［2014］生涯衝動的なのか？家庭犬における長期的な衝動性

Impulsive for life? The nature of long-term impulsivity in domestic dogs

書誌情報Riemer, S., Mills, D.S. & Wright, H. Impulsive for life? The nature of long-term impulsivity in domestic dogs. Anim Cogn 17, 815–819 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-013-0701-4

Notice

表題の論文を日本語訳してみました。翻訳アプリにかけた日本語訳を英文に照らして修正していますが、表記のゆれや訳の間違いがあるかもしれません。正確に内容を知りたい方は、原文をご覧ください。

Abstract：要旨

Individual differences in impulsivity occur at a cognitive and/or behavioural level and are associated with differing life outcomes.

衝動性の個人差は、認知レベルおよび/または行動レベルで生じ、さまざまな人生の転帰と関連している。

However, there is a lack of empirical evidence to support the long-term stability of these characteristics in non-human animals. This study reports on the stability of convergent measures of impulsivity in domestic dogs assessed more than 6 years apart.

しかし、ヒト以外の動物におけるこれらの特性の長期安定性を裏付ける経験的証拠は不足している。本研究では、6年以上の間隔をおいて評価された家庭犬における衝動性の収束測定の安定性について報告する。

Measures were (1) owner assessment by means of a questionnaire, the validated ‘Dog Impulsivity Assessment Scale’ (DIAS) and (2) dogs’ performance in a delayed reward choice test.

測定方法は、(1)質問票による飼い主の評価、有効な「犬の衝動性評価尺度」（DIAS）、および(2)遅延報酬選択テストにおける犬の成績である。

Dogs had 15-min free access to two food dispensers, one dispensing a piece of food immediately, the other dispensing three pieces after a delay, which increased by 1 s every other time the dogs sampled it.

犬たちは2つのフードディスペンサーを15分間自由に使うことができ、一方はすぐに1個のフードを出し、もう一方は犬がサンプリングするたびに1秒ずつ増加する遅延の後に3個のフードを出した。

Maximum delay reached in this task reflects decision-making, or cognitive impulsivity, whereas the rate of extra presses on the delayed reward device during the delay can be considered as a measure of motor or behavioural impulsivity.

この課題で到達した最大遅延は意思決定、つまり認知的衝動性を反映し、遅延中に遅延報酬装置を余分に押す割合は運動的、行動的衝動性の指標とみなすことができる。

DIAS scores were strongly and significantly correlated across years. The maximum delay reached in the behaviour test was also highly stable, whereas paw-pressing rate was uncorrelated between the years.

DIASスコアは年度間で強く有意な相関があった。行動テストで到達した最大遅延時間も非常に安定していたが、肉球を押す速度は年度間で相関がなかった。

These results demonstrate that cognitive but not motor impulsivity is highly consistent over time in dogs.

これらの結果は、犬では認知的衝動性ではなく運動的衝動性が経時的に非常に一貫していることを示している。

References：参考文献

1. Anokhin AP, Golosheykin S, Grant JD, Heath AC (2011) Heritability of delay discounting in adolescence: a longitudinal twin study. Behav Genet 41:175–184. doi:10.1007/s10519-010-9384-7
   Article PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

2. Arce E, Santisteban C (2006) Impulsivity: a review. Psicothema 18:213–220
   PubMed Google Scholar

3. Audrain-McGovern J, Rodriguez D, Epstein LH, Cuevas J, Rodgers K, Wileyto EP (2009) Does delay discounting play an etiological role in smoking or is it a consequence of smoking? Drug Alcohol Depend 103(3):99–106
   Article PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

4. Casey BJ, Somerville LH, Gotlib IH, Ayduk O, Franklin NT, Askren MK, Jonides J, Berman MG, Wilson NL, Teslovich T, Glover G, Zavas V, Mischel W, Shoda Y (2011) Behavioral and neural correlates of delay of gratification 40 years later. PNAS 108:14998–15003.
   doi:10.1073/pnas.1108561108
   Article CAS PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

5. Cervantes MC, Delville Y (2009) Serotonin 5-HT1A and 5-HT3 receptors in an impulsive-aggressive phenotype. Behav Neurosci 123:589–598. doi:10.1037/a0015333
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

6. Cherek DR, Moeller FG, Dougherty DM, Rades H (1997) Studies of violent and nonviolent male parolees: II. Laboratory and psychometric measurements of impulsivity. Biol Psychiatry 41:523–529
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

7. Dougherty DM, Bjork JM, Harper RA, Marsh DM, Moeller FG, Mathias CW, Swann AC (2003) Behaviorial impulsivity paradigms: a comparison in hospitalized adolescents with disruptive behaviour disorders. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 44:1145–1157. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00197
   Article PubMed Google Scholar

8. Fratkin L, Sinn DL, Patall EA, Gosling SD (2013) Personality consistency in dogs: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 8:e54907. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054907
   Article CAS PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

9. Jimura K, Chushak MS, Braver TS (2013) Impulsivity and self-control during interfemoral decision making linked to the neural dynamics of reward value representation. J Neurosci 33:344–357
   Article CAS PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

10. Kalenscher T, Ohmann T, Güntürkün O (2006) The neuroscience of impulsive and self-controlled decisions. Int J Psychophsiol 62:203–211
    Article Google Scholar

11. Kirby KN (2009) One-year temporal stability of delay-discount rates. Psychon Bull Rev 16:457–462
    Article PubMed Google Scholar

12. Lessells CM, Boag PT (1987) Unrepeatable repeatability’s: a common mistake. Auk 104:116–121
    Article Google Scholar

13. Logue AW, Peña-Correal TE (1985) The effect of food deprivation on self control. Behav Process 10:355–368. doi:10.1016/0376-63578590036-1
    Article Google Scholar

14. Mills DS (2010) Personality. In: Mills DS (ed) Encyclopaedia of applied animal behaviour. CABI, Wallingford, pp 463–465
    Google Scholar

15. Mischel W, Shoda Y, Peake EK (1988) The nature of adolescent competencies predicted by preschool delay of gratification. J Pers Soc Psychol 54:687–696. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.26.6.978
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

16. Odum AL (2011) Delay discounting: trait variable? Behav Process 87:1–9
    Article Google Scholar

17. Réale D, Reader SM, Sol D, McDougall PT, Dingemanse NJ (2007) Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biol Rev 82:291–318
    Article PubMed Google Scholar

18. Reynolds B (2006) A review of delay-discounting research with humans: relations to drug use and gambling. Behav Pharmacol 17:651–667. doi:10.1097/FBP.0b013e3280115f99
    Article PubMed Google Scholar

19. Stamps J, Groothuis TG (2010) The development of animal personality: relevance, concepts and perspectives. Biol Rev 85:301–325. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00103.x
    Article PubMed Google Scholar

20. Van den Berg L, Schilder MBH, de Vries H, Leegwater PAG, van Oost BA (2006) Phenotyping of aggressive behaviour in Golden retriever dogs with a questionnaire. Behav Genet 36:882–902
    Article PubMed Google Scholar

21. Van den Bergh F, Spronk M, Ferreira L, Bloemarts E, Groenink L, Olivier B, Oosting R (2006) Relationship of delay aversion and response inhibition to extinction learning, aggression, and sexual behaviour. Behav Brain Res 175:75–81. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2006.08.003
    Article PubMed Google Scholar

22. Winstanley CA, Eagle DM, Robbins TW (2006) Behaviorial models of impulsivity in relation to ADHD: translation between clinical and preclinical studies. Clin Psychol Rev 26:379–395. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2006.01.001
    Article PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar

23. Wright HF, Mills DS, Pollux PMJ (2011) Development and validation of a psychometric tool for assessing impulsivity in the domestic dog Canis familiaris. Int J Comp Psychol 24:210–225. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.09.019
    Google Scholar

24. Wright HF, Mills DS, Pollux PMJ (2012) Behavioural and physiological correlates of impulsivity in the domestic dog Canis familiaris. Physiol Behav 105:676–682. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.09.019
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

25. Zaichenko MI, Merzhanova GKh (2011) Studies of impulsivity in rats in conditions of choice between food reinforcements of different value. Neurosci Behav Physiol 41:445–451
    Article Google Scholar

Keywords:

Dogs Canis familiaris, Impulsivity, Delayed reward choice, Personality, Test–retest reliability, Stability

Development of a human-analogue, 3-symptom domain Dog ADHD and Functionality Rating Scale (DAFRS) - Scientific Reports

The family dog, in its natural environment, exhibits neuropsychological deficits redolent of human psychiatric disorders, including behaviours that are similar to human attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms. Based on standard questionnaire methods in humans, we aimed to develop and validate a detailed, psychometrically improved tool to assess owner views on relevant dog behaviours. We modified available questionnaires by adding items that allow for separate analysis of impulsivity, and items on functional impairment. We collected data from 1168 owners for different validation steps of the new questionnaire and, similarly to assessment of humans where teachers also evaluate as an expert control, we collected data from dog trainers. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis revealed 3 factors: inattention (IA), hyperactivity (H) and impulsivity (I), corresponding to all three human symptom dimensions in dogs. Test–retest analyses showed excellent agreement between measurements for all factors. Similarly to findings with humans, trainer-owner rating comparisons showed fair (IA) to moderate (H, I) agreement. As in humans, greater ADHD scores were associated with greater functional impairment scores. We suggest that in dogs, similarly to humans, parallel examination of (extreme) ADHD and functional impairment scores could help distinguish diagnosable individuals, after further validation of the questionnaire using a relevant behaviour test.