Adolescence marks the onset of substance use experimentation and adolescents are particularly vulnerable to certain negative effects of substances. Some evidence indicates reinforcement sensitivity is associated with substance use, though little is known about mechanisms underlying such association. in the current study were to examine, (1) associations between behavioral activation (BAS) and behavioral inhibition (BIS) system sensitivity, positive (PA) and negative affectivity (NA), and alcohol use and alcohol problems as well as tobacco, and marijuana use, and whether (2) associations are mediated by PA or NA. Participants were a community sample of N = 125 adolescents (Mage = 15.67 years; SD = 0.93; 52% boys) who completed self-report measures. evinced associations, generally as expected, across variables (all ps < 0.05). In mediation analyses, an association emerged between BIS sensitivity and alcohol use, mediated by NA (95%CIs [0.034; 0.390]); greater BIS sensitivity was associated with greater NA and greater NA was associated with greater alcohol use. These findings were replicated with alcohol problems. An association also emerged between BAS sensitivity and marijuana use, mediated by PA (95%CIs [−0.296; −0.027]); greater BAS sensitivity was associated with greater PA and greater PA was associated with lower marijuana use. Finally, BIS sensitivity was associated with tobacco use through NA (95%CIs [0.023; 0.325]) and PA (95%CIs [0.004; 0.116]), with NA linked to greater, but PA linked to lower tobacco use. BAS sensitivity was also associated with tobacco use through PA (95%CIs [−0.395; −0.049]), with PA linked again to lower tobacco use. There are unique and shared effects of domains of reinforcement sensitivity on adolescent substance use and these vary with index of dispositional affectivity and type of substance considered.
Aims Various genetic polymorphisms have been associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and some of these have also been implicated in individual differences in affective processing. Yet, no studies to date have examined the complex interrelations across these genetic polymorphisms, ADHD, and affective processing. Several variables (e.g., age, ethnicity, sex) have been shown to affect whether a given genetic variant confers risk. Our aim was to examine whether relevant genetic variants differentially confer risk for negative affectivity (NA) and/or emotion dysregulation (ED), depending on ADHD status. Methods Participants were n = 297 adolescents (M age =15.30 years; SD = 1.06; 60.27% boys) with ( n = 83) and without (DSM-5) ADHD. ADHD- and affective processing-related dopaminergic and serotonergic polymorphisms were genotyped (i.e., DRD2/ANKK1 TaqIA (rs1800497), dopamine receptor DRD4 exon-3 48 bp VNTR, and serotonin transporter linked polymorphic region 5-HTTLPR including the rs25531). Affectivity and ED were measured via parent- and/or self-report. Results We first calculated bivariate correlations between polymorphisms, affectivity, and ED then compared the obtained (Fisher's r to z -transformed) values between with and without ADHD groups. There were no correlations that were significant – but several differed – across groups. In youth without ADHD, carrying the DRD2 rs1800497 T-allele was negatively associated both with negative affectivity ( p corr =.033) and with self-rated ED ( p corr =0.039). In youth with ADHD, carrying the DRD4 VNTR 7-repeat allele was positively associated with self-rated ED ( p corr =0.008), and carrying the L'L’ relative to the low-expression S’ serotonergic allele was also positively associated with parent-rated ED ( p corr =.042) Conclusion Differences across with and without ADHD groups with regard to correlations between genetic polymorphisms - previously implicated in both ADHD and affective processing - and negative affectivity and emotion dysregulation indicate that certain genetic variants may differentially confer risk for affective outcomes, given ADHD status. These results have implications for targeted prevention of adolescent affective outcomes, which will be discussed during the presentation. That findings held across different indices of affective processing (dispositional affectivity and certain emotion dysregulation components) suggest these results may be robust.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
