Models of ADHD: Five ways smaller sooner is better

Hyperbolae

Hyperbolic relations between independent and dependent variables are ubiquitous in the experimental analysis of behavior, mentioned in over 150 articles in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. There are two principal forms of hyperbolae: The first describes the relation between response rate and reinforcement rate on variable-interval schedules of reinforcement; it rises asymptotically toward a maximum. The second describes the relation between the current equivalent value of an incentive and its delay or (im)probability; it falls from a maximum toward an asymptote of 0. Where do these come from? What do their parameters mean? How are they related? This article answers the first two questions and addresses the last.

Spontaneously hypertensive rats show higher impulsive action, but equal impulsive choice with both positive and aversive consequences

Both positive and aversive delayed consequences play an important role in decision making. However, most of research has studied the temporal discounting of the positive consequences, while the study of the aversives is scarce in general and null in some areas. This is the case of research on impulsivity in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR), an animal model of ADHD. To evaluate SHRs' sensitivity to aversive delayed consequences, we employed a choice procedure in which subjects chose between a smaller-amount alternative and a larger-amount alternative plus a shock; when preference for the smaller-amount alternative stabilized, five different delays to the shock were presented with the objective of analyzing the recovery of preference for the larger-amount alternative, which is related to the sensitivity to the delayed aversive consequence. To analyze the sensitivity to delayed positive consequences we employed a procedure that evaluated the preference between a smaller-amount alternative and a larger-amount alternative as a function of the delay to the later. Finally, to evaluate impulsive action we employed a DRL 10s schedule. In all tasks, Wistar rats were evaluated as control strain. The results indicated that choice impulsivity was equivalent between strains, both for positive and for aversive consequences. In contrast, we found a higher level of impulsive action in SHR.

Behavioral trainings and manipulations to reduce delay discounting: A systematic review

In everyday decision-making, individuals make trade-offs between short-term and long-term benefits or costs. Depending on many factors, individuals may choose to wait for larger delayed reward, yet in other situations they may prefer the smaller, immediate reward. In addition to within-subject variation in the short-term versus long-term reward trade-off, there are also interindividual differences in delay discounting (DD), which have been shown to be quite stable. The extent to which individuals discount the value of delayed rewards turns out to be associated with important health and disorder-related outcomes: the more discounting, the more unhealthy or problematic choices. This has led to the hypothesis that DD can be conceptualized as trans-disease process. The current systematic review presents an overview of behavioral trainings and manipulations that have been developed to reduce DD in human participants aged 12 years or older. Manipulation studies mostly contain one session and measure DD directly after the manipulation. Training studies add a multiple session training component that is not per se related to DD, in between two DD task measurements. Ninety-eight studies (151 experiments) were identified that tested behavioral trainings and manipulations to decrease DD. Overall, results indicated that DD can be decreased, showing that DD is profoundly context dependent and changeable. Most promising avenues to pursue in future research seem to be acceptance-based/mindfulness-based trainings, and even more so manipulations involving a future orientation. Limitations and recommendations are discussed to identify the mechanistic processes that allow for changes in discount rate and behavior accordingly.

On the Complexity of Discounting, Choice Situations, and People

Although steep delay discounting is associated with various behavioral problems, perhaps most prominently substance abuse, we argue that it is best not conceived of as a character flaw such as impulsivity. Such a view, although part of a centuries-old tradition, does not distinguish between actions whose outcomes involve gains and losses, or between delayed outcomes and probabilistic outcomes, nor does it acknowledge that how steeply an individual discounts one of these kinds of outcome appears to be independent of how steeply they discount other kinds. Therefore, we advocate an approach that does not require making judgments about the character of the individuals involved. We show that when drug-dependent individuals are compared with controls, a substantial number of the drug-dependent individuals discount delayed monetary rewards less steeply than the average (median) member of the control group. Moreover, a substantial number of the controls discount more steeply than the average drug-dependent individual. Finally, we point out that many everyday choice situations differ from those studied in most discounting experiments in that they involve both gains and losses as well as qualitatively different outcomes that may be both delayed and probabilistic. Past research on discounting that focused on simple choice situations has provided a solid foundation, but research on more complicated situations is now needed. We believe that the principles revealed by such research will both inform the choices of treatment providers and improve our understanding of the complicated decisions that people face every day.

The overall discount rate

Discounting refers to the way in which the value of an outcome depends on the delay until it is obtained. If an organism's discount function is known, then its rate of discounting at any delay can be found. If the function is not known, the normalised area under an estimate of the discount function has been used as a measure that summarises the strength of discounting over a range of delays. We propose a new measure of the strength of discounting: the overall discount rate W, which is the drop in value from the start to the end of the value curve divided by the area under this curve. We show that our measure has various advantages over the normalised area, namely it can be linked to the instantaneous rate of discounting and it respects the special nature of exponential discounting. It does not give a unique value to each curve, but we prove that this is incompatible with the requirement that similar discount functions be assigned similar values, and so this is not a defect of the measure.

Toward a Unifying Account of Impulsivity and the Development of Self-Control

Impulsivity has traditionally been thought to involve various behavioral traits that can be measured using different laboratory protocols. Whereas some authors regard different measures of impulsivity as reflecting fundamentally distinct and unrelated behavioral tendencies (fragmentation approach), others regard those different indexes as analogue forms of the same behavioral tendency, only superficially different (unification approach). Unifying accounts range from mere intuitions to more sophisticated theoretical systems. Some of the more complete attempts at unifying are intriguing but have validity weaknesses. We propose a new unifying attempt based on theoretical points posed by other authors and supplemented by theory and research on associative learning. We then apply these assumptions to characterize the paradigms used to study impulsivity in laboratory settings and evaluate their scope as an attempt at unification. We argue that our approach possesses a good balance of parsimony and empirical and theoretical grounding, as well as a more encompassing scope, and is more suitable for experimental testing than previous theoretical frameworks. In addition, the proposed approach is capable of generating a new definition of impulsivity and outlines a hypothesis of how self-control can be developed. Finally, we examine the fragmentation approach from a different perspective, emphasizing the importance of finding similarities among seemingly different phenomena.

Risk preferences impose a hidden distortion on measures of choice impulsivity

Measuring temporal discounting through the use of intertemporal choice tasks is now the gold standard method for quantifying human choice impulsivity (impatience) in neuroscience, psychology, behavioral economics, public health and computational psychiatry. A recent area of growing interest is individual differences in discounting levels, as these may predispose to (or protect from) mental health disorders, addictive behaviors, and other diseases. At the same time, more and more studies have been dedicated to the quantification of individual attitudes towards risk, which have been measured in many clinical and non-clinical populations using closely related techniques. Economists have pointed to interactions between measurements of time preferences and risk preferences that may distort estimations of the discount rate. However, although becoming standard practice in economics, discount rates and risk preferences are rarely measured simultaneously in the same subjects in other fields, and the magnitude of the imposed distortion is unknown in the assessment of individual differences. Here, we show that standard models of temporal discounting —such as a hyperbolic discounting model widely present in the literature which fails to account for risk attitudes in the estimation of discount rates— result in a large and systematic pattern of bias in estimated discounting parameters. This can lead to the spurious attribution of differences in impulsivity between individuals when in fact differences in risk attitudes account for observed behavioral differences. We advance a model which, when applied to standard choice tasks typically used in psychology and neuroscience, provides both a better fit to the data and successfully de-correlates risk and impulsivity parameters. This results in measures that are more accurate and thus of greater utility to the many fields interested in individual differences in impulsivity.

Social choice for one: On the rationality of intertemporal decisions

When faced with an intertemporal choice between a smaller short-term reward and a larger long-term prize, is opting for the latter always indicative of delay tolerance? And is delay tolerance always to be regarded as a manifestation of self-control, and thus as a rational solution to intertemporal dilemmas? I argue in favor of a negative answer to both questions, based on evidence collected in the delay discounting literature. This highlights the need for a nuanced understanding of rationality in intertemporal choice, to capture also situations in which waiting is not the optimal strategy. This paper suggests that such an understanding is fostered by adopting social choice theory as a promising framework to model intertemporal decision making. Some preliminary results of this approach are discussed, and its potential is compared with a much more studied formal model for intertemporal choice, i.e. game theory.