppe, R.A., Junck, L., Kluin, K.J., Martorello, S., Heumann, M., Hill, E. (1996). Effects of disulfiram on positron emission tomography and neuropsychological studies in severe chronic alcoholism. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 20 (8), 1456-1461.
Gurba, E. (2011). Wczesna dorosłość. W: J. Trempała (red.), Psychologia rozwoju człowieka (s. 287-311). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Harris, G.J., Oscar-Berman, M., Gansler, A., Streeter, C., Lewis, R.F., Ahmed, I., Achong, D. (1999). Hypoperfusion of the cerebellum and aging effects on cerebral cortex blood flow in abstinent alcoholics: a SPECT study. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 23 (7), 1219-1227.
Holloway, F.A. (1995). Low-dose alcohol effects on human behavior and performance. Alcohol, Drugs & Driving, 11, 39-56.
Jones, B., Parsons, O.A. (1972). Specific vs generalized deficits of abstracting ability in chronic alcoholics. Archives of General Psychiatry, 26 (4), 380-384.
Kin-Dittmann, I. (2007). Nietrzeźwi uczestnicy wypadków drogowych w latach 2000-2006. Alkoholizm i Narkomania, 20 (4), 361-375.
Kinney, J., Leaton, G. (1996). Zrozumieć alkohol. Warszawa: Państwowa Agencja Rozwiązywania Problemów Alkoholowych.
Kirsner, K. (1998). Implicit memory. W: K. Kirsner, C. Speelrnan, M. Maybery, A. O'Brien-Malone, M. Anderson, C. MacLeod (red.), Implicit and explicit mental processes (s. 13-36). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Koelega, HS. (1995). Alcohol and vigilance performance: a review. Psychopharmacology, 118 (3), 233-249.
Kopera, M., Wojnar, M., Szelenberger, W. (2010). Funkcje poznawcze, struktura i czynność mózgu u osób uzależnionych od alkoholu. Alkoholizm i Narkomania, 23 (4), 361-378. Lyvers, M.F., Malzmann, I. (1991). Selective effects of alcohol on Wisconsin card sorting test performance. British Journal of Addiction, 86 (4), 399-407.
Marczinski, C.A., Abroms, B.D., van Selst, M., Fillmore, M.T. (2005). Alcohol-induced impairment of behavioral control: differential effects on engaging vs. disengaging responses. Psychopharmacology, 182 (3), 452-459.
Marinkovic, K., Oscar-Berman, M., Urban, T., O'Reilly, C.E., Howard,J.A., Sawyer, K., Harris, G.J. (2009). Alcoholism and dampened temporal limbic activation to emotional faces. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 33 (11), 1880-1892.
Meda, S.A., Calhoun, V.D., Astur, R.S., Turner, B.M., Ruopp, K., Pearlson, G.D. (2009). Alcohol dose effects on brain circuits during simulated driving: an fMRI study. Human Brain Mapping, 30 (4), 1257-1270.
Miller, L. (1985). Neuropsychological assessment substance abusers: review and recommendations. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2 (1), 5-17.
Moskowit'z, H., Fiorentino, D. (2000). A Review of the Scientific Literature Regarding the Effects of Alcohol on Driving-Related Behavior at Blood Alcohol Concentrations of 80 mg/dl and Lower (Report H S -809-028). Washington: Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, http://www.nhtsa. gov
Mumenthaler, M.S., Taylor, J.L., O'Hara, R., Yesavage, J.A. (1999). Gender differences in moderate drinking effects. Alcohol Research and Health, 23 (1), 55-64.
Nicolas, J.M., Catafau, A.M., Estruch, R., Lomefia, F.J., Salamero, M., Herranz, R.,
Monforte, R. Cardenal, C., Urbano-Marquez, A. (1993). Regional cerebral blood flow-SPECT in chronic alcoholism: relation to neuropsychological testing. Journal of nuclear medicine: official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 34 (9), 1452-1459.
Nixon, S.J., Bowlby, D. (1996). Evidence of alcohol-related efficiency deficits in an episodic learning task. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 20 (1), 21-24.
Nowakowska, K., Jabłkowska, K., Borkowska, A. (2007). Zaburzenia funkcji poznawczych u pacjentów uzależnionych od alkoholu. Psychiatria Polska, XLI (5), 693-702.
Ogden, E.J., Moskowit'z, H. (2004). Effects of alcohol and other drugs on driver performance. Traffic Injury Prevention, 5 (3), 185-198.
Oscar-Berman, M., Kirkley, S.M., Gansler, D.A., Couture, A. (2004). Comparisons of Korsakoff and Non-Korsakoff Alcoholics on Neuropsychological Tests of Prefrontal Brain Functioning. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 28 (4), 667-675.
Parsons, O.A. (1987). Neuropsychological consequences of alcohol abuse: Many questions - some answers. W: O. Parsons, N. Butters, P. Nathan (red.), Neuropsychology of Alcoholism: Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment (s. 153-173). New York: Guilford.
Raichle,M.E.,MacLeod,A.M.,Snyder,A.Z.,Powers,W.J.,Gusnard,D.A.,ShulInan,G.L. (2001). A default mode of brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98 (2), 676-682.
Ratti, M.T., Bo, P., Giardini, A., Soragna, D. (2002). Chronic alcoholism and the frontal lobe: which executive functions are imparied? Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 105 (4), 276-281.
Rotter T. (red.) (2003). Metodyka psychologicznych badań kierowców. Warszawa: Instytut Transportu Samochodowego.
Rzepecki-Smith, C.I., Meda, S.A., Calhoun, V.D., Stevens, M.C., Jafri, M.J., Astur, R.S., Pearlson, G.D. (2010). Disruptions in functional network connectivity during alcohol intoxicated driving. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 34 (3), 479-487.
Sano, M., Wendt, P.E., Wirsen, A., Stenberg, G., Risberg, J., Ingvar, D.H. (1993). Acute effects of alcohol on regional cerebral blood flow in man. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 54 (3), 369-376.
Schacter, D.L. (1987). Implicit memory: History and current status. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13 (3), 501-518.
Schulte, T., Miiller-Oehring, E.M., Strasburger, H., Warzel, H., Sabel, B.A. (2001). Acute effects of alcohol on divided and covert attention in men. Psychopharmacology, 154 (1), 61-69.
Schweizer, T.A., Vogel-Sprott, M., Danckert, J., Roy, E. A., Skakum, A., Broderick, C.E. (2006). Neuropsychological profile of acute alcohol intoxication during ascending and descending blood alcohol concentrations. Neuropsychopharmacology, 31 (6), 1301-1309.
Sklar, A.L., Boissoneault, J., FillInore, M.T., Nixon, S.J. (2014). Interactions between age and moderate alcohol effects on sirnulated driving performance. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 231 (3), 557-566.
Sullivan, E.V., Mathalon, D.H., Zipursky, R.B., Kersteen-Tucker, Z., Knight, R.T., Pfefferbaum, A. (1993). Factors of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test as measures of frontal-lobe function in schizophrenia and in chronic alcoholism. Psychiatry Research, 46 (2), 175-199.
Tarter, R.E. (1975). Psychological deficit in chronic alcoholics: a review. International Journal of the Addictions, 10, 327-368.
Tarter, R.E. (1980). Brain damage in chronic alcoholics: a review of the psychological evidence. W: D. Richter (red.), Addiction and Brain Damage (s. 267-297). London: Croom Helm.
Tarter, R.E., Jones, B.M., Simpson, C.D., Vega, A. (1971). Effects of task complexity and practice on performance during acute alcohol intoxication. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 33 (1), 307-318.
Valdez, P., Ramirez, C., Garcia, A. (2012). Circadian rhythms in cognitive performance: implications for neuropsychological assessment. Chronophysiology and Therapy, 2, 81-92.
Weissenborn, R., Duka, T. (2000). State-dependent effects of alcohol on explicit memory: the role of semantic associations. Psychopharmacology, 149 (1), 98-106.
Weissenborn, R., Duka, T. (2003). Acute alcohol effects on cognitive function in social drinkers: their relationship to drinking habits. Psychopharmacology, 165, 306-312.
Wiergowski, M. (2012). Propozycja interpretacji wyników analitycznych uzyskanych w pobliżu prawnej granicy stężeń dla stanu po użyciu alkoholu lub stanu nietrzeźwości. Archiwum Medycyny Sadowej i Kryminologii, LXII, 178-185.
Zheng, H., Kong, L., Chen, L., Zhang, H., Zheng, W. (2015). Acute Effects of Alcohol on the Human Brain: A Resting-State fMRI Study. BioMed Research International, doi: 10.1155/2015/947529
Tytuł: The effect of 0.1-0.25 mg/dm3 of breath alcohol concentration on cognitive functions in alcohol nondependent young adults
Autorzy: Monika Wiłkość, Magadalena Wiechowska, Ludmiła Zając-Lamparska, Anita Markowska, Maciej Michalak