Evidence of Executive Dysfunction in Co-occurring Substance Use Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder or Antisocial Personality Disorder

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMoody, Laraen
dc.contributor.committeechairBickel, Warren K.en
dc.contributor.committeememberStephens, Robert S.en
dc.contributor.committeememberFranck, Christopher T.en
dc.contributor.departmentPsychologyen
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-13T19:44:26Zen
dc.date.adate2015-02-06en
dc.date.available2017-06-13T19:44:26Zen
dc.date.issued2014-09-12en
dc.date.rdate2015-02-06en
dc.date.sdate2014-09-24en
dc.description.abstractBackground and Aims: Executive dysfunction is pervasive in substance-dependent individuals (Verdejo-García, Bechara, Recknor, & Perez-Garcia, 2006). As many as four-fifths of individuals in treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) have co-existing lifetime psychopathology. Executive function deficits are tied to markers of decreased quality of life including increases in negative life events (Green, Kern, Braff, & Mintz, 2000), maladaptive social functioning (Kurtz, Moberg, Ragland, Gur, & Gur, 2005) and worsened treatment outcomes (Czuchry & Dansereau, 2003). Despite evidence of executive dysfunction across several mental disorders, few studies investigate how the co-occurrence of psychopathologies in SUDs impacts executive functioning. Methods: Here, we compare measures of executive function (i.e., the Iowa Gambling Test, Letter Number Sequencing Test, Stroop Test, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Continuous Performance Test, Towers Test, and Delay Discounting Test) in individuals with a) substance use disorder, b) substance use disorder and co-occurring major depressive disorder, c) substance use disorder and co-occurring antisocial personality disorder, d) substance use disorder and co-occurring major depressive disorder and antisocial personality disorder and e) no substance use disorder or co-occurring psychopathology. Results: Regression models of respective executive function measure outcomes as a function of education, income, age, and group membership indicated that the Delay Discounting Test and Continuous Performance Test were the only significant overall models (F(4, 313) = 12.699, p < 0.001 and F(4, 307) = 2.659, p = 0.033, respectively). Conclusions: Overall the Delay Discounting Test and Continuous Performance Test were the most sensitive to differences between substance use and psychopathology profiles assessed.en
dc.description.degreeMaster of Scienceen
dc.identifier.otheretd-09242014-124042en
dc.identifier.sourceurlhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-09242014-124042/en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/78165en
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherVirginia Techen
dc.rightsIn Copyrighten
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en
dc.subjectPsychopathologyen
dc.subjectMajor Depressive Disorderen
dc.subjectAntisocial Personality Disorderen
dc.subjectSubstance Useen
dc.subjectExecutive Functionen
dc.titleEvidence of Executive Dysfunction in Co-occurring Substance Use Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder or Antisocial Personality Disorderen
dc.typeThesisen
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten
thesis.degree.disciplinePsychologyen
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen
thesis.degree.levelmastersen
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Scienceen

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Thumbnail Image
Name:
etd-09242014-124042_Moody_LM_T_2014.pdf
Size:
2.12 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
etd-09242014-124042_Moody_LM_T_2014_IRB.pdf
Size:
477.31 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

Masters Theses