Herman Aleksandra M, Critchley Hugo D, Duka Theodora
Behavioral and Clinical Neuroscience, School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Sussex Addiction and Intervention Centre, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Front Psychol. 2018 Aug 29;9:1625. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01625. eCollection 2018.
The consequences of impulsive decisions and actions represent a major source of concern to the health and well-being of individuals and society. It is, therefore, crucial to understand the factors which contribute to impulsive behaviors. Here, we examined how personality traits of behavioral tendencies, interoceptive sensibility as well as transient mood states predict behavioral performance on impulsivity and risk-taking tasks. 574 (121 males; age 18-45) individuals completed self-report personality measures of impulsivity, reward sensitivity, punishment avoidance as well as interoceptive sensibility, undertook a mood assessment and performed a set of cognitive tasks: delay discounting (temporal impulsivity), probability discounting (risk-taking), and reflection impulsivity task. Data were interrogated using principal component analysis, correlations and regression analyses to test mutual relationships between personality traits, interoceptive sensibility, mood state and impulsive behaviors. We observed a clear separation of measures used, both trait and behavioral. Namely, sensation-seeking, reward sensitivity and probability discounting reflected risk-taking. These were separate from measures associated with impulsivity, both trait (negative and positive urgency, premeditation, perseverance) and behavioral (delayed discounting and reflection impulsivity). This separation was further highlighted by their relationship with the current emotional state: positive affect was associated with increased risk-taking tendencies and risky decision-making, while negative emotions were related to heightened impulsivity measures. Interoceptive sensibility was only associated with negative emotions component. Our findings support the proposal that risk-taking and impulsivity represent distinct constructs that are differentially affected by current mood states. This novel insight enhances our understanding of impulsive behaviors.
冲动的决策和行为所带来的后果是个人和社会健康与幸福的主要担忧来源。因此,了解促成冲动行为的因素至关重要。在此,我们研究了行为倾向的人格特质、内感受敏感性以及短暂情绪状态如何预测冲动性和冒险任务中的行为表现。574名(121名男性;年龄18 - 45岁)个体完成了关于冲动性、奖励敏感性、惩罚回避以及内感受敏感性的自我报告人格测量,进行了情绪评估,并执行了一系列认知任务:延迟折扣(时间冲动性)、概率折扣(冒险)和反射冲动性任务。使用主成分分析、相关性分析和回归分析对数据进行分析,以测试人格特质、内感受敏感性、情绪状态和冲动行为之间的相互关系。我们观察到所使用的测量方法在特质和行为方面都有明显的区分。具体而言,寻求刺激、奖励敏感性和概率折扣反映了冒险行为。这些与与冲动性相关的测量方法不同,无论是特质方面(消极和积极紧迫感、预谋、毅力)还是行为方面(延迟折扣和反射冲动性)。它们与当前情绪状态的关系进一步凸显了这种区分:积极情绪与冒险倾向增加和冒险决策相关,而消极情绪与更高的冲动性测量值相关。内感受敏感性仅与消极情绪成分相关。我们的研究结果支持了冒险和冲动代表不同结构且受当前情绪状态差异影响的观点。这一新颖的见解增进了我们对冲动行为的理解。