Role of contingency in striatal response to incentive in adolescents with anxiety

This study examines the effect of contingency on reward function in anxiety. We define contingency as the aspect of a situation in which the outcome is determined by one's action-that is, when there is a direct link between one's action and the outcome of the action. Past findings in adolescents with anxiety or at risk for anxiety have revealed hypersensitive behavioral and neural responses to higher value rewards with correct performance. This hypersensitivity to highly valued (salient) actions suggests that the value of actions is determined not only by outcome magnitude, but also by the degree to which the outcome is contingent on correct performance. Thus, contingency and incentive value might each modulate reward responses in unique ways in anxiety. Using fMRI with a monetary reward task, striatal response to cue anticipation is compared in 18 clinically anxious and 20 healthy adolescents. This task manipulates orthogonally reward contingency and incentive value. Findings suggest that contingency modulates the neural response to incentive magnitude differently in the two groups. Specifically, during the contingent condition, right-striatal response tracks incentive value in anxious, but not healthy, adolescents. During the noncontingent condition, striatal response is bilaterally stronger to low than to high incentive in anxious adolescents, while healthy adolescents exhibit the expected opposite pattern. Both contingency and reward magnitude differentiate striatal activation in anxious versus healthy adolescents. These findings may reflect exaggerated concern about performance and/or alterations of striatal coding of reward value in anxious adolescents. Abnormalities in reward function in anxiety may have treatment implications

Why women take fewer risk than men do. The mediating role of state anxiety

Gender studies have showed that women take fewer risks than men do. Previous research has also provided evidence for a link between negative affect (anxiety and depressive mood) and risk-taking. Little is known about the relationships among these factors. We examined the role of state anxiety in the relationship between gender and risk-taking. Fully 149 undergraduate students filled out the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI) before playing the hot version of the Columbia Card Task (hot CCT), which is designed to measure emotionally based risk-taking behavior. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that gender and state anxiety were associated with risk-taking even when controlling for age, depressive mood, and trait anxiety. Moreover, results pointed out that gender is related to risk-taking through state anxiety. These results offer insights into gender research, as well as affective and decision science. Implications for future studies and applied interventions are discussed

Personality and risk:Beyond daredevils-Risk taking from a temperament perspective

We reviewed studies relating risk taking to personality traits. This search long has been elusive due to the large number of definitions of risk and to the variety of personality traits associated with risk taking in different forms and domains. In order to reconcile inconsistent findings, we categorized risk taking measures into self-report behavior inventories, self-report trait-based scales, and choice-based tasks. Likewise, we made a distinction between specific risk-related traits (e.g., sensation seeking, impulsivity) and more general traits (e.g., the Big Five). Sensation seeking aspects like thrill and experience seeking were more strongly associated with recreational and social risks that trigger emotional arousal. Impulsivity was associated with ethical, health safety, gambling, and financial risk taking, due to disregard of future consequences and to lack of self-control. Among the Big Five, extraversion and openness to experience were associated with risk seeking; whereas conscientiousness and agreeableness had more established links with risk aversion. Neuroticism facets, like anxiety and worry, had negative relationships with risk seeking; other facets, like anger and depression, promoted risk seeking. We concluded that the notion of a unidimensional “risk taking” trait seems misleading. The interplay of many traits encompassed in an overarching temperament model best represented personality-risk relations. Positive emotionality traits promoted risky behaviors that confer an emotionally rewarding experience to the person. Negative emotionality traits lead to heightened perceptions of danger, primarily motivating the avoidance of risk. The last disinhibition affected risk taking as a result of differences in self-control control acting upon momentary feelings and in self-interest. Potential applications for practitioners are also discussed