Probing the limits of delay intolerance: Preliminary young adult data from the Delay Frustration Task (DeFT)

Bitsakou, Paraskevi; Antrop, Inge; Wiersema, Jan R.; Sonuga‐Barke, Edmund

doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2005.06.031

Cited by 44 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An examination of patterns of variance across cells in the analysis for patients less than 12 years of age suggests that ceiling effects were less of an issue in this age group. Future research with adolescents should employ tasks that either extend the delay element of LL (i.e., adjusting delay levels during the task in response to performance to maximize the differentiation between delay averse and nondelay averse; Mü ller, Sonuga-Barke, Brandeis, & Steinhausen, 2006) or adopt a completely different index of delay aversion (Bitsakou, Antrop, Wiersema, Sonuga-Barke, 2005). Interpreting differences between childhood and adolescents on the MIDA may be further complicated by the fact that the expression of DAv changes with age, as is the case with other symptoms of ADHD (Nutt et al, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delay and reward choice in ADHD: An experimental test of the role of delay aversion.

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) choose smaller sooner (SS) over larger later (LL) rewards more than controls. Here we assess the contributions of impulsive drive for immediate rewards (IDIR) and delay aversion (DAv) to this pattern. We also explore the characteristics of, and the degree of familiality in, ADHD SS responders. We had 360 ADHD probands; 349 siblings and 112 controls (aged between 6 to 17 years) chose between SS (1 point after 2 s) and LL reward (2 points after 30 s) outcomes on the Maudsley Index of Delay Aversion (Kuntsi, Oosterlaan, Stevenson, 2001): Under one condition SS choice led to less overall trial delay under another it did not. ADHD participants chose SS more than controls under both conditions. This effect was larger when SS choice reduced trial delay. ADHD SS responders were younger, had lower IQ, more conduct disorder and had siblings who were more likely to be SS responders themselves. The results support a dual component model in which both IDIR and DAv contribute to SS choice in ADHD. SS choice may be a marker of an ADHD motivational subtype. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delay and reward choice in ADHD: An experimental test of the role of delay aversion.

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, children with ADHD are unusually vigilant to environmental delay-related cues suggesting an increased emotional salience for delay. They find the imposition of unexpected delay more Delay Aversion and ADHD -R2 8 frustrating than controls as indexed by an increased rate of responding during the delay period on the Delay Frustration Task (DeFT; Bitsakou et al, 2006). They show more activity and increased responding during fixed periods of delay or the extinction of reinforcers (Sagvolden et al, 1998).…”

Section: ) Of Two Tasks Commonly Used To Index This Tendency (Maumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Delay Frustration Task (DeFT; Bitsakou et al, 2006): The task has been described fully elsewhere (Bitsakou et al, 2006) and has high test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation This pattern of delay following responses was designed to create delay-related frustration leading to attempts by DAv participants to escape delay by pressing the button to move on to the next question. The participants were 'warned' that the computer has given signs of malfunction and that if the computer appeared not to register their response they may need to respond again before they could move onto the next trial.…”

Section: Tasks and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delay Aversion in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: An empirical investigation of the broader phenotype

et al. 2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the predictions of secondary adaptations are consistent with data from a range of different paradigms. For instance, ADHD children respond inappropriately to the unexpected imposition of delay (Bitsakou et al, 2006) and extinction of reward (Sagvolden et al, 1998); prematurely disengage from long and challenging tasks (Scime and Norvilitis, 2006); show more activity than controls during delay (Antrop et al, 2003); are biased towards task responses tied to immediate rewards (Tripp and Alsop, 2001); are unusually vigilant to environmental delay-related cues ; prefer reward immediacy to high reward rate or task ease (Neef et al, 2005); discount future hypothetical rewards (Barkley et al, 2001; but see Scheres et al, 2006 for counter case); and are differentially affected by slow event rates/sparse schedules of reinforcement Aase and Sagvolden, 2006). In summary there is evidence to support the notion that ADHD children can be DAv in both the narrow sense of choosing SS over LL rewards to escape delay in choice situations and in the broader sense as in seen in the effects of time-on-task/trial length on performance in non-choice situations.…”

Section: Psychopharmacologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Context-dependent Dynamic Processes in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Differentiating Common and Unique Effects of State Regulation Deficits and Delay Aversion

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to specify differential predictions is a mark of a scientific models' value. State regulation deficits (SRD) and delay aversion (DAv) have both been hypothesized as context-dependent dynamic dysfunctions in ADHD.However, to date there has been no systematic comparison of their common and unique elements. Here we review these hypotheses -and describe the core and secondary manifestations of the two constructs and review evidenceIn support of them. Second, we focus on what are seen as the hallmark indicators of the two deficits -preference of small immediate over large delayed rewards for DAv and the slow event rate effect for SRD. We describe the overlap between these two manifestations and then explore how experimental manipulations and the analysis of neuropsychological and physiological mediators of effects can allow us to differentiate these two patterns of neuropsychological dysfunction on the basis of specific predictions. Finally, we highlight the implications of neuropsychological heterogeneity for the practical implementation of tests of DAv and SRD.Key words: Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; delay aversion; state regulation; cognitive energetic; event rate; delay of gratification; delayed reward. 4 MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHDAttention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent child and adolescent condition, which often persists into adulthood, marked by developmentally inappropriate and pervasive expressions of inattention, overactivity and impulsiveness (Banaschewski et al., in press). It is associated with functional impairments across multiple academic and social domains and is commonly accompanied by a range of externalising (e.g., conduct disorder) and internalising (e.g., anxiety) comorbid disorders (Taylor and SonugaBarke, 2008). Until recent times dominant neuropsychological theories of ADHD have focused on cognitive impairments associated with deficits in executive functions such as inhibitory control (Nigg, 2005) and working memory (Rapport et al., 2008). These are postulated to be grounded in altered fronto-striatal neural circuits modulated by catecholamine-based neuro-transmitters (Arnsten, 2009). Support for executive impairments in ADHD of the sort predicted by these models come from many studies (e.g. Willcutt et al., 2005;Bitsakou et al., 2008). However, it now seems unlikely that such deficits mediate the link between ADHD and its underlying causes (i.e., genes and environments; in any straightforward way . For instance, many children with ADHD appear not to have dysfunctional executive processes, while many children without ADHD, either with others disorders or with no disorder at all, do (Willcutt et al., 2005). Even where ADHD and executive dysfunction co-present the pattern is 5 rather fragmented and variable so that pervasive and severe executive deficit appears quite rare . Perhaps reflecting the influence of the classical bio-medical framework (Singh, 2008) and neuropsychological models of brain insult (Loge et al., 1990), ...

show abstract

Probing the limits of delay intolerance: Preliminary young adult data from the Delay Frustration Task (DeFT)

Cited by 44 publications

References 34 publications

Delay and reward choice in ADHD: An experimental test of the role of delay aversion.

Delay and reward choice in ADHD: An experimental test of the role of delay aversion.

Delay Aversion in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: An empirical investigation of the broader phenotype

Context-dependent Dynamic Processes in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Differentiating Common and Unique Effects of State Regulation Deficits and Delay Aversion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About