Impulsive action but not impulsive choice determines problem gambling severity
- Author
- Damien Brevers, Axel Cleeremans, Frederick Verbruggen (UGent) , Antoine Bechara, Charles Kornreich, Paul Verbanck and Xavier Noel
- Organization
- Abstract
- Background: Impulsivity is a hallmark of problem gambling. However, impulsivity is not a unitary construct and this study investigated the relationship between problem gambling severity and two facets of impulsivity: impulsive action (impaired ability to withhold a motor response) and impulsive choice (abnormal aversion for the delay of reward). Methods: The recruitment includes 65 problem gamblers and 35 normal control participants. On the basis of DSM-IV-TR criteria, two groups of gamblers were distinguished: problem gamblers (n = 38) and pathological gamblers (n = 27) with similar durations of gambling practice. Impulsive action was assessed using a response inhibition task (the stop-signal task). Impulsive choice was estimated with the delay-discounting task. Possible confounds (e.g., IQ, mood, ADHD symptoms) were recorded. Results: Both problem and pathological gamblers discounted reward at a higher rate than their controls, but only pathological gamblers showed abnormally low performance on the most demanding condition of the stop-signal task. None of the potential confounds covaried with these results. Conclusions: These results suggest that, whereas abnormal impulsive choice characterizes all problem gamblers, pathological gamblers' impairments in impulsive action may represent an important developmental pathway of pathological gambling.
- Keywords
- STOP-SIGNAL PARADIGM, PATHOLOGICAL GAMBLERS, RESPONSE-INHIBITION, DECISION-MAKING, BEHAVIORAL-MODELS, DISINHIBITION, SENSITIVITY, PERSPECTIVE, ADHD, STOP-SIGNAL
Downloads
-
Brevers et al 2012.pdf
- full text (Published version)
- |
- open access
- |
- |
- 519.11 KB
Citation
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-8534965
- MLA
- Brevers, Damien, et al. “Impulsive Action but Not Impulsive Choice Determines Problem Gambling Severity.” PLOS ONE, vol. 7, no. 11, 2012, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050647.
- APA
- Brevers, D., Cleeremans, A., Verbruggen, F., Bechara, A., Kornreich, C., Verbanck, P., & Noel, X. (2012). Impulsive action but not impulsive choice determines problem gambling severity. PLOS ONE, 7(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050647
- Chicago author-date
- Brevers, Damien, Axel Cleeremans, Frederick Verbruggen, Antoine Bechara, Charles Kornreich, Paul Verbanck, and Xavier Noel. 2012. “Impulsive Action but Not Impulsive Choice Determines Problem Gambling Severity.” PLOS ONE 7 (11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050647.
- Chicago author-date (all authors)
- Brevers, Damien, Axel Cleeremans, Frederick Verbruggen, Antoine Bechara, Charles Kornreich, Paul Verbanck, and Xavier Noel. 2012. “Impulsive Action but Not Impulsive Choice Determines Problem Gambling Severity.” PLOS ONE 7 (11). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050647.
- Vancouver
- 1.Brevers D, Cleeremans A, Verbruggen F, Bechara A, Kornreich C, Verbanck P, et al. Impulsive action but not impulsive choice determines problem gambling severity. PLOS ONE. 2012;7(11).
- IEEE
- [1]D. Brevers et al., “Impulsive action but not impulsive choice determines problem gambling severity,” PLOS ONE, vol. 7, no. 11, 2012.
@article{8534965,
abstract = {{Background: Impulsivity is a hallmark of problem gambling. However, impulsivity is not a unitary construct and this study investigated the relationship between problem gambling severity and two facets of impulsivity: impulsive action (impaired ability to withhold a motor response) and impulsive choice (abnormal aversion for the delay of reward).
Methods: The recruitment includes 65 problem gamblers and 35 normal control participants. On the basis of DSM-IV-TR criteria, two groups of gamblers were distinguished: problem gamblers (n = 38) and pathological gamblers (n = 27) with similar durations of gambling practice. Impulsive action was assessed using a response inhibition task (the stop-signal task). Impulsive choice was estimated with the delay-discounting task. Possible confounds (e.g., IQ, mood, ADHD symptoms) were recorded.
Results: Both problem and pathological gamblers discounted reward at a higher rate than their controls, but only pathological gamblers showed abnormally low performance on the most demanding condition of the stop-signal task. None of the potential confounds covaried with these results.
Conclusions: These results suggest that, whereas abnormal impulsive choice characterizes all problem gamblers, pathological gamblers' impairments in impulsive action may represent an important developmental pathway of pathological gambling.}},
articleno = {{e50647}},
author = {{Brevers, Damien and Cleeremans, Axel and Verbruggen, Frederick and Bechara, Antoine and Kornreich, Charles and Verbanck, Paul and Noel, Xavier}},
issn = {{1932-6203}},
journal = {{PLOS ONE}},
keywords = {{STOP-SIGNAL PARADIGM,PATHOLOGICAL GAMBLERS,RESPONSE-INHIBITION,DECISION-MAKING,BEHAVIORAL-MODELS,DISINHIBITION,SENSITIVITY,PERSPECTIVE,ADHD,STOP-SIGNAL}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{11}},
pages = {{8}},
title = {{Impulsive action but not impulsive choice determines problem gambling severity}},
url = {{http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050647}},
volume = {{7}},
year = {{2012}},
}
- Altmetric
- View in Altmetric
- Web of Science
- Times cited: