Emotional Rapid Response Impulsivity in Incarcerated Men and Non-Incarcerated Controls

Figures & data

Table 1. Summary table of previous emotional rapid response inhibition studies in offending populations.

	Offending group (n)	Control group (n)	Stimuli Used	Covariates	Results
Baliousis et al., 2019	Incarcerated individuals (n = 120)	Prison staff (n = 20)	Emotional words	none	Significant impairment in emotional rapid response inhibitionin offenders
Turner et al., 2018	Child sexual abusers (n = 63)	Non-offending (n = 63)	(fake) nude images of children	age and education	Significant impairment in emotional rapid response inhibitionin offenders
Meier et al., 2012	Incarcerated individuals (n = 13)	Non-offending (n = 13)	Facial expressions	none	No difference

Table 2. Sample characteristics. This table shows sample characteristics per group. Prevalence rates and interquartile range are denoted within brackets.

Characteristic	Detainee, N = 283^1	NIC N = 51^1	p-value^2
Age	33 (26, 44)	41 (24, 56)	0.028
Education			<0.001
Low	101 (36%)	2 (3.9%)
Medium	150 (53%)	14 (27%)
High	32 (11%)	35 (69%)
Misconduct	47 (17%)	0 (0%)	0.002
Prior Conviction (% yes)	214 (76%)	0 (0%)	<0.001
Aggression	26 (18, 34)	20 (16, 27)	0.008
Median (IQR); n (%) Wilcoxon rank-sum test; Pearson’s Chi-squared test

Table 3. Commission Error Estimates are compared to a reference category (group: incarcerated individuals and emotion condition: Happy-Fear). Therefore, incarcerated individuals make more commission errors compared to NIC, and both groups make less commission errors in both Happy_(go) -Neutral_(No-Go) and Neutral_(go) – Fear_(No-Go) compared to the Happy_(go) – Fear_(No-Go) condition.

	estimate	std.error	t-statistic	df	p-value
Group
NIC	−8.53	2.34	−3.65	1990.15	0.000
Emotion condition
Fear(go) – Neutral(No-Go)	−2.48	1.29	−1.92	1793.98	0.054
Happy(go) – Fear(No-Go)	−1.27	1.30	−0.98	1687.23	0.326
Happy(go) -Neutral(No-Go)	−9.13	1.29	−7.07	1752.25	0.000
Neutral(go) – Fear(No-Go)	−3.37	1.29	−2.61	1761.44	0.009
Neutral(go) – Happy(No-Go)	1.57	1.29	1.22	1783.04	0.224

Figure 1. Commission error rate per emotion condition and group, uncorrected for age and education.

Baliousis, M., Duggan, C., McCarthy, L., Huband, N., & Völlm, B. (2019). Executive function, attention, and memory deficits in antisocial personality disorder and psychopathy. Psychiatry Research, 278, 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.05.046

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Turner, D., Laier, C., Brand, M., Bockshammer, T., Welsch, R., & Rettenberger, M. (2018). Response inhibition and impulsive decision-making in sexual offenders against children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 127(5), 471. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000359

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Meier, N. M., Perrig, W., & Koenig, T. (2012). Neurophysiological correlates of delinquent behaviour in adult subjects with ADHD. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 84(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.12.011

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar