How Two Impulsivity Measures Are Used For Human Behavior Exist

1982 WordsMay 17, 20168 Pages
Abstract Various definitions of impulsivity and theories of the composition of impulsivity in terms of human behavior exist. This paper critically examines two impulsivity measures, a behavioural measure and a self-report measure, to convey how different yet similar impulsivity can be measured. The self-reported measure is a worldwide used and highly cited tool that has profoundly influenced the concept of impulsivity and is arguably the most common measure for impulsivity on a multidimensional level. Opposing the behavioral measure is a nontraditional measure that is specific and limited to one factor which is described as the primary characteristic of impulsivity by its author. This review also explores whether these…show more content…
Moeller, Baratt, Dougherty, Schmitz and Swann (2001) found a significantly higher prevalence of impulsivity amongst people with conduct disorder, personality disorders, substance use disorders, and bipolar disorder. Impulsivity is part of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-IV (DSM-IV) diagnostic criteria for disorders however there is little research and clarity on the aspect of impulsivity in psychiatric disorders (Moeller et al. 2001). Webster and Jackson (1997) argue that the aim of the DSM classification of disorders is to determine and moderate their treatment. Therefore, with no clear comprehension of impulsivity or its correlation with disorders, DSM recommendations for treatment will range from absent to disorientated. For this reason, it is important to have a reliable and valid tool to clinically examine impulsivity (Verdejo-Garcia, Lozano, Moya, Angel Alcazar & Perez-Garcia, 2010). This essay will critically examine different tests of impulsivity, explore what dimensions of impulsivity they measure and attempt to evaluate whether these tests are measuring the intended constructs of impulsivity. Impulsivity is a multidimensional personality construct that can consist of both functional and dysfunctional facets such as proneness to act with less forethought, which can be desirable or detrimental, depending on the situation (Cyders & Coskunpinar, 2011; Dickman 1990;
Open Document