A person that was shown to be able to delay their gratification (resist temptation)
3 of 22
Low delayer?
A person that was shown to be unable to delay their gratification (they couldn’t resist temptation).
4 of 22
D.V s?
Exp x1: performance on impulse control task,reaction+accuracy (go/no-go task) + Exp x2: same as experiment x1 but use fMRI to examine brain
5 of 22
Independent measures?
P’s were either high or low delayers; they could not be both.
6 of 22
Repeated measures?
1). P’s completed delay of gratification tasks age 4 and again in their 20s and 30s. 2). P’s in experiment 1 also completed both hot and cool version of the go/no-go task.
7 of 22
Type of study?
Longitudinal Study-followed some of the original p's from 4 yrs into their 40’s (completing tests). + study shows development of delay of gratification over time.
Press button when see a certain face: go- actively go . No-go: not suppose to press the button
11 of 22
Hot/cold - go/ no-go?
Hot- featured happy facial expressions. Cold- neutral expressions.
12 of 22
ex.1 reaction times -Hot/cold - go/ no-go tasks ?
no effects of delay group (high or low) on reaction time on go trials. - didn’t matter if you were a high or low delayer when correctly pressing the button during the go trials.
13 of 22
Quantitative results?
1) Hot = 99.5% correct 2) Cool = 99.8% correct.
14 of 22
Results regarding 'Low delayers' in experiment 1?
1)Low delayers more likely to respond mistakenly in no-go trials+ perform worse than high delayers in hot version of the task. 2) Low delayers at 4yrs old showed greater difficulty suppressing their responses to happy faces than high delayers.
15 of 22
Experiment x2, how did it work?
P’s completed a ‘hot’ version of the go/no-go task similar to that used in experiment 1, whilst in the fMRI machine.
16 of 22
Results of Experiment x2?
1) x2 delay groups (high/low) did not differ significantly in reaction times in correct ‘go’ trials 2) Similar to reaction time results in experiment 1
17 of 22
Imagery results of experiment x2?
1) right inferior frontal gyrus was involved in accurately withholding a response 2) low delayers had reduced activity in the inferior frontal gyrus for correct no-go relative to go trials.
18 of 22
Imagery results of experiment x2?
3)ventral striatum showed significant differences in activity between high+low delayers. 4) prefrontal cortex differentiated between no-go + go trials to a greater extent in high delayers.The ventral striatum showed exaggerated activity in low delay
19 of 22
Conclusions?
1)Sensitivity to environmental hot cues plays a significant role in individuals ability to suppress actions towards alluring cues. 2)Resistance to temptation appears to be a relatively stable characteristic of an individual over time-child to adult
20 of 22
Conclusions?
3) Cognitive control can be strongly influenced by contextual factors (i.e- ‘hot’ cues in alluring situations)
21 of 22
Conclusion?
4) Ventral frontostriatal circuitry supports resistance to temptation with a combination of lowered activity in the inferior frontal gyrus and higher activity in ventral striatum in low delayers
Comments
No comments have yet been made