Prof. Wiers is full professor of developmental psychopathology at the University of Amsterdam.
The goal of my research group is to increase understanding into the (neuro-) cognitive processes involved in the etiology of addiction and related disorders and to use this knowledge to develop interventions. Together with my colleagues, I developed the alcohol-related approach-avoidance task (AAT) as a novel measure of automatic, implicit appetitive tendencies toward alcohol (Wiers et al., 2009). Based on the AAT, we subsequently developed automatic action tendency re-training as an implicit intervention designed to reduce appetitive tendencies toward alcohol and thereby decrease alcohol consumption in students (Wiers et al 2010), and increase abstinence in alcoholic patients (Wiers et al., 2011, replications: Eberl et al 2013; Rinck, Wiers et al., 2018; Manning et al 2021). We also conducted the first randomized controlled trial (RCT) on attentional re-training in alcohol use disorders (AUDs, Schoenmakers et al., 2010), and conducted research on neurocognitive predictors of trajectories of addiction (e.g. Cousijn et al., 2012), and on the effects of various novel interventions: re-training and transcranical Direct Current stimulationtDCS, e.g. Gladwin et al., 2012; Den Uyl et al, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018) for addiction. Although the focus of my work has been on (neuro)cognitive processes involved in addictive behaviors, we also developed training for other disorders (e.g. anxiety, depression). We launched a site for the public, where people can take part in online training (www.impliciet.eu), and we aim for a further integration of Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT) with Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) applications, for which we now also develop mobile and gamified varieties.
With my colleagues, I published widely-cited dual-process models for addictions (e.g. Wiers & Stacy, 2006; Wiers et al., 2007; Stacy & Wiers, 2010), and health behaviors (Hofmann, Friese & Wiers, 2008). More recently, we reformulated our theoretical perspective (Gladwin et al., 2011; Wiers et al., 2013; Hommel & Wiers, 2017; Wiers & Gladwin, 2017), given neural implausibility and homunculus problems associated with original dual-process models, as we and others identified. We proposed a new perspective in which automatic and controlled processes constitute a continuum, with (processing-) time (Gladwin et al., 2011) and meta-control (Hommel & Wiers, 2017) as moderators. From this perspective, human behavior is generally goal-directed, with different goals moving us in different directions: immediate short-term goals may conflict with long-term goals, with akrasia problems relating to a general tendency to value short-term goals stronger (delay-discounting), see Gladwin et al., 2011; Köpetz et al., 2013). In contrast to dual process models, executive control (EC) functions to develop and emerge from a competitive and interactive EC network (ECN) managing input and different goals, rather than from an independent top-down control system. Thus, our new perspective emphasizes the interwoven nature of processes underlying ability and motivation to control impulses. It dovetails with current functional network perspectives, in which large-scale neurocognitive networks interact to guide behavior. I emphasize the dynamic and reversible nature of neurocognitive abnormalities associated with addictions and related problems, either through behavioral change (e.g., prolonged abstinence), or with targeted interventions, such as cognitive training, or neuro-rehabilitation and –modulation.
In a series of studies, we tested both relatively automatic processes (attentional bias; memory associations; approach tendencies) and executive control processes as individual difference measures. What we consistently found was that in individuals with relatively low executive control functions, automatic processes primarily predicted their addictive behaviors, while in individuals with relatively high executive control, reflective processes (e.g. expected outcomes) predicted their addictive behaviors (Grenard et al., 2008; Thush et al., 2008; Houben & Wiers, 2009). We found the same dissociation for the prediction of other impulsive behaviors, including eating behavior in restraint eaters, sexual interest and aggression (Hofmann et al.,2008) and for aggression after alcohol (Wiers et al., 2009, Pharmacol, Biochem Behav). In high-risk adolescents we found that an alcohol-approach bias predicts escalation of drinking in those adolescents with relatively weakly developed executive control functions (Peeters et al, 2012; 2013). We also started studying acute alcohol effects from this perspective and found that attentional bias in heavy drinkers is stronger found stronger attentional bias after alcohol than after placebo and the correlation between attentional bias and approach bias was markedly stronger after alcohol than after placebo (Schoenmakers et al., 2008; Field et al 2010; Korucuoglu et al 2014).
We are interested in the study of neurocognitive mechanisms underlying the psychological processes described above and in genetic associations with these processes. Regarding the latter, we found that heavy drinking carriers of the G-Allele in the OPRM1 gene showed stronger cue-induced craving (Van den Wildenberg et al., 2007) and stronger automatic approach tendencies for alcohol, as well as for other appetitive stimuli (Wiers et al., 2009, Genes Brain Behav). We are currently studying genetic correlates of attentional bias as well (Sara Pieters). In addition to cognitive measures we use psychophysiological indices of underlying processes (e.g. eye movements, Schoenmakers et al., 2008; Friese et al., 2010), EEG and fMRI (see papers Cousijn et al; Gladwin et al; Korucuoglu et al; Kaag et al; Schulte et al), and several papers from the ENIGMA consortium.
From the general perspective outlined above, we have developed new interventions, aimed at reducing the influence of impulsive processes on behavior, and to increase the influence of reflective/control processes . This can be done by varieties of so called cognitive bias modification (CBM) interventions, such as attentional re-training (alcohol: Schoenmakers et al., 2007; 2010; Rinck, Wiers et al., 2018), cigarette smoking: Elfeddali et al 2016), or through approach-bias re-training (Wiers et al., 2010; 2011; Eberl et a 2013a,b; Rinck, Wiers et al., 2018; Manning et al 2021). We also work on increasing executive control (e.g., Houben et al, 2011). For a reviews of training-studies in addiction and related psychopathology, see Wiers et al (2013, Clinical Psychological Science; 2018 Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs). Note that when synthesizing research on interventions, it is crucial to distinguish between proof of principle (PoP) studies in volunteers and RCTs in patients, which represent different phases of the experimental medicine approach to intervention-development (Sheeran et al., 2017; Wiers et al., 2018). Once separated, the pattern is clear: PoP studies have short-lived effects on behavior, in case the targeted bias is successfully changed and RCTs in which CT is added to treatment result in long-term clinical effects (about 10% reduction in relapse one year later, an effect size similar to medication for alcohol use disorders, see Wiers et al., 2018a,b). This conclusion was corroborated by our recent Bayesian individual patient data meta-analysis including clinical RCTs only (Boffo et al in 2019 Neuropsychology Review), while it was clear that further research is needed.
Based on findings in basic research into cognitive processes underlying Approach Bias Modification (a series of studies of Van Dessel and colleagues), we recently proposed a new variety of CBM: ABC training, where the A stands for personalized Antecedents (contextual cues), the B for personally-relevant Behavioral alternatives to achieve the same goal, and the C for the personally relevant Consequences of both behavioral choices. See Wiers, Van Dessel & Köpetz, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2020) for details. We are currently testing this new approach for smoking cessation (Jorien Treur) and reducing alcohol intake (Ting Pan).
He is internationally known for his work on assessing and changing implicit cognitive processes in addiction. He published over 400 international papers and many books and book-chapters. He received the prestigious VIDI (2002) and VICI (2008) research grants from the Dutch National Science Foundation (N.W.O.) for research on implicit cognition and addiction. With Alan Stacy, he edited the Handbook of Implicit Cognition and Addiction (SAGE, 2006). He has been senior editor of the no 1 ranked journal in the field of substance abuse (Addiction) since 2009, and on the editorial board of several other Addiction journals.
Together with Claudi Bockting, Reinout Wiers co-chairs the interdisciplinary centre for urban mental health, a UvA research priority area, with the mission to unravel new pathways to improve urban mental health:
from complexity to action. A position paper was published in Lancet Psychiatry (2021)
I am involved as co-PI in the gravitation project New Science of Mental Disorders, where I lead the WP on the role of cognitive control in the development and treatment of mental disorders from the network perspective. See: https://www.nsmd.eu/
With Pim Cuijpers and Heleen Riper (VU), Wiers started the caring universities project, followed by UvAcare with the head of the student physicians Peter Vonk. General aim is to help students with mental health problems with scalable e-health solutions. All students (including PhD students) are regularly invited to take part in an online mental health screener, and those who meet criteria are invited to take part in CBT-based e-health.
In addition to N.W.O. Vici and Vidi grants, he received a total of 17 grants as P.I> and another 9 grants, as co-PI, including an EU WP7 grant (AliceRap).
Nederlandse publicaties, in chronologische volgorde.
International Books and Chapters