. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Nov 1.

Published in final edited form as: Behav Modif. 2012 May 22;36(6):808–833. doi: 10.1177/0145445512446741

Table 3.

Affective Response Types: Means (SDs) and Between-Group Effect Sizes (d) of Cue-Elicited Change in Craving and Salivary Responding

Groups	Ms and SDs
	NA-NN			TA-TN
	n	Self-report craving	Salivation	n	Self-report craving	Salivation
Positive	20	1.33 (1.85)^a	0.46 (0.78)^a	24	1.64 (1.68)^a,b	0.38 (0.64)^a
Ambivalent	56	3.37 (2.34)^b	0.38 (0.87)^a	40	2.35 (2.05)^b	0.45 (0.91)^a
Indifferent	9	0.81 (0.72)^a	0.00 (0.43)^a	21	0.76 (1.38)^a	0.30 (0.89)^a
Negative	23	1.97 (1.98)^a,b	0.18 (0.41)^a	23	1.67 (2.43)^a,b	0.57 (1.00)^a

Group differences	Between-group effect sizes

Ambivalent– positive		0.93	−0.10		0.38	0.09
Ambivalent– negative		0.63	0.26		0.31	−0.13
Ambivalent– indifferent		1.18	0.47		0.87	0.17
Positive– negative		−0.34	0.47		−0.01	−0.23
Positive– indifferent		0.34	0.69		0.58	0.11
Negative– indifferent		0.69	0.45		0.47	0.29

Note: NA-NN reflects change in response from NN (neutral-image/in vivo neutral cue) to NA (neutral-image/in vivo alcohol cue) trial. TA-TN reflects change in response from TN (traumaimage/in vivo neutral cue) to TA (trauma-image/in vivo alcohol cue) trial. Means sharing similar superscripts do not differ significantly based on Scheffé corrections. Small effect size (d) = 0.2, medium effect size = 0.5, large effect size = 0.8.

Homogeneous subgroups comparing the four responder types for each dependent variable (i.e., comparison of means within same vertical column).