Cargando…

Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Impulsivity has consistently been associated with over-consumption and addiction. Recent research has reconceptualized impulsivity as a two-dimensional construct (Dawe, Gullo, & Loxton, 2004). This study explores the relationship of the two components of impulsivity, reward...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goodwin, Belinda C., Browne, Matthew, Rockloff, Matthew, Loxton, Natalie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Akadémiai Kiadó 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387770/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27363460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/2006.5.2016.047
_version_ 1782521010118983680
author Goodwin, Belinda C.
Browne, Matthew
Rockloff, Matthew
Loxton, Natalie
author_facet Goodwin, Belinda C.
Browne, Matthew
Rockloff, Matthew
Loxton, Natalie
author_sort Goodwin, Belinda C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Impulsivity has consistently been associated with over-consumption and addiction. Recent research has reconceptualized impulsivity as a two-dimensional construct (Dawe, Gullo, & Loxton, 2004). This study explores the relationship of the two components of impulsivity, reward drive (RD) and rash impulsivity (RI), on a broad group of 23 hedonic consumption behaviors (e.g., gambling, substance use, eating, and media use). We tentatively grouped the behaviors into three descriptive classes: entertainment, foodstuffs, and illicit activities and substances. RESULTS: RD and RI positively predicted elevated levels of consumption in a community sample (N=5,391; 51% female), for the vast majority of the behaviors considered. However, the effect sizes for RD and RI varied significantly depending on the behavior; a pattern that appeared to be at least partially attributable to the class of consumption. Results support the view that RD is related more strongly to the consumption of products that provide social engagement or a sense of increased status; whereas RI better reflects an approach toward illicit or restricted products that are intensely rewarding with clear negative consequences. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Results support the utility of the two-factor model of impulsivity in explaining individual differences in patterns of hedonic consumption in the general population. We discuss findings in terms of strengthening current conceptualizations of RI and RD as having distinct implications with respect to health-related behaviors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5387770
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53877702017-04-13 Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli Goodwin, Belinda C. Browne, Matthew Rockloff, Matthew Loxton, Natalie J Behav Addict Full-Length Report BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Impulsivity has consistently been associated with over-consumption and addiction. Recent research has reconceptualized impulsivity as a two-dimensional construct (Dawe, Gullo, & Loxton, 2004). This study explores the relationship of the two components of impulsivity, reward drive (RD) and rash impulsivity (RI), on a broad group of 23 hedonic consumption behaviors (e.g., gambling, substance use, eating, and media use). We tentatively grouped the behaviors into three descriptive classes: entertainment, foodstuffs, and illicit activities and substances. RESULTS: RD and RI positively predicted elevated levels of consumption in a community sample (N=5,391; 51% female), for the vast majority of the behaviors considered. However, the effect sizes for RD and RI varied significantly depending on the behavior; a pattern that appeared to be at least partially attributable to the class of consumption. Results support the view that RD is related more strongly to the consumption of products that provide social engagement or a sense of increased status; whereas RI better reflects an approach toward illicit or restricted products that are intensely rewarding with clear negative consequences. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Results support the utility of the two-factor model of impulsivity in explaining individual differences in patterns of hedonic consumption in the general population. We discuss findings in terms of strengthening current conceptualizations of RI and RD as having distinct implications with respect to health-related behaviors. Akadémiai Kiadó 2016-07-01 2016-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5387770/ /pubmed/27363460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/2006.5.2016.047 Text en © 2016 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Full-Length Report
Goodwin, Belinda C.
Browne, Matthew
Rockloff, Matthew
Loxton, Natalie
Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli
title Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli
title_full Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli
title_fullStr Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli
title_full_unstemmed Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli
title_short Differential Effects of Reward Drive and Rash Impulsivity on the Consumption of a Range of Hedonic Stimuli
title_sort differential effects of reward drive and rash impulsivity on the consumption of a range of hedonic stimuli
topic Full-Length Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387770/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27363460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/2006.5.2016.047
work_keys_str_mv AT goodwinbelindac differentialeffectsofrewarddriveandrashimpulsivityontheconsumptionofarangeofhedonicstimuli
AT brownematthew differentialeffectsofrewarddriveandrashimpulsivityontheconsumptionofarangeofhedonicstimuli
AT rockloffmatthew differentialeffectsofrewarddriveandrashimpulsivityontheconsumptionofarangeofhedonicstimuli
AT loxtonnatalie differentialeffectsofrewarddriveandrashimpulsivityontheconsumptionofarangeofhedonicstimuli