Risk‐Taking Patterns of Children, Associated Cognitive Weaknesses, and Prevention of Negative Outcomes

Abstract

ObjectiveAccidents, drug use, and unsafe sex associated with greater propensity for risk‐taking are leading causes of illness and death among adolescents. This study aimed to help identify and further characterize children with maladaptive risk‐taking to improve primary prevention interventions.MethodsTwo scores from the Bubblegum Analog Risk‐Taking Task for Children (BART‐C), total points and average inflations of unpopped bubbles, were used in a cluster analysis to identify distinct patterns of risk‐taking among 6,267 kindergarten through eighth‐grade children. Clusters were compared with the Flanker Test of Focused Attention, the Go/No‐Go test of inhibition, and the List Sorting Working Memory Test.ResultsBoth BART‐C scores made significant (p<0.001) contributions in defining three clusters of children: reckless, risk avoidant, and adaptive risk‐taking. Clusters differed significantly on Flanker Test measures of incongruent accuracy (p=0.004) and reaction time (p<0.001), Go/No‐Go inhibition (p=0.001), and List Sorting Working Memory Test scores (p<0.001). The reckless cluster had lower Flanker accuracy and Go/No‐Go inhibition than did the other groups and lower working memory than the adaptive risk‐taking group. Compared with adaptive risk‐takers, the risk‐avoidant group was slower (p<0.001), showed a nonsignificant trend toward greater accuracy on the Flanker test, and had lower working memory scores (p<0.001).ConclusionsThe BART‐C defined two maladaptive risk‐taking clusters: reckless and risk avoidant. Significant differences in cognitive function between these groups and the adaptive risk‐taking group provides external validation of and further characterizes the clusters. Early intervention may prevent future health‐compromising behaviors among reckless children and may promote fuller learning and development among risk‐avoidant children.

A scoping review on self-regulation and reward processing measured with gambling tasks: Evidence from the general youth population

“…Specifically, the two types of gambling tasks administered as card games were the Children’s Gambling Task (n = 2) [ 1 ] and Preschool Gambling Task (PGT; n = 1) [ 25 ], which are age-appropriate versions of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) [ 6 ]. The latter is also the measure that was most frequently used (n = 5), followed by the Hungry Donkey Task (HDT; n = 3) [ 26 ], the CGT (n = 2), the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART; n = 2) [ 5 ] and the Bubblegum Analogue Risk Task for children (BART-C; n = 2) [ 27 , 28 ], and the IGT for children (n = 1) [ 29 ], which are other age-appropriate versions of the BART and the IGT, respectively. Detailed descriptions for each gambling task and their different versions are reported in S3B Table in S1 File .…”

“…Groppe and Elsner (2015–2017) found similar results in two studies using the same data at baseline and one year later, and found positive correlations between attention shifting and decision-making measured by the HDT ( r = 0.09 to 0.13, p < .01) [ 60 , 61 ]. The final study used the BART-C to create three risk-taking clusters (risk-avoidant, reckless, adaptive risk-takers), and found that reckless participants had less attention accuracy than both risk-avoidant and adaptive risk-takers, while the risk-avoidant ones were slower compared to the adaptive risk-takers ( p < .001 to < .05; effect sizes are not reported) [ 28 ].…”

“…Instead, the direction of the results for attention, set-shifting and cognitive flexibility was mixed. Specifically, significant positive associations were found for decision-making measured using the PGT and the HDT (both derived from the IGT), whereas one study [ 28 ] found negative associations for both risk-taking and risk-avoidance measured using the BART-C. However, it should be noted that the significance or not of the association, as well as its direction, was also dependent on the specific measures used to assess self-regulation.…”