Ivo Marx1, Thomas Hacker2, Xue Yu3, Samuele Cortese4,5,6,7,8, Edmund Sonuga-Barke9. 1. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Neurology, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, University Medicine Rostock, Rostock, Germany. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medicine Rostock, Rostock, Germany. 3. School of Education, Chongqing Normal University, Chongqing, China. 4. Center for Innovation in Mental Health, Academic Unit of Psychology, Southampton, UK. 5. Clinical and Experimental Sciences (CNS and Psychiatry), Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, UK. 6. Solent NHS Trust, Southampton, UK. 7. New York University Child Study Center, New York, USA. 8. Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 9. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, King's College London, London, UK.
Abstract
Objective: Impulsive choices can lead to suboptimal decision making, a tendency which is especially marked in individuals with ADHD. We compared two different paradigms assessing impulsive choice: the simple choice paradigm (SCP) and the temporal discounting paradigm (TDP). Method: Random effects meta-analyses on 37 group comparisons (22 SCP; 15 TDP) consisting of 3.763 participants (53% ADHD). Results: Small-to-medium effect sizes emerged for both paradigms, confirming that participants with ADHD choose small immediate over large delayed rewards more frequently than controls. Moderation analyses show that offering real rewards in the SCP almost doubled the odds ratio for participants with ADHD. Conclusion: We suggest that a stronger than normal aversion toward delay interacts with a demotivating effect of hypothetical rewards, both factors promoting impulsive choice in participants with ADHD. Furthermore, we suggest the SCP as the paradigm of choice due to its larger ecological validity, contextual sensitivity, and reliability.
Objective: Impulsive choices can lead to suboptimal decision making, a tendency which is especially marked in individuals with ADHD. We compared two different paradigms assessing impulsive choice: the simple choice paradigm (SCP) and the temporal discounting paradigm (TDP). Method: Random effects meta-analyses on 37 group comparisons (22 SCP; 15 TDP) consisting of 3.763 participants (53% ADHD). Results: Small-to-medium effect sizes emerged for both paradigms, confirming that participants with ADHD choose small immediate over large delayed rewards more frequently than controls. Moderation analyses show that offering real rewards in the SCP almost doubled the odds ratio for participants with ADHD. Conclusion: We suggest that a stronger than normal aversion toward delay interacts with a demotivating effect of hypothetical rewards, both factors promoting impulsive choice in participants with ADHD. Furthermore, we suggest the SCP as the paradigm of choice due to its larger ecological validity, contextual sensitivity, and reliability.
Authors: Prerona Mukherjee; Veronika Vilgis; Shawn Rhoads; Rajpreet Chahal; Catherine Fassbender; Ellen Leibenluft; J Faye Dixon; Murat Pakyurek; Wouter van den Bos; Stephen P Hinshaw; Amanda E Guyer; Julie B Schweitzer Journal: J Atten Disord Date: 2021-11-02 Impact factor: 3.256
Authors: Stephen V Faraone; Tobias Banaschewski; David Coghill; Yi Zheng; Joseph Biederman; Mark A Bellgrove; Jeffrey H Newcorn; Martin Gignac; Nouf M Al Saud; Iris Manor; Luis Augusto Rohde; Li Yang; Samuele Cortese; Doron Almagor; Mark A Stein; Turki H Albatti; Haya F Aljoudi; Mohammed M J Alqahtani; Philip Asherson; Lukoye Atwoli; Sven Bölte; Jan K Buitelaar; Cleo L Crunelle; David Daley; Søren Dalsgaard; Manfred Döpfner; Stacey Espinet; Michael Fitzgerald; Barbara Franke; Manfred Gerlach; Jan Haavik; Catharina A Hartman; Cynthia M Hartung; Stephen P Hinshaw; Pieter J Hoekstra; Chris Hollis; Scott H Kollins; J J Sandra Kooij; Jonna Kuntsi; Henrik Larsson; Tingyu Li; Jing Liu; Eugene Merzon; Gregory Mattingly; Paulo Mattos; Suzanne McCarthy; Amori Yee Mikami; Brooke S G Molina; Joel T Nigg; Diane Purper-Ouakil; Olayinka O Omigbodun; Guilherme V Polanczyk; Yehuda Pollak; Alison S Poulton; Ravi Philip Rajkumar; Andrew Reding; Andreas Reif; Katya Rubia; Julia Rucklidge; Marcel Romanos; J Antoni Ramos-Quiroga; Arnt Schellekens; Anouk Scheres; Renata Schoeman; Julie B Schweitzer; Henal Shah; Mary V Solanto; Edmund Sonuga-Barke; César Soutullo; Hans-Christoph Steinhausen; James M Swanson; Anita Thapar; Gail Tripp; Geurt van de Glind; Wim van den Brink; Saskia Van der Oord; Andre Venter; Benedetto Vitiello; Susanne Walitza; Yufeng Wang Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 9.052