Discounting of delayed rewards in substance abusers: relationship to antisocial personality disorder

Petry, Nancy M.

doi:10.1007/s00213-002-1115-1

Cited by 168 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

131

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a related study comparing people addicted to heroin with controls, Kirby et al (1999) obtained weak but significant positive correlations between the logarithm of k and measures of impulsivity from the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (Barratt, 1985) and the Impulsiveness and Adventuresomeness subscales of the 1-5 Questionnaire (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1978). Petry (2002) also observed a significant correlation between scores on the EPQ Impulsivity scale and discounting rates in substance abusers. 1 Less consistent relations between behavioral and psychometric measures have been reported in studies involving smokers and drinkers.…”

Section: Behavioral and Psychometric Measuresmentioning

confidence: 95%

A Discounting Framework for Choice With Delayed and Probabilistic Rewards.

Green¹,

Myerson²

2004

Psychological Bulletin

1,430

1,337

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When choosing between delayed or uncertain outcomes, individuals discount the value of such outcomes on the basis of the expected time to or the likelihood of their occurrence. In an integrative review of the expanding experimental literature on discounting, the authors show that although the same form of hyperbola-like function describes discounting of both delayed and probabilistic outcomes, a variety of recent findings are inconsistent with a single-process account. The authors also review studies that compare discounting in different populations and discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the findings. The present effort illustrates the value of studying choice involving both delayed and probabilistic outcomes within a general discounting framework that uses similar experimental procedures and a common analytical approach.Choice is relatively predictable when the alternatives differ on only one dimension. For example, if individuals are offered a choice between two rewards that differ only in amount, they generally choose the larger rather than the smaller reward. Similarly, if offered a choice between two rewards that differ only in delay, individuals tend to choose the reward available sooner rather than the one available later, and if offered a choice between two alternatives that differ only in probability, they tend to choose the more certain reward. These same general principles, and a complementary set of principles for negative outcomes (e.g., smaller punishments will be chosen over larger ones), apply both to humans and other animals. These behavioral tendencies obviously make both economic and evolutionary sense.Problems arise, however, when choice options differ on more than one dimension-for example, when an individual must choose between a smaller reward available sooner and a larger reward available later. It is also unclear, in general, which alternative an individual would (or should) select when choosing between a smaller, more certain reward and a larger, less certain one or between a less certain reward available sooner and a more certain, but more delayed, reward. These problems are only compounded when rewards differ on all three dimensions (i.e., amount, delay, and probability). The central issue is how individuals make trade-offs among their preferences on these dimensions (Keeney & Raiffa, 1993).This issue is not only of theoretical interest; it also has implications for everyday decision making, which often involves outcomes that differ on multiple dimensions. Examples of such decisions include deciding whether to purchase a less expensive item that can be enjoyed now or to save for a more expensive one; whether to choose a risky investment that potentially could pay off at a high rate or one that pays a low but guaranteed rate of return; and whether to buy

show abstract

Section: Behavioral and Psychometric Measuresmentioning

confidence: 95%

A Discounting Framework for Choice With Delayed and Probabilistic Rewards.

Green¹,

Myerson²

2004

Psychological Bulletin

1,430

1,337

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, increased rates of temporal discounting among teenagers and children who were diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; e.g., Barkley et al, 2001) could be explained by the relative difficulties with executive functioning that arise with ADHD. In addition, individuals diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder (ADP) also tend to exhibit greater discounting of delayed rewards than controls, which could be related to relatively weak activation in their executive system (Petry, 2002). Indeed, prefrontal cortex dysfunction has been implicated in these and other disorders, particularly those that, like ADHD, primarily affect young people.…”

Section: Neuroeconomics Of Addiction: Competing Neural Systems Hypothmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral and neuroeconomics of drug addiction: Competing neural systems and temporal discounting processes

Bickel

Miller

et al. 2007

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

520

408

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We review behavioral-and neuroeconomic research that identifies temporal discounting as an important component in the development and maintenance of drug addiction. First we review behavioral economic research that explains and documents the contribution of temporal discounting to addiction. This is followed with recent insights from neuroeconomics that may provide an explanation of why drug dependent individuals discount the future. Specifically, neuroeconomics has identified two competing neural systems that are related to temporal discounting using brainimaging techniques that examine the relative activation of different brain regions for temporal discounting. According to the competing neural systems account, choices for delayed outcomes are related to the prefrontal cortex (i.e., the "executive system") and choices for immediate outcomes are related to the limbic brain regions (i.e., the "impulsive system"). Temporal discounting provides a useful framework for future imaging research, and suggests a novel approach to designing effective drug dependence prevention and treatment programs.

show abstract

“…One operational definition of impulsivity is the degree to which an individual discounts the value of a delayed reward, known as delay discounting [2][3][4][5][6]. Increased discounting of delayed rewards has been observed in children with ADHD, impulsive psychiatric patients, and substance abusers [7][8][9][10][11][12]. Although delay discounting is an accepted operational definition of impulsivity, little is known about its underlying neurobiological substrates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nucleus accumbens lesions decrease sensitivity to rapid changes in the delay to reinforcement

Acheson

Farrar

Patak

et al. 2006

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both humans and non-humans discount the value of rewards that are delayed or uncertain, and individuals that discount delayed rewards at a relatively high rate are considered impulsive. To investigate the neural mechanisms that mediate delay discounting, the present study examined the effects of excitotoxic lesions of the nucleus accumbens (NAC) on discounting of reward value by delay and probability. Rats were trained on delay (n = 24) or probability discounting (n = 24) tasks. Following training, excitotoxic lesions of the NAC were made by intracranial injections of 0.5 µl 0.15 M quinolinic acid (n = 12) or vehicle (n = 12) aimed at the NAC (AP +1.6, ML ±1.5, DV −7.1). NAC lesions did not alter performance in animals tested with a constant delay (4 s) or probability (0.4) of reinforcement. However, when tested with between session changes in the delay (0, 1, 2, 4, and 8 s) of reinforcement, the lesioned rats had flatter discount curves than the sham group, indicating that they were less sensitive to frequent changes in the delay to reward. In contrast, the NAC lesions did not affect discounting of probabilistic rewards. NAC lesions impaired the ability to adapt to frequent between session changes in the delay to reward but did not increase or decrease discounting when the delay was held constant across sessions. NAC lesions may disrupt the ability of the animals to predict the timing of delayed rewards when the delay to reward is changed frequently.

show abstract

Discounting of delayed rewards in substance abusers: relationship to antisocial personality disorder

Abstract: These results provide further evidence of more rapid discounting of delayed rewards in substance abusers, especially among substance abusers with a co-morbid diagnosis of ASP.

Cited by 168 publications

References 66 publications

A Discounting Framework for Choice With Delayed and Probabilistic Rewards.

A Discounting Framework for Choice With Delayed and Probabilistic Rewards.

Behavioral and neuroeconomics of drug addiction: Competing neural systems and temporal discounting processes

Nucleus accumbens lesions decrease sensitivity to rapid changes in the delay to reinforcement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About