Reflection impulsivity in binge drinking: behavioural and volumetric correlates

Abstract

The degree to which an individual accumulates evidence prior to making a decision, also known as reflection impulsivity, can be affected in psychiatric disorders. Here, we study decisional impulsivity in binge drinkers, a group at elevated risk for developing alcohol use disorders, comparing two tasks assessing reflection impulsivity and a delay discounting task, hypothesizing impairments in both subtypes of impulsivity. We also assess volumetric correlates of reflection impulsivity focusing on regions previously implicated in functional magnetic resonance imaging studies. Sixty binge drinkers and healthy volunteers were tested using two different information‐gathering paradigms: the beads task and the Information Sampling Task (IST). The beads task was analysed using a behavioural approach and a Bayesian model of decision making. Delay discounting was assessed using the Monetary Choice Questionnaire. Regression analyses of primary outcomes were conducted with voxel‐based morphometry analyses. Binge drinkers sought less evidence prior to decision in the beads task compared with healthy volunteers in both the behavioural and computational modelling analysis. There were no group differences in the IST or delay discounting task. Greater impulsivity as indexed by lower evidence accumulation in the beads task was associated with smaller dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and inferior parietal volumes. In contrast, greater impulsivity as indexed by lower evidence accumulation in the IST was associated with greater dorsal cingulate and precuneus volumes. Binge drinking is characterized by impaired reflection impulsivity suggesting a deficit in deciding on the basis of future outcomes that are more difficult to represent. These findings emphasize the role of possible therapeutic interventions targeting decision‐making deficits.

Jumping to conclusions in untreated patients with Parkinson's disease

“…In line with a previous study in the non-PD population [33] there was no correlation between the beads task and temporal discounting and no difference between the PD group and controls. While in standard temporal discounting tasks rewards are delayed by weeks, in the beads task, drawing more of the beads delays a possible reward only by a few seconds and correct responses resulted in small fixed rewards, compared to anticipated large rewards in temporal discounting tasks.…”

“…For example, previous studies on substance abusers showed this cohort gather significantly less evidence on the beads task but did not perform worse on feedback learning and risk taking tasks [42]. Furthermore, a recent study has suggested that the beads task may be particularly sensitive to assess impulsivity as it is visually less explicit and requires individuals to rely on their internal task representation [33], which is not the case in classical risk taking [43] and feedback learning tests.…”

Response to Cognitive impulsivity and the behavioral addiction model of obsessive–compulsive disorder: Abramovitch and McKay (2016)

“…In fact, increased cognitive impulsivity on the cognitive subscales of the BIS-11 is a well-replicated finding in substance and behavioral addictions, such as gambling disorder and internet addiction (Choi et al., 2014; Marazziti et al., 2014; Zhou, Zhou, & Zhu, 2016). Moreover, previous studies showed similar results of increased reflection impulsivity using the same (Beads) task in a range of addiction-related disorders, such as substance use disorders, gambling disorder, binge drinking, and Parkinson’s disease with medication-induced behavioral addictions (Banca et al., 2016; Djamshidian et al., 2012, 2013). …”

Model-Based Control in Dimensional Psychiatry

“…More broadly, the capacity to build an internal model of the task structure or environment can potentially be extended to other forms of behavioural inflexibility such as set shifting or reversal learning and forms of impulsivity such as reflection impulsivity (76). Together, these findings highlight a role for (6)).…”