Measure Of Risk-taking Propensity Research Articles

Relationship of the balloon analog risk task to neurocognitive impairment differs by HIV serostatus and history of major depressive disorder

HIV and major depressive disorder (MDD) commonly co-occur and are both linked to greater risk-taking behavior, possibly due to neurocognitive impairment (NCI). The present study examined the concordance of the Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART), a gold standard measure of risk-taking propensity, with NCI and real-world sexual risk behaviors in PWH with comorbid MDD. Participants included 259 adults, stratified by HIV serostatus (HIV + /HIV −) and lifetime MDD (MDD + /MDD −), who completed neuropsychological testing, the BART, and sexual risk behavior questionnaires. Logistic regression, stratified by HIV serostatus, examined joint effects of MDD and BART (linear and quadratic) on NCI. Follow-up linear regressions examined sexual risk behavior and neurocognitive domain T-scores as correlates of the BART. NCI prevalence was lowest in HIV − /MDD − , but BART scores did not differ by HIV/MDD status. In the HIV + group, BART performance predicted NCI such that high and low BART scores related to greater odds of NCI, but only in dual-risk HIV + /MDD + individuals. HIV + /MDD + individuals with both low and high BART scores exhibited poorer learning and recall, whereas processing speed and executive function were only poor in low BART risk-taking HIV + /MDD + . Higher BART scores linearly related to higher sexual risk behaviors only in MDD + individuals, independent of HIV serostatus. Low and high risk-taking on the BART may reflect discrete neurocognitive profiles in HIV + /MDD + individuals, with differential implications for real-world sexual risk behavior. HIV and comorbid MDD may disturb corticostriatal circuits responsible for integrating affective and neurocognitive components of decision-making, thereby contributing to risk-averse and risk-taking phenotypes.

1077 The Association Between Sleep Problems And Risk-taking Behavior Differs Between Racial Majority And Minority Groups

Abstract Introduction Individuals with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) often experience poor sleep quality and elevated self-destructive behaviors. Among healthy individuals, poor sleep quality can lead to increased risk-taking behavior through decreased inhibition and/or increased willingness to take risks. However, it is unclear whether racial/ethnic background may influence this relationship, in particular among individuals with PTSD. We examined whether the relationship between sleep quality and risk propensity would differ between majority and minority racial groups in individuals with PTSD. Methods Seventy-six individuals (61.8% female; mean age=31.7, SD=8.8) with a clinical diagnosis of PTSD were administered the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) as a measure of sleep-related functional impairment of daily activities, and the Evaluation of Risk (EVAR) Scale as a measure of risk-taking propensity. Forty-seven individuals identified with the majority racial group (Caucasian) and 29 individuals identified themselves within the minority. Results There were no significant group differences for FOSQ and total EVAR risk-taking scores. However, the strength of association between measures differed significantly between groups (Z=1.95, p=.051). For the racial/ethnic majority, functional impairments due to lack of sleep were positively associated with risk-taking propensity (r=.460, p=.001); this relationship was not present for the minority group (r=.016, p=.936). Conclusion Self-reported functional impairments due to sleep loss significantly correlated with risk-taking propensity for those who identified themselves as part of the majority racial group but not for individuals who identified as part of a racial minority. Findings suggest that broad conclusions regarding the association between sleep disruption and risk-taking may not apply equally across racial/ethnic groups and such factors should be considered when evaluating studies of sleep and risk behaviors. Whether these differing effects are due to cultural factors or stable differences in biology is not known and will require additional research. Support W81XWH-14-1-0570

Risk-taking propensity and (un)healthy behavior in Germany

BackgroundEarlier research in South Africa (Szrek et al., 2012) confirmed the one-item Dohmen measure (Dohmen et al., 2011) to be a significant predictor of risky health behavior. MethodsThe present study investigated the relationship of the Dohmen measure with other measures of risk-taking propensity (e.g., Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale), and its predictive power for smoking, problematic drinking, problematic car driving, and problematic sexual behavior, in a sample of 63 patients of psychiatric clinics and 102 healthy participants in Germany. ResultsThe Dohmen measure was significantly positively related to other involved instruments. It served as predictor of two of the four investigated risky health activities (i.e., smoking, problematic drinking). ConclusionsThe Dohmen measure seems to be a valid and time efficient instrument to assess general risk-taking propensity, as well as specific propensity for smoking and problematic drinking in Germany.

Is risk-taking propensity a familial vulnerability factor for alcohol use? An examination in two independent samples

Research indicates that increased risk-taking propensity (RTP) is associated with higher alcohol use. There is also some evidence to suggest that it is not just a state factor or ‘scar,’ but instead a vulnerability factor. If this is the case, increased RTP should be evident in healthy individuals that are at risk for alcohol use. To date, few studies have examined whether RTP is a familial vulnerability factor and thus, the aim of the current study was to test whether RTP aggregates within families and if increased RTP is evident in biological family members at risk for alcohol use. Sample 1 included 87 biological, adult sibling pairs and Sample 2 included 111 biological mother and adolescent dyads (total N = 396). All participants completed a behavioral measure of RTP and were assessed for alcohol use. Results in both samples were strikingly consistent. In Sample 1, RTP was correlated among siblings and greater frequency of proband alcohol use predicted greater sibling RTP, over and above sibling alcohol use. In Sample 2, RTP was correlated among mothers and their offspring and greater maternal alcohol use problems predicted greater adolescent RTP over and above adolescent substance use. Together, these findings suggest that RTP may be a familial vulnerability factor for alcohol use as it aggregates within families and is increased in relatives of individuals with higher levels of alcohol use.

Development and validation of the Occupational Therapy Risk Propensity Test (OT-RiPT) for drivers with disability

Background: Male drivers in the 16- to 19-year age group have a nine-fold increase in their crash risk compared with 25- to 34-year-olds who have a relative risk of 2.3. Crash risk in young drivers has been directly linked to risk-taking behaviour. This paper reports the development of a video risk assessment tool for use with drivers. Aim/objective: This paper reports on the process of validating and investigating the reliability of the Occupational Therapy Risk Propensity Test (OT-RiPT) to measure risk-taking propensity. Material and methods: 20 healthy male participants were recruited. OT-RiPT scores were correlated with driving experience. Internal consistency was investigated using Cronbach’s alpha. Face validity was established. The OT-RiPT and a validated driver behaviour questionnaire were administered and the results correlated to establish discriminant validity. Results: There was no significant correlation between driving experience and OT-RiPT scores. Good internal consistency was established. OT-RiPT has high face validity. Discriminant validity was demonstrated. Conclusion and significance: Pending further testing, OT-RiPT shows promise as a reliable and valid measure of risk-taking propensity in young drivers.

Impulsivity and risk-taking in borderline personality disorder with and without substance use disorders.

Impulsivity and risk taking propensity were assessed in participants with borderline personality disorder (BPD-only; n = 19), BPD and a current or past substance use disorder (BPD-SUD; n = 32), and a matched comparison group (MC; n = 28). Participants were administered behavioral measures of two facets of the multidimensional construct of impulsivity [GoStop, delay discounting task (DDT)], one measure of risk-taking propensity [Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART)], and two self-report measures of impulsivity (i.e., Barrett Impulsiveness Scale, Eysenck Impulsiveness Scale). The BPD-SUD group, but not the BPD-only group, discounted delayed rewards faster than the MC group on the DDT, suggesting that the BPD-SUD/MC group difference may be because of the SUD rather than BPD. In contrast, both the BPD-SUD and BPD-only groups exhibited poorer behavioral response inhibition compared with the MC group, but the two BPD groups did not differ from one another. This finding suggests that the differences in behavioral response inhibition may be because of BPD rather than SUD and that behavioral response disinhibition may be a core feature of BPD. None of the groups differed on the measure of risk-taking propensity (i.e., BART). On self-report questionnaires, the BPD-SUD group reported more impulsivity than the BPD-only group and both BPD groups reported more impulsivity than the MC group. Data from the DDT and self-report measures provide partial support for the hypothesis that BPD individuals with a SUD are more impulsive than BPD individuals without a SUD on some facets of impulsivity (e.g., desire to obtain a smaller immediate reward rather than wait to obtain a larger reward in the future). Results suggest that behavioral response inhibition may be a novel treatment outcome variable for BPD treatment studies.

Impulsivity and decision making in the balloon analogue risk-taking task

It is not clear whether impulsivity is related to decision-making processes. Although recent studies have proposed that these kinds of processes are not related to impulsivity, most of them have focused only on certain dimensions of impulsivity such as “narrow impulsivity” and not taken into account other dimensions such as functional impulsivity or venturesomeness. Using Dickman’s model of dysfunctional and functional impulsivity we have analysed the relationships between measures of these dimensions, the dimensions measured by the I 7 questionnaire, and various parameters of the Balloon Analogue Risk Taking Task (BART). The BART is a widely used measure of risk-taking propensity which we have modified in order to manipulate the risk associated with the task. The results obtained show that neither dysfunctional impulsivity nor narrow impulsivity are related to decision processes in this task while functional impulsivity is related to an “impulsive decision-making” style only in the low risk condition. Venturesomeness also showed a significant relationship with BART results in the low risk condition, although partial correlation analysis suggested that these results are mainly due to functional impulsivity.

Evaluation of Entrepreneurial Risk-Taking using Magnitude of Loss Scale

The importance of risk-taking in business ventures has been emphasised by many. Attempts to distinguish entrepreneurs on their risk-taking propensity have produced conflicting results. Data on two measures of risk-taking propensity were collected from entrepreneurs, prospective entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneur others. While the groups did not differ significantly on risk-taking propensity as measured by the Choice Dilemma Questionnaire, entrepreneurs and prospective entrepreneurs differed significantly from others on the Magnitude of Loss Questionnaire. Similarly, entrepreneurial aspirants differed significantly from the nonentrepreneur group. These results highlight the significance of loss, an important aspect in risk-taking, which is often ignored in entrepreneurial and managerial studies. The riskiness in business ventures which has been the main stumbling block for many is not the low probability of success but the high stakes involved in entrepreneurship.