- 學位論文
檳榔成癮者的抑制控制能力
Inhibition control function deficit in betel-quid-dependent chewers
摘要
在台灣，18歲以上的人口有6.4%的檳榔嚼食者。但是少有研究探討檳榔嚼食者與多向度抑制控制的關係，因此本研究欲以三向度抑制控制之觀點，探討檳榔成癮者是否具有抑制控制能力缺損，以三個作業：Antisaccade task、Flanker task、Recent-probe task，分別檢驗檳榔成癮者三向度的抑制控制能力：抑制優勢運動反應（Prepotent response inhibition）、抑制干擾物（Resistance to distractor interference）、抑制前向記憶（Resistance to proactive interference）。本研究以39位檳榔成癮組、39位菸酒控制組、41位健康控制組為樣本，探討三組之間在不同抑制控制作業下的反應，結果顯示：（1）三組在Antisaccade task上無顯著差異；（2）三組在Flanker task上無顯著差異；（3）檳榔成癮組在Recent-probe task各個情境中反應時間顯著大於菸酒控制組（4）三組在Recent-probe task第N個嘗試沒出現答案時有顯著差異，反應時間：檳榔成癮組 > 健康控制組 > 菸酒控制組；（5）三組在Recent-probe task在第N-1個嘗試沒出現但第N個嘗試有出現時有顯著差異，反應時間：檳榔成癮組 > 健康控制組 > 菸酒控制組；（6）三組在Recent-probe task第N-1個嘗試有出現但第N個嘗試沒出現時有顯著差異，錯誤率：檳榔成癮組 > 菸酒控制組 > 健康控制組。結論：檳榔嚼食者無抑制優勢運動反應與抑制干擾物能力上的缺損，而在抑制前向記憶能力上有顯著缺損。
並列摘要
In Taiwan, more than 6.4% of the population over the age of 18 are betel-quid chewers. However, few studies have explored the relationship between betel-quid-dependent chewers and multi-dimensional inhibitory control. We explore whether betel nut addicts have inhibitory control deficits from the perspective of three-dimensional inhibitory control. Used three tasks: Antisaccade task, Flanker task, and Recent-probe task. To test the three-dimensional inhibitory control ability of betel quid addicts: Prepotent response inhibition, Resistance to distractor interference, and Resistance to proactive interference. Thirty-nine betel-quid-dependent chewers (BQDC), 39 tobacco and alcohol controls (TAC), and 41 healthy controls (HC) were recruited to participate. The responses between the three groups under different inhibitory control tasks were explored, and the results showed: (1) There is no significant difference between the three groups in the Antisaccade task; (2) There is no significant difference in the Flanker task among the three groups; (3) The reaction time of the BQDC in each situation of the Recent-probe task is significantly more than TAC; (4) There is a significant difference between the three groups of reaction time when there was no answer in the N trial of the Recent-probe task. The reaction time of the BQDC is significantly more than TAC and HC; (5) There is a significant difference between the three groups of reaction time in the Recent-probe task when the N-1 trial had not to appear, but when the N trial attempt did appear. The reaction time of the BQDC is significantly more than TAC and HC; (6) There is a significant difference between the three groups of error rate in the N-1 trial of the Recent-probe task had appeared, but when the N trial does not appear. The error rate of the BQDC is significantly more than TAC and HC. Conclusion: betel-quid chewers do not exhibit deficits in the ability for prepotent response inhibition and resistance to distractor interference, but show significant deficits in the ability for resistance to proactive interference.