Impulsivity And Its Effect On The Risk Of A Reward

From neurobiological point of view, Impulsive aggression is seen as a consequence of a failure in the regulation of negative emotions, such as anger, for example. This thinking of Disinhibition and hostility was found and documented by Grafman et al. (1996) in TBI patients with frontal lobe damage involving subcortical limbic structures. According to Davidson et al (2000), threatening environmental stimuli are transmitted to the amygdala, which makes projections to the basal ganglia, where they are integrated with information of the social context that comes from the orbitofrontal cortex. Appropriate behavioral responses can, therefore, be initiated through projections toward other cortical regions, hypothalamus or brain stem. Consequently, the orbitofrontal cortex and adjacent areas such as the dorsolateral prefrontal

However, as there are multiple other constructs of impulsivity, there lacks a consensus on a concrete definition, and a number of impulsivity measures are subsequently used in research. The two most commonly documented processes are inhibitory control (IC), the ability to suppress pre-activated motor responses and cognitions (Miyake et al.,2000), and impulsive choice, the tendency for distant outcomes to have less value than immediate outcomes (Odum,2011). IC is measured using computer tasks, such as stop-signal and go/no-go tasks, which require participants to inhibit a dominant motor response. Impulsive choice is assessed using delay discounting (DD), involving choices between smaller immediate rewards, and larger rewards after a delay (Dougherty et al.,2005).

However, Loree et al.,(2015) mentions that impulsivity also negatively influences treatment of substance use disorders. That is to say, the lack of impulsivity regulation not only is a risk factor for substance use disorder, it is also an aspect that inhibits the treatment of an individual with a substance use disorder. Abu-Shakra and Cox (2014), aim to do is say that disinhibited behaviours such as impulsivity not only influences substance abuse but, also disruptive behaviour disorders. The aim of their paper is to suggest that externalized behaviours, also known as disinhibited behaviour traits, influence the progression of disruptive behaviour disorder and substance use

The point of this article is establish ties between drug-addiction and deficiencies in the brain that regulate impulse control. The article shows that through the testing of drug-addicts brains and comparing their brain functions to those of their non-addicted siblings revealed that the deficiencies present in the drug-addicts also existed in the non-addict siblings, suggesting that drug addiction is hereditary. The article goes on to say that if that is true, it serves as a basis for the prevention of drug addiction since the non-addict siblings were able to exert some level of control over their impulses and not become addicted to drugs.

Psychopaths are rarely impulsive but rather act only after careful planning and

A symptom often overlooked called hyperfocus is where one becomes absorbed in tasks that are stimulating and rewarding. It’s more of a coping mechanism used to tune out other chaos. It makes one lose track of time and neglect what a person is supposed to be doing. Other symptoms along with inattentiveness are poor organizational skills, very messy, tendency to procrastinate, trouble starting and finishing projects, chronic lateness forgetting appointments and important deadlines, often loses or misplaces items, and overestimates or underestimates the time it takes to complete a task. The second subtype hyperactive includes being restless, feeling agitated, unable to sit still, always fidgeting, easily bored, having racing thoughts, craves excitement and attention, often acts out for attention, talking excessively, and doing a million different things at once. The second subtype in conjunction with hyperactivity also contains impulsivity. These symptoms include trouble inhibiting behaviors and responses acting before thinking, frequently interrupt conversations or talk over someone unable to wait ones turn, blurt out answers, thoughts, or rude comments, have addictive traits, are reckless and spontaneous, are careless about consequences, misbehave in socially

Best, Williams and Coccaro (2002) defined premeditated aggression as the sort of aggression one uses to try and control their external environment, like mugging someone. Impulsive aggression results from the inability to control your impulses and emotions, leading to things like temper tantrums or road rage. It is ths impulsive aggression that appears to present itself more readily in those with prefrontal injuries. This study sought to examine exactly where that dysfunction might be. In order to this they recruited twenty-four patients diagnosed with Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED). IED tends to exhibit itself in the form of chronic impulsive aggression. 22 control subjects were also recruited. Interestingly, exclusion criteria included any past neurological illness or traumatic brain injury. Multiple neuropsychological tests of frontal lobe functioning were administered to the participants. On working memory tasks, there was no impairment suggesting that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was in working order. However, in all tests related to the Orbitomedial Prefrontal Cortex Circuit there was statistically significant impairment in the IED group when compared to controls. This included poor problem solving, as evidenced by the Iowa Gambling Task, and impaired recognition of facial emotion, particularly negative emotions such as disgust or anger. Interestingly, they found that the most common

Two measures frequently used are the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS-11) and delayed discounting tasks. The BIS-11 produces global impulsivity scores and scores on three second-order factors: attentional, motor, and non-planning. Delayed discounting declines the current value of a reward with delay to obtaining that reward. Several studied have been conducted to investigate the relationship between the two.

“This group of disorders is characterized by: early onset; a combination of overactive, poorly modulated behaviour with marked inattention and lack of persistent task involvement; and pervasiveness over situations and persistence over time of these behavioural characteristics.” (Mulhauser, 2015, p.1) The hyperactivity aspect of this disorder is most prominent in younger children, and may decrease in intensity as a child ages, highlighting the inattentiveness and impulsive behavior in adolescence. Today, those that do not display this hyperactive trait but still experience the same problems with inattention are typically diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder. However, this term as a diagnosis has only been used in recent

Hyperbolic discounting has been shown in child psychology studies with the Stanford marshmallow experiement.1 In this study, a child was offered a choice between one marshmallow immediately or two marshmallows after a short period of time, usually around 15 minutes. Follow up studies have shown the children who were able to wait longer for the two marshmallows tended to have better life outcomes, as measured by SAT scores, educational attainment, body mass index, and other life

These similarities indicate that the addiction development is linked to neuroplasticity (von der Goltz and Kiefer 2009). Neuroplasticity mechanisms are linked to different neurocognitive phenotypes (Contreras-Rodríguez et al. 2015). For instance, impulsivity has been linked to ventral striatum neuroadaptations, and compulsive habits are associated with the shift to control of the dorsal striatum and insula networks (Contreras-Rodríguez et al. 2015). Moreover, dopamine plays a role in processing reward prediction and eventually in the understanding of addictive disorders as a learning model. This is a result of dopamine’s ability to increase memory association therefore, blocking of the dopaminergic transmission decreases this

The article, High Impulsivity Predicts the Switch to Compulsive Cocaine-Talking, sought to determine whether impulsivity and novelty-seeking (which are behavioral markers of addictive drugs) place individuals in the vulnerability of compulsive seeking of the drug. The researchers used laboratory rats to test the vulnerability. Researchers found that high reactivity to novelty predicted the likelihood of rats seeking cocaine self-administration. However, high impulsivity seemed to predict the development of addiction like behavior in the laboratory rats. The results obtained by researchers has changed the perspective from the impulsivity aspect of drug use towards the compulsivity factor during the initial stages of addiction development. Interestingly, the compulsive factor can be generated through neural physiology (i.e. neural mechanisms or diminished function of cortical function).

The two conditions presented in random fashion each session to minimize sequence effect. After introduction of treatment and collection of data the behavior analyst compared the distance between the two data path ,graph showed clearly more effectiveness of token economy than positive reinforcement on the target behavior sitting on the seat. once Token economy determine as the best intervention , behavior analyst withdraw the positive reinforcement intervention ,and he administered in the final phase token economy across sessions

As well as to pinpoint the exact impulsivity factor that plays a role in the connection between the two. Negative urgency and sensation seeking has been implicated in sexual behavior (Deckman & DeWall, 2011), this study aims to discover if these factors carry over and explain the relation between risky sexual behavior and substance abuse.

The “competing neurobehavioral decisions systems” (CNDS) theory is a dual theory that serves to integrate the relationship between substance abuse and impulse control disorder; therefore, reigning the ability to develop new treatments or elucidate improvements in established treatment processes (Bickel et al., 2015). The CNDS theory hypothesizes that an imbalance between the impulsive and executive regulatory brain systems is prevalent in subjects with an addiction disorder. A treatment process that can establish the balance of these two systems can possibly result in eradication of first impulsive control disorders, and then transiently addiction disorders.