Escuela de Psicología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Texas Tech University, Department of Psychological Sciences, Lubbock, TX, United States.
Addict Behav. 2019 Jan;88:61-66. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.08.018. Epub 2018 Aug 17.
Several types of impulsivity have been linked to various substance use outcomes. The UPPS-P framework has received major focus within the field of substance use research. However, this framework is not without limitation. An alternative framework is the Two-Factor Model of impulsivity, which posits that rash impulsivity and reward drive are the central, if not sufficient, domains of impulsivity. Unfortunately, the extant literature is quite limited in terms of work that have directly compared the UPPS-P framework to the Two-Factor Model of impulsivity, particularly in prospective designs focused on the initiation of common, problematic forms of substance use among adolescents (i.e., alcohol and marijuana use). In the current study, the UPPS-P measures were compared to dedicated measures of the Two-Factor Model of impulsivity in a sample of Chilean adolescents who were lifetime abstainers of alcohol or marijuana use at baseline (N = 541) to predict the initiation of use for these substances at a one-year follow-up. Results showed that the Two-Factor Model had superior predictive utility compared to the UPPS-P measures, and only rash impulsivity and reward drive were significant predictors in a multivariate model that simultaneously considered UPPS-P and Two-Factor Model assessments. Overall, the current findings indicate that the Two-Factor Model should be considered to index risk of substance use initiation to guide prevention efforts and highlight the importance of direct comparisons of alternative measurement and theoretical frameworks of impulsivity within the field of substance use research.
几种类型的冲动性与各种物质使用结果有关。UPPS-P 框架在物质使用研究领域受到了极大的关注。然而，该框架并非没有局限性。另一种框架是冲动的双因素模型，该模型假设冲动和奖励驱动是冲动的核心，如果不是充分的，领域。不幸的是，就直接比较 UPPS-P 框架和冲动的双因素模型的文献而言，现有的文献相当有限，特别是在针对青少年常见、有问题的物质使用形式（即酒精和大麻使用）的启动的前瞻性设计中。在当前的研究中，在智利青少年样本中，将 UPPS-P 测量与冲动的双因素模型的专用测量进行了比较，这些青少年在基线时终生不饮酒或不使用大麻（N=541），以预测这些物质在一年随访时的使用开始情况。结果表明，与 UPPS-P 测量相比，双因素模型具有更好的预测效用，只有冲动和奖励驱动是在同时考虑 UPPS-P 和双因素模型评估的多元模型中的显著预测因素。总体而言，目前的研究结果表明，应考虑使用双因素模型来衡量物质使用开始的风险，以指导预防工作，并强调在物质使用研究领域直接比较替代的测量和冲动理论框架的重要性。
