TY - JOUR
T1 - Trans-diagnostic measurement of impulsivity and compulsivity
T2 - A review of self-report tools
AU - Hook, Roxanne W.
AU - Grant, Jon E.
AU - Ioannidis, Konstantinos
AU - Tiego, Jeggan
AU - Yücel, Murat
AU - Wilkinson, Paul
AU - Chamberlain, Samuel R.
PY - 2021/1
Y1 - 2021/1
N2 - Introduction: Impulsivity and compulsivity are important constructs, relevant to understanding behaviour in the general population, as well as in particular mental disorders (e.g. attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder). The current paper provides a narrative review of self-report impulsivity and compulsivity scales. Methods: A literature search was conducted using the following terms: (“impulsivity” OR “compulsivity”) AND (“self-report” OR “questionnaire” OR “psychometric” OR “scale”). Results: 25 impulsive and 11 compulsive scales were identified, which varied considerably in psychometric properties, convenience, and validity. For impulsivity, the most commonly used scales were the BIS and the UPPS-P, whilst for compulsivity, the Padua Inventory was commonly used. The majority of compulsivity scales measured OCD symptoms (obsessions and compulsions) rather than being trans-diagnostic or specific to compulsivity (as opposed to obsessions). Scales capable of overcoming these limitations were highlighted. Discussion: This review provides clarity regarding relative advantages and disadvantages of different scales relevant to the measurement of impulsivity and compulsivity in many contexts. Areas for further research and refinement are highlighted.
AB - Introduction: Impulsivity and compulsivity are important constructs, relevant to understanding behaviour in the general population, as well as in particular mental disorders (e.g. attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder). The current paper provides a narrative review of self-report impulsivity and compulsivity scales. Methods: A literature search was conducted using the following terms: (“impulsivity” OR “compulsivity”) AND (“self-report” OR “questionnaire” OR “psychometric” OR “scale”). Results: 25 impulsive and 11 compulsive scales were identified, which varied considerably in psychometric properties, convenience, and validity. For impulsivity, the most commonly used scales were the BIS and the UPPS-P, whilst for compulsivity, the Padua Inventory was commonly used. The majority of compulsivity scales measured OCD symptoms (obsessions and compulsions) rather than being trans-diagnostic or specific to compulsivity (as opposed to obsessions). Scales capable of overcoming these limitations were highlighted. Discussion: This review provides clarity regarding relative advantages and disadvantages of different scales relevant to the measurement of impulsivity and compulsivity in many contexts. Areas for further research and refinement are highlighted.
KW - Compulsivity
KW - Impulsivity
KW - Phenotype
KW - Questionnaire
KW - Review
KW - Self-report
KW - Trans-diagnostic
KW - Transdiagnostic
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85095454719&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.10.007
DO - 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.10.007
M3 - Review Article
C2 - 33115636
AN - SCOPUS:85095454719
VL - 120
SP - 455
EP - 469
JO - Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
JF - Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
SN - 0149-7634
ER -