Environmental rearing effects on impulsivity and reward sensitivity.

Kirkpatrick, Kimberly; Marshall, Andrew T.; Clarke, J.Jackson; Cain, Mary E.

doi:10.1037/a0034124

Cited by 37 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, gamblers discount probabilistic rewards less steeply than control subjects Madden et al, 2009; also see Weatherly & Derenne, 2012) and continue to make risky choices despite the experience of repeated losses (Linnet, Røjskjaer, Nygaard, & Maher, 2006). Accordingly, a thorough understanding of the mechanisms driving individual differences offers critical insight into questions such as why some individuals continue to gamble despite having experienced a series of consecutive losses (Rachlin, 1990).Recently, much of the work from our laboratory has been focused on the assessment of individual differences in impulsive and risky choice and the underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms in rats (Galtress, Garcia, & Kirkpatrick, 2012; Garcia & Kirkpatrick, 2013;Kirkpatrick, Marshall, Clarke, & Cain, 2013;Kirkpatrick, Marshall, Smith, Koci, & Park, 2014;Smith, Marshall, & Kirkpatrick, 2015), which will be the primary focus of this review. Here, we will discuss mechanisms of impulsive and risky choice and their relationship.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, much of the work from our laboratory has been focused on the assessment of individual differences in impulsive and risky choice and the underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms in rats (Galtress, Garcia, & Kirkpatrick, 2012;Garcia & Kirkpatrick, 2013;Kirkpatrick, Marshall, Clarke, & Cain, 2013;Kirkpatrick, Marshall, Smith, Koci, & Park, 2014;Smith, Marshall, & Kirkpatrick, 2015), which will be the primary focus of this review. Here, we will discuss mechanisms of impulsive and risky choice and their relationship.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rats received choices between an SS of 1 pellet after 10 s and an LL of 1, 2, or 3 pellets after 30 s, with LL magnitude manipulated across phases. Under these conditions, differential rearing exerted a significant effect on impulsive choice (Figure 6), corroborating the findings of the previous studies with IC rats displaying greater impulsive choice behaviors.Additionally, in order to better understand the relationship between reward sensitivity and impulsivity, Kirkpatrick et al (2013) conducted a second experiment that also included a standard rearing condition (SC) in addition to the IC and EC groups. SC rats were pair-housed and handled daily but were not provided with any novel objects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, in order to better understand the relationship between reward sensitivity and impulsivity, Kirkpatrick et al (2013) conducted a second experiment that also included a standard rearing condition (SC) in addition to the IC and EC groups. SC rats were pair-housed and handled daily but were not provided with any novel objects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Mechanisms of Individual Differences in Impulsive and Risky Choice in Rats

Kirkpatrick¹,

Marshall²,

Smith³

2015

CCBR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual differences in impulsive and risky choice are key risk factors for a variety of maladaptive behaviors such as drug abuse, gambling, and obesity. In our rat model, ordered individual differences are stable across choice parameters and months of testing, and span a broad spectrum, suggesting that rats, like humans, exhibit trait-level impulsive and risky choice behaviors. In addition, impulsive and risky choices are highly correlated, suggesting a degree of correspondence between these two traits. An examination of the underlying cognitive mechanisms has suggested an important role for timing processes in impulsive choice. In addition, in an examination of genetic factors in impulsive choice, the Lewis rat strain emerged as a possible animal model for studying disordered impulsive choice, with this strain demonstrating deficient delay processing. Early rearing environment also affected impulsive behaviors, with rearing in an enriched environment promoting adaptable and more self-controlled choices. The combined results with impulsive choice suggest an important role for timing and reward sensitivity in moderating impulsive behaviors. Relative reward valuation also affects risky choice, with manipulation of objective reward value (relative to an alternative reference point) resulting in loss chasing behaviors that predicted overall risky choice behaviors. The combined results are discussed in relation to domain-specific versus domain-general subjective reward valuation processes and the potential neural substrates of impulsive and risky choice. Keywords: impulsive choice; risky choice; discounting; individual differences; ratImpulsive choice is measured by presenting a choice between a smaller reward that is available sooner (the SS) and a larger reward that is available later (the LL). Thus, the impulsive choice paradigm pits reward magnitude against delay to reward by essentially asking whether an individual is willing to wait longer to receive a better outcome (Mazur, 1987(Mazur, , 2007. Impulsive choice is indicated by preferences for the SS, particularly when those choices lead to less overall reward earning, and are thus maladaptive, whereas choices of the LL (when it is more objectively valuable) are indicative of greater self-control. Individual differences in impulsive choice are associated with numerous maladaptive behaviors and disorders such as: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; Barkley, Edwards, Laneri, Fletcher, & Metevia, 2001;Solanto et al., 2001;Sonuga-Barke, 2002;Sonuga-Barke, Taylor, Sembi, & Smith, 1992), pathological gambling (Alessi & Petry, 2003;MacKillop et al., 2011;Reynolds, Ortengren, Richards, & de Wit, 2006), obesity (Davis, Patte, Curtis, & Reid, 2010), and substance abuse (Bickel & Marsch, 2001). Additionally, impulsive choice has also been posited as a primary risk factor (MacKillop et al., 2011;Verdejo-García, Lawrence, & Clark, 2008) and 46 COMPARATIVE COGNITION & BEHAVIOR REVIEWSKirkpatrick, Marshall, and Smith predictor of treatment outcomes (Broos, Dierg...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mechanisms of Individual Differences in Impulsive and Risky Choice in Rats

Kirkpatrick¹,

Marshall²,

Smith³

2015

CCBR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, we cannot rule out the possible role of environmental enrichment. Environmental enrichment, which typically includes social contact, novelty, and physical activity, decreases measures of impulsive choice (Perry et al, 2008b; Kirkpatrick et al, 2013; 2014, but see Hellemans et al, 2005). It is possible that the effects of physical activity in the present study are due to an enrichment-related effect; however, it is also possible that the effects of environmental enrichment reported in previous studies may be due to the physical activity component of the manipulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of physical activity on impulsive choice: Influence of sensitivity to reinforcement amount and delay

Strickland

Feinstein

Lacy

et al. 2016

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impulsive choice is a diagnostic feature and/or complicating factor for several psychological disorders and may be examined in the laboratory using delay-discounting procedures. Recent investigators have proposed using quantitative measures of analysis to examine the behavioral processes contributing to impulsive choice. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of physical activity (i.e., wheel running) on impulsive choice in a single-response, discrete-trial procedure using two quantitative methods of analysis. To this end, rats were assigned to physical activity or sedentary groups and trained to respond in a delay-discounting procedure. In this procedure, one lever always produced one food pellet immediately, whereas a second lever produced three food pellets after a 0, 10, 20, 40, or 80-second delay. Estimates of sensitivity to reinforcement amount and sensitivity to reinforcement delay were determined using (1) a simple linear analysis and (2) an analysis of logarithmically transformed response ratios. Both analyses revealed that physical activity decreased sensitivity to reinforcement amount and sensitivity to reinforcement delay. These findings indicate that (1) physical activity has significant but functionally opposing effects on the behavioral processes that contribute to impulsive choice and (2) both quantitative methods of analysis are appropriate for use in single-response, discrete-trial procedures.

show abstract

A delay discounting task produces a greater likelihood of waiting than a deferred gratification task

Young

McCoy

2014

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A first-person-shooter video game was adapted for the study of choice between smaller sooner and larger later outcomes to compare the behavioral patterns produced by deferred gratification (DG) and delay discounting (DD) tasks. Participants played a game in which they could either fire their weapon sooner and do a small amount of damage or wait a few seconds to fire their weapon and do a larger amount of damage. For the DD task, a failure to fire within one second committed the player to waiting for the larger later outcome thus removing the opportunity to defect during the delay that is present in the DG task. The incentive structure changed multiple times during game play so that at times the optimal decision was to choose the smaller sooner outcome whereas at other times the optimal decision was to wait for the larger later outcome. Players assigned to the DD task showed a greater tendency to wait and lower sensitivity to the changing incentives.

show abstract

Environmental rearing effects on impulsivity and reward sensitivity.

Cited by 37 publications

References 64 publications

Mechanisms of Individual Differences in Impulsive and Risky Choice in Rats

Mechanisms of Individual Differences in Impulsive and Risky Choice in Rats

The effects of physical activity on impulsive choice: Influence of sensitivity to reinforcement amount and delay

A delay discounting task produces a greater likelihood of waiting than a deferred gratification task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About