High BAS, but not low BIS, predicts externalizing symptoms in adults

Hundt, Natalie E.; Kimbrel, Nathan A.; Mitchell, John T.; Nelson‐Gray, Rosemery O.

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.018

Cited by 130 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Distributions of scores on the scales were unimodal and covered the range of possible scores (SP range = 1-24; SR range = 1-23). Mean scores on SP were 11.3 (SD = 5.7) and SR were 11.2 (SD = 4.6), similar to those found in previous studies at this university (e.g., Hundt, Kimbrel, Mitchell, & Nelson-Gray, 2008). …”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 87%

Reinforcement sensitivity theory predicts positive and negative affect in daily life

Hundt

Brown

Kimbrel

et al. 2013

Personality and Individual Differences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 87%

Reinforcement sensitivity theory predicts positive and negative affect in daily life

Hundt

Brown

Kimbrel

et al. 2013

Personality and Individual Differences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These results, indicating that primary and secondary psychopathy can be differentiated in terms of the relative magnitude of their relationship to the BIS, support the conceptualization of primary psychopathy as being low-anxious. A host of subsequent studies have supported this initial finding (Kimbrel, Nelson-Gray, & Mitchell, 2007;Uzieblo, Verschuere, & Crombez, 2007;Hundt, Kimbrel, Mitchell, & Nelson-Gray, 2008;Ross, Benning, Patrick, Thompson, & Thurston, 2009). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Throwing more light on the dark side of psychopathy: An extension of previous findings for the revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory

Broerman¹,

Ross²,

Corr³

2014

Personality and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Ross, S. R. Permanent repository linkCorr, P. J. IntroductionDue to researchers' differing opinions regarding the construct of psychopathy, the distinction between primary and secondary psychopathy, though it has long been recognized to exist, has yet to be fully understood. This distinction, originally proposed by Karpman (1941Karpman ( , 1948, suggests two separate etiologies leading to psychopathy. Whereas primary psychopathy stems from genetic influences resulting in emotional deficits, secondary psychopathy is associated with environmental factors such as abuse (Lee & Salekin, 2010). Additionally, primary psychopathy is characterized by lack of fear/anxiety, secondary psychopathy is thought more to represent a vulnerability to experience higher levels of negative affect in general (Vassileva, Kosson, Abramowitz, & Conrad, 2005).For the reason that primary and secondary psychopathy have been theorized to be related to fearlessness and reckless behavior, respectively, researchers have begun to investigate the relationship between psychopathy and the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) of personality (Corr, 2008). Research based on Gray's (1970Gray's ( , 1987 original model of RST has focused on two primary motivational systems: the behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and the behavioral approach system (BAS). In original RST, the BIS is sensitive to cues of punishment and inhibits goal-directed behavior in the presence of such cues. Thus, high BIS activation has been theorized to contribute to processes that, eventually, cause the experience of anxiety. In contrast, the BAS is sensitive to signals of reward, leading to increased goal-directed behavior in the presence of such cues. High BAS activation has been theorized to be related to the trait of reward sensitivity and impulsivity (e.g., Carver & White, 1994). Although Gray (1987) originally posited the BIS and BAS as independently functioning systems (the separable subsystems hypothesis), Corr (2001) In their study, Hughes, Moore, Morris, and Corr (2012) used an undergraduate sample to test the relationships between psychopathy the BAS, BIS, and FFFS. In accordance with Corr (2010), they reported that both primary and secondary psychopathy, as measured by the Levenson's Self-Report Psychopathy (LSRP) Scales (Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995), exhibited a negative association with BIS activation. Primary psychopathy was also shown to be positively related to the BAS -Reward Sensitivity and BAS -Drive facets, and negatively related to BAS Fun-Seeking; and in addition, it was related to FFFS-fear In contrast, in addition to an association with BIS, secondary psychopathy was positively related to Fun-Seeking (impulsivity)In both cases, the BIS can be seen as a cognitive mechanism that detects and resolves goal conflict, and is not simply a measure of anxiety.These results are intriguing but are inconsistent with a number of studies that ...

show abstract

“…Two behavioral inhibition system components are passive avoidance and extinction. Passive avoidance component indicates a lack of activity or surrender of a person to avoid punishing, and extinction component reflects stopping behaviors that are not rewarded in the aftermath (31). Heponiemi, T. (2004) also stated that the high sensitivity of behavioral inhibition system can make the patient prone to emotional distress in stressful situations and this emotional distress is one of the risk factors triggering reasons of migraines (29).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association Between Defensive Styles and Early Maladaptive Schemas in Patients with Migraine Headaches

Nejadian

Babamiri

Fard

2017

Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Migraine is one of the main reasons for primary and secondary headaches worldwide and has significant effects on patients' life. Based on recent studies, psychological factors may affect the severity, frequency, and the duration of migraine attacks. Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between defensive style and early maladaptive schemas in the patients with migraine headaches. Methods:The sample size consisted of 75 (male and female) patients which was based on Cochran's formula. Among the clients who referred to neurology clinics, patients with migraine headaches were selected by convenience sampling, they completed defensive styles questionnaire (DSQ-40), Young's early maladaptive schemas (YSQ-SF), and Ahvaz migraine questionnaire (AMQ). Statistical analyses were conducted by correlation coefficient and stepwise regression. Results:The results showed that there was a positive and significant relationship between immature defense style with the components including abandonment, mistrust, social isolation, emotional inhibition, defectiveness, failure, vulnerability, obedience, entitlement, insufficient self-control, enmeshment, and dependent and unrelenting standards. In addition, there was a negative and significant relationship between mature defensive style with the components namely social isolation and defectiveness. Neurotic defensive style was not compatible with any of the component schemas. Conclusions:The results obtained from the current research indicate that early maladaptive schemas can act as the foundation of emotional and behavioral tendencies and defensive styles in the patients with migraine headaches.

show abstract

High BAS, but not low BIS, predicts externalizing symptoms in adults

Cited by 130 publications

References 27 publications

Reinforcement sensitivity theory predicts positive and negative affect in daily life

Reinforcement sensitivity theory predicts positive and negative affect in daily life

Throwing more light on the dark side of psychopathy: An extension of previous findings for the revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory

The Association Between Defensive Styles and Early Maladaptive Schemas in Patients with Migraine Headaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About