Back to Search Start Over

Do facets of self-reported impulsivity predict decision-making under ambiguity and risk? Evidence from a community sample

Authors :
Sophie Bayard
Stéphane Raffard
Marie-Christine Gély-Nargeot
Dynamique des capacités humaines et des conduites de santé (EPSYLON)
Université Montpellier 1 (UM1)-Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 (UPVM)-Université de Montpellier (UM)
Université de Montpellier (UM)-Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 (UPVM)-Université Montpellier 1 (UM1)
Source :
Psychiatry Research, Psychiatry Research, Elsevier, 2011, 190 (2-3), pp.322-326. ⟨10.1016/j.psychres.2011.06.013⟩, Psychiatry Research, Elsevier, 2011, 190 (2-3), pp.322-326
Publication Year :
2011

Abstract

International audience; We investigated the links among decision-making assessed by the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and the Game of Dice Task (GDT), and the four facets of impulsivity (urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, and sensation seeking, UPPS) proposed by Whiteside and Lynam (2001) in a sample of 107 healthy volunteers. Hierarchical regressions controlling for age and gender indicated that sensation seeking and urgency were linked to disadvantageous decisions on the GDT while no association was found between IGT performance and the UPPS. Sensation seeking and urgency facets of impulsivity are related in healthy individuals, to decision-making processes where potential consequences of different options and their subsequent probabilities rely on explicit information. In healthy controls, there is little overlap between decision-making influenced by both implicit and explicit information and impulsivity as measured by the UPPS. These findings add evidence to the notion that self-reported trait impulsivity is associated with the decision making process. Decisions made under risk seemed to be differentially associated with specific facets of impulsivity.

Details

ISSN :
01651781 and 18727123
Volume :
190
Issue :
2-3
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Psychiatry research
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....499216ec17d26de22504c6039759d73d
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2011.06.013⟩