Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Subst Abuse Treat. 2021 Apr 14;130:108408. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108408

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.

3-Way interaction effects on main study outcomes

Note: Lower scores are “better” for both outcomes. AUD reflects high (mean + 1SD) and low (mean −1SD) scores on the full AUDIT. AUDIT scores were entered in analyses as a continuous variable and graphed here as dichotomous for visualization purposes only.

For craving, the significant interaction was driven by differences at the post-stressor time point and differences within each group across time. Within the control group, the change from post-stressor to post-CR/SQ is significantly different based on severity of AUD. Within the cognitive reappraisal group, the change from post-stressor to post-CR/SQ is near-significant (p = .055) different based on severity of AUD. For SSRT, the significant interaction was driven by differences between groups at the post-CR/SQ time point.