Abstract
RATIONALE: Alcohol dependence is characterised by motivational conflict (or ambivalence) in controlled cognitive processes, but it is unclear if ambivalence also exists within automatic cognitive processes, and if ambivalence operates between controlled and automatic processes. OBJECTIVE: To investigate ambivalence operating within and between controlled and automatic processes in alcohol dependence. METHOD: Alcohol-dependent patients who had recently completed inpatient alcohol detoxification (N = 47) and social drinking controls (N = 40) completed unipolar implicit association tests and self-report measures of alcohol approach and avoidance motivation and alcohol outcome expectancies. RESULTS: As predicted, both positive and negative alcohol outcome expectancies were stronger in alcohol-dependent patients compared to controls, indicative of ambivalence. Groups did not differ on implicit alcohol-positive associations, but alcohol-dependent participants had significantly weaker alcohol-negative associations than controls. Regression analyses revealed that implicit negative associations accounted for unique variance in group membership after controlling for alcohol outcome expectancies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that alcohol dependent patients possess weak automatic alcohol-negative associations but not strong automatic alcohol-positive associations, and they suggest the presence of conflict between controlled and automatic processes with regard to negative alcohol cognitions.