Dougherty Donald M, Mathias Charles W, Marsh-Richard Dawn M, Furr R Michael, Nouvion Sylvain O, Dawes Michael A
University of Texas-Health Science Center at San Antonio-Department of Psychiatry 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, Mail Code 7792 San Antonio, TX 78229-3900.
Addict Disord Their Treat. 2009 Jun 1;8(2):61-73. doi: 10.1097/ADT.0b013e318172e488.
Researchers have clearly implicated impulsivity as having a key role in substance use disorders, and comparisons of self-report measures suggest there are measurably different components of impulsive behavior. However comparatively little research has been devoted to understanding the multidimensional nature of this construct using laboratory measures of impulsivity that may be more sensitive to tracking changes across time. Many studies have measured impulsivity, but this construct has been measured using methodologically different types of laboratory impulsivity paradigms that are often used in isolation. As a result, it is important to determine whether some of the most frequently used types of behavioral measures of impulsivity account for unique variance. METHODS: Here, we used factor analytical techniques in two studies to evaluate the independence of three of the most commonly used behavioral impulsivity paradigms. First, a factor analysis was conducted using previously collected data (n = 204), and second, data was gathered specifically to replicate and extend the results of our original analysis (n = 198). RESULTS: Both studies revealed three distinct factors, confirming our hypothesis of at least three components of impulsive behavior that can be measured by these methodological approaches. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that researchers should carefully consider their selection of laboratory-behavioral impulsivity measures, and that the measure(s) selected should be related to the particular underlying processes relevant to substance use disorders and treatment success.
研究人员已明确指出冲动性在物质使用障碍中起关键作用，自我报告测量的比较表明冲动行为存在可测量的不同成分。然而，相对较少的研究致力于使用可能对跟踪随时间变化更敏感的冲动性实验室测量来理解这一概念的多维性质。许多研究测量了冲动性，但这一概念是使用方法上不同类型的实验室冲动性范式进行测量的，这些范式通常单独使用。因此，确定一些最常用的冲动性行为测量类型是否解释独特的方差很重要。方法：在此，我们在两项研究中使用因子分析技术来评估三种最常用的行为冲动性范式的独立性。首先，使用先前收集的数据（n = 204）进行因子分析，其次，专门收集数据以复制和扩展我们原始分析的结果（n = 198）。结果：两项研究均揭示了三个不同的因子，证实了我们的假设，即冲动行为至少有三个成分可以通过这些方法学方法进行测量。结论：这些发现表明，研究人员应仔细考虑他们对实验室行为冲动性测量的选择，并且所选的测量应与与物质使用障碍和治疗成功相关的特定潜在过程相关。
