Rapid-response Impulsivity Research Articles

Impulsivity and reduced quality of life in persons with paraplegia.

Low Quality of Life (QoL) in persons with paraplegia may stem from impulsive behaviors. Impulsivity in persons with paraplegia and persistently low QoL has seldom been probed but could be targeted with cognitive behavioral therapies. Determine how task-assessed and self-report impulsivity relate to quality of life (QoL) in adults with paraplegia. In a preliminary study, 33 adults with paraplegia after traumatic SCI were administered verbal interviews on QoL from the PROMIS item bank at baseline and at six-month follow-up, along with several computerized metrics of impulsivity at baseline. A cluster of (n = 10) participants characterized by high levels of negative affect and low levels of resilience and life satisfaction across both baseline and follow-up showed significantly greater negative urgency impulsivity (p = 0.007) as well as significantly lower mindfulness and self-care in some domains (all p < 0.05), compared to the cluster of participants (n = 23) who showed higher life satisfaction and resilience. Behavioral metrics of delay discounting and rapid-response (motoric) impulsivity did not significantly differ (all p > 0.05) between the two clusters of participants. These data suggest that novel interventions that reduce trait impulsivity in other disorders could be applied to potentially reduce risk for reduced self-care and QoL in individuals with paraplegia.

Emotional Rapid Response Impulsivity in Incarcerated Men and Non-Incarcerated Controls

ABSTRACT So far, few studies have assessed emotional rapid response impulsivity (RRI) in incarcerated men. Available studies use varying methodological approaches and show mixed results, but incarcerated individuals are more likely to be impaired by emotional RRI. None of these studies, however, reported on any correlational or regression analysis assessing whether emotional RRI was linearly related to antisocial behavior in general or aggression and misconduct in particular. The current study investigated whether incarcerated individuals (n = 283) show impaired performance on an emotional Go/No-Go task compared to non-incarcerated controls (n = 51), and whether performance is associated with increased trait aggression, and within-prison misconduct. The results indicate that incarcerated individuals indeed show impaired emotional RRI compared to non-incarcerated controls, irrespective of emotional condition, but impaired emotional RRI was not related to trait aggression or within-prison misconduct. The impairment, relative to non-offending controls, could therefore be related to other factors than their anti-social behavior, which could hamper the use of emotional RRI in risk assessment or forensic clinical practice.

The use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to reduce impulsivity and aggression in adults with mild intellectual developmental disabilities: the tDCS-RIADD randomised controlled trial protocol

BackgroundChallenging behaviours, in particular aggressive behaviours, are prevalent among people with intellectual developmental disabilities. Predictors of challenging behaviours are numerous, including past history of aggression, poor coping skills and impulsivity. Factors like motor or rapid-response impulsivity (RRI) have neurobiological underpinnings that may be amenable to change via neuromodulation using non-invasive brain stimulation techniques like transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).MethodsThis study aims to determine the efficacy of anodal tDCS in reducing RRI and incidents of aggression in people with intellectual developmental disabilities (IDD) in residential or hospital settings. Using a single blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial design, adults with IDD, with a history of impulsivity leading to aggression, will be randomised to receive either repetitive anodal or sham tDCS applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Outcome measures assessing impulsivity and aggression will be collected for up to 1 month following the last tDCS session.DiscussionThe results of this study may pave the way for developing targeted interventions for impulsivity and aggressive behaviours in people with IDD.

Considering Motor Excitability During Action Preparation in Gambling Disorder: A Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Study.

A lack of inhibitory control appears to contribute to the development and maintenance of addictive disorders. Among the mechanisms thought to assist inhibitory control, an increasing focus has been drawn on the so-called preparatory suppression, which refers to the drastic suppression observed in the motor system during action preparation. Interestingly, deficient preparatory suppression has been reported in alcohol use disorders. However, it is currently unknown whether this deficit also concerns behavioral, substance-free, addictions, and thus whether it might represent a vulnerability factor common to both substance and behavioral addictive disorders. To address this question, neural measures of preparatory suppression were obtained in gambling disorder patients (GDPs) and matched healthy control subjects. To do so, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was applied over the left and the right motor cortex to elicit motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in both hands when participants were performing a choice reaction time task. In addition, choice and rapid response impulsivity were evaluated in all participants, using self-report measures and neuropsychological tasks. Consistent with a large body of literature, the MEP data revealed that the activity of the motor system was drastically reduced during action preparation in healthy subjects. Surprisingly, though, a similar MEP suppression was observed in GDPs, indicating that those subjects do not globally suffer from a deficit in preparatory suppression. By contrast, choice impulsivity was higher in GDPs than healthy subjects, and a higher rapid response impulsivity was found in the more severe forms of GD. Altogether, those results demonstrated that although some aspects of inhibitory control are impaired in GDPs, these alterations do not seem to concern preparatory suppression. Yet, the profile of individuals suffering of a GD is very heterogeneous, with only part of them presenting an impulsive disposition, such as in patients with alcohol use disorders. Hence, a lack of preparatory suppression may be only shared by this sub-type of addicts, an interesting issue for future investigation.

Comparison of rapid response impulsivity and choice impulsivity between children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and normal children

Comparison of rapid response impulsivity and choice impulsivity between children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and normal children

Linking Cognitive Measures of Response Inhibition and Reward Sensitivity to Trait Impulsivity.

Impulsivity is regarded as a multifaceted construct that comprises two dimensions: rapid-response impulsivity and reward-delay impulsivity. It is unclear, however, which aspects of trait impulsivity, as assessed by self-report measures are related to rapid-response impulsivity and/or to reward-delay impulsivity, as different results have been reported in studies using both self-report and cognitive measures. This study aimed to directly relate self-report measures of impulsivity to cognitive measures of impulsivity in individuals at low- or high-levels on two impulsivity dimensions, specifically rapid-response impulsivity and reward-delay impulsivity. Participants were classified into high- or low-impulsivity groups based on (1) level of rapid-response impulsivity (determined by BIS-11 Motor subscale scores); (2) level of reward-delay impulsivity (determined by BIS/BAS subscale scores); and (3) a combination of rapid-response impulsivity and reward-delay impulsivity levels. Impulsivity was assessed using Go/No-Go, Stop-Signal and Delay-Discounting tasks and self-report measures. The high rapid-response impulsivity group showed significantly higher reward-delay impulsivity on both, the Delay-Discounting tasks and on self-report measures assessing reward-delay impulsivity, than the low-risk group. Based on the level of reward-delay impulsivity, the high reward-delay impulsivity group scored significantly higher on task-based (cognitive) and self-report measures assessing rapid-response inhibition than the low reward-delay impulsivity group. Combining both dimensions of impulsivity showed that the high-impulsivity group performed significantly worse in rapid-response paradigms and temporally discounted significantly more impulsively than the low-impulsivity group. Thus, combined impulsivity factors provide better assessment of impulsivity than each dimension alone. In conclusion, robust differences in impulsivity can be identified in non-clinical young adults.

The Patterns of Rapid Response and Choice Impulsivity in Young Adults with Smart-Phone Addiction Tendencies

The Patterns of Rapid Response and Choice Impulsivity in Young Adults with Smart-Phone Addiction Tendencies

Rapid-Response Impulsivity Predicts Depression and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptomatology at 1-Year Follow-Up in Blast-Exposed Service Members

ObjectiveTo determine if elevated rapid-response impulsivity after blast exposure (as a putative marker of ventral prefrontal cortex [vPFC] damage) is predictive of future elevated affective symptomatology in blast-exposed service members. DesignLongitudinal design with neurocognitive testing at initial assessment and 1-year follow-up assessment of psychiatric symptomatology by telephone interview. SettingVeterans Administration medical centers and postdeployment assessment centers at military bases. ParticipantsBlast-exposed U.S. military personnel (N=84) ages 19 to 39 years old. InterventionsNot applicable. Main Outcome MeasuresCenter for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) scores, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist Version 5 (PCL-5) scores, and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-C (AUDIT-C) scores at the 12-month follow-up telephone interview. ResultsAfter controlling for age and affective symptom scores reported at the initial assessment, commission errors on the Continuous Performance Test-II of the initial assessment were predictive of higher symptom scores on the CES-D and PCL-5 at follow-up, but were not predictive of AUDIT-C scores. ConclusionsElevated rapid-response impulsivity, as a behavioral marker of reduced top-down frontocortical control, is a risk factor for elevated mood and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms over time in blast-exposed individuals. Future longitudinal studies with predeployment neurobehavioral testing could enable attribution of this relation to blast-related vPFC damage.

Rapid-response impulsivity: Definitions, measurement issues, and clinical implications.

Impulsivity is a multifaceted construct that is a core feature of multiple psychiatric conditions and personality disorders. However, progress in understanding and treating impulsivity is limited by a lack of precision and consistency in its definition and assessment. Rapid-response impulsivity (RRI) represents a tendency toward immediate action that occurs with diminished forethought and is out of context with the present demands of the environment. Experts from the International Society for Research on Impulsivity (InSRI) met to discuss and evaluate RRI measures in terms of reliability, sensitivity, and validity, with the goal of helping researchers and clinicians make informed decisions about the use and interpretation of findings from RRI measures. Their recommendations are described in this article. Commonly used clinical and preclinical RRI tasks are described, and considerations are provided to guide task selection. Tasks measuring two conceptually and neurobiologically distinct types of RRI, "refraining from action initiation" (RAI) and "stopping an ongoing action" (SOA) are described. RAI and SOA tasks capture distinct aspects of RRI that may relate to distinct clinical outcomes. The InSRI group recommends that (a) selection of RRI measures should be informed by careful consideration of the strengths, limitations, and practical considerations of the available measures; (b) researchers use both RAI and SOA tasks in RRI studies to allow for direct comparison of RRI types and examination of their associations with clinically relevant measures; and (c) similar considerations be made for human and nonhuman studies in an effort to harmonize and integrate preclinical and clinical research.

The misnomer of impulsivity: commentary on "choice impulsivity" and "rapid-response impulsivity" articles by Hamilton and colleagues.

The misnomer of impulsivity: commentary on "choice impulsivity" and "rapid-response impulsivity" articles by Hamilton and colleagues.

Consensus building: Commentary on “choice impulsivity” and “rapid-response impulsivity” articles by Hamilton and colleagues.

Consensus building: Commentary on “choice impulsivity” and “rapid-response impulsivity” articles by Hamilton and colleagues.

Fractionating impulsivity: commentary on "choice impulsivity" and "rapid-response impulsivity" articles by Hamilton and colleagues.

Samuel Chamberlain and Naomi Fineberg, Commentary on choice impulsivity and rapid-response impulsivity articles by Hamilton and colleagues, Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, Vol. 6(2): 201-203, April 2015. © American Psychological Association

Trait impulsivity and increased pre-attentional sensitivity to intense stimuli in bipolar disorder and controls

Impulsivity and sensation seeking are stimulus-oriented traits. Because they differ in degree of intention and planning, they may have distinct neurophysiological mechanisms. Impulsivity is prominent in bipolar disorder, and may be related to pre-attentional information filtering and stimulus-orientation. We investigated specificity of relationships between impulsivity and sensitivity to stimulus intensity in bipolar disorder and controls, using intensity–sensitivity of auditory evoked potentials. Seventy-six subjects (37 healthy controls, 39 with bipolar disorder) were administered an intensity–sensitivity paradigm. Additional measures included Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) and Eysenck Impulsivity and Venturesomeness scores. State-dependent rapid-response impulsivity was measured using the Immediate Memory Task. Intensity-sensitivities of the auditory evoked P1N1, N1P2, P1, N1, and P2 potentials were assessed as the slope of amplitude relative to loudness. Analyses used general linear models (GLM) with impulsivity-related measures as dependent variables and age, gender, education, and diagnosis as dependent variables. BIS-11 total, motor, and attentional impulsivity scores correlated positively with pre-attentional N1 and P1N1 intensity–sensitivity slopes in bipolar disorder, but not in controls. BIS-11 nonplanning and Eysenck Venturesomeness scores did not correlate with intensity–sensitivity. Intensity–sensitivity slopes did not correlate with rapid-response impulsivity. Correlations between N1 or P1N1 slopes and BIS-11 scores in bipolar disorder were not affected by age, education, WAIS, treatment, symptoms, or gender. Trait impulsivity in bipolar disorder may be related to poorly modulated stimulus-driven late pre-attentional responses to stimuli, potentially resulting in exaggerated responses to intense stimuli even before conscious awareness. Components of trait impulsivity are physiologically heterogenous relative to intensity–sensitivity.

Pre-attentive information processing and impulsivity in bipolar disorder

Early responses to stimuli can be measured by sensory evoked potentials (EP) using repeated identical stimuli, S1 and S2. Response to S1 may represent efficient stimulus detection, while suppression of response to S2 may represent inhibition. Early responses to stimuli may be related to impulsivity. We compared EP reflecting stimulus detection and inhibition in bipolar disorder and healthy controls, and investigated relationships to impulsivity. Subjects were 48 healthy controls without family histories of mood disorder and 48 with bipolar disorder. EP were measured as latencies and amplitudes for auditory P50 (pre-attentional), N100 (initial direction of attention) and P200 (initial conscious awareness), using a paired-click paradigm, with identical stimuli 0.5 s apart. Impulsivity was measured by questionnaire and by laboratory tests for inability to suppress responses to stimuli or to delay response for a reward. Analyses used general linear models. S1 amplitudes for P50, N100, and P200, and gating of N100 and P200, were lower in bipolar disorder than in controls. P50 S1 amplitude correlated with accurate laboratory-task responding, and S2 amplitude correlated with impulsive task performance and fast reaction times, in bipolar disorder. N100 and P200 EP did not correlate with impulsivity. These findings were independent of symptoms, treatment, or substance-use history. EPs were not related to questionnaire-measured or reward-based impulsivity. Bipolar I disorder is characterized by reduced pre-attentional and early attentional stimulus registration relative to controls. Within bipolar disorder, rapid-response impulsivity correlates with impaired pre-attentional response suppression. These results imply specific relationships between ERP-measured response inhibition and rapid-response impulsivity.

Norepinephrine and impulsivity: effects of acute yohimbine

Rapid-response impulsivity, characterized by inability to withhold response to a stimulus until it is adequately appraised, is associated with risky behavior and may be increased in a state-dependent manner by norepinephrine. We assessed effects of yohimbine, which increases norepinephrine release by blocking alpha-2 noradrenergic receptors, on plasma catecholamine metabolites, blood pressure, subjective symptoms, and laboratory-measured rapid-response impulsivity. Subjects were 23 healthy controls recruited from the community, with normal physical examination and ECG, and negative history for hypertension, cardiovascular illness, and axis I or II disorder. Blood pressure, pulse, and behavioral measures were obtained before and periodically after 0.4mg/kg oral yohimbine or placebo in a randomized, counterbalanced design. Metabolites of norepinephrine [3-methoxy-4-hydroxyphenylglycol (MHPG) and vanillylmandelic acid (VMA)] and dopamine [homovanillic acid (HVA)] were measured by high-pressure liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection. Rapid-response impulsivity was measured by commission errors and reaction times on the immediate memory task (IMT), a continuous performance test designed to measure impulsivity and attention. Yohimbine increased plasma MHPG and VMA but not HVA. Yohimbine increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate. On the IMT, yohimbine increased impulsive errors and impulsive response bias and accelerated reaction times. Yohimbine-associated increase in plasma MHPG correlated with increased impulsive response rates. Time courses varied; effects on blood pressure generally preceded those on metabolites and test performance. These effects are consistent with increased rapid-response impulsivity after pharmacological noradrenergic stimulation in healthy controls. Labile noradrenergic responses, or increased sensitivity to norepinephrine, may increase risk for impulsive behavior.

Mechanisms of impulsivity in bipolar disorder and related illness

Impulsivity is a multifaceted aspect of behavior that is prominent in psychiatric disorders and has serious behavioral consequences. This paper reviews studies integrating behavioral and physiological mechanisms in impulsivity and their role in severity and course of bipolar and related disorders. This is a review of work that used questionnaire, human behavioral laboratory, and neurophysiological measurements of impulsivity or related aspects of behavior. Subjects included individuals with bipolar disorder, substance-use disorders, antisocial personality disorder, and healthy controls. Models of impulsivity include rapid-response impulsivity, with inability to reflect or to evaluate a stimulus adequately before responding, and reward-based impulsivity, with inability to delay response for a reward. In normal subjects, rapid-response impulsivity is increased by yohimbine, which increases norepinephrine release. Impulsivity is increased in bipolar disorder, whether measured by questionnaire, by measures of rapid-response impulsivity, or by measures of ability to delay reward. While affective state has differential effects on impulsivity, impulsivity is increased in bipolar disorder regardless of affective state or treatment. Impulsivity, especially rapid-response, is more severe with a highly recurrent course of illness or with comorbid substance-use disorder, and with history of medically severe suicide attempt. In antisocial personality disorder, rapid-response impulsivity is increased, but reward-based impulsivity is not. In general, impulsivity is increased more in bipolar disorder than in antisocial personality disorder. In combined bipolar disorder and antisocial personality disorder, increased impulsivity is associated with substance-use disorders and suicide attempts. Impulsivity is associated with severe behavioral complications of bipolar disorder, antisocial personality disorder, and substance-use disorders.

Trait impulsivity and response inhibition in antisocial personality disorder

Background Impulsive behavior is a prominent characteristic of antisocial personality disorder. Impulsivity is a complex construct, however, representing distinct domains of cognition and action. Leading models refer to impulsivity as an inability to evaluate a stimulus fully before responding to it (rapid-response impulsivity), and as an inability to delay responding despite a larger reward (reward-delay impulsivity). We investigated these models in terms of the diagnosis and severity of antisocial personality disorder. Methods Thirty-four male subjects on probation/parole who met DSM-IV criteria for ASPD, and 30 male healthy comparison subjects, matched by ethnicity, were recruited from the community. The Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) provided an integrated measure of trait impulsivity. Rapid-response impulsivity was assessed using the Immediate Memory Task (IMT), a continuous performance test. Reward delay impulsivity was assessed using the Two-choice Impulsivity Paradigm (TCIP), where subjects had the choice of smaller-sooner or larger-delayed rewards, and the Single Key Impulsivity Paradigm (SKIP), a free-operant responding task. Results Compared to controls, subjects with ASPD had higher BIS-11 scores (Effect Size (E.S.) = 0.95). They had slower reaction times to IMT commission errors (E.S. = 0.45). Correct detections, a measure of attention, were identical to controls. On the SKIP, they had a shorter maximum delay for reward (E.S. = 0.76), but this was not significant after correction for age and education. The groups did not differ on impulsive choices on the TCIP (E.S. < 0.1). On probit analysis with age and education as additional independent variables, BIS-11 score, IMT reaction time to a commission error, and IMT positive response bias contributed significantly to diagnosis of ASPD; SKIP delay for reward did not. Severity of ASPD, assessed by the number of ASPD symptoms endorsed on the SCID-II, correlated significantly with commission errors (impulsive responses) on the IMT, and with liberal IMT response bias. This relationship persisted with correction for age and education. Discussion These results suggest that ASPD is characterized by increased rapid-response impulsivity. Aspects of impulsivity related to reward-delay or attention appear relatively intact.

Dimensional assessment of personality and impulsiveness in borderline personality disorder

The aim of this study is to determine the dimensional personality profile in borderline personality disorder (BPD), and to assess the multidimensional nature of impulsiveness using self-reported and laboratorial measures. We compared the differences in 39 female subjects diagnosed with BPD and 102 healthy controls using a battery of self-report instruments and a laboratorial measure of impulsivity. BPD patients obtained higher scores in impulsivity and aggressiveness self-report measures and higher impulsive-related temperament dimensions, compared with the control group. BPD patients did not differ from controls in laboratorial-behavioral impulsivity and there was no association between self-report impulsivity and the performance in the laboratorial task. According to our findings, BPD patients are characterized by high levels of trait impulsivity in several domains. Our results do not support the hypothesis of a possible deficit in the inhibitory control in BPD patients, suggested by an impulsive response pattern in the neurocognitive assessment. Future studies should study the relationship between personality traits and rapid-response impulsivity using different laboratorial-behavioral measures in BPD patients.

Varieties of Impulsivity in Males With Alcohol Dependence: The Role of Cluster‐B Personality Disorder

Impulsivity has been associated with alcohol dependence, but impulsivity in alcohol-dependent subjects with a Cluster-B personality disorder (PD) has not been well characterized. Using a variety of laboratory measures of impulsivity, we assessed whether alcohol-dependent patients (ADP) with borderline personality disorder (BPD) exhibited the same pattern of behavioral impulsivity than ADP with antisocial personality disorder (AntPD). Also, differences between ADP without PDs and healthy controls were assessed. A cross-sectional patient survey with a community comparison group. Diagnoses were made using the Structured Interview for DSM-IV. Sustained attention and rapid-response impulsivity were assessed using the continuous performance test. Inhibitory control was measured by the stop-signal task. Ability to delay reward task was assessed using differential reinforcement for low-rate responding (DRLR). A final sample of 247 males with alcohol-dependence recruited from 2 alcoholism treatment centers was compared with a matched nonsubstance-abusing comparison group (n = 96). Alcohol-dependent patients with BPD made more omission errors than ADP with AntPD, but individuals with AntPD exhibited the poorest efficiency in DRLR. ADPs with a Cluster-B PD displayed more impairment across all behavioral measures than ADP without PD and than controls. In contrast, with respect to controls ADP without a Cluster-B PD showed more impairment only in DRLR. Our findings support the suggestion of 2 paradigms in alcohol dependence. The first, based on inability to delay gratification, might be a vulnerability marker for alcohol dependence. The second was related to inhibitory control and might be specific for AntPD and BPDs.

Two models of impulsivity: relationship to personality traits and psychopathology

Background: Impulsivity is prominent in psychiatric disorders. Two dominant models of impulsivity are the reward-discounting model, where impulsivity is defined as inability to wait for a larger reward, and the rapid-response model, where impulsivity is defined as responding without adequate assessment of context. We have compared the role of these models of impulsivity in human psychopathology, based on the hypothesis that rapid-response impulsivity would be more strongly related to other aspects of psychopathology and to impulsivity as described by questionnaires. Methods: We investigated relationships between personality and laboratory measures of impulsivity, and between these measures and clinical characteristics, in parents of adolescent subjects with disruptive behavioral disorders (DBDs) and matched control subjects. Diagnoses were rendered using the Structured Interview for DSM-IV. The Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS) was used as a trait measure of impulsivity. Rapid-response impulsivity was assessed using a form of the Continuous Performance Test, the Immediate Memory-Delayed Memory Task (IMT/DMT). Reward-delay impulsivity was measured using two tasks where subjects could choose between smaller immediate or larger delayed rewards. Results: Rapid-response, but not reward-delay impulsivity, was significantly higher in subjects with lifetime Axis I or Axis II diagnoses. Scores on the BIS were elevated in subjects with Axis I diagnoses and correlated significantly with both rapid-response and reward-delay tests, but more strongly with the former. Multiple regression showed that rapid-response, but not reward-delay performance or intelligence quotient, contributed significantly to BIS scores. Correlations were similar in parents of control subjects and of DBD subjects. Conclusions: These data suggest that measures of rapid-response impulsivity and of reward-delay impulsivity are both related to impulsivity as a personality characteristic. The relationship appears stronger, however, for rapid-response impulsivity, as measured by the IMT/DMT. Laboratory and personality measures of impulsivity appear to be related to risk of psychopathology.