Investigating the behavioral and self-report constructs of impulsivity domains using principal component analysis.
Investigating the behavioral and self-report constructs of impulsivity domains using principal component analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/fbp.0b013e32833113a3
复制
发表时间：
2009-09
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Pearlson GD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Meda SA;Stevens MC;Potenza MN;Pittman B;Gueorguieva R;Andrews MM;Thomas AD;Muska C;Hylton JL;Pearlson GD
冲动通常被定义为一种人类行为，其特征是个人倾向于按照冲动而不是思想行事，而不是考虑后果，包括一系列不适应的行为，这些行为反过来又受到不同神经系统的影响。与上述定义一致的是，行为研究一致地表明，冲动的潜在结构本质上是多维的。然而，到目前为止，关于构成这种行为的不同领域或结构的研究一直没有定论。此外，关于自我报告和实验室测量冲动的方法是相同的还是不同的，也没有明确的共识。本研究的目的是：1)使用与物质滥用相关的不同程度的推定冲动的样本，包括有药物使用或成瘾(ARA)风险的受试者，来表征冲动的潜在多维结构；2)使用基于主成分的因素分析来评估自我报告和实验室冲动测量之间的关系。此外，我们的补充目标是分别评估每个组(健康组和ARA组)内冲动的结构结构。我们使用了五个自我报告量表(行为抑制系统/行为激活系统(BIS/BAS)、Barratt冲动量表-11、Padua问卷、Zuckerman感觉寻求量表(SSS)、惩罚敏感性和奖励敏感性问卷)和两个基于计算机的实验室任务(气球模拟风险任务和经验延迟任务)来测量176名成年被试的冲动方面。研究对象包括健康对照组(N=)、有酗酒家族史的非酒精者(N=36)、既吸食可卡因(N=20)和现在吸食可卡因(N=31)的受试者。有酗酒和吸食可卡因家族史的受试者被归类为“危险/成瘾”(ARA)，以评估我们的补充目标。我们的总体结果揭示了冲动结构的多维本质，通过占总方差近70%的五因素解以最佳方式捕捉到这一点。五个因素/成分被归因于“自我报告的行为激活度”、“自我报告的强制性和奖惩”、“自我报告的冲动”、“行为时态折扣”和“行为冒险行为”。我们还发现，与之前发表的报告相反，某些实验室测量和自我报告测量之间存在显著重叠，表明它们可能测量的是相同的冲动领域。此外，我们的补充分析还表明，在健康组和ARA组中，冲动结构大致相同，但并不完全相同。
Impulsivity, often defined as a human behavior characterized by the inclination of an individual to act on urge rather than thought, with diminished regard to consequences, encompasses a range of maladaptive behaviors which are in turn affected by distinct neural systems. Congruent with the above definition, behavioral studies have consistently shown that the underlying construct of impulsivity is multidimensional in nature. However, research to date has been inconclusive regarding the different domains or constructs that constitute this behavior. In addition there is also no clear consensus as to whether self-report and laboratory based measures of impulsivity measure the same or different domains. The current study aimed to: 1) characterize the underlying multidimensional construct of impulsivity using a sample with varying degrees of putative impulsivity related to substance misuse, including subjects who were at-risk of substance use or addicted (ARA), and 2) assess relationships between self-report and laboratory measures of impulsivity, using a principal component-based factor analysis. In addition, our supplementary goal was to evaluate the structural constructs of impulsivity within each group separately (healthy and ARA). We used five self-report measures (Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation System (BIS/BAS), Barratt Impulsivity Scale-11, Padua Inventory, Zuckerman Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS), and Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire) and two computer based laboratory tasks (Balloon Analog Risk Task and the Experiential Delay Task) to measure aspects of impulsivity in a total of 176 adult subjects. Subjects included healthy controls (N=89), non-alcoholic subjects with family histories of alcoholism (FHP; N=36) and both former (N=20) and current (N=31) cocaine users. Subjects with a family history of alcoholism and cocaine abusers were grouped together as “at-risk/addicted” (ARA) to evaluate our supplementary goal. Our overall results revealed the multidimensional nature of the impulsivity construct as captured optimally through a five factor solution that accounted for nearly 70% of the total variance. The five factors/components were imputed as follows “Self-Reported Behavioral Activation”, “Self-Reported Compulsivity and Reward/Punishment”, “Self-Reported Impulsivity”, “Behavioral Temporal Discounting” and “Behavioral Risk-Taking.” We also found that contrary to previously published reports, there was significant overlap between certain laboratory and self-report measures, indicating that they might be measuring the same impulsivity domain. In addition, our supplemental analysis also suggested that the impulsivity constructs were largely, but not entirely the same within the healthy and ARA groups.