{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021015761821366025, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.422077922077922, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Isolating Proactive Slowing from Reactive Inhibitory Control in Heavy Drinkers

Abstract Background: Impaired inhibitory control is thought to contribute to alcohol (mis)use. However, current definitions of inhibitory control are over-simplified by a failure to distinguish reactive inhibitory control from proactive slowing. Objectives: To distinguish “reactive” inhibitory control and proactive slowing in heavy drinkers, and characterize associations between both constructs and individual differences in alcohol consumption. Methods: Sixty heavy drinkers completed self-reported measures of alcohol consumption, followed by two modified Stop-Signal tasks and an AX-continuous performance task in a laboratory setting. Results: Heavy drinkers demonstrated proactive slowing when inhibition was more likely but individual differences in proactive slowing and reactive stopping were unrelated to individual differences in alcohol consumption. Conclusions/Importance: Within a sample of heavy drinkers, individual differences in reactive inhibitory control and proactive slowing are unrelated to individual differences in alcohol consumption.