Transcript Slide 1

Laboratory and Questionnaire Assessment of the BAS and BIS
Craig R.
aUniversity
a
Colder ,
William F.
b
Wieczorek ,
Jennifer P.
a
Read ,
Larry W. Hawk,
a
Jr. ,
Liliana J.
c
Lengua ,
& Rina D.
d
Eiden
at Buffalo, The State University of New York, bBuffalo State University, cUniversity of Washington, dResearch Institute on Addictions
ABSTRACT
RESULTS
There are a limited number of measures that assess children’s individual differences in sensitivity of the
behavioral approach (BAS) and inhibition systems (BIS) from Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity model. We
revised a questionnaire and laboratory assessment (Colder & O’Connor, 2004) of the BAS and BIS. Factor
analysis supported a two factor model with a reduced number of items relative to the original questionnaire.
Performance of the laboratory task was consistent with expectation. BAS activation reduced reaction times
and BIS activation slowed responding. Relatively weak relations were observed between our questionnaire
assessments and the performance on the laboratory task. Associations with the EATQ-R scales supported
the validity of our questionnaire assessment of the BIS/BAS. Overall, the revised questionnaire and
laboratory task improved measurement of individual differences in the BAS and BIS in children, but there
continues to be limited cross-method convergent validity.
1. Exploratory factor analysis was used to examine the factor structure of the SPSRQ-C. A two-factor
orthogonal solution was specified based on theory, and 27 items were deleted due to weak standardized
factor loadings (<.40). The final solution resulted in a 13 item sensitivity to punishment scale and an 8
item sensitivity to reward scale. (Table 1).
2. Random effects regressions were used to examine BAS activation (the impact of introducing reward on
RTs) and BIS activation (slowed RTs in response to aversive compared to appetitive trials during the
post-punishment block) during the PSRTT-CR (Table 2).
3. OLS regressions were used to examine the relationship between SPSRQ-C scales and BAS/BIS
activation during the PSRTT-CR (Table 3).
4. OLS regressions were used to examine the relationship between the EATQ-R scales and BAS/BIS
activation during the PSRTT-CR (Table 4).
5. OLS regressions were used to examine the relationship between the SPSRQ-C and EATQ-R (Table 5).
BACKGROUND & Hypotheses
Table 3. Standardized coefficients for regression models with SPSRQ-C scales
predicting PSRTT-CR reaction times (RT) from reward block and aversive trials (red
circle trials) of the post-punishment block
Effect
Age
Gender
Error rate
RT control variable
No Reward RT
Appetitive Trial RT
SPa
SRb
Model R2
DV=RT during Reward Block
-.06
.13*
-.07*
DV=RT during post-punishment Aversive Trials
-.11*
-.02*
-.19*
.77*
.71*
.03
.01
.06*
.07*
.66
.62
Notes: aSP=SPSRQ-C sensitivity to punishment. bSR=SPSRQ-C sensitivity to reward. * p < .05.
Background: Several models of psychopathology incorporate the behavioral approach (BAS) and behavioral
Inhibition system (BIS) from Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity model (e.g., Fowles, 1994). The BIS inhibits
behavior in response to punishment cues/frustrative non-reward. The BAS activates behavior in response to
reward cues. Few measures assess these constructs in children. In an effort to develop multiple methods of
assessing BAS and BIS functioning in children, Colder and O’Connor (2004) adapted a laboratory task (Point
Scoring Reaction Time Task for Children, PSRTT-C) and a parent report questionnaire (Sensitivity to
Punishment Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire for Children, SPSRQ-C). Our goal was to revise and improve
our multi-method assessments in a large representative sample, and examine convergent and discriminant
validity between the new SPSRQ-C, PSRTT-C, and the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire Revised
(EATQ-R).
Hypotheses: We expected correspondence between the SPSRQ-C and the PSRTT-C indices of BIS/BAS.
Moreover, high levels of BIS were expected to be associated with high levels of EATQ-R negative affect and low
levels of EATQ-R surgency, and high levels of BAS were expected to the associated with high levels of EATQ-R
surgency. No hypotheses were made regarding EATQ-R effortful control.
METHODS
Sample: The sample was taken from a 3-year longitudinal study investigating problem behavior and substance
use in adolescence, and included 10 to 13 year-olds (N = 378, mean age = 11) recruited in Erie County, New
York using random-digit-dialing. Children were eligible for the study if they did not have any disabilities
precluding them from understanding or completing the interviews, and were between the ages of 10-12 at the
time of recruitment. The sample was evenly split on gender (52% female). The majority of the children were
Caucasian (75%), 15% were Black/African-American, 3% were Hispanic, 2% were Asian/Pacific Islander, and
5% reported another race/ethnicity. Family income ranged from 0 to $250,000 (median = $60,000). Most of the
children were from two-parent families (72%).
Procedures: Data collection took approximately 2½ hours and families were compensated $75. Adolescent and
a caregiver (83% mothers) were interviewed in separate rooms by trained interviewers in our university offices.
Measures for this poster were taken at the baseline assessment.
Measures:
Caregiver reports of child temperament. Caregivers completed the SPSRQ-C (Colder & O’Connor, 2004)
and EATQ-R (Ellis & Rothbart, 2001). The SPSRQ-C includes 48 items that assess sensitivity to punishment
and reward. The EATQ-R includes 50 items that assess eight dimensions, including activation control,
affiliation, attention, fear, frustration, inhibitory control, shyness, and surgency. In prior research (Ellis &
Rothbart, 2001), factor analysis supported the reduction of the eight dimensions into 3 higher-order factors
(effortful control, negative affect, and surgency).
Point Scoring Reaction Time Task for Children Revised (PSRTT-CR). Children completed a revised version
of the PSRTT-C (Colder & O’Connor, 2004). The PSRTT-CR involves 4 blocks of 50 3-s trials. The blocks are
administered in a fixed order– No reward, reward, punishment, and post-punishment. In each trial, a colored
circled is presented above a two-digit number, and the child’s task is to discriminate between odd/even numbers
using a response box. Correct discriminations in the reward and subsequent blocks are rewarded by a variable
number of points depending on reaction time (RT) (earned points = 935/RT). Incorrect discriminations result in a
loss of 2 points. At the start of the task, children are told to ignore the circles. Before the punishment block,
children are told that responding when a red circle appears will lead to a loss of 50% of total points. Thus, red
circles are a cue for punishment. Of the 50 trials, 5 include a red circle (aversive trials). Prior to initiating the
post-punishment block, children are told that a red circle will not result in point loss, and they should respond
during these trials. Declines in RTs from the no reward to reward blocks indicate BAS activation. Slowing of
RTs during aversive (red circle trials) relative to appetitive trials (trials that immediately precede the red circle
trials) from the post-punishment block indicate BIS activation.
Table 1. Standardized factor loadings and communalities from principal factors exploratory factor
analysis of the SPSRQ-C
Item
Sensitivity to
Punishment
.67
.41
.63
.64
.62
.42
.45
.54
.70
.71
.59
.41
Your child is often afraid of new or unexpected situations
In unfamiliar tasks, your child worries about failure
Your child is a shy person
Whenever possible, your child avoids demonstrating their skills for fear of being embarrassed
When in a group, your child has difficulty thinking of something to say
It bothers your child to tell a store clerk that he/she was given the wrong change
Whenever he/she can, your child avoids going to unfamiliar places
It is difficult for your child to talk with someone they do not know
Your child generally tries to avoid speaking in groups
Your child could do more things if it were not for his/her fear
Your child is afraid of many things compared to other children their age
Your child often refrains from doing something he/she likes in order not to be rejected or disapproved of
by others
Your child often refrains from doing something because of fear of being embarrassed
.68
-.32
Your child enjoys being the center of attention
-.28
When your child is in a group, they try to stand out as the smartest or the funniest
The possibility of obtaining social status moves your child to action, even if this involves not playing fair
.10
Your child generally prefers activities that involve immediate reward
.12
.17
Your child often has trouble resisting the temptation of doing forbidden things
Your child sometimes does things for quick reward
-.02
Your child has difficulty staying focused on his/her school work in the presence of an attractive alternative .09
.06
Your child engages in risky behavior to obtain a reward
Percent variance
Cronbach’s alpha
63%
.86
Table 4. Standardized coefficients for regression models predicting EATQ-R scales
Sensitivity
to reward
-.01
.12
-.19
.21
.01
-.03
.05
-.09
-.06
.09
.13
.12
h2
.23
.44
.48
.56
.60
.50
.54
.47
.55
.22
.30
.31
.32
.37
.28
.29
.23
.31
.46
.18
.43
.45
.37
.18
.20
.30
.50
.51
.37
.48
31%
.74
Notes: Highest loading for each item is bolded. Response options were 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 4 = Agree
5 = Strongly agree. Solution based on varimax rotation. Items were averaged for subsequent analysis, and the scales were independent (r = .06, p >
.05).
Table 2. Unstandardized coefficients (SE) from random effects regression models predicting
reaction times (RTs) in milliseconds from the PSRTT-CRa
Effect
Model testing SRb
Model testing SPc
Intercept
Aged
Gender (0=male, 1=female)
Error rated
Condition Contrast
No reward (0) vs. reward (1)
Appetitive (0) vs. aversive (1)
821.53* (29.85)
-52.93* (10.93)
39.54* (18.54)
-103.67* (80.17)
675.77* (35.98)
-61.19* (12.85)
48.78* (22.37)
-724.17* (152.00)
-100.84* (6.37)
75.21* (8.74)
Notes: aModels included a random intercept, and fixed effects estimates are based on restricted maximum likelihood estimation. bSR=sensitivity to
reward. cSP=sensitivity to punishment. dVariable was centered at the sample mean to facilitate interpretation of the intercept. * p < .05.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS and CONTACT INFORMATION
This research was supported by a grant from the NIDA (R01 DA020171) awarded to Craig Colder. The content of this
poster is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIDA.
Correspondence should be addressed to: Craig R. Colder, Ph.D., Psychology Department, Park Hall, University at
Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14260
Email: [email protected]
Effect
Age
Gender (0=male, 1=female)
SPa
SRb
Model R2
DV=Effortful Control
-.04
.09*
-.20*
-.58*
DV=Surgency
-.02
.09*
-.67*
.16*
.41
DV=Negative Affect
-.07
.08
.43*
.25*
.47
.26
Note: aSP=SPSRQ-C senstivity to punishment. bSR=SPSRQ-C sensitivity to reward. * p < .05. Examination of the 1st-order
scales of negative affect suggested that SP predicted fear and frustration. High levels of SP were associated with high levels of
fear and frustration. SR predicted only frustration. High levels of SR were associated with high levels of frustration.
Table 5. Standardized coefficients for regression models with EATQ-R scales
predicting PSRTT-CR reaction times (RT) from reward block and aversive trials (red
circle trials) of the post-punishment block
Effect
DV=RT during Reward Block
Age
Gender (0=male, 1=female)
Error rate
RT control variable
No Reward RT
Appetitive Trial RT
Effortful control
Surgency
Negative Affect
Model R2
-.06*
.14*
-.07*
DV=RT during post-punishment Aversive
Trials
-.11*
-.03
-.19*
.77*
.71*
-.01
.03
.04
-.07*
-.03
.02
.60
.62
Notes: * p < .05.
CONCLUSION
The goal of this study was to revise our parent questionnaire (SPSRQ-C) and laboratory task
(PSRTT-CR) assessment of individual differences in BAS and BIS. In our previous work
(O’Connor & Colder, 2004), we found the BAS scale to have a multi-factorial structure, which
had no theoretical basis. In our current analysis, we forced a two-factor solution and
substantially reduced the item pool, resulting in two theoretically coherent scales that were
internally consistent and orthogonal. Moreover, associations with the EATQ-R supported
validity of the SPSRQ-C scales The original PSRTT-C did not include a no reward block, and
thus potentially confounded BAS activation with BIS activation. The PSRTT-CR addressed
this limitation, and results suggested speeded responding with the introduction of reward
(BAS activation), and slowed responding with the presentation of punishment cues (BIS
activation). As commonly found, there was limited evidence for cross-method association.
This may be attributable to one method being a better measure of BAS/BIS. For example,
parents may not be good reporters of behavior reflective of BAS/BIS functioning, or the
laboratory task may provide too circumscribed an assessment of trait levels of BAS/BIS. It is
also possible that each measure reflects different aspects of BAS/BIS functioning, yet need
further refinement to demonstrate that they are assessing the same construct.
Citations
Colder, C. R., & O’Connor, R. M. (2004). Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity model and child psychopathology: laboratory and
questionnaire assessment of the BAS and BIS. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 435-451.
Fowles, D. C. (1994). A motivational theory of psychopathology . In W. D. Spaulding (Ed.) Integrative views of motivation,
cognition, and emotion (pp. 181-205). NY: Plenum Press.
Ellis, L. K. & Rothbart, M. K. (2001). Revision of the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire. A poster Presented at the
Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN, April 19-22.