Table 4.
Description and main results of studies evaluating emotional regulation in binge drinking.
| Authors (year) | Participants | Intervention | Comparator | Experimental design | Outcomes | Quality | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample (n) | Age | Gender ratio (% of males) | Inclusion criteria | Binge drinking criteria | Control group/variable | Processes measured | Task/scale | Stimuli | Main results | Limits | ||
| Cohen-Gilbert et al. (2017) | 23 college students | Range 18–20 Mean 18.80 |
Not reported | No MRI contraindication, neurological disorder, and use of illicit drugs. Low use of marijuana and tobacco No alcohol use before the experiment |
The number of binge drinking episodes (≥ 70 alcohol gr for boys or ≥ 56 for girls in one occasion) in the three-past month | Continuous view of binge drinking (0 – 19 BD episodes in the past three months) Contrast between emotional images (positive and negative) and neutral ones |
Impact of emotional scenes on the ability to inhibit an automatic response | Structured Clinical Interview Counseling Center Assessment of Psychological Symptoms Go/No-Go task (letters as target stimuli; emotional images as preliminary background) fMRI recording |
Positive, negative, and neutral images from the IAPS | Negative emotional background: higher binge drinking episodes related to decreased activation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, and anterior cingulate cortex. Positive emotional background: non-significant results |
Small sample size | 76.47 |
| Ehret et al. (2013) | 1,084 college students | Mean age of 20.1 | 37% | N/A | At least one binge drinking episode (≥ 70 alcohol gr for boys or ≥ 56 for girls) in the last month | Analyses were adjusted for gender, membership affiliation in a fraternity or sorority, and typical weekly drinking | Emotional regulation | Daily Drinking Questionnaire The Rutgers Alcohol Problems Protective Behavioral Strategies Drinking Refusal Self-Efficacy (social pressure, emotional relief, opportunistic) Drinking Motives (enhancement, social, coping, conformity) |
N/A | Greater binge drinking in participants with lower protective behavioral strategies, poor drinking refusal self-efficacy for social pressure or emotional regulation Participants with high drinking refusal self-efficacy in social and emotional contexts: protective behavioral strategies were not related to alcohol consequences |
No information on the causality | 64.71 |
| Herman et al. (2018) | 30 college students | Range 18–37 Mean 23.40 |
30% | No MRI contradiction, mental or neurological disorder, no significant impairment of vision | Binge drinking score as a continuous variable | Continuous view of binge drinking Control by comparing fearful expressions to neutral ones |
Inhibition of fear (facial expressions) Impact of fearful emotional expressions on decision-making abilities (delay discounting) |
Barratt Impulsiveness Scale Alcohol Use Questionnaire Affective Stop Signal Task (fearful and neutral facial expressions as target stimuli) Affective Delay Discounting Task (fearful and neutral facial before target trials) fMRI recording |
Emotional facial expressions of fear and neutral facial expressions | Successful inhibition of fear: higher binge drinking scores related to decreased activation in frontal and parietal brain areas Delayed reward after the fearful presentation: higher binge drinking scores related to decreased frontopolar activation |
No evaluation of socio-emotional functioning | 70.59 |
| Laghi et al. (2018) | 1,004 high-school students | Range 16–21 Mean 17.90 |
39.34% | N/A | At least one binge drinking episode (≥ 50 alcohol gr for boys or ≥ 40 for girls on one occasion) in the past two weeks | Comparison of three groups: 227 BD, 89 binge eaters, 37 participants presenting both binge behaviors | Emotion regulation | The binge eating scale Drinking quantity and frequency The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (expression suppression and cognitive reappraisal) |
N/A | Cognitive reappraisal: no group difference Expression suppression: BD < binge eaters and participants with both binge behaviors |
No consideration of confounding variables (e.g., negative emotions) | 70.59 |
| Trojanowski et al. (2019) | 776 college students | Range 17–22 Mean 18.79 |
20.10% | N/A | At least one binge drinking episode (≥ 70 alcohol gr for boys or ≥ 56 for girls on one occasion) in the past month | Mixture modeling was used to create four groups: BD, binge eaters, both bingers, and low bingers | Emotion regulation | Eating Disorder Examination Drinking Timeline Follow-back Drinking Motives and Eating Motives Questionnaire Thinness and Restricting Expectancies Inventory UPPS-P (negative and positive urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, sensation seeking) Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale Beck Depression Inventory AUDIT Quality of Life Inventory |
N/A | Depression, eating disorders, impulsivity, emotion regulation, quality of life: Low binge < binge eaters and both bingers Social and enhancement motives: BD > low binge |
No information on the causality | 82.24 |
Note. All alcohol units have been converted in grams of pure ethanol, according to the number of grams per unit in each country. BD = binge drinkers; AUDIT = Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test; fMRI = functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging.