Abstract

Impulsivity is a feature of many brain disorders. Although often defined as the predisposition to act with an inadequate degree of deliberation, forethought, or control, it has proven difficult to measure. This may in part be due to the fact that it is a multifaceted construct, with impulsive decisions potentially arising as a result of a number of underlying mechanisms. Indeed, a “functional” degree of impulsivity may even promote effective behavior in healthy participants in a way that can be advantageous under certain circumstances. Although many tasks have been developed to study impulsivity, few examine decisions made rapidly, for time-sensitive rewards. In the current study we examine behavior in 59 adults on a manual “Traffic Light” task which requires participants to take risks under time pressure, if they are to maximize reward. We show that behavioral variables that index rapid anticipatory responding in this paradigm are correlated with one, specific self-report measure of impulsivity: “lack of premeditation” on the UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale. Participants who scored more highly on this subscale performed better on the task. Moreover, anticipatory behavior reduced significantly with age (18–79 years), an effect that continued to be upheld after correction for potential age differences in the ability to judge the timing of responses. Based on these findings, we argue that the Traffic Light task provides a parametric method to study one aspect of impulsivity in health and disease: namely, rapid decision-making in pursuit of risky, time-sensitive rewards.

Highlights

  • Impulsivity has been defined as the predisposition to act with a low or inadequate degree of deliberation, forethought, or control (Moeller et al, 2001)

  • We investigated whether the relationship between the frequency of penalized trials and self-reported impulsivity was more pronounced on penalized trials for which amber duration was longer (≥750 ms) vs. shorter (

  • We found that participants who incurred more penalties on the Traffic Light task accumulated higher mean reward

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Impulsivity has been defined as the predisposition to act with a low or inadequate degree of deliberation, forethought, or control (Moeller et al, 2001). An established self-report instrument, the UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale (Whiteside and Lynam, 2001), for example, distinguishes four cognitive dimensions that predispose to impulsive acts: (1) lack of premeditation or a tendency to act without deliberation; (2) lack of perseverance or inability to complete dull or difficult tasks; (3) urgency or acting rashly whilst upset; and (4) sensation-seeking or need for novelty and excitement. If the task demands are relatively simple but participants are under time pressure, people classified as being highly impulsive can sometimes perform better than those with low trait impulsivity (Dickman and Meyer, 1988) Such observations led Dickman to propose that there might be two general classes of impulsivity: “dysfunctional” and “functional” (Dickman, 1990). Functional impulsivity refers to the tendency to act rapidly with little forethought when this style of responding might be optimal

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call