Attentional bias to betel quid cues: An eye tracking study.

The World Health Organization regards betel quid as a human carcinogen, and DSM-IV and ICD-10 dependence symptoms may develop with heavy use. This study, conducted in central Taiwan, investigated whether betel quid chewers can exhibit overt orienting to selectively respond to the betel quid cues. Twenty-four male chewers' and 23 male nonchewers' eye movements to betel-quid-related pictures and matched pictures were assessed during a visual probe task. The eye movement index showed that betel quid chewers were more likely to initially direct their gaze to the betel quid cues, t(23) = 3.70, p < .01, d = .75, and spent more time, F(1, 23) = 4.58, p < .05, η2 = .17, and were more fixated, F(1, 23) = 5.18, p < .05, η2 = .18, on them. The visual probe index (response time) failed to detect the chewers' attentional bias. The current study provided the first eye movement evidence of betel quid chewers' attentional bias. The results demonstrated that the betel quid chewers (but not the nonchewers) were more likely to initially direct their gaze to the betel quid cues, and spent more time and were more fixated on them. These findings suggested that when attention is directly measured through the eye tracking technique, this methodology may be more sensitive to detecting attentional biases in betel quid chewers. (PsycINFO Database Record

Spatial short-term memory is impaired in dependent betel quid chewers.

RATIONAL: Betel quid is regarded as a human carcinogen by the World Health Organization. It remains unknown whether chewing betel quid has a chronic effect on healthy betel quid chewers' memory. OBJECTIVES: The present study aims to investigate whether chewing betel quid can affect short-term memory (STM). METHODS: Three groups of participants (24 dependent chewers, 24 non-dependent chewers, and 24 non-chewers) were invited to carry out the matrix span task, the object span task, and the digit span task. All span tasks' results were adopted to assess spatial STM, visual STM, and verbal STM, respectively. Besides, there are three set sizes (small, medium, and large) in each span task. RESULTS: For the matrix span task, results showed that the dependent chewers had worse performances than the non-dependent chewers and the non-chewers at medium and large set sizes. For the object span task and digit span task, there were no differences in between groups. In each group, recognition performances were worse with the increasing set size and showing successful manipulation of memory load. CONCLUSIONS: The current study provided the first evidence that dependent betel quid chewing can selectively impair spatial STM rather than visual STM and verbal STM. Theoretical and practical implications of this result are discussed.