（甲基）安非他命戒癮者內隱態度：以工作記憶負荷作為調節變項

（甲基）安非他命是台灣目前被使用最多的非法成癮物質第二名，且近十年來濫用者有大幅上升的趨勢，長期濫用除了造成個體生心理上的危害，也衍生許多公共衛生及社會問題。過去，許多學者採用雙重歷程模型來解釋成癮行為，與自動化歷程有關的內隱態度也已被多項研究證實能夠有效預測物質使用且與戒癮的成效和復發有關。然而，目前已有部分研究指出測量內隱態度的內隱連結測驗可能仍會受到控制化歷程所影響，而工作記憶負荷便是調節雙重歷程對內隱連結測驗影響的重要因子之一。本研究欲探討工作記憶負荷（WML）是否能夠調節（甲基）安非他命戒癮組與健康組在正、負向安非他命內隱態度的連結強度。研究對象為21位正在接受安非他命戒癮門診治療的戒癮組，以及21位從未吸食過毒品的健康組。研究採用工作記憶負荷作業結合單極單一目標內隱連結測驗（Unipolar SC-IAT）測量不同WML下，兩組別在正、負向安非他命內隱態度連結強度的差異，同時透過歷程分離程序檢驗工作記憶負荷作業的操弄是否能夠影響雙重歷程在Unipolar SC-IAT的相對貢獻。研究結果顯示，WML無法調節組別與安非他命內隱態度間的關係，不論是在正向或負向安非他命內隱態度均不會因為組別或WML的不同而有所差異。WML操弄檢驗方面，兩組參與者在高WML時，WML作業反應時間均顯著較低WML時長；但不同WML下，控制化與自動化歷程在正、負向安非他命Unipolar SC-IAT的貢獻均無顯著差異。顯示雖然高WML作業確實較低WML需消耗更多工作記憶資源，但這樣的實驗操弄並不會影響個體雙重歷程在Unipolar SC-IAT的相對貢獻。這可能是由於個體間本身認知能力的差異或是情境因素直接或間接地影響Unipolar SC-IAT的結果而產生混淆。未來在進行類似研究時，除了需考慮情境因素外，建議可加入獨立的認知作業，以單獨評估個體間執行功能之差異，並將其納入控制變項。

Methamphetamine is currently the second most common illegal drug in Taiwan. In the past, many scholars have used Dual-process model to explain addictive behavior. Implicit attitudes which associated with automatic process had been shown to be a strong predictor of drug abuse. The present study aimed to investigate whether working memory load（WML） can moderate the association between amphetamine implicit attitudes and different groups. 21 methamphetamine-dependent patients and 21 nondrug matched healthy controls were recruited in this study. Both groups completed four Unipolar Single Target Implicit Association Tests （Unipolar SC-IAT）combined with WML tasks to measure the difference in positive and negative amphetamine implicit association between two groups under high and low WML conditions. We also investigated whether the manipulation of WMLs can affect the relative contribution of dual-process model in Unipolar SC-IAT through Process dissociation procedure（PDP）. Results showed that WMLs were unable to moderate the relationship between groups and amphetamine implicit attitudes. Regarding the manipulation of WMLs, both groups had significantly longer reaction times in high-WML than in low-WML task; however, there was no significant difference between the contributions of controlled and automatic processes to neither positive nor negative Unipolar SC-IAT under different WML conditions. Such results may be due to contextual factors or individual differences in cognitive abilities. When conducting similar studies in the future, it is recommended adding independent cognitive tasks to assess individual differences in cognitive abilities and used as a control variable.