ADHD Is Associated With a Widespread Pattern of Risky Behavior Across Activity Domains.

Objective: ADHD has been linked to higher engagement in risky behaviors in circumscribed domains such as dangerous driving, substance abuse, and gambling. This study tests whether ADHD is associated with a pervasive tendency to engage in risky behavior across a spectrum of activities and domains, and whether this tendency is driven by comorbid disorders. Method: A sample of 97 adults with ADHD and 103 typically developing controls completed a self-report questionnaire measuring the likelihood and frequency of engaging in a broad range of risky behaviors. ADHD, comorbid psychiatric disorders, and demographic variables were extensively assessed using standardized instruments. Results: Participants with ADHD reported a pervasive tendency to engage in risky behaviors across multiple activities. This tendency was associated with ADHD over and above the contribution of comorbid psychiatric disorders. Conclusion: These results suggest that ADHD is uniquely linked to a pervasive pattern of engagement in risky behaviors.

What Drives Risky Behavior in ADHD: Insensitivity to its Risk or Fascination with its Potential Benefits?

OBJECTIVE: ADHD is linked to increased engagement in risky behavior (ERB). Recent work suggests that this link is mediated by the perceived benefits of the behaviors, but not by the perceived risks or the attitudes toward the risks. Here we examine this hypothesis, using the psychological risk-return and psychometric multidimensional measurement models. METHOD: Adults with or without ADHD completed questionnaires measuring the likelihood of different risky behaviors and the perceived risks and benefits ascribed to these behaviors. Participants' ratings of 25 characteristics of various risky behaviors allowed us to derive two factors corresponding to perceived risk and perceived benefit of ERBs. Overall attitudes toward the perceived risks and benefits were extracted. RESULTS: Perceived benefit mediated the link between ADHD and ERB, in both models. Attitudes toward the perceived risks mediated that link in the psychometric model only. CONCLUSION: Perceived benefit plays an important role in the link between ADHD and ERB.

ADHD-associated risk taking is linked to exaggerated views of the benefits of positive outcomes.

Attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is often assumed to be associated with increased engagement in risk-taking behaviors. The current study sought to understand the mental processes underlying this association using a theory-driven behavioral economics perspective. Psychological risk-return models suggest that risk and benefit are inherently subjective, and risk taking is best understood as the interplay between cognitions and motivations regarding the benefits and risks of alternatives. A sample of 244 adults was assessed for ADHD symptoms. The likelihood of engagement in a range of risky behaviors (e.g., driving without wearing a seat belt), the magnitude of perceived benefit and risk ascribed to these behaviors, and benefit and risk attitudes of each participant were extracted from the Domain Specific Risk Taking (DOSPERT) scales. ADHD symptoms were correlated with more risky behaviors and perception of greater benefits from engaging in these behaviors, but were not correlated with risk perception. Mediation analysis revealed that the association between ADHD symptoms and engagement in risk taking was mediated by perceived benefits. These findings highlight the idea that people with high level ADHD symptoms tend to engage in risky behaviors because they find such behavior particularly appealing, rather than because they seek risk per se.

Agency and the construction of social preference: between inequality aversion and prosocial behavior.

The term social preference refers to decision makers' satisfaction with their own outcomes and those attained by comparable others. The present research was inspired by what appears to be a discrepancy in the literature on social preferences--specifically, between a class of studies demonstrating people's concern with inequality and others documenting their motivation to increase social welfare. The authors propose a theoretical framework to account for this puzzling difference. In particular, they argue that a characteristic of the decision setting--an individual's role in creating the outcomes, referred to as agency--critically affects decision makers' weighting of opposing social motives. Namely, in settings in which people can merely judge the outcomes, but cannot affect them ("low agency"), their concern with inequality figures prominently. In contrast, in settings in which people determine the outcomes for themselves and others ("high agency"), their concern with the welfare of others is prominent. Three studies using a new salary-allocation paradigm document a robust effect of agency. In the high-agency condition, participants had to assign salaries, whereas in the low-agency condition, they indicated their satisfaction with equivalent predetermined salaries. It was found that, compared with low-agency participants, high-agency participants were less concerned with disadvantageous salary allocations and were even willing to sacrifice a portion of their pay to better others' outcomes. The effects of agency are discussed in connection to inequality aversion, social comparison, prosocial behavior, and preference construction.

Spurious consensus and opinion revision: why might people be more confident in their less accurate judgments?

In the interest of improving their decision making, individuals revise their opinions on the basis of samples of opinions obtained from others. However, such a revision process may lead decision makers to experience greater confidence in their less accurate judgments. The authors theorize that people tend to underestimate the informative value of independently drawn opinions, if these appear to conflict with one another, yet place some confidence even in the spurious consensus, which may arise when opinions are sampled interdependently. The experimental task involved people's revision of their opinions (caloric estimates of foods) on the basis of advice. The method of sampling the advisory opinions (independent or interdependent) was the main factor. The results reveal a dissociation between confidence and accuracy. A theoretical underlying mechanism is suggested whereby people attend to consensus (consistency) cues at the expense of information on interdependence. Implications for belief updating and for individual and group decisions are discussed.