Background-Acute alcohol administration affects impulsive behavior, although these effects vary as a function of alcohol dose, assessment instrument, and time of measurement following administration.Methods-We concurrently examined the dose-dependent effects of alcohol on three distinct types of impulsivity tasks (continuous performance [IMT], stop-signal [GoStop], and delay-discounting [SKIP] tasks). Ninety healthy alcohol drinkers were assigned to one of the three task groups (n = 30 each), each group experienced placebo, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 g/kg alcohol doses across 5 experimental days, and task performance was assessed at 0.5 h before and 0.25, 1.0, and 2.0 h after alcohol administration. We hypothesized that impulsive responding on all tasks would be increased by acute alcohol administration both across time and during the peak BrAC, but the magnitude would depend on the task being tested. Analyses included the time-course and the peak BrAC effects. Task comparisons of peak behavioral changes following each dose are illustrated using standardized scores.Results-While alcohol consumption increased impulsive responding during all three tasks to some extent, our hypothesis was only partially supported. During the IMT, the 0.6 and 0.8 g/kg doses produced increased impulsive responding across time and at the peak BrAC. However, during the GoStop and SKIP, impulsivity increased across time regardless of the alcohol dose size, with no differences in impulsive responding among dose conditions at peak BrAC.Conclusions-This study demonstrated alcohol-induced changes in impulsivity are not uniformly affected by alcohol. These data, in conjunction with previous studies, further support that impulsivity is not a unitary construct.

This study examined clinical characteristics and laboratory-measured impulsive behavior of adolescents engaging in either non-suicidal self-injury with (NSSI+SA; n = 25) or without (NSSIOnly; n = 31) suicide attempts. We hypothesized that adolescent with NSSI+SI would exhibit more severe clinical symptoms and higher levels of behavioral impulsivity compared to adolescents with NSSI-Only. Adolescents were recruited from an inpatient psychiatric hospital unit and the two groups were compared on demographic characteristics, psychopathology, selfreported clinical ratings, methods of non-suicidal self-injury, and two laboratory impulsivity measures. Primary evaluations were conducted during psychiatric hospitalization, and a subset of those tested during hospitalization was retested 4-6 weeks after discharge. During hospitalization, NSSI+SA patients reported worse depression, hopelessness, and impulsivity on standard clinical measures, and demonstrated elevated impulsivity on a reward-directed laboratory measure compared to NSSI-Only patients. In the preliminary follow-up analyses, depression, hopelessness, suicidal ideation, and laboratory impulsivity were improved for both groups, but the NSSI+SA group still exhibited significantly more depressive symptoms, hopelessness, and impulsivity than the NSSI-Only group. Risk assessments for adolescents with NSSI+SA should include consideration not only of the severity of clinical symptoms but of the current level impulsivity as well.

Objectives Researchers have clearly implicated impulsivity as having a key role in substance use disorders, and comparisons of self-report measures suggest there are measurably different components of impulsive behavior. However comparatively little research has been devoted to understanding the multidimensional nature of this construct using laboratory measures of impulsivity that may be more sensitive to tracking changes across time. Many studies have measured impulsivity, but this construct has been measured using methodologically different types of laboratory impulsivity paradigms that are often used in isolation. As a result, it is important to determine whether some of the most frequently used types of behavioral measures of impulsivity account for unique variance. Methods Here, we used factor analytical techniques in two studies to evaluate the independence of three of the most commonly used behavioral impulsivity paradigms. First, a factor analysis was conducted using previously collected data (n = 204), and second, data was gathered specifically to replicate and extend the results of our original analysis (n = 198). Results Both studies revealed three distinct factors, confirming our hypothesis of at least three components of impulsive behavior that can be measured by these methodological approaches. Conclusions These findings suggest that researchers should carefully consider their selection of laboratory-behavioral impulsivity measures, and that the measure(s) selected should be related to the particular underlying processes relevant to substance use disorders and treatment success.

Alprazolam administration produced increases in human risk taking under laboratory conditions. In union with previous studies, the observed shift in trial-by-trial response probabilities suggests that sensitivity to consequences (e.g., oversensitivity to recent rewards) may be an important mechanism in the psychopharmacology of risky decision making. Additionally, risk-seeking personality traits may be predictive of acute drug effects on risk-taking behavior.