Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Core studies > Casey - Biological area > Flashcards

Casey - Biological area Flashcards

1
Q

What did earlier research from Eigsti (2006) show?

A

Showed performance on a delay-of-grat task in childhood

predicted the efficiency with which the same individuals performed a cognitive control task (go/no-go task) as adolescents and young adults

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the marshmallow experiment?

A
  • It is an experimental design that measures a child’s ability to delay gratification
  • The child is given the option of waiting a bit for a new marshmallow, or if they didn’t wait, they would get a less desirable treat - one marshmallow
  • The minutes or seconds a child waits measures their ability to delay gratification
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Who was called as a High delayer in the marshmallow task?

A

Could wait for another marshmallow and delay gratification

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Who was classed as a low delayer in the marshmallow task?

A

Those who could not wait for another marshmallow and they ate it before the 15 minutes was up

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What was the alluring stimulus in the task?

A

Marshmallow

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the effect of being able to delay gratification/resist temptation?

A

The ability to resist temptation in favour of long-term goals is an essential part of individual, societal and economic success

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What can alluring situations result in?

A

Alluring situations can diminish control

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What does delay of gratification depend on?

A

Cognitive control

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What correlation has been found?

A

A correlation has been found between an avoidance of risky behaviour and greater excitation in the right inferior frontal gyrus

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What was found about the ventral striatum?

A
  • It has been found that functionally, the ventral striatium helps and balances motivation with both higher-level and lower-level functions, such as inhibiting one’s behaviour in a complex social interaction.
  • This region has been found to be the region in the basal ganglia neural circuit that’s most closely associated with reward.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What was the aim of Casey et al’s study?

A
  • The aim was to build on earlier research to assess whether delay of gratification in childhood predicts impulse control abilities
  • and sensitivity to alluring or social cues (happy faces) at the behavioural and neural level when participants were in their 40s (adults)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Experimental method?

A

Quasi experiment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

2 Experimental design?

A
  • Independent measures design - High v low delayers

- Repeated measures design - age

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Why could it be considered a repeated measures design?

A

Some participants completed self-control scales when in their 20s and 30s and that those taking part in experiment one did both the ‘hot’ and ‘cool’ go/no-go task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What was the IV?

A

Whether the participant was a high delayer or low delayer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What was the DV?

A
  • Performance on the impulse control task (in terms of reaction times and accuracy) in exp 1
  • And the performance on the impulse control task (reaction times and accuracy) and imaging results using the fMRI scanner in exp 2
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

How many participants were from the original delay of gratification task

A

562

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Where was the study conducted?

A

Stanford’s Bing Nursery School

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

How old were the children in the original study?

A

4 years old

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What year was the original study in?

A

Late 1960s, early 1970s

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

How many people did self-control scales when in their 20s and 30s?

A
  • 20yrs = 155

- 30yrs = 135

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

How many were contacted to take part in Casey’s study?

A

117

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What specific people were contacted for the study?

A

Those, 117, who were above average or below average in their original delay of gratification performance as well as in the self-report measures of self-control were contacted in relation to taking part in this study.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

How many agreed to take part in the longitudinal behavioural study (exp 1)

A

59 of the 117

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
What was the female to male comparison?
- 23 males | - 36 females
26
How were participants classified?
- P’s classified as low or high delayers from their results of: - a) their delay of gratification performance - b) self-control measures
27
How many high delayers were in experiment one?
- 32 high delayers | - 12 males, 20 females
28
How many low delayers were in experiment one?
- 27 low delayers | - 11 male, 16 females
29
How many agreed to be apart of a functional neuroimaging study in experiment two?
- 27 of the 59 | - (13 males, 14 females)
30
How many HD + LD were there in exp 2?
- 15 high delayers | - 11 low delayers
31
Why was one participant excluded?
One 41 yr old man was excluded from all analysis because of poor performance
32
In the end, how many participants were in experiment two?
26
33
What is subject attrition in a longitudinal study?
- When participants drop out of the study for any reason and do not return to complete the study - It can threaten the study’s validity
34
What did experiment one test?
Tested whether individuals who were less able to delay gratification as a child and young adult (LD) would, as adults in their 40s show less impulse control in suppression of a response to ‘hot’ relative ‘cool cues’
35
Did participants give consent?
59 participants, already LD or HD, consented to take part in a behavioural version of a “hot” and “cool” impulse control task
36
How many times did the P’s complete versions of the go/no-go task
Participants completed two versions of the go/no-go task
37
What did the ‘cool’ version consist of?
- Consisted of male and female stimuli which were presented one sex as a ‘go’ (target) stimulus to which participants were instructed to press a button - Other sex as a ‘no-go’ (non-target) stimulus to which P’s were instructed to withhold a button press
38
What happened before the onset of each run?
A screen appeared showing which stimulus category served as the target
39
What were participants instructed to do?
instructed to respond quickly and as accurately as possible
40
How long did the face appear for?
500ms
41
How long was the interval that followed the face appearance?
1-s interstimulus interval
42
How was the ‘hot’ version of the go/no-go task similar or different to the ‘cool’ version?
- Similar - identical | - Different - fearful and happy facial expressions served as stimuli
43
How were the laptops standardised? where were they sent?
- Tasks were presented using programmed laptop computers | - It was sent to P’s homes
44
What was the fMRI scanner used for?
Used to examine neural correlates of delay of gratification
45
What was expected of LD?
Expected that LD would show diminished activity in the right inferior frontal gyrus and amplififed activity in the ventral striatum compared to HD
46
How many participants agreed to complete the imaging study?
27 P’s from Exp 1 consented
47
What did P’s complete?
‘Hot’ version of the go/no-go task like that used in exp 1
48
What was a difference in the hot go-no/go task to exp 1?
- Timing - Number of trials - Apparatus
49
How long was each face presented for? what was it followed by?
- 500 ms | - Followed by a jittered interial interval ranging from 2 to 14.5s in duration
50
How many trials were presented in pseudorandomised order?
48 trials
51
How was the task made viewable to Ps?
- Viewable by a rear projection screen | - And a Neuroscreen five-button response pad recorded button responses and reaction times
52
When responding to the ‘go’ trials, how did Ps do?
- High level of accuracy for correctly responding to go trials - cool (99.8 % correct) - hot (99.5% correct)
53
How did LDs do on the no-go?
- Accuracy for no-go was more variable | - LD commiting more false alarms than HD
54
Results for LD and HD
- Low and high delayers performed comparably on the "cool" task but the low delayers trended toward performing more poorly on the "hot" task - than the high delayers; only the low delay group showed a significant decrement in performance for the "hot" trials relative to the "cool" trials.
55
What did it show about LD and HD as adults and children
go/no-go task produced differences between the delay groups only in the presence of emotional "hot" cues i.e., individuals, who as a group, had more difficulty delaying gratification at four years of age (low delayers) showed more difficulty as adults in suppressing responses to happy faces than the high delayers.
56
Result for accuracy (1)
Overall accuracy rates for the "hot" go/no-go task were uniformly high for "go" trials (mean 98.2% correct hits) with more variable performance to "no-go" trials (12.4% false alarm rate).
57
What differences were observed?
- Differences between the two delay groups in "no-go" accuracy were consistent with the observed differences in the "hot" task performance - LD commited more false alarms than HD
58
What did the trials show about the brain?
The "no-go" vs. "go" trials found candidate regions of the brain differentially engaged as a function of cognitive control tasks.
59
What was the right inferior frontal gyrus associated with?
RIFG was associated with accurately withholding a response
60
Compared with HD, what did LD show?
Diminished recruitment of the right inferior frontal gyrus for correct ‘No-go’ relative to ‘go’ trials
61
What did the ventral striatum reveal about LD?
- Reward-related region of the brain showed a three-way interaction of group x trial x emotion - Elevated activity to happy ‘no-go’ trials for LD - Exaggerated recruitment in LD
62
What plays a significant role to an individual’s ability to suppress actions towards alluring cues.
Sensitivity to environmental hot cues plays a significant role in an individual’s ability to suppress actions toward alluring cues.
63
Give a conclusion about resisting temptation by context
The ability to resist temptation varies by context, the more tempting the choice for the individual, the more predictive are the individual differences in peoples’ ability to regulate their behaviour
64
Give a conclusion about how being a LD or HD didn’t really change over time
Individuals, who, at the age of 4, had difficulty delaying gratification and who continue to show reduced self-control abilities, have more difficulty as adults in suppressing responses to positive social cues than those who don’t

Core studies (20 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions