Casey Et Al

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

Build on previous research to assess whether delay of gratification in childhood predicts impulse control abilities when the ppts were in their 40’s

Question 2

What experiment was used

Answer 2

Quasi

Question 3

IV

Answer 3

Whether the ppt was a high or low delayer

Question 4

DV (exp 1)

Answer 4

Performance on the impulse control tasks (reaction times and accuracy)

Question 5

DV (exp 2)

Answer 5

Performance on the impulse control tasks (reaction times and accuracy) and imaging results using fmri scans

Question 6

Why was it repeated measures?

Answer 6

Did both hot and cool tasks

Question 7

What type of study was it?

Answer 7

Longitudinal

Question 8

Sample

Answer 8

562 children from Stanford bing nursery when they were 4
155 completed self control in 20’s
135 in their 30’s
117/135 who were below/above average in their original delay of gratification and self control test were contacted
59/117 agreed to take part in exp 1
27 agreed to take part in exp 2
(1 mans results were excluded due to poor performance so results were based on 26)

Question 9

Experiment 1 procedure

Answer 9

Ppts completed a cool task which consisted of male/female stimuli which were presented, one sex was go stimulus where ppts had to press a button and the other sex was nogo where ppts didn’t have to press a button
The hot version was the same but contained happy and fearful faces as the stimuli

Question 10

How were tasks presented in exp 1?

Answer 10

Using laptops send to their homes

Question 11

How long did each face appear for exp 1?

Answer 11

500ms - 1 second interval

Question 12

Procedure experiment 2

Answer 12

FMRI was used to investigate neural correlates of delay of gratification. It was predicted that low delayers would show less activity in the right pre frontal cortex but high activity in the ventral striatum
27 ppts took part
Ppts completed a hot version similar to exp 1

Question 13

How was the task seen exp 2?

Answer 13

viewable by a projection screen

Question 14

How many ppts were in exp 1?

Answer 14

59

Question 15

How many ppts were in exp 2?

Answer 15

27

Question 16

Key findings exp 1

Answer 16

No effects in reaction times
Ppts had high levels of accuracy in go trials during cool tasks (99.8% correct) & hot tasks (99.5% correct)
Low delayers had more false alarms on the no go trials
Low delayers were poorer against hot tasks than high delayers
Differences only occurred in hot cues for low delayers - harder to suppress responses to happy faces

Question 17

Results for experiment 2

Answer 17

Reaction times didn’t differ
High accuracy for go trails (98.2% correct) but low accuracy no go trials (12.4% false alarms)
Low delayers had more false alarms
Different regions of the brain were identified for doing cognitive tasks
Right inferior gurus - accurately withholding a response)

Question 18

Conclusions

Answer 18

Hot cues influence if people can suppress responses
Individuals who, at the age of 4, who find it hard to delay gratification, have more difficulty suppression resounded to positive social cues than those who don’t

Question 19

Background to the study (previous research)

Answer 19

Previous research had shown a link between delay of gratification in childhood and self control in adults. Pre school children who couldn’t delay gratification (cookies) had more difficulty suppressing actions. Findings suggested as a child, delay of gratification predicts capacity to control thoughts and actions in childhood