• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

冲动性社会影响会增加年轻人在时间折扣任务中的冲动性选择。

Impulsive social influence increases impulsive choices on a temporal discounting task in young adults.

作者信息

Gilman Jodi M, Curran Max T, Calderon Vanessa, Stoeckel Luke E, Evins A Eden

机构信息

Center for Addiction Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2014 Jul 2;9(7):e101570. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0101570. eCollection 2014.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0101570
PMID:24988440
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4079280/
Abstract

Adolescents and young adults who affiliate with friends who engage in impulsive behavior are more likely to engage in impulsive behaviors themselves, and those who associate with prosocial (i.e. more prudent, future oriented) peers are more likely to engage in prosocial behavior. However, it is difficult to disentangle the contribution of peer influence vs. peer selection (i.e., whether individuals choose friends with similar traits) when interpreting social behaviors. In this study, we combined a novel social manipulation with a well-validated delay discounting task assessing impulsive behavior to create a social influence delay discounting task, in which participants were exposed to both impulsive (smaller, sooner or SS payment) and non-impulsive (larger, later or LL payment) choices from their peers. Young adults in this sample, n = 51, aged 18-25 had a higher rate of SS choices after exposure to impulsive peer influence than after exposure to non-impulsive peer influence. Interestingly, in highly susceptible individuals, the rate of non-impulsive choices did not increase after exposure to non-impulsive influence. There was a positive correlation between self-reported suggestibility and degree of peer influence on SS choices. These results suggest that, in young adults, SS choices appear to be influenced by the choices of same-aged peers, especially for individuals who are highly susceptible to influence.

摘要

与有冲动行为的朋友交往的青少年和年轻人自己更有可能做出冲动行为,而与亲社会(即更谨慎、更着眼于未来)同伴交往的人则更有可能做出亲社会行为。然而,在解释社会行为时,很难区分同伴影响与同伴选择(即个体是否选择具有相似特质的朋友)的作用。在本研究中,我们将一种新颖的社会操纵与一项经过充分验证的评估冲动行为的延迟折扣任务相结合,创建了一个社会影响延迟折扣任务,其中参与者会接触到来自同伴的冲动选择(较小、较早或SS支付)和非冲动选择(较大、较晚或LL支付)。该样本中有51名年龄在18至25岁之间的年轻人,在受到冲动同伴影响后,选择SS的比例高于受到非冲动同伴影响后。有趣的是,在高度易受影响的个体中,接触非冲动影响后,非冲动选择的比例并未增加。自我报告的易受暗示性与同伴对SS选择的影响程度之间存在正相关。这些结果表明,在年轻人中,SS选择似乎受到同龄同伴选择的影响,尤其是对于那些高度易受影响的个体。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/21c2e86371c7/pone.0101570.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/dfd3f7a93712/pone.0101570.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/04183154c7f3/pone.0101570.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/f1fb035cc2ee/pone.0101570.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/21c2e86371c7/pone.0101570.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/dfd3f7a93712/pone.0101570.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/04183154c7f3/pone.0101570.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/f1fb035cc2ee/pone.0101570.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b06a/4079280/21c2e86371c7/pone.0101570.g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Impulsive social influence increases impulsive choices on a temporal discounting task in young adults.冲动性社会影响会增加年轻人在时间折扣任务中的冲动性选择。
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 2;9(7):e101570. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0101570. eCollection 2014.
2
Cannabis as a shareable commodity in a social discounting task.大麻作为一种可共享的商品在社会贴现任务中。
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2024 Jun;32(3):295-304. doi: 10.1037/pha0000699. Epub 2023 Dec 21.
3
Mechanisms of impulsive choice: I. Individual differences in interval timing and reward processing.冲动选择的机制:I. 间隔计时与奖励处理中的个体差异。
J Exp Anal Behav. 2014 Jul;102(1):86-101. doi: 10.1002/jeab.88. Epub 2014 Jun 25.
4
Generalizability of time-based interventions: Effects of choice procedure and smaller-sooner delay.基于时间的干预措施的可推广性:选择程序和更小更快延迟的影响。
Behav Processes. 2022 Mar;196:104584. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2022.104584. Epub 2022 Jan 13.
5
Temporal discounting for self and friends in adolescence: A fMRI study.青少年时期的自我和朋友的时间贴现:一项 fMRI 研究。
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2023 Apr;60:101204. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2023.101204. Epub 2023 Jan 27.
6
Impulsive choice and pre-exposure to delays: iv. effects of delay- and immediacy-exposure training relative to maturational changes in impulsivity.冲动选择与延迟前暴露:iv. 相对于冲动性成熟变化的延迟和即时暴露训练的效果。
J Exp Anal Behav. 2018 May;109(3):587-599. doi: 10.1002/jeab.432. Epub 2018 Apr 23.
7
Delay discounting and impulsivity traits in young and older gambling disorder patients.年轻和年长的赌博障碍患者的延迟折扣和冲动性特质
Addict Behav. 2017 Aug;71:96-103. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 6.
8
Measurement of impulsive choice in rats: same- and alternate-form test-retest reliability and temporal tracking.大鼠冲动性选择的测量:同型和异型重测信度及时间追踪
J Exp Anal Behav. 2015 Jan;103(1):166-79. doi: 10.1002/jeab.124. Epub 2014 Dec 9.
9
Using delay discounting to understand impulsive choice in socially anxious individuals: failure to replicate.运用延迟折扣来理解社交焦虑个体的冲动选择:未能重复验证。
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2015 Mar;46:198-201. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2014.10.010.
10
Delay discounting of hypothetical monetary rewards with decoys.带有诱饵的假设性货币奖励的延迟折扣
Behav Processes. 2016 Jan;122:26-35. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.10.017. Epub 2015 Oct 28.

引用本文的文献

1
The Group Intertemporal Decision-Making Process.群体跨期决策过程。
Behav Sci (Basel). 2024 Sep 14;14(9):815. doi: 10.3390/bs14090815.
2
Beyond the Situation: Hanging Out with Peers now is Associated with Short-Term Mindsets Later.情境之外:当下与同龄人相处与日后的短期思维模式相关。
J Dev Life Course Criminol. 2024;10(1):51-72. doi: 10.1007/s40865-024-00249-2. Epub 2024 Feb 17.
3
Psychological variables related to decision making for mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic.与新冠疫情期间佩戴口罩决策相关的心理变量

本文引用的文献

1
Effects of anonymous peer observation on adolescents' preference for immediate rewards.匿名同伴观察对青少年即时奖励偏好的影响。
Dev Sci. 2014 Jan;17(1):71-8. doi: 10.1111/desc.12099. Epub 2013 Nov 6.
2
Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: Rates decrease as amounts increase.延迟折扣概率奖励:奖励金额越高,折扣率越低。
Psychon Bull Rev. 1996 Mar;3(1):100-4. doi: 10.3758/BF03210748.
3
Changing delay discounting in the light of the competing neurobehavioral decision systems theory: a review.根据竞争神经行为决策系统理论改变延迟折扣:综述。
Curr Issues Personal Psychol. 2023 Jun 23;11(3):175-181. doi: 10.5114/cipp/166281. eCollection 2023.
4
Peer feedback decreases impulsive choice in adolescents with and without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.同伴反馈减少了患有和未患有注意力缺陷/多动障碍的青少年的冲动选择。
JCPP Adv. 2022 Feb 25;2(1):e12065. doi: 10.1002/jcv2.12065. eCollection 2022 Mar.
5
The effect of chronic regulatory focus and social comparison on undergraduates' intertemporal choices under gain-loss frame.慢性调节焦点和社会比较对得失框架下大学生跨期选择的影响。
Front Psychol. 2023 Jan 6;13:1076304. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1076304. eCollection 2022.
6
Cerebellar impulsivity-compulsivity assessment scale.小脑冲动-强迫评估量表。
Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2023 Jan;10(1):48-57. doi: 10.1002/acn3.51698. Epub 2022 Nov 19.
7
Sex differences in neural substrates of risk taking: Implications for sex-specific vulnerabilities to internet gaming disorder.性别在冒险行为的神经基础中的差异:对互联网游戏障碍的性别特异性脆弱性的影响。
J Behav Addict. 2022 Sep 2;11(3):778-795. doi: 10.1556/2006.2022.00057. Print 2022 Sep 26.
8
Effects of individual and dyadic decision-making and normative reference on delay discounting decisions.个体和对偶决策以及规范参照对延迟折扣决策的影响。
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2022 Jul 28;7(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s41235-022-00422-5.
9
Better together? Social distance affects joint probability discounting.更紧密的关系?社交距离会影响共同概率折扣。
Mem Cognit. 2022 Oct;50(7):1513-1529. doi: 10.3758/s13421-022-01290-6. Epub 2022 Mar 10.
10
The social contagion of temporal discounting in small social networks.小社交网络中时间折扣的社会传染。
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2021 Mar 3;6(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s41235-020-00249-y.
J Exp Anal Behav. 2013 Jan;99(1):32-57. doi: 10.1002/jeab.2. Epub 2012 Dec 5.
4
From neural responses to population behavior: neural focus group predicts population-level media effects.从神经反应到群体行为:神经焦点小组预测群体层面的媒体效果。
Psychol Sci. 2012 May 1;23(5):439-45. doi: 10.1177/0956797611434964. Epub 2012 Apr 17.
5
How much should I eat? Situational norms affect young women's food intake during meal time.我应该吃多少?情境规范会影响年轻女性在用餐时的食物摄入量。
Br J Nutr. 2012 Feb;107(4):588-94. doi: 10.1017/S0007114511003278. Epub 2011 Jul 5.
6
Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain's reward circuitry.同伴通过增强大脑奖励回路的活动增加青少年的冒险行为。
Dev Sci. 2011 Mar;14(2):F1-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01035.x.
7
Single- and cross-commodity discounting among cocaine addicts: the commodity and its temporal location determine discounting rate.可卡因成瘾者的单一和交叉商品贴现:商品及其时间位置决定贴现率。
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011 Sep;217(2):177-87. doi: 10.1007/s00213-011-2272-x. Epub 2011 Apr 14.
8
Immediate pleasures and future consequences. A neuropsychological study of binge eating and obesity.即时满足与未来后果。暴食和肥胖的神经心理学研究。
Appetite. 2010 Feb;54(1):208-13. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2009.11.002. Epub 2009 Nov 5.
9
One-year temporal stability of delay-discount rates.延迟折扣率的一年时间稳定性。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Jun;16(3):457-62. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.3.457.
10
Age differences in future orientation and delay discounting.未来取向和延迟折扣中的年龄差异。
Child Dev. 2009 Jan-Feb;80(1):28-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01244.x.