Hypothesized Domain
Measure Type
Measure Duration
Target Population

Measures Coming Soon

December 1, 2017
Brief COPE
Brief Risk-Resilience Index for Screening (BRISC)
Emotion Regulation Task
fMRI Facial Emotion Paradigm
Go-No-Go fMRI Paradigm
Maze
Resting State Task
Immersive Virtual Reality Assay for target: Regulation of Emotion
Immersive Virtual Reality Assay for target: Regulation of Cognition
Immersive Virtual Reality Assay for target: Regulation of Self-Reflection
Naturalistic Assays (passive) for target: Regulation of Emotion
Behavioral Assays for Regulation of Emotion
Naturalistic Assays (passive) for target: Regulation of Cognition
Behavioral Assays for Regulation of Cognition
Naturalistic Assays (passive) for target: Regulation of Self-Focused Reflection
Behavioral Assays for Regulation of Self-Focused Reflection
10-Item Personality Inventory
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 1 min
Access Measure
The Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) is a brief assessment of the Big Five personality dimensions: (1) Extraversion, (2) Agreeableness, (3) Conscientiousness, (4) Emotional Stability, and (5) Openness to Experience. Items are rated on a scale from 1, disagree strongly, to 7, agree strongly. Example items include, “I see myself as extraverted, enthusiastic” (Extraversion) and “I see myself as dependable, self-disciplined” read more (Conscientiousness). read less
Adaptive N-Back Task
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Adaptive N-Back Task is a behavioral measure of working memory within the larger domain of executive function. It assesses the cognitive ability to store and control information on a short-term basis. In this computer task a sequential stream of visual stimuli (typically letters) are presented one at a time. Participants’ task is to identify whether a current stimulus (e.g., read more the letter B) is the same as a stimulus that appeared N trials previously, where N has a variable value that changes at times during the task to alter the level of demand on participants’ cognitive resources. Each stimulus is typically presented very briefly (e.g., 0.5 seconds) with a substantial delay between each one (e.g., 2 seconds) to ensure that working memory is sufficiently taxed. A typical block of the task includes 12 sequentially presented stimuli. In recent versions of the task participants are instructed to ignore the case of the letter (e.g., B is the same as b) in order to reduce the confound of perceptual familiarity. As an example, in a 2-back condition within this task, the correct answers for the final three stimuli in the sequence D b v d V would be the following: no, no, yes. In contrast, in a 3-back condition for the same sequence, the correct answers for the final two letters would be the following: yes, no. In the adaptive version, task complexity (i.e., n-back level) is adjusted according to each participant’s performance. The dependent measures are accuracy and response time for each level of task complexity (i.e., each n-back level). read less
Angling Risk Task
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Angling Risk Task (ART) assesses cognitive processes underlying decision making in a sequential risk-taking paradigm. This task is comprised of tournaments of 30 rounds each. In each round, participants “fish” for red and blue fish in an attempt to earn as much money as possible. Of the N fish, N-1 are red and 1 is blue. Each red fish read more the participant catches is worth five cents; if the participant catches the blue fish, however, the round ends, and the participant loses all the money accumulated in that round. Participants are able to stop any round at any time and collect their earnings. Each tournament can have a different release law: (1) Catch ‘n’ Keep, in which the probability of catching a red fish goes down as each fish is caught and removed from the pond, and (2) Catch ‘n’ Release, where the probability of catching a red fish stays constant.read less
Angling Risk Task – Always Sunny
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Angling Risk Task (ART) Always Sunny assesses cognitive processes underlying decision making in a sequential risk-taking paradigm. This task is comprised of tournaments of 30 rounds each. In each round, participants “fish” for red and blue fish in an attempt to earn as much money as possible. Of the N fish, N-1 are red and 1 is blue. Each read more red fish the participant catches is worth five cents; if the participant catches the blue fish, however, the round ends, and the participant loses all the money accumulated in that round. Participants are able to stop any round at any time and collect their earnings. Each tournament can have a different release law: (1) Catch ‘n’ Keep, in which the probability of catching a red fish goes down as each fish is caught and removed from the pond, and (2) Catch ‘n’ Release, where the probability of catching a red fish stays constant. In the “Always Sunny” version of the task, participants are able to see the number of red and blue fish. The outcome is the ART score – the average number times the participant chooses to “fish” on trials that end by choice (i.e. rather than ending by catching a blue fish). read less
Attentional Network Test
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Attention Network Test (ANT) is a task designed to test three attentional networks: (1) alerting, (2) orienting, and (3) executive control. The ANT combines attentional and spatial cues with a flanker task (a central imperative stimulus is flanked by distractors that can indicate the same or opposite response to the imperative stimulus). On each trial a spatial cue is read more presented, followed by an array of five arrows presented at either the top or the bottom of the computer screen. The subject must indicate the direction of the central arrow in the array of five. The cue that precedes the arrows can be non-existent, a center cue, a double cue (one presented at each of the two possible target locations), or a spatial cue that deterministically indicates the upcoming target location. Each network is assessed via reaction times (RTs). The alerting network contrasts performance with and without cues, the orienting network contrasts performance on the task with or without a reliable spatial cue, and executive control (conflict) is measured by assessing interference from flankers.read less
Barratt Impulsiveness Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS) is 30-item self-report scale that is commonly used to measure impulsiveness. Participants respond to each item using a 4-point Likert scale: 1 (rarely/never), 2 (occasionally), 3 (often), and 4 (almost always/always). Principal components analysis has revealed six primary factors of the scale: 1) attention (e.g., “I am restless at the theater or lectures”), 2) motor read more impulsiveness (e.g., “I do things without thinking”), 3) self-control (e.g., “I say things without thinking”), 4) cognitive complexity (e.g., “I get easily bored when solving thought problems”), 5) perseverance (e.g., “I change jobs”), and 6) cognitive instability (e.g., “I have ‘racing’ thoughts”). Three secondary factors have also been identified: attentional impulsiveness (mixture of primary factors 1 and 6), motor impulsiveness (mixture of primary factors 2 and 5), and non-planning impulsiveness (mixture of primary factors 3 and 4). read less
Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function – Adults
Self-Regulation Self-report | 15-25 min
Access Measure
The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adults (BRIEF-A) is a 75-item scale designed to assess self-reported behaviors associated with executive function. The BRIEF-A can be scored as an overall measure (Global Executive Composite), or broken into two domains: Behavioral Regulation Index (BRI), including (1) inhibit, (2) shift, (3) control, and (4) monitor, and Metacognitive Index (MI), including (1) initiate, (2) read more Working Memory, (3) Plan/Organize, (4) Task Monitor, and (5) Organization of Materials. There are also three different validity scales: (1) negativity, (2) infrequency, and (3) inconsistency. The current version was adapted to include 32 questions from the original scale, comprising four subscales of the Metacognitive Index: (1) Initiate (e.g. “I need to be reminded to begin a task even when I am willing”), (2) Working Memory (e.g. I have trouble concentrating on tasks such as chores, reading, or work”), (3) Plan/Organize (e.g. “I get overwhelmed by large tasks”), and (4) Task Monitor (e.g. “I make careless errors when completing tasks”). It also includes two added items with repeated content and reversed wording to check for acquiescence bias. Answers are scored from 1, never a problem, to 7, always a problem. Higher scores indicate poor executive function.read less
BIS/BAS Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The BIS/BAS Scale is a 24-item self-report questionnaire designed to measure two motivational systems: the behavioral inhibition system (BIS), which corresponds to motivation to avoid aversive outcomes, and the behavioral activation system (BAS), which corresponds to motivation to approach goal-oriented outcomes. Participants respond to each item using a 4-point Likert scale: 1 (very true for me), 2 (somewhat true for read more me), 3 (somewhat false for me), and 4 (very false for me). The scale has four subscales that were derived via factor analysis. One subscale corresponds to the BIS. Seven items contribute to this score (e.g., “Criticism or scolding hurts me quite a bit”). The remaining three subscales correspond to three components of BAS. BAS Drive measures the motivation to follow one’s goals. Four items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I want something I usually go all-out to get it”). BAS Reward Responsiveness measures the sensitivity to pleasant reinforcers in the environment. Four items contribute to this score (e.g., “It would excite me to win a contest”). BAS Fun Seeking measures the motivation to find novel rewards spontaneously. Five items contribute to this score (e.g., “I crave excitement and new sensations”). read less
Brief Self-Control Survey
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Brief Self-Control Survey measures self-control, with a focus on operational aspects (e.g., overriding distraction). The scale consists of 13 items, measured on a scale from 1, not at all like me, to 5, very much like me. Example items include “I am good at resisting temptation” and “I have a hard time breaking bad habits” (reverse coded).
Choice Reaction Time
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
The Choice Reaction Time (CRT) task measures the basic cognitive processes of perception, discrimination, response selection, and response execution. The task involves making a specific, speeded response to two or more stimuli that are presented in succession. For example, subjects could make an “m” keypress when a circle appears and a “z” keypress when a square appears. The main dependent read more measure is the speed and accuracy of the responses.read less
Cognitive Reflection Test
Self-Regulation Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) measures cognitive processing – specifically the tendency to suppress an incorrect, intuitive answer and come to a more deliberate, correct answer. The test is comprised of three questions: (1) A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost? _____ cents (2) If read more it takes 5 machines 5 minutes to make 5 widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets? _____ minutes (3) In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake? _____ days The measure is scored as the total number of correct answers. read less
Columbia Card Task – Cold Version
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The “cold” version of the Columbia Card Task (CCT) is a behavioral measure of decision making. (For comparison, see also the “hot” version of the CCT in the Measures Repository.) The task is constructed such that the optimal decision making strategies are the same for the cold CCT as the hot CCT, but the procedures vary either to engage (hot read more version) or not engage (cold version) affective processes. In the cold CCT participants are presented with a display of 32 cards arranged face down in a grid made up of four rows and eight columns. On each trial they are asked to indicate how many cards they would like to turn over. They are instructed that they may turn over as many cards as they wish for a given display with the goal of maximizing their earnings. Each gain card turned over adds to their total earnings. Each loss card turned over subtracts from their earnings and also immediately terminates the trial. A higher number of cards turned over is associated with a higher total amount won as long as no loss card is turned over. This principle incentivizes the decision to turn over a higher number of cards. However, a higher number of cards turned over is also associated with a higher probability of encountering a loss. This principle incentivizes the decision to turn over a lower number of cards. Therefore, to maximize their earnings, participants must properly weigh the probability of a loss, the gain amount, and the loss amount as they make the decision about how many cards to turn over on each trial. The task uses a 3 x 3 x 3 factorial design involving probability of loss (1, 2, or 3 loss cards per display), gain amount (10, 20, or 30 points), and loss amount (250, 500, or 750 points) with two trials per cell of the design, resulting in a total of 54 trials. The dependent measure is the average number of cards turned over in the task. Those three factors may be analyzed to determine whether participants make use of one, two, or all three of them to reach their decisions. Ultimately, a higher average number of cards turned over reflects increased risk taking.read less
Columbia Card Task – Hot Version
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The “hot” version of the Columbia Card Task (CCT) is a behavioral measure of decision making processes. (For comparison, see also the “cold” version of the CCT in the Measures Repository.) The task is constructed such that the optimal decision making strategies are the same for the cold CCT as the hot CCT, but the procedures vary either to engage read more (hot version) or not engage (cold version) affective processes. In the hot CCT participants are presented with a display of 32 cards arranged face down in a grid made up of four rows and eight columns. On each trial they may turn over cards one at a time, thereby revealing either a win or a loss. They are instructed that they may decide to stop turning over cards at any time for a given display with the goal of maximizing their earnings. Each gain card turned over adds to their total earnings. Each loss card turned over subtracts from their earnings and also immediately terminates the trial. As more cards are turned over, the total amount won increases as long as no loss card is turned over. This principle incentivizes the decision to continue to turn over additional cards. However, as more cards are turned over, the probability of encountering a loss also increases for the next selection. This principle incentivizes the decision to stop turning over cards. Therefore, to maximize their earnings, participants must properly weigh the probability of a loss, the gain amount, and the loss amount as they make each decision. The task uses a 3 x 3 x 3 factorial design involving probability of loss (1, 2, or 3 loss cards per display), gain amount (10, 20, or 30 points), and loss amount (250, 500, or 750 points) with two trials per cell of the design, resulting in a total of 54 trials. The dependent measure is the average number of cards turned over in the task. Those three factors may be analyzed to determine whether participants make use of one, two, or all three of them to reach their decisions. Ultimately, a higher average number of cards turned over reflects increased risk taking. This hot version of the CCT critically differs from the cold version because it includes immediate positive or negative affective feedback following each decision made within each trial. For one, participants see positive feedback right away as they turn over each gain card in that the front of each such card shows a schematic happy face. Furthermore, for each card turned over within a trial, participants see a display showing their total earnings change immediately either for the better (gain card) or the worse (loss card).read less
Consideration of Future Consequences Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10 min
Access Measure
The Consideration of Future Consequences Scale is comprised of 14 items that tap into an individual’s tendency to think about long-term consequences of his or her actions, or to guide behavior based on short- versus long-term considerations. There are seven statements representative of forward thinking (e.g., “I am ready to sacrifice my current happiness or wellbeing in order to achieve read more future results.”) and seven reverse-coded statements (e.g., “Since my everyday work has specific outcomes, it is more important to me than behavior that has distant outcomes.”), Response options range from 1, not at all like me, to 7, very much like me. Higher scores indicate greater consideration of future consequences, or forward-looking behavior.read less
Convex Time Budgets
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Convex Time Budgets (CTB) task measures delay discounting, which is the tendency to discount value in the future (e.g., a lower subjective value of money at a later date relative to an earlier date). This tendency is often reflected by a preference for small rewards received sooner over larger rewards received later. Typically, delay discounting is measured by asking read more participants to repeatedly make choices between receiving one reward at a sooner time or a different reward at a later time by varying the amounts of money for each trial. Some research indicates that this method of measuring delay discounting results in overly high estimates of discounting rates, however. The CTB task was developed as an alternative to deal with this issue by varying the amounts of money on each trial as well as the two times that participants must compare on each trial. In this task, participants make 48 decisions total. Twenty-four of these decisions are in the gains domain, and 24 decisions are in the losses domain. These decisions occur for three compared times: (1) 2 vs. 4 weeks from today, (2) today vs. 4 weeks from today, and (3) today vs. 2 weeks from today. In the gain domain, participants must choose how much money they would like to receive in two separate installments to be gained in separate portions at the sooner and the later date. The sooner gain always has a maximum of 400 KSH (a monetary unit), whereas the later gain maximum varies: 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1200 KSH, or 1600 KSH. For example, for this gains condition, a participant with an early maximum of 400 KSH and a later maximum of 400 KSH might choose to receive 333 KSH 2 weeks from today and 67 KSH 4 weeks from today. In contrast, in the loss domain, participants are given two endowments of 1600 KSH, one sooner and one later, and choose between loss amounts at each of the two time points. The sooner loss is always 400 KSH, and the later varies: 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1200 KSH, or 1600 KSH. The Convex Time Budget task is designed to elicit parameters of individual utility functions over money. Participants are assumed to utility-maximizing and have preferences which are described by a Constant Relative Risk Aversion utility function u(c)=c^σ and a quasi-hyperbolic discounting function u(c_t )= βδ^t u(c_0). Each CTB decision can be described in terms of a “budget constraint”: participants trade off money at the earlier date and money at the later date at a given “interest rate”, with the 400 KSH serving as a type of capital which can be taken earlier or saved and increased. Under this framework, a utility-maximizing participant’s choices would deterministically be a function of the interest rate, front-end delay, delay between payments and preference parameters ,  and . The values of these parameters which most closely follow the model are estimated using nonlinear least squares regression. This process is done separately for each individual in both domains, so that parameters can be compared both between and within-subject. read less
Couple Coercion Scale
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 2 min
Access Measure
This 9-item self-report scale assesses an individual's perception of how much coercion characterizes their relationship with their partner. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from Never to Always. Items include: (1) When I get into a conflict with my partner, we go back and forth taking it up a notch until things get too heated and one of us read more gives up, (2) When I get into a conflict with my partner, it gets heated and one of us gives in or walks away just to make it stop, (3) When I get into a conflict with my partner, it seems like we up the intensity and unpleasantness until one of us gives up, (4) When we disagree, it will escalate until one of us gives in just to make it stop, (5) Disagreements tend to get more and more heated until one of us wins and the other gives in, (6) When I ask my partner to do something, s/he often gets out of it by yelling at me or hitting me, (7) The only way to get my partner to do what I want is to yell, (8) When my partner and I disagree, s/he often expresses high levels of anger as a way of getting his/her way, (9) When my partner gets hostile or combative, I often give in to what s/he wants.read less
Couples Conflict Task
Interpersonal & Social Processes Observational | 20 min
Access Measure
Couples engage in two 10-minute conflict discussions (e.g., one from each partner; top two important topics for couple). To generate topics for the two 10-minute conflict discussions, each participant completes a questionnaire about things they had unsuccessfully tried to get their partners to do, do differently, or change in the preceding year. Participants rate a list of possible desired changes, read more and then rate whether they have engaged in discussions about that change in the past year and how important the change is to them. If more than one topic is similarly rated as of greatest importance, one is chosen via a random number generator. The most important change(s) that have been discussed in the past year is selected. Participants are not told which topic has been selected until immediately prior to the relevant conversation. Prior to the conversation, the following instructions are given: “You had indicated that you would like your partner to ___[topic]___. For this first conversation, we’d like you to have a conversation with each other about this topic for 10 minutes and try to get somewhere with it. We’d like you to deal with the issue the way you typically would at home. In other words, what we’re interested in is seeing how this kind of thing usually goes with you guys, so we’d like you to bring up the topic and talk about it however you usually would. When I leave the room you should start discussing it. After 10 minutes, I’ll knock and let you know that it’s time to stop. Any questions?” The assessor then positions the couple appropriately for the cameras (and attaches lavaliere microphones if not in a room equipped with microphones). The assessor leaves the room for 10 minutes, during which the couple converses uninterrupted. The most fundamental property of a coding system is the sampling strategy for behavior, otherwise known as the coding unit. Major sampling strategies are event, duration, interval, and time. Coding systems can be molar/global (i.e. makes summary ratings) or molecular/microbehavioral (i.e. codes behavior as it unfolds over time). Investigators may use scores to analyze means, variability, or sequences. read less
Daily Inventory of Stressful Events (DISE)
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
Stress is a multidimensional construct with different areas of stress potentially having differential relationships with short-term and long-term outcomes. The Daily Inventory of Stressful Events (DISE) is a semi-structured survey in which participants report whether any of a series of stressful events had occurred within the past 24 hours. This end-of-day measure consists of a brief set of stem and read more conditional questions that can be can be administered via smartphones. An example stem question is “Did you have an argument or disagreement with anyone in the past 24 hours?” An example follow-up questions is “How stressful was this?” “How much control did you have over the situation?” This instrument yields several variables for each reported stressor including: (a) content classification of the stressor (e.g., work overload, argument over housework, traffic problem); (b) subjective severity of stressors; (c) primary appraisals (i.e., areas of life that were at risk because of the stressor); and (d) perceived control of the situation. read less
Deferment of Gratification Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 5-10 min
Access Measure
The Deferment of Gratification Scale consists of 12 items asking about the preference or ability to defer gratification versus pursuit of more immediate rewards. Six items are ‘positive’ (e.g., “I enjoy something more when I have to wait for it and plan for it.”) and six are reverse-coded (e.g., “I like spending my money immediately after I get it”). Response read more options range from 1, strongly disagree, to 7, strongly agree. Higher scores indicate greater deferment of gratification.read less
Dickman Functional and Dysfunctional Impulsivity Survey
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Dickman Functional and Dysfunctional Impulsivity Survey is a 23-item self-report scale designed to assess separable components of impulsivity. Participants respond to each item with a True/False response. Dysfunctional impulsivity is the tendency to make quick decisions in contexts when such decisions are not adaptive. Twelve items contribute to this dysfunctional subscale score (e.g., “I often say whatever comes into read more my head without thinking first”). In contrast, functional impulsivity is the somewhat less-studied tendency to make quick decisions when such decisions are appropriate for the situation at hand. Eleven items contribute to this functional subscale score (e.g., “I like sports and games in which you have to choose your next move very quickly”). read less
Dietary Decisions Task
Self-Regulation Task | 12 min
Access Measure
The Dietary Decision Task is a three-stage measure that assesses self-control. In stages one and two, participants are presented with 50 food items which they rate in two stages for health and for taste on a five-point scale (order of presentation is counterbalanced across subjects). A reference item that is rated as neutral in both health and taste is selected read more for each participant. In stage three, participants are presented with this reference (neutral) food item and subsequent items, and make a decision about which of the two they would like to eat. Participants are grouped ex post as self-controllers or non-self-controllers based on their decisions: self-controller if their decisions are driven primarily by health, or non-self-controller if their decisions are driven primarily by taste. read less
Digit Span Task
Self-Regulation Task | 7 min
Access Measure
The Digit Span Task is a simple behavioral measure of working memory capacity, the cognitive ability to store and manage information on a transient basis. Although the original version of this task was verbally administered, recent versions are generally administered via computer. On each trial participants are presented with a series of digits appearing one at a time on a read more computer screen (e.g., 3, 4, 1, 2, 7, 8). The task exists with two variants: forward-span and backward-span. In the forward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the digits in the order they appeared by typing them via keypress. In the backward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the digits in the reverse order they appeared. For both variants of the task, after each successfully completed trial, the number of digits presented increases by one for the next trial. After a failed trial (i.e., if any digits are missing and/or if the exact order of digits is wrong), the number of digits presented remains the same for the next trial. The task concludes after participants make errors for two trials in a row for a given digit span. The dependent measure, digit span, is the maximum number of digits correctly recalled.read less
Directed Forgetting Task
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
The Directed-Forgetting Task measures proactive interference from previously relevant information. In each trial, participants are first presented with six stimuli arranged in a 2x3 matrix. After a short delay, participants are instructed to forget either the top three stimuli or the bottom three stimuli, so that participants retain only the other three stimuli in memory (i.e. the “target set”). After read more a second delay, participants are presented with a recognition probe. This could be a Positive probe (part of the target set), a Forget probe (part of the set the participant was instructed to forget), or a Control probe (not part of the target or forget set). Participants select a “yes” response for Positive probes and a “no” for Forget or Control probes. Performance is measured with error rates and reaction time (RT) on correct trials. The directed-forgetting effect, the main dependent measure, is the increase in RT and error rate on Forget compared to Control probes. read less
Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey: Expected Benefits
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey (DOSPERT) is a 30-item self-report scale that measures three aspects of individual differences with regard to risk taking behaviors: expected benefits of taking risks (the present measure), risk taking behavior, and perceptions of risk. (For the latter two measures listed above, please see the separate listings in this Measures Repository.) Participants are presented with read more a series of situations and asked to “indicate the benefits you would obtain” from each one using a 7-point Likert scale: 1 (No Benefits at all), 2, 3, 4 (Moderate Benefits), 5, 6, and 7 (Great Benefits). The expected benefits of risk taking are assessed in five separate domains (six items corresponding to each domain): Ethical (e.g., “Not returning a wallet you found that contains $200”), Financial (Investment and Gambling) (e.g., “Investing 5% of your annual income in a very speculative stock, ” “Betting a day’s income at a high-stakes poker game”), Health and Safety (e.g., “Riding a motorcycle without a helmet”), Recreational (e.g., “Bungee jumping off a tall bridge”), and Social (e.g., “Moving to a city far away from your extended family”). The dependent measures are the expected benefits scores, which are computed separately for each of the five domains as the sum of all item scores within that domain. An overall expected benefits score may also be computed across the five domains by summing the relevant score for all 30 items. read less
Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey: Risk Perceptions
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey (DOSPERT) is a 30-item self-report scale that measures three aspects of individual differences with regard to risk taking behaviors: risk perceptions (the present measure), risk taking behavior, and expected benefits of taking risks. (For the latter two measures listed above, please see the separate listings in this Measures Repository.) Participants are presented with a read more series of situations and asked to “indicate how risky you perceive” each one using a 7-point Likert scale: 1 (Not at all Risky), 2 (Slightly Risky), 3 (Somewhat Risky), 4 (Moderately Risky), 5 (Risky), 6 (Very Risky), and 7 (Extremely Risky). Perceived risk levels are assessed in five separate domains (six items corresponding to each domain): Ethical (e.g., “Not returning a wallet you found that contains $200”), Financial (Investment and Gambling) (e.g., “Investing 5% of your annual income in a very speculative stock, ” “Betting a day’s income at a high-stakes poker game”), Health and Safety (e.g., “Riding a motorcycle without a helmet”), Recreational (e.g., “Bungee jumping off a tall bridge”), and Social (e.g., “Moving to a city far away from your extended family”). The dependent measures are the risk perceptions scores, which are computed separately for each of the five domains as the sum of all item scores within that domain. An overall risk perceptions score may also be computed across the five domains by summing the relevant score for all 30 items. read less
Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey: Risk Taking
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey (DOSPERT) is a 30-item self-report scale that measures three aspects of individual differences with regard to risk taking behaviors: risk taking behavior (the present measure), perceptions of risk, and expected benefits of taking risks. (For the latter two measures listed above, please see the separate listings in this Measures Repository.) Participants are presented with read more a series of situations and asked to “indicate the likelihood that you would engage in the described activity or behavior” for each one using a 7-point Likert scale: 1 (Extremely Unlikely), 2 (Moderately Unlikely), 3 (Somewhat Unlikely), 4 (Not Sure), 5 (Somewhat Likely), 6 (Moderately Likely), and 7 (Extremely Likely). The likelihoods of risk taking are assessed in five separate domains (six items corresponding to each domain): Ethical (e.g., “Not returning a wallet you found that contains $200”), Financial (Investment and Gambling) (e.g., “Investing 5% of your annual income in a very speculative stock, ” “Betting a day’s income at a high-stakes poker game”), Health and Safety (e.g., “Riding a motorcycle without a helmet”), Recreational (e.g., “Bungee jumping off a tall bridge”), and Social (e.g., “Moving to a city far away from your extended family”). The dependent measures are the risk taking scores, which are computed separately for each of the five domains as the sum of all item scores within that domain. An overall risk taking score may also be computed across the five domains by summing the relevant score for all 30 items. read less
Dot Pattern Expectancy
Self-Regulation Task | 15 min
Access Measure
The Dot Pattern Expectancy (DPX) task measures individual differences in cognitive control. Participants are presented with a cue made up of dots. This cue can be a valid cue – referred to as A (e.g., ":") – or an invalid cue – referred to as B (e.g., ".."). Next a probe is presented, also made up of a simple dot read more formation. This probe can be valid (X) or invalid (Y). Participants are instructed to respond to valid probe and cue combinations (targets – AX combinations) with a key press (e.g., “x”) and all others (non-targets) with a different key press (e.g., “m”). read less
Ecological Momentary Assessment of Stressful Events
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
The Ecological Momentary Assessment of Stressful Events is a brief measure of momentary experiences of stress aimed to be administered in ecologically valid environments close in time to the occurrence of stressful events. The goal of this measurement strategy is to minimize retrospective recall biases that can accompany the reporting of stress. The EMA measure consists of a brief set read more of stem and conditional questions that can be administered via smartphones as people go about their daily activities. The stem question assesses whether a stressful event has recently occurred (“Did anything stressful occur since the last survey?”), followed by a series of follow-ups that assess characteristics of the stressor (e.g., event type, timing, and intensity). read less
Effort Discounting Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Effort Discounting Task is a behavioral measure of the temporal discounting of effort, which is a tendency to prefer to expend greater effort at a later time over lesser effort at a sooner time. Participants make 18 decisions about when they will make a specified number of phone calls to the study center for monetary compensation of 500 read more KSH (equivalent to ~5 USD) to be received one month later after successfully completing the required effort from the chosen decision. These decisions occur over three timeframes: (1) two vs. four weeks from today, (2) today vs. four weeks from today, and (3) today vs. two weeks from today. There are six decisions to make for each timeframe. In these decisions, the earlier time always requires two calls, and the later time requires one, two, three, four, five, or six calls. The participant must make the calls between 6 pm and 10 pm, and, if multiple calls are required, they must be spaced apart by a minimum of 10 minutes to ensure that each call reflects a distinct effort. During the four-hour window in which participants can make the calls, they receive hourly reminders to minimize the potential confounder of forgetting, which is distinct from the key construct of effort discounting. Intertemporal choices over effort are then modeled using a quasi-hyperbolic discounting function following Laibson (1997), which allows for time-inconsistent preferences. From participants’ choices, two discounting parameters are estimated: First, the “present-bias” parameter, βi, which attaches special weight to immediate outcomes. βi = 1 implies no present bias, whereas βi < 1 implies present bias. The second parameter, δi, describes the rate at which future outcomes are devalued exponentially. For example, δi = 1 means that a participant behaves as if they are indifferent between making 2 calls today and 2 calls two weeks from today, whereas δi = .5 implies that the participant would be indifferent between 1 call today and 2 calls two weeks from today.read less
Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10 min
Access Measure
The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) is a 10-item self-report scale designed to assess habitual use of two commonly used strategies to alter emotion: cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression. Participants respond to each item using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Cognitive reappraisal involves thinking differently about a situation in order to change its read more meaning in order to alter one’s emotional experience. Expressive suppression involves decreasing the outward expression of emotion. Six items contribute to the subscale for cognitive reappraisal (e.g., “When I’m faced with a stressful situation, I make myself think about it in a way that helps me stay calm”). Four items contribute to the subscale for expressive suppression (e.g., “When I am feeling negative emotions, I make sure not to express them”).read less
Five Facets of Mindfulness Survey
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Five Facets of Mindfulness Survey is a 39-item self-report scale that measures components of mindfulness, which is a tendency to attend to the present moment with a non-judgmental attitude. Participants indicate whether each item is generally true for them using a 5-point Likert scale: 1 (never or very rarely true), 2 (rarely true), 3 (sometimes true), 4 (often true), read more and 5 (very often or always true). The measure has five subscales: Observing, Describing, Acting with awareness, Non-judging of inner experience, and Non-reactivity to inner experience. Observing involves noticing details of the internal and external environments. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I’m walking, I deliberately notice the sensations of my body moving”). Describing involves the ability to put words to experiences. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., “I can usually describe how I feel at the moment in considerable detail”). Acting with awareness involves paying attention to what one is doing in the present moment. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., a reverse-coded item is “When I do things, my mind wanders off and I’m easily distracted”). Non-judging of inner experience involves a lack of evaluation about one’s thoughts and emotions. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., a reverse-coded item is “I believe some of my thoughts are abnormal or bad and I shouldn’t think that way”). Non-reactivity to inner experience involves the tendency to allow thoughts and emotions to pass without getting fixated on them. Seven items contribute to this score (e.g., “In difficult situations, I can pause without immediately reacting”). read less
Frustration in Timed Backwards Math
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Observational | 0-5 min
The Frustration in Timed Backwards Math Task assesses behaviors that indicate general anxiety, sadness, or frustration/anger in children. Participants complete the serial subtraction portion of the Trier Social Stress Test for Children (TSST-C), an adapted version of a standardized stress paradigm originally developed and evaluated in adults. Participants are asked to count backwards from a high number by a certain read more interval. If a mistake is made, then they must start again from the beginning. There are three trials during each of which the children count for one minute (i.e., three minutes total). Coders are trained to code from videotape the highest degree of observed negative affect present during each 10-second segment for two separate domains of negative emotion: anxiety/worry/sadness/resignation and anger/irritation. read less
Five-Trial Adjusting Delay Discounting Task
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
The Five-Trial Adjusting Delay Discounting Task is a very brief variant of the traditional Delay Discounting Task. The construct of delay discounting refers to people’s tendency to value rewards less as the amount of time increases until those rewards would be received. The relationship between delays and subjective value can be represented with a hyperbolic curve. That is, as the read more time delay increases away from the present, the minimum amount of money that a person would prefer to receive right away for a given amount of money in the future (e.g., $1, 000) decreases very steeply for small increases in delay relative to the present (e.g., hours to weeks in the future) and then continues to decrease but less steeply with greater increases in delay relative to the present (e.g., months to years in the future). This brief task uses only five trials to estimate a person’s discounting rate by adjusting the specifications of each subsequent trial based on performance of the preceding trial. Each 5-trial version of this task uses one monetary amount for each trial (e.g., $1, 000; $1, 000, 000). Each participant is asked on the first trial of the task whether they would prefer to receive that amount in three weeks or half that amount now. On the next trial the question is repeated but with a different time delay according to the participant’s response on the previous trial. That is, a greater delay is presented on the next trial if the participant chose “now” on the previous trial, whereas a lesser delay is presented if the participant chose the later time on the previous trial. The dependent measure is the steepness of the delay discounting curve.read less
Future Orientation Scale of the Time Perspective Survey
Self-Regulation Self-report | 0-5 min
Access Measure
The Future Orientation Scale of the Time Perspective Survey (child version) assesses the extent to which school-aged children have the ability or inclination to focus their attention on the future, as opposed to focusing on the past or present moments. This inclination may be related to an individual’s decisions regarding eating or other health behaviors. Children are asked to respond read more with how well each statement describes what they believe on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (“Very Untrue”) to 5 (“Very True”). There are 13 total items (e.g., “Finishing homework and doing other jobs at home comes before play”, “I make lists of things to do.”) This scale was modified from the original measure that was developed for adults. read less
Future Time Perspective Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Future Time Perspective (FTP) scale measures a person’s perception of their future as being time-limited. It consists of ten items rated on a scale from 1, very untrue, to 7, very true (e.g., “Many opportunities await me in the future” and “There is plenty of time left in my life to make new plans”). Items are coded so that read more higher scores reflect a more expansive view of the future. read less
Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The original Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale contains 10 items designed to tap into a global sense of self-efficacy, or belief of an individual in his or her ability (e.g., “I can always solve difficult problems if I try hard enough, ” and “I can usually handle whatever comes my way.”) The revised version here includes these 10 items and two, which read more are repeated and reversed to examine acquiescence bias. Response options range from 1, never true, to 7, always true. Higher scores indicate greater generalized self-efficacy.read less
Go-No Go Task
Self-Regulation Task | 7 min
Access Measure
This task measures response inhibition. In the go/no-go task, participants respond to certain stimuli (“go” stimuli) and make no response for others (“no-go” stimuli). The main dependent measure in go/no-go tasks is the commission error rate (making a “go” response on “no-go” trials); fewer errors signifies better response inhibition.
Grit-S
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The 8-item Grit-S is a short form of the original 12-item Grit-O scale. This scale measures perseverance – grit – as an individual difference score. There are two distinct subscales: consistency of interest (e.g., “I have been obsessed with a certain idea or project for a short time but later lost interest”), and perseverance of effort (e.g., “I finish whatever read more I begin”). read less
Holt-Laury Risk Titrator
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Holt-Laury Task measures risk aversion. In this task, participants are given a set of paired lottery choices. These pairs are structured so that the lesser payoff in choice “A” is always worth more than the lesser payoff in choice “B” (e.g., the high payoff in “A” is $2.00 and the low payoff is $1.60, whereas the high payoff in read more “B” is $3.85 and the low payoff is $.10). Initially, the chance of the high payoff is 1/10 and the low payoff 9/10. With each step, the probability of the high payoff steadily increases by 1/10 (e.g., the second pair has a 2/10 probability for the high payoff and 8/10 for the low payoff). When the probability of the high payoff is low, choosing the “B” lottery is seen as the risky decision. As the probabilities change, the expected value of “B” over “A” increases. When this occurs, continuing to choose the “A” lottery indicates risk aversion. read less
Hierarchical Task
Self-Regulation Task | 24 min
Access Measure
The Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning Task measures participants’ ability to discover and use higher-order structure in their environment. Participants are presented with 18 stimuli composed of three dimensions: shape, orientation, and border color. The task requires that participants respond to stimuli by pressing one of three keys in response to each of the stimuli. In a "flat" condition, the keys are read more randomly associated with the shapes so that the participant must learn each association independently. In a "hierarchical" condition, the stimulus-response mappings are instead structured, such that participants can use a rule to determine the correct response based on the combination of the three features. In this condition, the colored borders indicate whether "orientation" or "shape" determine the response (e.g., if the border is red, the correct response is based on the orientation). If participants learn this hierarchical structure, then performance is improved. read less
I-7: Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The I-7 Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness Questionnaire has a total of 54 items and three subscales. Of the 54 items, 19 measure Impulsiveness (e.g., “Do you often buy things on impulse?” and “Do you mostly speak before thinking things out?”), 16 measure Venturesomeness (e.g., “Would you enjoy parachute jumping?” and “Do you sometimes like doing things that are a bit frightening?”), read more and 19 measure Empathy (e.g., “Does it worry you when others are worrying and panicky?” and “Would you feel sorry for a lonely stranger in a group?”). Answers are marked as “Yes” or “No.” read less
Internal Self-Efficacy Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 20-25 min
Access Measure
The Internal Self-Efficacy Task was designed to capture individual differences in the tendency to set challenging goals. In the first stage (Stage 1: Piece-rate real effort task), participants are given three minutes in which they need to complete as many matches as possible in a real-effort slider-matching task. In this task, participants touch the computer screen to move a slider read more to its “goal” position (i.e., match the slider to the goal). Participants are told that they will be paid 10 KSH (~ 0.10 USD) for each correct match. After completing this task, participants are asked how many matches they think they completed and how confident they are in this answer. In the second stage (Stage 2: Goal-setting) participants are told that they will again complete the real-effort slider-matching task for a three-minute interval but with a different payment scheme. Specifically, participants are told to specify a match target, and that, if they meet the target, they will receive 20 KSH (~ 0.20 USD) multiplied by this target (e.g., someone who says they will make 10 matches will receive 200 KSH if they meet or exceed the target, but 0 KSH (0 USD) if they do not meet this target). This non-linear payment scheme encourages people to set realistic goals. In the third and final stage (Stage 3) participants complete the three-minute real-effort slider-matching task. At the end of the task they are told whether or not they met their target goal, allowing for measurement of “endogenous effort” (number correct) and examination of the relationship between the target and effort. A novel metric was designed to score this task. The score is defined: SX=Ya/(1+| Ya- Y|) Where Y is the actual performance in the second round and Ya is the goal for that round. This measure was chosen to be increasing in the goal set but decreasing in the inaccuracy of the goal. read less
Information Sampling Task
Self-Regulation Task | 12 min
Access Measure
The Information Sampling Task (IST) is a behavioral measure of reflection impulsivity that assesses the amount of information people accrue prior to making to a decision. Participants are asked to determine the color of the majority of items on a computer screen display for a total of 20 trials. At the start of each trial this display consists of a read more square grid comprised of 25 grey boxes arranged in 5 rows and 5 columns. Participants have the opportunity to test boxes one at a time to learn more information in order to make their decision. Immediately after each test the selected box changes from grey to one of two colors (e.g., yellow or green). Participants can select as many boxes as they prefer and as quickly or slowly as they prefer during this sampling phase. Then, at any time during the information gathering process participants may choose to stop their sampling and instead select one of two colored panels at the bottom of the screen to indicate their decision about the correct answer for the current display (e.g., yellow or green). A feedback screen appears for two seconds after participants make their decision. For correct answers the feedback message reads: “Correct! You have won [x] points.” For incorrect answers the feedback message reads: ‘“Wrong! You have lost 100 points.” During a jittered intertrial interval of at least 1 second participants can view their current earnings displayed on the screen. The 20 trials are presented in blocked design with two conditions with counterbalanced order. In the Fixed Win condition, 100 points are won for each correct answer, and 100 points are lost for each incorrect answer. Critically, the earnings and losses for this condition are not dependent on the number of sampled boxes prior to the decision. In contrast, in the Decreasing Win condition, the total possible win for correct answers begins at 250 points and decreases by 10 points for each box sampled. The losses are always 100 points for this condition. The following dependent measures may be compared for the two conditions: the average number of boxes opened before committing to a decision, the probability of a correct answer at the point of the decision (i.e., taking into account the available sampled information), and the number of incorrect decisions.read less
Intertemporal Choice Task with Discount Titrating
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Intertemporal Task with Discount Titrating is a brief behavioral task that measures delay discounting, which is the tendency to discount the value of rewards to be received in the future. This tendency is reflected by a preference for small rewards received sooner over larger rewards received later. On each trial participants are asked to make an intertemporal choice. That read more is, they must decide between two options differing in the time they would be received: a sooner, smaller reward and a later, larger reward. In this variant of the task, the later, larger rewards are systematically titrated in small increments to determine the value at which the later, larger rewards are sufficiently abundant that participants opt to for them instead of the sooner, smaller rewards. The task is presented in two phases. In all trials in the first phase, participants choose between the sooner reward being given right away (i.e., today) and the later reward being given at some fixed point in the future (e.g., 3 months). The smaller, sooner reward remains the same for all trials (e.g., $50), whereas the later, larger amounts increase by a set increment from each trial to the next one (e.g., trial 1: $55, trial 2: $60, trial 3: $65, …, trial 11: $105). In contrast, in all trials in the second phase, participants choose between the sooner reward being given in the near future (e.g., 2 months) and the later reward being given substantially further in the future (e.g., 5 months). Again, as in the first phase, the smaller, sooner reward remains the same for all trials (e.g., $30), whereas the later, larger amounts increase by a set increment from each trial to the next one (e.g., trial 1: $35, trial 2: $40, trial 3: $45, …, trial 11: $85). The dependent measure is the switching point corresponding to the minimum later reward value at which the participant opts for the later reward rather than the sooner reward. A lower switching point reflects greater delay discounting. read less
Keep Track Task
Self-Regulation Task | 6 min
Access Measure
The Keep Track Task measures the cognitive process of updating and monitoring working memory. In each trial, participants are first presented with a set of categories. Possible categories include: (1) animals, (2) colors, (3) countries, (4) distances, (5) metals, and (6) relatives. Next, target categories remain at the bottom of the screen, and 15 words are presented sequentially. These words read more are exemplars from the six possible categories, with 2-3 words from each category. Participants are required to remember the last (most recent) word presented for each of the target categories, and to write them down at the end of the trial. For example, if one of the target categories is “color” and participants first see “yellow” and then, later, “blue” (and no other color words), they are supposed to write down “blue” at the end of the trial. The dependent measure is the proportion of words the participant identifies correctly. read less
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6+)
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 10 min
Access Measure
The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6+) is a 6-item self-report measure of psychological distress intended to be used as a quick tool to assess risk for serious mental illness in the general population. On the first critical item, participants indicate how often they have had six different feelings or experiences during the past 30 days using a 5-point Likert scale: read more 4 (All of the time), 3 (Most of the time), 2 (Some of the time), 1 (A little of the time), and 0 (None of the time). The feelings and experiences for this first item are the following: “nervous, ” “hopeless, ”, “restless or fidgety, ” “so depressed that nothing could cheer you up, ” “that everything was an effort, ” and “worthless.” The next item assesses the extent to which the feelings are typical for the person. The remaining items assess to what extent these experiences led to functional impairment. Specifically, they assess how many days that people were totally unable to work due to the feelings, how many days their productivity was at least halved by the feelings, how many times they saw a health professional about the feelings, and how often physical health problems seemed to be the primary causes of the feelings. The total score for the scale is computed by summing the points for the six experiences within the first item of the scale. read less
Kirby Delay-Discounting Task
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
The Kirby Delay-Discounting Task (DDT) is a measure of temporal discounting, the tendency for people to prefer smaller, immediate monetary rewards over larger, delayed rewards. Participants complete a series of 27 questions that each require choosing between a smaller, immediate reward (e.g., $25 today) versus a larger, later reward (e.g., $35 in 25 days). The 27 items are divided into read more three groups according to the size of the larger amount (small, medium, or large). Modeling techniques are used to fit the function that relates time to discounting. The main dependent measure of interest is the steepness of the discounting curve such that a more steeply declining curve represents a tendency to devalue rewards as they become more temporally remote.read less
Local-Global Task
Self-Regulation Task | 8 min
Access Measure
The local-global task measures interference from other features when asked to identify either global or local features of a stimulus. In the local-global task, subjects see large letters (e.g., H or X) made up of smaller letters (e.g., H or X). Subjects are instructed to respond to either the global feature (the large letter) or the local feature (the smaller read more letters that make up the larger letter) while ignoring the non-instructed feature. Subjects tend to be faster and more accurate when the local and global features match (e.g., an H made up of H’s) than when they differ (e.g., an H made up of X’s). The local-global interference effect is particularly large when subjects are asked to focus on the local level. read less
Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) is a 15-item self-report survey that measures the tendency to be fully aware of one’s experience in the present moment without distraction or forgetfulness. Participants indicate whether they frequently or infrequently experience each item using a 6-point Likert scale: 1 (Almost Always), 2 (Very Frequently), 3 (Somewhat Frequently), 4 (Somewhat Infrequently), 5 (Very Infrequently), read more and 6 (Almost Never). The scale was developed with the understanding that people likely have better conscious access to information about their tendency to be mindless rather than mindful. As a result, the total score for the MAAS is computed by reverse-scoring and then summing all items. Examples of items include the following: “I find it difficult to stay focused on what’s happening in the present, ” “I do jobs or tasks automatically, without being aware of what I’m doing, ” and “I snack without being aware that I’m eating.” read less
Motor Selective Stop Signal
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
The motor selective stop-signal task measures the ability to engage response inhibition selectively to specific responses. In this task, cues are presented to elicit motor responses (e.g., right hand responses, left hand responses). A stop-signal is presented on some trials, and subjects must stop if certain responses are required on that trial (e.g., right hand responses) but not others (e.g., read more left hand responses) if a signal occurs. In contrast to a simple stop-signal task in which all actions are stopped when a stop-signal is presented, this task aims to be more like stopping in “the real world” in that certain motor actions must be stopped (e.g., stop pressing the accelerator at a red light) but others should proceed (e.g., steering the car and/or conversing with a passenger). Commonly, stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), the main dependent measure for response inhibition in stopping tasks, is prolonged in the motor selective stopping task when compared to the more canonical simple stopping task. This prolongation of SSRT is taken as evidence of the cost of engaging inhibition that is selective to specific effectors or responses.read less
Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness
Self-Regulation Self-report | 2 min
Access Measure
The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness is a 32 item self-report measure composed of the following 8 subscales: (i) Noticing: awareness of uncomfortable, comfortable and neutral bodily sensations; (ii) Not-Distracting: the tendency to not ignore or distract oneself from sensations of pain or discomfort; (iii) Not-Worrying: the tendency to not react with emotional distress or worry to sensations of read more pain or discomfort; (iv) Attention Regulation: the ability to sustain and control attention to bodily sensation; (v) Emotional Awareness: the awareness of the connection between bodily sensations and emotional states; (vi) Self-Regulation: the ability to regulate psychological distress by attention to bodily sensations; (vii) Body Listening: actively listening to the body for insight; and (viii) Trusting: experiencing one’s body as safe and trustworthy. Individuals rate items based on a 6 point Likert scale from 0-5 with ‘0’ indicating ‘Never’ and ‘5’ indicating ‘Always’. Total scores are obtained through reverse coding items 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and summing all items. Sub-scale scores can be calculated and itemized descriptions are available free from the Osher Center for Integrative Mindfulness (OCIM) (https://www.osher.ucsf.edu/maia/). Higher total scores and subscale scores indicate higher levels of positive awareness. The primary purpose in developing the MAIA was to aid in delineating between beneficial versus maladaptive interoceptive attention; the latter being associated with hypochondriasis, somatization and anxiety disorders while adaptive attention has been widely associated with positive health outcomes and enhanced resilience. Since its inception in 2012 the MAIA has been translated into 16 languages and implemented extensively in both cross sectional and longitudinal studies. The MAIA is available free from the University of California OCMI webpage at (https://www.osher.ucsf.edu/maia/) read less
Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire: Control vs. Impulsivity Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) is a 276-item self-report measure of a broad range of personality traits. It assesses 11 personality traits: control vs. impulsivity (the present measure), well-being, social potency, achievement, social closeness, stress reaction, aggression, alienation, harm avoidance, traditionalism, and absorption in experiences and thoughts. Participants are asked to indicate whether each item is true or false for read more them. Items about control vs. impulsivity assess whether participants report being “reflective, ” “cautious, ” “careful, ” “level-headed, ” and “sensible, ” and whether they make “detailed plans.” Items are summed to compute a total score for each trait. Higher total scores for the control-vs.-impulsivity trait reflect acting rationally, preferring to plan one’s actions, making decisions carefully, and lack of spontaneity. read less
Multiple Price List Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 15-20 min
Access Measure
The Multiple Price List Task measures delay discounting, which is the tendency to discount value in the future (e.g., a lower subjective value of money at a later date relative to an earlier date). This tendency is often reflected by a preference for small rewards received sooner over larger rewards received later. In this task, participants make 48 decisions. read more Twenty-four of these decisions are in the gains domain, and 24 decisions are in in the losses domain. These decisions occur for three compared times: (1) 2 vs. 4 weeks from today, (2) today vs. 4 weeks from today, and (3) today vs. 2 weeks from today. In the gains domain, participants choose between a smaller, sooner reward, or a larger, later reward. The early amount gained is always 400 KSH (a monetary unit equivalent to ~4 USD), and the later amount gained is either 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1, 200 KSH, or 1, 600 KSH. In the losses domain, participants are given a 1, 600 KSH endowment to start with, and are asked to choose between a smaller, sooner loss or a larger, later loss. Parallel to the amounts added in the gains domain, for the losses domain, the early amount subtracted is always 400 KSH (a monetary unit), and the later amount subtracted is either 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1, 200 KSH, or 1, 600 KSH. The Multiple Price List task is designed to measure parameters of a discounting model on an individual level. Participants are assumed to discount the future in a quasi-hyperbolic way (Laibson, 1997) and be utility-maximizing. If this is true and utility is linear in income, then the points at which participants switch from accepted the early payment/loss to the later payment/loss or vice versa identify their precise discounting function. This function is characterized by two parameters. The first is a discounting parameter, commonly referred to by the Greek letter delta, which indicates the rate at which the subjective value of monetary rewards declines over time. For example, if a participant is indifferent between 400 KSH tomorrow and 800 KSH in two days, their decision would be characterized by a discount parameter of 0.5. The other parameter, often represented by the Greek letter beta, characterizes present-biasedness. Present-bias is the tendency for monetary rewards now to be higher in subjective value than those at any future date, regardless of how soon the “future” is. This parameter is estimated by dividing the discount rate in the near frame (today vs. 2 weeks from today) by the discount rate in the far frame (2 weeks from today vs. 4 weeks from today). These parameters are measured separately for each participant separately in the gains and losses domains.read less
NIH Self-Efficacy Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 0-5 min
Access Measure
The NIH Toolbox Self-Efficacy Scale is a 10-item self-reported measure that assesses belief in one’s capacity to manage and have control over meaningful events in life. Children answer questions (e.g., “I can manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough”; “When I have a problem, I can find several ways to solve it”) using a 5-point Likert read more response scale (1=Never, 2=Almost Never, 3=Sometimes, 4=Fairly Often, 5=Very Often). Total self-efficacy score ranges from 10-50. read less
Parent Cognition Scale
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 15-20 min
Access Measure
The Parent Cognition Scale (PCS) is a 30-item self-report measure designed to assess the degree to which parents endorse dysfunctional child-responsible and parent-causal attributions for child misbehavior. Respondents are asked to think about a target child’s misbehavior over the past 2 months and to rate various possible causes for their child’s misbehavior on a 6-point Likert scale that ranges from read more 1 (always true) to 6 (never true); when scoring, each item is reverse scored so that higher scores indicate greater endorsement. This measure yields a Child-Responsible subscore (which draws from items such as "My child thinks that s/he is the boss") and a Parent-Causal subscore (which draws from items such as "I'm not structured enough with my child").read less
Parent-Child Coercion Scale
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 2 min
Access Measure
This 9-item self-report scale assesses a parent's perception of how much coercion characterizes their relationship with their child.
Parent-Child Interaction Protocol
Interpersonal & Social Processes Observational | 30 min
Access Measure
This parent-child interaction protocol has been successfully used in over 20 years of research to elicit a wide range of harsh/overreactive and lax/permissive discipline in parent-toddler interactions. Parent-child interaction typically takes place in a small room containing a chair for the parent and three low tables. Objects that are attractive to children in this age range, but are not typically read more considered toys (e.g., a manual typewriter, an old school bell, a sealed glass jar of hard candy) were on the tables. The parent is instructed that the child is forbidden to touch these objects. The interaction consists of three tasks that present the parent with typical but challenging situations for the parent and child. First, the parent is instructed to supervise the child for a maximum of 10 minutes in putting a set of toys into a plastic bin. Then the parent gives the child another set of toys and is instructed to have the child play independently while the parent engages in a 10-minute simulated phone conversation with the experimenter. Finally, the parent is told to have the child play quietly and independently on a mat while the parent completes questionnaires for 10 minutes. The parent is told to handle the child and the situations in the manner the parent feels is most appropriate. The parent wears a "bug-in-the-ear device" to allow communications between the parent and experimenter. The experimenter cues the parent when the parent should proceed to the next situation but offers no advice or instruction about how to handle the child. The interaction can be scored in a variety of ways, based on experimenter interest. Some prior research has coded observed discipline behavior of the parent, as well as positive or negative child behavior.read less
Parent-Rated Stress (NIH Perceived Stress Scale)
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 0-5 min
Access Measure
The NIH Toolbox Perceived Stress Survey is a 10-item parent report measure of the stress experienced by children ages 8 to 12 years old. It assesses how unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overloaded respondents believe that their children find their lives. It is comprised of 10 items from the original Perceived Stress Scale developed for adults. Participants are asked to respond to read more questions (e.g., "How often did your child seem able to control life's irritations?"; "How often did difficulties pile up so high that your child did not seem able to overcome them?") with how frequently each statement describes their perceptions of their child's stress in the last month on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Very Often). Scores are obtained by reversing responses to the four positively stated items and then summing across all scale items. The mean score is generated; higher scores are indicative of greater perceived stress.read less
Pearlin Mastery Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
The Pearlin Mastery Scale consists of seven items designed to assess one aspect of psychological coping resources (Mastery). Example items include, “Sometimes I feel that I am being pushed here and there in life” (reverse-scored) and “What happens to me in the future mostly depends on me.” Response options range from 1, strongly disagree, to 7, strongly agree. Higher scores read more indicate greater mastery. read less
Physiological Linkage and Relationship Quality
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience, Interpersonal & Social Processes Physiological | 10-15 min
Physiological linkage is a measure of the similarity of physiological responding of two interacting people. Relationship partners engage in a 10-15 minute discussion about an identified area of unresolved conflict and disagreement in their relationship. During the interaction, measures of peripheral physiological activity are monitored from each partner (heart rate and measures of bodily movement have proven to be particularly read more useful). A number of statistical approaches have been used in the literature to characterize the degree of linkage or synchrony between partners' physiological responding. We are currently computing linkage during short 20-second moving time windows (windows are overlapped by one second) using lagged cross-correlations. These correlations can be averaged or the number of windows in which linkage correlations are significant can be counted. Correlations can be examined with the sign preserved (i.e., in-phase or out-of-phase linkage) or as an absolute value. This measure may be useful non-verbal measure that is sensitive to coercive communications in dyadic interactions (validation for this purpose has not been accomplished yet). It may also be useful for characterizing these processes in larger groups (e.g., parents and child).read less
Pittsburgh Stress Battery
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Task | 45 min
The Pittsburg Stress Battery (PSB) is a standardized means of evaluating cardiovascular (CV) reactions as a response to acute stressors which have been linked to an increased risk for cardiovascular disease. It was developed at the University of Pittsburg School of Medicine’s Psychiatric Institute. The original protocols vary but normally consisted of three tasks designed to maximize various psychological demands: read more a visual short term memory task (scanning), an accuracy evaluation (targeting), and a cognitive motor/reflex task (tracking). For example, the original protocol was designed to require participants use minimal motor skills tasks were completed on a joystick or keypad. The protocol consisted of (1) identifying the placement of a series of dots after they vanish from the screen (scanning) (2) shooting and hitting a target moving across the top of the computer screen (targeting) (3) moving the cursor over a specified area with directional commands reversed (tracking). Additionally, the battery has been modified in various trials, for example, by including The Stroop Task (see this task listed separately in this same Measures Repository), arithmetic task evaluations, and/or cold-pressor experiences. Although tests may vary, all task batteries are designed with the goal of increasing a participant’s CV reactions. Between each task participants are allowed a resting period. Between each task participants are allowed a resting period in some protocols they are asked to participate in a minimally invasive task designed to elicit stable cardiovascular measures between testing including minimally cognitively invasive questionnaires. Multiple measures of cardiovascular reactivity are administered during each test and have included continuous heart rate measures using electrocardiogram (EKG) devices, measures of preejection period (PEP) elicited through evaluation of cardiograph waveforms as well as discrete measures of systolic blood and diastolic blood pressure. read less
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS)
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 7 min
Access Measure
The Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is a 20-item self-report questionnaire used to measure the emotions of the respondent’s child during the past few weeks. The items are grouped into the two subscales with 10 items each: positive affect and negative affect. The respondent is asked to read several words which describe different feelings and emotions and enter read more a number that corresponds to the value on a scale to indicate the extent to which his/her child feels this way on average. The 5-item Likert scale ranges from 1 (“Very slightly or not at all”) to 5 (“Extremely”). Higher scores on Positive Affect indicate greater intensity of positive emotions, and higher scores on Negative Affect indicate greater intensity of negative emotions. read less
Probabilistic Selection Task
Self-Regulation Task | 14 min
Access Measure
The probabilistic selection task assesses the tendency to learn from positive versus negative outcomes. Participants are trained to select between abstract stimuli associated with different probabilities of giving a reward (e.g., a stimulus that results in reward 70% of the time vs. one that results in reward 30% of the time). Participants learn three probability pairings: 80/20, 70/30, and 60/40, read more and eventually learn to select the higher probability outcome. Testing involves selecting amongst novel pairings (e.g., 80/40). The participant's bias towards learning from positive vs. negative outcomes is assessed by their relative success on high-probability pairings (80/70) vs. low-probability pairings (20/30). Greater success on high-probability pairings indicates a tendency to learn from positive outcomes, whereas greater success on low-probability pairings indicates a tendency to learn from negative outcomes.read less
Psychological Refractory Period Paradigm Task
Self-Regulation Task | 12 min
Access Measure
The Psychological Refractory Period (PRP) task measures information processing limits. In PRP tasks, subjects are presented with two different stimuli in rapid succession, each of which acts as the imperative stimulus for a different choice reaction time (choice RT) task using a different set of responses. The duration between the onset of the two stimuli, the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), read more is manipulated across trials. The main dependent measure is the speed of responding, especially for the second task in the sequence, as a function of SOA. read less
Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System (RMICS)
Interpersonal & Social Processes Observational | 4 min
Access Measure
The Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System (RMICS) is an event-based system designed to code observed dyadic behavior. Behavior is defined broadly to include all observable actions (i.e. affective, motoric, paralinguistic, and linguistic). The RMICS was designed to measure frequencies of behavior and behavioral patterns (i.e. sequences) between intimate partners during conflicts. The RMICS is the second-generation extension of the Marital read more Interaction Coding System (MICS), the oldest and most widely used couples observational system (Heyman, 2001). Although originally designed to code conflict behavior (see Couples Conflict Task for details about structured couples conflict interactions), the RMICS has been used to code of wide variety of structured dyadic conversations (e.g., analogue problem-solving tasks, social support tasks, and sibling conversations). The RMICS comprises three negative codes (low-intensity hostility, high-intensity hostility, dysphoric affect), two positive codes (low-intensity positivity, high-intensity positivity), one neutral (constructive problem discussion/solution), and one other. Coders assign a code to each speaker and listener turn, contingent on the verbal, nonverbal, and paraverbal content within. For example, an utterance such as, “You make me sick, ” would be awarded a high-intensity hostility code because it suggests abject disgust—classified as one of the seven types of psychological abuse by the RMICS. RMICS coding can be done in approximate real time (i.e., 10-15 min. coding for a 10-min. interaction). Coders code both partners simultaneously. What is done with the code is determined by investigator interest. Some examples of variables of interest might be frequency of hostile codes, or sequential analyses that would identify how often a certain code follows another code. read less
Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test is a behavioral task that assesses non-verbal, analytic intelligence. Participants are presented with a display showing a matrix (e.g., a 3 x 3 grid consisting of three rows with three cells in each row). With the exception of the cell on the bottom right, each of the other cells in the display is occupied by a read more complex visual stimulus. Participants’ task is to determine which of eight other possible stimuli is the correct entry for the single empty cell. In order to answer correctly on each trial, participants must carefully analyze the display to determine a complex set of rules that governs the relationships among the elements that compose the stimuli. For example, both of the following rules may apply to the display in a single trial. First, the quantity of particular elements appearing in the cells of each row may increase from the left cell (one black square) to the middle cell (two black squares) to the right cell (three black squares). Second, a particular element of the complex stimuli has the same property for each cell in a given row (a rectangular bar always with the same orientation), but this property varies for cells in the left column (horizontal orientation), cells in the middle column (vertical orientation), and cells in the right column (diagonal orientation). The task advances in a progressive way such that the trials become increasingly difficult. The dependent measure is the number of correctly answered items in the entire set. read less
Recent Probes Task
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
This behavioral task indexes the degree to which participants can resist proactive interference from recently encountered but no-longer-relevant information. Participants are asked to remember a small number of items called the target set (e.g., 4 letters) over a short retention interval, followed by a recognition probe (e.g., a single letter). Probes can either be positive (i.e., a member of the read more target set) or negative (i.e., not a member of the target set). Additionally, probes can be recent (i.e., a member of the target set from the previous trial) or non-recent. Therefore, on a given trial, the probe can be a recent positive (a member of the current trial and the preceding trial memory set), non-recent positive (a member of the current trial but not the preceding trial memory set), recent negative (a member of the preceding trial but not the current trial memory set), or non-recent negative (not a member of the current trial or the preceding trial memory set). Participants are asked to give one response if the probe was part of the memory set for that trial and a different response if the probe was not part of the memory set for that trial. The main dependent measure compares speed and accuracy on recent negative probes to non-recent negative probes, with the typical result being a performance decrement on recent vs non-recent negative probes. This relative performance decrement is evidence of failure to resist proactive interference. read less
Risk Preferences Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Risk Preferences Task is a behavioral measure of risky decision-making that occurs in three series. In each series, participants must choose to draw a ball from one of two jars: Jar A or Jar B. Jar A and Jar B each contain two balls with an equal probability of being chosen at random (50%). The first round is an read more unpaid practice round, after which Series 1-3 occur. In Series 1 (choices over gains), the participant begins with 1000 KSH (KSH is a monetary unit; 100 KSH is ~ 1 USD), and makes 10 decisions about which jar to choose from. Jar A contains a blue ball worth 400 KSH and a red ball worth 300 KSH, and Jar B contains an orange ball worth 50 KSH and a green ball with a value that varies from 620 KSH to 1300 KSH. For Series 2, the participant receives an additional 1000 KSH endowment. Series 2 (choices over losses) also comprises 10 decisions, in which Jar A contains a blue ball (400 KSH loss) and a red ball (300 KSH loss), and Jar B contains an Orange ball (50 KSH loss) and a green ball (540 KSH loss to 830 KSH loss). For Series 3, the participant receives an additional 350 KSH endowment. In Series 3 (choices over gains and losses), Jar A contains a red ball (gain of 10 KSH, 40 KSH or 250 KSH) and a blue ball (loss of 40 KSH or 80 KSH), and Jar B contains a green ball (gain of 300 KSH) and an orange ball (loss of 110 KSH, 140 KSH, 160 KSH, or 210 KSH). The task is scored following the methodology in Tanaka, Camerer & Nguyen (2010). It is assumed that participant decisions are utility-maximizing in a prospect theory framework. This model is characterized by parameters for risk aversion and loss aversion which differ across participants. An iterative process allows the researcher to derive the set of values for these parameters which would rationalize each participant’s choices. For more details, see section II.B of Tanaka, Camerer & Nguyen (2010) read less
Selection-Optimization-Compensation Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Selection-Optimization-Compensation Questionnaire (SOCQ) is a 12-item self-report scale designed to measure the extent to which people use the principles of selection, optimization, and compensation to manage their resources in order to maximize beneficial outcomes and minimize adverse ones. According to the Selection-Optimization-Compensation framework (SOC), opportunities and resources vary over the lifespan, and adaptively navigating these changing conditions involves three read more components. First, the selection of possible goals is necessary in light of limited resources (e.g., time, energy) at different stages of life. Elective selection involves the use of self-regulatory processes to choose one or several goals from among many possible goals. In contrast, loss-based selection involves adapting to lacking resources that were previously available earlier in life. Second, the optimization of available internal resources (e.g., cognitive control) or external resources (e.g., friends’ advice) is used to best serve one’s chosen goals. Third, compensation is needed when resources are limited or lacking so that one substitutes a different means to achieve the same goal. Each SOCQ item consists of a pair of opposing statements that each correspond to hypothetical individuals called Person A and Person B. Participants indicate for each item which statement best represents them. In all of the following examples, the SOC target is listed first followed by a non-SOC distractor, but the order of conditions is randomized in each item of the actual SOCQ. Three items measure elective selection (e.g., Person A: “I concentrate all my energy on a few things” vs. Person B: “I divide my energy among many things”). Three items measure loss-based selection (e.g., Person A: “When I can’t do something important the way I did before, I look for a new goal” vs. Person B: “When I can’t do something important the way I did before, I distribute my energy among many things”). Three items measure optimization (e.g., Person A: “I make every effort to achieve a given goal” vs. Person B: “I prefer to wait for a while and see if things will work out by themselves”). Three items measure compensation (e.g., Person A: “When things don't go as well as they used to, I keep trying other ways of doing it until I can achieve the same result I used to” vs. Person B: “When things don't go as well as they used to, I accept it”). The dependent measures are the number of SOC targets endorsed within each of the four subscales: elective selection, loss-based selection, optimization, and compensation. Additionally, a composite index is computed by summing the four subscales totals. read less
Shape Matching Task
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The shape matching task assesses cognitive control, or resistance to distraction. Participants are presented with probe and target shapes and must decide whether they are the same shape. On some trials a distractor shape will be present, which the participant is instructed to ignore. The primary dependent measure is the difference in response time and accuracy between when the distractor read more is present versus absent. read less
Shift Task
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Shift Task was designed to understand reinforcement learning (RL) in a complex, multidimensional environment. In this task, participants are presented with three stimuli characterized by three dimensions: (1) color, (2) texture, and (3) shape. Each of these dimensions has three different exemplars (e.g., shape could be circle, square, or triangle), so that, across the three stimuli, each exemplar from read more each dimension is represented once. The combinations of the three dimensions differ across presentations. One exemplar of one dimension (e.g., the triangle exemplar from the shape dimension) is associated with a 75% probability of reward; stimuli without this characteristic are associated with a 25% probability of reward. Participants select one of the three stimuli on each presentation, and are instructed to try to get as many points (“rewards”) as possible. Thus participants are incentivized to learn which exemplar is associated with a greater probability of reward. The rewarded exemplar is switched every 15-25 trials without notifying the participants. This switch could be to a different exemplar from the same dimension (e.g., from triangle to square) or to a different dimension (e.g., shape/triangle to color/red). Switching patterns are analyzed to determine the balance between a computationally efficient process of serial-hypothesis-testing – attending to one feature at a time – versus a fully Bayesian procedure taking advantage of all available probabilistic information. read less
Short Self-Regulation Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Short version of the Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SSRQ) is a 31-item self-report measure of the ability to regulate behavior to achieve one’s goals. Participants indicate the extent to which they agree with each item using a 5-point Likert scale: 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Somewhat Disagree), 3 (Neutral), 4 (Somewhat Agree), and 5 (Strongly Agree). The measure has one total scale read more computed by summing the items (after reverse-coding certain items, as needed). Examples of items include the following: “Once I have a goal, I can usually plan how to reach it, ” “I have a lot of willpower, ” and “As soon as I see a problem or challenge, I start looking for possible solutions.” read less
Simon Task
Self-Regulation Task | 8 min
Access Measure
The Simon Task is a behavioral measure of interference/conflict resolution. In this task participants are asked to respond to visual stimuli by making a rightward response to one stimulus (e.g., a circle) and a leftward response to another (e.g., a square). The stimuli are sometimes presented on the right side of the display and sometimes on the left. The location/side read more of the display on which the stimuli appear is irrelevant to accurate performance on the task, but it influences participants’ patterns of responding by either matching (i.e., congruent trials) or not matching (i.e., incongruent trials) the side (left or right) of the correct button press associated with the shape. The main dependent measures of interest contrasts reaction time and accuracy for congruent trials (e.g., a circle on the right side of the screen) vs incongruent trials (e.g., a circle on the left side of the screen). This Simon Effect is indicated by lower accuracy and/or longer reaction time for incongruent vs congruent trials. This effect is taken as a measure of interference or conflict between a goal-relevant dimension (i.e., the identity of the shape) and a non-goal-relevant dimension (i.e., the location of the shape). read less
Simple Reaction Time Task
Self-Regulation Task | 3 min
Access Measure
The Simple Reaction Time (RT) Task measures the basic cognitive processes of perception and response execution. The task requires that participants make one specific response (e.g., a spacebar press) whenever any stimulus (e.g., a shape) appears on the screen. Typically, there is only one stimulus that repeats throughout the experiment. This straightforward task engages certain basic processes, such as perception read more and response execution, without requiring more complicated processes such as attentional focusing (i.e., resisting distraction) or response inhibition (i.e., stopping a motor action). The main dependent measure is the speed of responding.read less
Spatial Span Task
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Spatial Span Task is a behavioral measure of working memory capacity, the cognitive ability to store and manage information on a transient basis. It is an analog to the Digit Span Task. On each trial participants are presented with an array of geometric shapes such as white squares appearing on a computer screen. On each trial the squares change read more from white to a different color in a sequence with variable orders and colors. The task exists with two variants: forward-span and backward-span. In the forward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the squares in the order they changed color by typing keys corresponding to each square via keypress. In the backward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the squares in the reverse order that they changed color. The difficulty level is systematically increased by varying the number of boxes on each trial from two boxes (easiest) to nine boxes (most difficult). The dependent measure, spatial span, is the maximum number of boxes correctly recalled. read less
Stimulus Selective Stop Signal Task
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
The Stimulus Selective Stop-Signal Task measures two fundamental processes of cognitive control: response inhibition and response selection. The task is a variant of the simple Stop-Signal Task in which participants are asked to stop responding to one particular stimulus called the “stop signal” (e.g., an orange stimulus) but not to a second stimulus called the “ignore signal” (e.g., a blue read more stimulus). This task has the benefit of ecological validity in that it matches the way stopping of behavior occurs in some real-world contexts. That is, in some real-world circumstances, stopping must occur in response to certain stimuli (e.g., a red light) but not in response to other similar stimuli (e.g., a green light). The stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), the main dependent measure for response inhibition in stopping tasks, is prolonged in the stimulus selective stopping task when compared to the more canonical simple Stop-Signal Task. read less
Stop Signal Task
Self-Regulation Task | 30 min
Access Measure
The Stop-Signal Task is designed to measure motor response inhibition, one aspect of cognitive control. On each trial of this task participants are instructed to make a speeded response to an imperative "go" stimulus except on a subset of trials when an additional "stop signal" occurs, in which case participants are instructed that they should make no response. The Independent read more Race Model describes performance in the Stop-Signal Task as a race between a go process that begins when the go stimulus occurs and a stop process that begins when the stop signal occurs. According to this model, whichever independent process reaches completion first determines the resulting behavior; earlier completion of the go process results in an overt response (i.e., stop-failure), whereas earlier completion of the stop process results in successful inhibition. The main dependent measure, stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), can be computed such that lower SSRT indicates greater response inhibition. One variant of the task measures proactive slowing, the tendency for participants to respond more slowly in anticipation of a potential stopping signal. This variant often uses multiple probabilities of a stop signal (e.g., 20% and 40%) to manipulate participants’ expectancies about the likelihood of a stop signal occurring. The extent of slowing in the higher compared to the lower stop probability conditions is an index of proactive slowing/control. read less
Stroop Task
Self-Regulation Task | 8 min
Access Measure
The Stroop task is a seminal measure of cognitive control. Successful performance of the task requires the ability to overcome automatic tendencies to respond in accordance with current goals. On each trial of the task, a color word (e.g., “red”, “blue”) is presented in one of multiple ink colors (e.g., blue, red). Participants are instructed to respond based upon the read more ink color of the word, not the identity of the word itself. When the color and the word are congruent (e.g., “red” in red ink), the natural tendency to read the word facilitates performance, resulting in fast and accurate responding. When the color and the word are incongruent (e.g., “red” in blue ink), the strong, natural tendency to read must be overcome to respond to the ink color. The main dependent measure in the Stroop task is the “Stroop Effect, ” which is the degree of slowing and the reduction in accuracy for incongruent relative to congruent trials.read less
Stroop-like Arrows Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Stroop-like Arrows Task aims to measure aspects of executive control, such as attentional control and inhibitory control. This adaptation of the Stroop-like Arrows Task consists of a series of 30 red and blue arrows (stimuli), which participants must respond to by pressing a “button” (a green rectangle) either in the congruent direction of the arrow (when it is red) read more or in the incongruent direction of the arrow (when it is blue). In other words, when the arrow is red and points to the left, the respondent should press the button to the left. On the other hand, when the arrow is blue and points to the left, the respondent should press the button to the right. Respondents must complete the task as quickly as possible. Responses are scored as either correct or incorrect, and reaction times are recorded by trial type. Significantly longer response times and lower frequency of correct responses to incongruent stimuli are interpreted as evidence of a “Stroop-like” effect. The number of arrows that a participant identifies correctly on average per second is used as a measure of overall performance.read less
Task-Switching Task
Self-Regulation Task | 24 min
Access Measure
Task-switching tasks index the control processes involved in reconfiguring the cognitive system to support a new stimulus-response mapping. In this task, subjects are presented with a task cue followed by a colored number (between 1-4 or 6-9). The cue indicates whether to respond based on parity (odd/even), magnitude (greater/less than 5), or color (orange/blue). Trials can present the same cue read more and task, or can switch the cue or the task. Responses are slower and less accurate when the cue or task differs across trials (i.e. a switch) compared to when the current cue or task remains the same (i.e. a repeat). read less
Theories of Willpower Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Theories of Willpower Scale measures beliefs about the consequences of mental exertion. Specifically, the scale measures whether someone sees mental exertion as a limited versus unlimited resource. The scale consists of 12 items, six assess beliefs about strenuous mental activity (e.g., “Your mental stamina fuels itself. Even after strenuous mental exertion, you can continue doing more of it”) and read more six assess beliefs about resisting temptations (e.g., “Resisting temptations makes you feel more vulnerable to the next temptations that come along”). Answers are scored from 1, strongly agree, to 6, strongly disagree, and all items are pooled to create a total scale score. read less
Three Factor Eating Questionnaire-R18
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Three Factor Eating Questionnaire Revised, 18-item (TFEQ-R18) measures dietary restraint. There are three different factors: (1) Cognitive Restraint, comprised of six items (e.g., “I consciously hold back at meals in order not to gain weight), (2) Uncontrolled Eating, comprised of nine items (e.g., “When I see a real delicacy, I often get so hungry that I have to eat read more right away”), and (3) Emotional Eating, comprised of three items (e.g., “When I feel blue, I often overeat”). Responses are scored on a 4-point scale, and anchors can vary across items (e.g., definitely true to definitely false, or never to at least once a week). Means are computed for each subscale (as long as at least half of the items have been answered) and are transformed to correspond to a 0-100 scale score.read less
Tower of London
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Tower of London task is an ostensible measure of planning ability. In this task, participants are presented with colored disks stacked vertically in three possible positions (the “start” state), and are instructed to move them one at a time until they match a given configuration (the “goal” state). Each trial can vary in difficulty, requiring different numbers of moves read more or including different numbers of disks. Difficult trials may also require moves that result in a series of configurations that do not match the “goal, ” but that are required in order to solve the task (“subgoal chunks”). Dependent variables can include preplan times (i.e. time between task introduction and the first move), move times, excess moves made (i.e. number of moves exceeding the minimum needed to solve the task), and number of trials in which the task was completed with the minimum number of moves. read less
Two-Stage Task
Self-Regulation Task | 26 min
Access Measure
This task assess two types of reinforcement learning (RL): model-free and model-based RL. In this task, participants make two sequential decisions that navigate them through two "stages" defined by different stimuli. First-stage choices are associated with one of two second stages (e.g., 2a and 2b): one first-stage choice leads to 2a 70% of the time and 2b 30% of the read more time, while the opposite is true of the other first-stage choice (i.e. 2a occurs 30% of the time and 2b occurs 70% of the time). Each second-stage choice is associated with some probability of receiving a reward. This probability changes slowly over time, requiring continuous learning in order to succeed at the task. Because the goal of the subject is to maximize rewards in the second stage, ideal performance would entail identifying the most rewarding second stage (e.g., 2a) and making first-stage choices that make this result more likely (e.g., the first-stage choice that results in 2a 70% of the time). read less
UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale is a 59-item measure of factors that could lead to impulsive behaviors. It was derived by including existing scales of impulsivity in factor analysis. Participants respond to each item using a 4-point Likert scale: 1 (Agree Strongly), 2 (Agree Some), 3 (Disagree Some), and 4 (Disagree Strongly). There are five subscales: Positive Urgency, Negative Urgency, read more Lack of Premeditation, Lack of Perseverance, and Sensation Seeking. Positive Urgency measures the tendency to act impulsively due to positive affect. Twelve items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I am in great mood, I tend to get into situations that could cause me problems”). Negative Urgency measures the tendency to act impulsively due to negative affect. Twelve items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I am upset, I often act without thinking”). Lack of Premeditation refers to the tendency to act rashly without first reflecting upon the decision to act. Eleven items contribute to this score (e.g., “I am not one of those people who blurt out things without thinking”). Lack of Perseverance involves a tendency not to complete projects. Ten items contribute to this score (e.g., example of a reverse-coded item: “Unfinished tasks really bother me”). Sensation Seeking involves motivation to experience novelty. Twelve items contribute to this score (e.g., “I would like to learn to fly an airplane”). read less
Video-Mediated Affective Recall
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 60 min
Access Measure
The Video-Mediated recall procedure is a self-reported measure of remembered emotional responses and cognitions during a previous experience of social interaction with a close other such as one’s romantic partner or one’s child. The video-mediated recall procedure is a procedure by which parents and/or a member of a couple view a videotape of their interaction with their partner or child. read more While watching the video, they use a dial to rate their experienced emotion and/or cognitions moment-by-moment during the interaction task. The measure can be scored in a variety of ways depending on investigator interest. For example, previous research has scored the measure using average attributions rated over the episode, the proportion of negative to positive affect, and average child behavior during the task (see measured section below for details). read less
Writing Task
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
This is an exploratory task, intended to identify behavioral features of self-regulation. Participants are asked to write for 5 minutes in response to the prompt "what happened in the last month?" The data will be analyzed using standard methods for sentiment analysis as well as advanced methods for natural language processing.
Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The 56-item Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZPTI) measures individual differences in time-orientation, or tendency to focus on different aspects of the past, present, and future. The measure consists of five subscales, with answers scored from 1, very uncharacteristic [of me], to 5, very characteristic [of me]. The subscales are: (1) Past-Negative, including 10 items such as, “I think about the read more bad things that have happened to me in the past, ” (2) Present-Hedonistic, including 15 items such as, “Taking risks keeps my life from becoming boring, ” (3) Future, including 13 items such as, “I complete projects on time by making steady progress, ” (4) Past-Positive, including nine items such as, “It gives me pleasure to think about the past, ” and (5) Present-Fatalistic, including nine items such as, “Often luck pays off better than hard work.” read less
Zuckerman Sensation Seeking Scale-V
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Zuckerman Sensation-Seeking Scale-V (SSS-V) consists of 40 forced-choice questions designed to assess individual differences in optimal level of stimulation. For example, one choice might be, “I would like to learn to fly an airplane” (indicating greater sensation-seeking) versus “I would not like to learn to fly an airplane” (indicating lower sensation-seeking). The SSS-V can be scored as a general read more measure of sensation-seeking by summing all items, but can also be split into four 10-item factors: (1) Thrill and Adventure Seeking (TAS; e.g., parachute jumping), (2) Experience Seeking (ES; e.g., exploring strange cities or towns alone), (3) Disinhibition (DIS; e.g., desiring varied sexual experiences), and (4) Boredom Susceptibility (BS; e.g., preference for unpredictable friends).read less
10-Item Personality Inventory
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 1 min
Access Measure
The Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) is a brief assessment of the Big Five personality dimensions: (1) Extraversion, (2) Agreeableness, (3) Conscientiousness, (4) Emotional Stability, and (5) Openness to Experience. Items are rated on a scale from 1, disagree strongly, to 7, agree strongly. Example items include, “I see myself as extraverted, enthusiastic” (Extraversion) and “I see myself as dependable, self-disciplined” read more (Conscientiousness). read less
Adaptive N-Back Task
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Adaptive N-Back Task is a behavioral measure of working memory within the larger domain of executive function. It assesses the cognitive ability to store and control information on a short-term basis. In this computer task a sequential stream of visual stimuli (typically letters) are presented one at a time. Participants’ task is to identify whether a current stimulus (e.g., read more the letter B) is the same as a stimulus that appeared N trials previously, where N has a variable value that changes at times during the task to alter the level of demand on participants’ cognitive resources. Each stimulus is typically presented very briefly (e.g., 0.5 seconds) with a substantial delay between each one (e.g., 2 seconds) to ensure that working memory is sufficiently taxed. A typical block of the task includes 12 sequentially presented stimuli. In recent versions of the task participants are instructed to ignore the case of the letter (e.g., B is the same as b) in order to reduce the confound of perceptual familiarity. As an example, in a 2-back condition within this task, the correct answers for the final three stimuli in the sequence D b v d V would be the following: no, no, yes. In contrast, in a 3-back condition for the same sequence, the correct answers for the final two letters would be the following: yes, no. In the adaptive version, task complexity (i.e., n-back level) is adjusted according to each participant’s performance. The dependent measures are accuracy and response time for each level of task complexity (i.e., each n-back level). read less
Angling Risk Task
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Angling Risk Task (ART) assesses cognitive processes underlying decision making in a sequential risk-taking paradigm. This task is comprised of tournaments of 30 rounds each. In each round, participants “fish” for red and blue fish in an attempt to earn as much money as possible. Of the N fish, N-1 are red and 1 is blue. Each red fish read more the participant catches is worth five cents; if the participant catches the blue fish, however, the round ends, and the participant loses all the money accumulated in that round. Participants are able to stop any round at any time and collect their earnings. Each tournament can have a different release law: (1) Catch ‘n’ Keep, in which the probability of catching a red fish goes down as each fish is caught and removed from the pond, and (2) Catch ‘n’ Release, where the probability of catching a red fish stays constant.read less
Angling Risk Task – Always Sunny
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Angling Risk Task (ART) Always Sunny assesses cognitive processes underlying decision making in a sequential risk-taking paradigm. This task is comprised of tournaments of 30 rounds each. In each round, participants “fish” for red and blue fish in an attempt to earn as much money as possible. Of the N fish, N-1 are red and 1 is blue. Each read more red fish the participant catches is worth five cents; if the participant catches the blue fish, however, the round ends, and the participant loses all the money accumulated in that round. Participants are able to stop any round at any time and collect their earnings. Each tournament can have a different release law: (1) Catch ‘n’ Keep, in which the probability of catching a red fish goes down as each fish is caught and removed from the pond, and (2) Catch ‘n’ Release, where the probability of catching a red fish stays constant. In the “Always Sunny” version of the task, participants are able to see the number of red and blue fish. The outcome is the ART score – the average number times the participant chooses to “fish” on trials that end by choice (i.e. rather than ending by catching a blue fish). read less
Attentional Network Test
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The Attention Network Test (ANT) is a task designed to test three attentional networks: (1) alerting, (2) orienting, and (3) executive control. The ANT combines attentional and spatial cues with a flanker task (a central imperative stimulus is flanked by distractors that can indicate the same or opposite response to the imperative stimulus). On each trial a spatial cue is read more presented, followed by an array of five arrows presented at either the top or the bottom of the computer screen. The subject must indicate the direction of the central arrow in the array of five. The cue that precedes the arrows can be non-existent, a center cue, a double cue (one presented at each of the two possible target locations), or a spatial cue that deterministically indicates the upcoming target location. Each network is assessed via reaction times (RTs). The alerting network contrasts performance with and without cues, the orienting network contrasts performance on the task with or without a reliable spatial cue, and executive control (conflict) is measured by assessing interference from flankers.read less
Barratt Impulsiveness Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS) is 30-item self-report scale that is commonly used to measure impulsiveness. Participants respond to each item using a 4-point Likert scale: 1 (rarely/never), 2 (occasionally), 3 (often), and 4 (almost always/always). Principal components analysis has revealed six primary factors of the scale: 1) attention (e.g., “I am restless at the theater or lectures”), 2) motor read more impulsiveness (e.g., “I do things without thinking”), 3) self-control (e.g., “I say things without thinking”), 4) cognitive complexity (e.g., “I get easily bored when solving thought problems”), 5) perseverance (e.g., “I change jobs”), and 6) cognitive instability (e.g., “I have ‘racing’ thoughts”). Three secondary factors have also been identified: attentional impulsiveness (mixture of primary factors 1 and 6), motor impulsiveness (mixture of primary factors 2 and 5), and non-planning impulsiveness (mixture of primary factors 3 and 4). read less
Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function – Adults
Self-Regulation Self-report | 15-25 min
Access Measure
The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adults (BRIEF-A) is a 75-item scale designed to assess self-reported behaviors associated with executive function. The BRIEF-A can be scored as an overall measure (Global Executive Composite), or broken into two domains: Behavioral Regulation Index (BRI), including (1) inhibit, (2) shift, (3) control, and (4) monitor, and Metacognitive Index (MI), including (1) initiate, (2) read more Working Memory, (3) Plan/Organize, (4) Task Monitor, and (5) Organization of Materials. There are also three different validity scales: (1) negativity, (2) infrequency, and (3) inconsistency. The current version was adapted to include 32 questions from the original scale, comprising four subscales of the Metacognitive Index: (1) Initiate (e.g. “I need to be reminded to begin a task even when I am willing”), (2) Working Memory (e.g. I have trouble concentrating on tasks such as chores, reading, or work”), (3) Plan/Organize (e.g. “I get overwhelmed by large tasks”), and (4) Task Monitor (e.g. “I make careless errors when completing tasks”). It also includes two added items with repeated content and reversed wording to check for acquiescence bias. Answers are scored from 1, never a problem, to 7, always a problem. Higher scores indicate poor executive function.read less
BIS/BAS Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The BIS/BAS Scale is a 24-item self-report questionnaire designed to measure two motivational systems: the behavioral inhibition system (BIS), which corresponds to motivation to avoid aversive outcomes, and the behavioral activation system (BAS), which corresponds to motivation to approach goal-oriented outcomes. Participants respond to each item using a 4-point Likert scale: 1 (very true for me), 2 (somewhat true for read more me), 3 (somewhat false for me), and 4 (very false for me). The scale has four subscales that were derived via factor analysis. One subscale corresponds to the BIS. Seven items contribute to this score (e.g., “Criticism or scolding hurts me quite a bit”). The remaining three subscales correspond to three components of BAS. BAS Drive measures the motivation to follow one’s goals. Four items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I want something I usually go all-out to get it”). BAS Reward Responsiveness measures the sensitivity to pleasant reinforcers in the environment. Four items contribute to this score (e.g., “It would excite me to win a contest”). BAS Fun Seeking measures the motivation to find novel rewards spontaneously. Five items contribute to this score (e.g., “I crave excitement and new sensations”). read less
Brief Self-Control Survey
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Brief Self-Control Survey measures self-control, with a focus on operational aspects (e.g., overriding distraction). The scale consists of 13 items, measured on a scale from 1, not at all like me, to 5, very much like me. Example items include “I am good at resisting temptation” and “I have a hard time breaking bad habits” (reverse coded).
Choice Reaction Time
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
The Choice Reaction Time (CRT) task measures the basic cognitive processes of perception, discrimination, response selection, and response execution. The task involves making a specific, speeded response to two or more stimuli that are presented in succession. For example, subjects could make an “m” keypress when a circle appears and a “z” keypress when a square appears. The main dependent read more measure is the speed and accuracy of the responses.read less
Cognitive Reflection Test
Self-Regulation Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) measures cognitive processing – specifically the tendency to suppress an incorrect, intuitive answer and come to a more deliberate, correct answer. The test is comprised of three questions: (1) A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost? _____ cents (2) If read more it takes 5 machines 5 minutes to make 5 widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets? _____ minutes (3) In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake? _____ days The measure is scored as the total number of correct answers. read less
Columbia Card Task – Cold Version
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The “cold” version of the Columbia Card Task (CCT) is a behavioral measure of decision making. (For comparison, see also the “hot” version of the CCT in the Measures Repository.) The task is constructed such that the optimal decision making strategies are the same for the cold CCT as the hot CCT, but the procedures vary either to engage (hot read more version) or not engage (cold version) affective processes. In the cold CCT participants are presented with a display of 32 cards arranged face down in a grid made up of four rows and eight columns. On each trial they are asked to indicate how many cards they would like to turn over. They are instructed that they may turn over as many cards as they wish for a given display with the goal of maximizing their earnings. Each gain card turned over adds to their total earnings. Each loss card turned over subtracts from their earnings and also immediately terminates the trial. A higher number of cards turned over is associated with a higher total amount won as long as no loss card is turned over. This principle incentivizes the decision to turn over a higher number of cards. However, a higher number of cards turned over is also associated with a higher probability of encountering a loss. This principle incentivizes the decision to turn over a lower number of cards. Therefore, to maximize their earnings, participants must properly weigh the probability of a loss, the gain amount, and the loss amount as they make the decision about how many cards to turn over on each trial. The task uses a 3 x 3 x 3 factorial design involving probability of loss (1, 2, or 3 loss cards per display), gain amount (10, 20, or 30 points), and loss amount (250, 500, or 750 points) with two trials per cell of the design, resulting in a total of 54 trials. The dependent measure is the average number of cards turned over in the task. Those three factors may be analyzed to determine whether participants make use of one, two, or all three of them to reach their decisions. Ultimately, a higher average number of cards turned over reflects increased risk taking.read less
Columbia Card Task – Hot Version
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The “hot” version of the Columbia Card Task (CCT) is a behavioral measure of decision making processes. (For comparison, see also the “cold” version of the CCT in the Measures Repository.) The task is constructed such that the optimal decision making strategies are the same for the cold CCT as the hot CCT, but the procedures vary either to engage read more (hot version) or not engage (cold version) affective processes. In the hot CCT participants are presented with a display of 32 cards arranged face down in a grid made up of four rows and eight columns. On each trial they may turn over cards one at a time, thereby revealing either a win or a loss. They are instructed that they may decide to stop turning over cards at any time for a given display with the goal of maximizing their earnings. Each gain card turned over adds to their total earnings. Each loss card turned over subtracts from their earnings and also immediately terminates the trial. As more cards are turned over, the total amount won increases as long as no loss card is turned over. This principle incentivizes the decision to continue to turn over additional cards. However, as more cards are turned over, the probability of encountering a loss also increases for the next selection. This principle incentivizes the decision to stop turning over cards. Therefore, to maximize their earnings, participants must properly weigh the probability of a loss, the gain amount, and the loss amount as they make each decision. The task uses a 3 x 3 x 3 factorial design involving probability of loss (1, 2, or 3 loss cards per display), gain amount (10, 20, or 30 points), and loss amount (250, 500, or 750 points) with two trials per cell of the design, resulting in a total of 54 trials. The dependent measure is the average number of cards turned over in the task. Those three factors may be analyzed to determine whether participants make use of one, two, or all three of them to reach their decisions. Ultimately, a higher average number of cards turned over reflects increased risk taking. This hot version of the CCT critically differs from the cold version because it includes immediate positive or negative affective feedback following each decision made within each trial. For one, participants see positive feedback right away as they turn over each gain card in that the front of each such card shows a schematic happy face. Furthermore, for each card turned over within a trial, participants see a display showing their total earnings change immediately either for the better (gain card) or the worse (loss card).read less
Consideration of Future Consequences Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10 min
Access Measure
The Consideration of Future Consequences Scale is comprised of 14 items that tap into an individual’s tendency to think about long-term consequences of his or her actions, or to guide behavior based on short- versus long-term considerations. There are seven statements representative of forward thinking (e.g., “I am ready to sacrifice my current happiness or wellbeing in order to achieve read more future results.”) and seven reverse-coded statements (e.g., “Since my everyday work has specific outcomes, it is more important to me than behavior that has distant outcomes.”), Response options range from 1, not at all like me, to 7, very much like me. Higher scores indicate greater consideration of future consequences, or forward-looking behavior.read less
Convex Time Budgets
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Convex Time Budgets (CTB) task measures delay discounting, which is the tendency to discount value in the future (e.g., a lower subjective value of money at a later date relative to an earlier date). This tendency is often reflected by a preference for small rewards received sooner over larger rewards received later. Typically, delay discounting is measured by asking read more participants to repeatedly make choices between receiving one reward at a sooner time or a different reward at a later time by varying the amounts of money for each trial. Some research indicates that this method of measuring delay discounting results in overly high estimates of discounting rates, however. The CTB task was developed as an alternative to deal with this issue by varying the amounts of money on each trial as well as the two times that participants must compare on each trial. In this task, participants make 48 decisions total. Twenty-four of these decisions are in the gains domain, and 24 decisions are in the losses domain. These decisions occur for three compared times: (1) 2 vs. 4 weeks from today, (2) today vs. 4 weeks from today, and (3) today vs. 2 weeks from today. In the gain domain, participants must choose how much money they would like to receive in two separate installments to be gained in separate portions at the sooner and the later date. The sooner gain always has a maximum of 400 KSH (a monetary unit), whereas the later gain maximum varies: 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1200 KSH, or 1600 KSH. For example, for this gains condition, a participant with an early maximum of 400 KSH and a later maximum of 400 KSH might choose to receive 333 KSH 2 weeks from today and 67 KSH 4 weeks from today. In contrast, in the loss domain, participants are given two endowments of 1600 KSH, one sooner and one later, and choose between loss amounts at each of the two time points. The sooner loss is always 400 KSH, and the later varies: 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1200 KSH, or 1600 KSH. The Convex Time Budget task is designed to elicit parameters of individual utility functions over money. Participants are assumed to utility-maximizing and have preferences which are described by a Constant Relative Risk Aversion utility function u(c)=c^σ and a quasi-hyperbolic discounting function u(c_t )= βδ^t u(c_0). Each CTB decision can be described in terms of a “budget constraint”: participants trade off money at the earlier date and money at the later date at a given “interest rate”, with the 400 KSH serving as a type of capital which can be taken earlier or saved and increased. Under this framework, a utility-maximizing participant’s choices would deterministically be a function of the interest rate, front-end delay, delay between payments and preference parameters ,  and . The values of these parameters which most closely follow the model are estimated using nonlinear least squares regression. This process is done separately for each individual in both domains, so that parameters can be compared both between and within-subject. read less
Couple Coercion Scale
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 2 min
Access Measure
This 9-item self-report scale assesses an individual's perception of how much coercion characterizes their relationship with their partner. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from Never to Always. Items include: (1) When I get into a conflict with my partner, we go back and forth taking it up a notch until things get too heated and one of us read more gives up, (2) When I get into a conflict with my partner, it gets heated and one of us gives in or walks away just to make it stop, (3) When I get into a conflict with my partner, it seems like we up the intensity and unpleasantness until one of us gives up, (4) When we disagree, it will escalate until one of us gives in just to make it stop, (5) Disagreements tend to get more and more heated until one of us wins and the other gives in, (6) When I ask my partner to do something, s/he often gets out of it by yelling at me or hitting me, (7) The only way to get my partner to do what I want is to yell, (8) When my partner and I disagree, s/he often expresses high levels of anger as a way of getting his/her way, (9) When my partner gets hostile or combative, I often give in to what s/he wants.read less
Couples Conflict Task
Interpersonal & Social Processes Observational | 20 min
Access Measure
Couples engage in two 10-minute conflict discussions (e.g., one from each partner; top two important topics for couple). To generate topics for the two 10-minute conflict discussions, each participant completes a questionnaire about things they had unsuccessfully tried to get their partners to do, do differently, or change in the preceding year. Participants rate a list of possible desired changes, read more and then rate whether they have engaged in discussions about that change in the past year and how important the change is to them. If more than one topic is similarly rated as of greatest importance, one is chosen via a random number generator. The most important change(s) that have been discussed in the past year is selected. Participants are not told which topic has been selected until immediately prior to the relevant conversation. Prior to the conversation, the following instructions are given: “You had indicated that you would like your partner to ___[topic]___. For this first conversation, we’d like you to have a conversation with each other about this topic for 10 minutes and try to get somewhere with it. We’d like you to deal with the issue the way you typically would at home. In other words, what we’re interested in is seeing how this kind of thing usually goes with you guys, so we’d like you to bring up the topic and talk about it however you usually would. When I leave the room you should start discussing it. After 10 minutes, I’ll knock and let you know that it’s time to stop. Any questions?” The assessor then positions the couple appropriately for the cameras (and attaches lavaliere microphones if not in a room equipped with microphones). The assessor leaves the room for 10 minutes, during which the couple converses uninterrupted. The most fundamental property of a coding system is the sampling strategy for behavior, otherwise known as the coding unit. Major sampling strategies are event, duration, interval, and time. Coding systems can be molar/global (i.e. makes summary ratings) or molecular/microbehavioral (i.e. codes behavior as it unfolds over time). Investigators may use scores to analyze means, variability, or sequences. read less
Daily Inventory of Stressful Events (DISE)
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
Stress is a multidimensional construct with different areas of stress potentially having differential relationships with short-term and long-term outcomes. The Daily Inventory of Stressful Events (DISE) is a semi-structured survey in which participants report whether any of a series of stressful events had occurred within the past 24 hours. This end-of-day measure consists of a brief set of stem and read more conditional questions that can be can be administered via smartphones. An example stem question is “Did you have an argument or disagreement with anyone in the past 24 hours?” An example follow-up questions is “How stressful was this?” “How much control did you have over the situation?” This instrument yields several variables for each reported stressor including: (a) content classification of the stressor (e.g., work overload, argument over housework, traffic problem); (b) subjective severity of stressors; (c) primary appraisals (i.e., areas of life that were at risk because of the stressor); and (d) perceived control of the situation. read less
Deferment of Gratification Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 5-10 min
Access Measure
The Deferment of Gratification Scale consists of 12 items asking about the preference or ability to defer gratification versus pursuit of more immediate rewards. Six items are ‘positive’ (e.g., “I enjoy something more when I have to wait for it and plan for it.”) and six are reverse-coded (e.g., “I like spending my money immediately after I get it”). Response read more options range from 1, strongly disagree, to 7, strongly agree. Higher scores indicate greater deferment of gratification.read less
Dickman Functional and Dysfunctional Impulsivity Survey
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Dickman Functional and Dysfunctional Impulsivity Survey is a 23-item self-report scale designed to assess separable components of impulsivity. Participants respond to each item with a True/False response. Dysfunctional impulsivity is the tendency to make quick decisions in contexts when such decisions are not adaptive. Twelve items contribute to this dysfunctional subscale score (e.g., “I often say whatever comes into read more my head without thinking first”). In contrast, functional impulsivity is the somewhat less-studied tendency to make quick decisions when such decisions are appropriate for the situation at hand. Eleven items contribute to this functional subscale score (e.g., “I like sports and games in which you have to choose your next move very quickly”). read less
Dietary Decisions Task
Self-Regulation Task | 12 min
Access Measure
The Dietary Decision Task is a three-stage measure that assesses self-control. In stages one and two, participants are presented with 50 food items which they rate in two stages for health and for taste on a five-point scale (order of presentation is counterbalanced across subjects). A reference item that is rated as neutral in both health and taste is selected read more for each participant. In stage three, participants are presented with this reference (neutral) food item and subsequent items, and make a decision about which of the two they would like to eat. Participants are grouped ex post as self-controllers or non-self-controllers based on their decisions: self-controller if their decisions are driven primarily by health, or non-self-controller if their decisions are driven primarily by taste. read less
Digit Span Task
Self-Regulation Task | 7 min
Access Measure
The Digit Span Task is a simple behavioral measure of working memory capacity, the cognitive ability to store and manage information on a transient basis. Although the original version of this task was verbally administered, recent versions are generally administered via computer. On each trial participants are presented with a series of digits appearing one at a time on a read more computer screen (e.g., 3, 4, 1, 2, 7, 8). The task exists with two variants: forward-span and backward-span. In the forward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the digits in the order they appeared by typing them via keypress. In the backward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the digits in the reverse order they appeared. For both variants of the task, after each successfully completed trial, the number of digits presented increases by one for the next trial. After a failed trial (i.e., if any digits are missing and/or if the exact order of digits is wrong), the number of digits presented remains the same for the next trial. The task concludes after participants make errors for two trials in a row for a given digit span. The dependent measure, digit span, is the maximum number of digits correctly recalled.read less
Directed Forgetting Task
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
The Directed-Forgetting Task measures proactive interference from previously relevant information. In each trial, participants are first presented with six stimuli arranged in a 2x3 matrix. After a short delay, participants are instructed to forget either the top three stimuli or the bottom three stimuli, so that participants retain only the other three stimuli in memory (i.e. the “target set”). After read more a second delay, participants are presented with a recognition probe. This could be a Positive probe (part of the target set), a Forget probe (part of the set the participant was instructed to forget), or a Control probe (not part of the target or forget set). Participants select a “yes” response for Positive probes and a “no” for Forget or Control probes. Performance is measured with error rates and reaction time (RT) on correct trials. The directed-forgetting effect, the main dependent measure, is the increase in RT and error rate on Forget compared to Control probes. read less
Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey: Expected Benefits
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey (DOSPERT) is a 30-item self-report scale that measures three aspects of individual differences with regard to risk taking behaviors: expected benefits of taking risks (the present measure), risk taking behavior, and perceptions of risk. (For the latter two measures listed above, please see the separate listings in this Measures Repository.) Participants are presented with read more a series of situations and asked to “indicate the benefits you would obtain” from each one using a 7-point Likert scale: 1 (No Benefits at all), 2, 3, 4 (Moderate Benefits), 5, 6, and 7 (Great Benefits). The expected benefits of risk taking are assessed in five separate domains (six items corresponding to each domain): Ethical (e.g., “Not returning a wallet you found that contains $200”), Financial (Investment and Gambling) (e.g., “Investing 5% of your annual income in a very speculative stock, ” “Betting a day’s income at a high-stakes poker game”), Health and Safety (e.g., “Riding a motorcycle without a helmet”), Recreational (e.g., “Bungee jumping off a tall bridge”), and Social (e.g., “Moving to a city far away from your extended family”). The dependent measures are the expected benefits scores, which are computed separately for each of the five domains as the sum of all item scores within that domain. An overall expected benefits score may also be computed across the five domains by summing the relevant score for all 30 items. read less
Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey: Risk Perceptions
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey (DOSPERT) is a 30-item self-report scale that measures three aspects of individual differences with regard to risk taking behaviors: risk perceptions (the present measure), risk taking behavior, and expected benefits of taking risks. (For the latter two measures listed above, please see the separate listings in this Measures Repository.) Participants are presented with a read more series of situations and asked to “indicate how risky you perceive” each one using a 7-point Likert scale: 1 (Not at all Risky), 2 (Slightly Risky), 3 (Somewhat Risky), 4 (Moderately Risky), 5 (Risky), 6 (Very Risky), and 7 (Extremely Risky). Perceived risk levels are assessed in five separate domains (six items corresponding to each domain): Ethical (e.g., “Not returning a wallet you found that contains $200”), Financial (Investment and Gambling) (e.g., “Investing 5% of your annual income in a very speculative stock, ” “Betting a day’s income at a high-stakes poker game”), Health and Safety (e.g., “Riding a motorcycle without a helmet”), Recreational (e.g., “Bungee jumping off a tall bridge”), and Social (e.g., “Moving to a city far away from your extended family”). The dependent measures are the risk perceptions scores, which are computed separately for each of the five domains as the sum of all item scores within that domain. An overall risk perceptions score may also be computed across the five domains by summing the relevant score for all 30 items. read less
Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey: Risk Taking
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Domain Specific Risk Taking Survey (DOSPERT) is a 30-item self-report scale that measures three aspects of individual differences with regard to risk taking behaviors: risk taking behavior (the present measure), perceptions of risk, and expected benefits of taking risks. (For the latter two measures listed above, please see the separate listings in this Measures Repository.) Participants are presented with read more a series of situations and asked to “indicate the likelihood that you would engage in the described activity or behavior” for each one using a 7-point Likert scale: 1 (Extremely Unlikely), 2 (Moderately Unlikely), 3 (Somewhat Unlikely), 4 (Not Sure), 5 (Somewhat Likely), 6 (Moderately Likely), and 7 (Extremely Likely). The likelihoods of risk taking are assessed in five separate domains (six items corresponding to each domain): Ethical (e.g., “Not returning a wallet you found that contains $200”), Financial (Investment and Gambling) (e.g., “Investing 5% of your annual income in a very speculative stock, ” “Betting a day’s income at a high-stakes poker game”), Health and Safety (e.g., “Riding a motorcycle without a helmet”), Recreational (e.g., “Bungee jumping off a tall bridge”), and Social (e.g., “Moving to a city far away from your extended family”). The dependent measures are the risk taking scores, which are computed separately for each of the five domains as the sum of all item scores within that domain. An overall risk taking score may also be computed across the five domains by summing the relevant score for all 30 items. read less
Dot Pattern Expectancy
Self-Regulation Task | 15 min
Access Measure
The Dot Pattern Expectancy (DPX) task measures individual differences in cognitive control. Participants are presented with a cue made up of dots. This cue can be a valid cue – referred to as A (e.g., ":") – or an invalid cue – referred to as B (e.g., ".."). Next a probe is presented, also made up of a simple dot read more formation. This probe can be valid (X) or invalid (Y). Participants are instructed to respond to valid probe and cue combinations (targets – AX combinations) with a key press (e.g., “x”) and all others (non-targets) with a different key press (e.g., “m”). read less
Ecological Momentary Assessment of Stressful Events
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
The Ecological Momentary Assessment of Stressful Events is a brief measure of momentary experiences of stress aimed to be administered in ecologically valid environments close in time to the occurrence of stressful events. The goal of this measurement strategy is to minimize retrospective recall biases that can accompany the reporting of stress. The EMA measure consists of a brief set read more of stem and conditional questions that can be administered via smartphones as people go about their daily activities. The stem question assesses whether a stressful event has recently occurred (“Did anything stressful occur since the last survey?”), followed by a series of follow-ups that assess characteristics of the stressor (e.g., event type, timing, and intensity). read less
Effort Discounting Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Effort Discounting Task is a behavioral measure of the temporal discounting of effort, which is a tendency to prefer to expend greater effort at a later time over lesser effort at a sooner time. Participants make 18 decisions about when they will make a specified number of phone calls to the study center for monetary compensation of 500 read more KSH (equivalent to ~5 USD) to be received one month later after successfully completing the required effort from the chosen decision. These decisions occur over three timeframes: (1) two vs. four weeks from today, (2) today vs. four weeks from today, and (3) today vs. two weeks from today. There are six decisions to make for each timeframe. In these decisions, the earlier time always requires two calls, and the later time requires one, two, three, four, five, or six calls. The participant must make the calls between 6 pm and 10 pm, and, if multiple calls are required, they must be spaced apart by a minimum of 10 minutes to ensure that each call reflects a distinct effort. During the four-hour window in which participants can make the calls, they receive hourly reminders to minimize the potential confounder of forgetting, which is distinct from the key construct of effort discounting. Intertemporal choices over effort are then modeled using a quasi-hyperbolic discounting function following Laibson (1997), which allows for time-inconsistent preferences. From participants’ choices, two discounting parameters are estimated: First, the “present-bias” parameter, βi, which attaches special weight to immediate outcomes. βi = 1 implies no present bias, whereas βi < 1 implies present bias. The second parameter, δi, describes the rate at which future outcomes are devalued exponentially. For example, δi = 1 means that a participant behaves as if they are indifferent between making 2 calls today and 2 calls two weeks from today, whereas δi = .5 implies that the participant would be indifferent between 1 call today and 2 calls two weeks from today.read less
Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10 min
Access Measure
The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) is a 10-item self-report scale designed to assess habitual use of two commonly used strategies to alter emotion: cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression. Participants respond to each item using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Cognitive reappraisal involves thinking differently about a situation in order to change its read more meaning in order to alter one’s emotional experience. Expressive suppression involves decreasing the outward expression of emotion. Six items contribute to the subscale for cognitive reappraisal (e.g., “When I’m faced with a stressful situation, I make myself think about it in a way that helps me stay calm”). Four items contribute to the subscale for expressive suppression (e.g., “When I am feeling negative emotions, I make sure not to express them”).read less
Five Facets of Mindfulness Survey
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Five Facets of Mindfulness Survey is a 39-item self-report scale that measures components of mindfulness, which is a tendency to attend to the present moment with a non-judgmental attitude. Participants indicate whether each item is generally true for them using a 5-point Likert scale: 1 (never or very rarely true), 2 (rarely true), 3 (sometimes true), 4 (often true), read more and 5 (very often or always true). The measure has five subscales: Observing, Describing, Acting with awareness, Non-judging of inner experience, and Non-reactivity to inner experience. Observing involves noticing details of the internal and external environments. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I’m walking, I deliberately notice the sensations of my body moving”). Describing involves the ability to put words to experiences. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., “I can usually describe how I feel at the moment in considerable detail”). Acting with awareness involves paying attention to what one is doing in the present moment. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., a reverse-coded item is “When I do things, my mind wanders off and I’m easily distracted”). Non-judging of inner experience involves a lack of evaluation about one’s thoughts and emotions. Eight items contribute to this score (e.g., a reverse-coded item is “I believe some of my thoughts are abnormal or bad and I shouldn’t think that way”). Non-reactivity to inner experience involves the tendency to allow thoughts and emotions to pass without getting fixated on them. Seven items contribute to this score (e.g., “In difficult situations, I can pause without immediately reacting”). read less
Frustration in Timed Backwards Math
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Observational | 0-5 min
The Frustration in Timed Backwards Math Task assesses behaviors that indicate general anxiety, sadness, or frustration/anger in children. Participants complete the serial subtraction portion of the Trier Social Stress Test for Children (TSST-C), an adapted version of a standardized stress paradigm originally developed and evaluated in adults. Participants are asked to count backwards from a high number by a certain read more interval. If a mistake is made, then they must start again from the beginning. There are three trials during each of which the children count for one minute (i.e., three minutes total). Coders are trained to code from videotape the highest degree of observed negative affect present during each 10-second segment for two separate domains of negative emotion: anxiety/worry/sadness/resignation and anger/irritation. read less
Five-Trial Adjusting Delay Discounting Task
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
The Five-Trial Adjusting Delay Discounting Task is a very brief variant of the traditional Delay Discounting Task. The construct of delay discounting refers to people’s tendency to value rewards less as the amount of time increases until those rewards would be received. The relationship between delays and subjective value can be represented with a hyperbolic curve. That is, as the read more time delay increases away from the present, the minimum amount of money that a person would prefer to receive right away for a given amount of money in the future (e.g., $1, 000) decreases very steeply for small increases in delay relative to the present (e.g., hours to weeks in the future) and then continues to decrease but less steeply with greater increases in delay relative to the present (e.g., months to years in the future). This brief task uses only five trials to estimate a person’s discounting rate by adjusting the specifications of each subsequent trial based on performance of the preceding trial. Each 5-trial version of this task uses one monetary amount for each trial (e.g., $1, 000; $1, 000, 000). Each participant is asked on the first trial of the task whether they would prefer to receive that amount in three weeks or half that amount now. On the next trial the question is repeated but with a different time delay according to the participant’s response on the previous trial. That is, a greater delay is presented on the next trial if the participant chose “now” on the previous trial, whereas a lesser delay is presented if the participant chose the later time on the previous trial. The dependent measure is the steepness of the delay discounting curve.read less
Future Orientation Scale of the Time Perspective Survey
Self-Regulation Self-report | 0-5 min
Access Measure
The Future Orientation Scale of the Time Perspective Survey (child version) assesses the extent to which school-aged children have the ability or inclination to focus their attention on the future, as opposed to focusing on the past or present moments. This inclination may be related to an individual’s decisions regarding eating or other health behaviors. Children are asked to respond read more with how well each statement describes what they believe on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (“Very Untrue”) to 5 (“Very True”). There are 13 total items (e.g., “Finishing homework and doing other jobs at home comes before play”, “I make lists of things to do.”) This scale was modified from the original measure that was developed for adults. read less
Future Time Perspective Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Future Time Perspective (FTP) scale measures a person’s perception of their future as being time-limited. It consists of ten items rated on a scale from 1, very untrue, to 7, very true (e.g., “Many opportunities await me in the future” and “There is plenty of time left in my life to make new plans”). Items are coded so that read more higher scores reflect a more expansive view of the future. read less
Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The original Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale contains 10 items designed to tap into a global sense of self-efficacy, or belief of an individual in his or her ability (e.g., “I can always solve difficult problems if I try hard enough, ” and “I can usually handle whatever comes my way.”) The revised version here includes these 10 items and two, which read more are repeated and reversed to examine acquiescence bias. Response options range from 1, never true, to 7, always true. Higher scores indicate greater generalized self-efficacy.read less
Go-No Go Task
Self-Regulation Task | 7 min
Access Measure
This task measures response inhibition. In the go/no-go task, participants respond to certain stimuli (“go” stimuli) and make no response for others (“no-go” stimuli). The main dependent measure in go/no-go tasks is the commission error rate (making a “go” response on “no-go” trials); fewer errors signifies better response inhibition.
Grit-S
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The 8-item Grit-S is a short form of the original 12-item Grit-O scale. This scale measures perseverance – grit – as an individual difference score. There are two distinct subscales: consistency of interest (e.g., “I have been obsessed with a certain idea or project for a short time but later lost interest”), and perseverance of effort (e.g., “I finish whatever read more I begin”). read less
Holt-Laury Risk Titrator
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Holt-Laury Task measures risk aversion. In this task, participants are given a set of paired lottery choices. These pairs are structured so that the lesser payoff in choice “A” is always worth more than the lesser payoff in choice “B” (e.g., the high payoff in “A” is $2.00 and the low payoff is $1.60, whereas the high payoff in read more “B” is $3.85 and the low payoff is $.10). Initially, the chance of the high payoff is 1/10 and the low payoff 9/10. With each step, the probability of the high payoff steadily increases by 1/10 (e.g., the second pair has a 2/10 probability for the high payoff and 8/10 for the low payoff). When the probability of the high payoff is low, choosing the “B” lottery is seen as the risky decision. As the probabilities change, the expected value of “B” over “A” increases. When this occurs, continuing to choose the “A” lottery indicates risk aversion. read less
Hierarchical Task
Self-Regulation Task | 24 min
Access Measure
The Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning Task measures participants’ ability to discover and use higher-order structure in their environment. Participants are presented with 18 stimuli composed of three dimensions: shape, orientation, and border color. The task requires that participants respond to stimuli by pressing one of three keys in response to each of the stimuli. In a "flat" condition, the keys are read more randomly associated with the shapes so that the participant must learn each association independently. In a "hierarchical" condition, the stimulus-response mappings are instead structured, such that participants can use a rule to determine the correct response based on the combination of the three features. In this condition, the colored borders indicate whether "orientation" or "shape" determine the response (e.g., if the border is red, the correct response is based on the orientation). If participants learn this hierarchical structure, then performance is improved. read less
I-7: Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The I-7 Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness Questionnaire has a total of 54 items and three subscales. Of the 54 items, 19 measure Impulsiveness (e.g., “Do you often buy things on impulse?” and “Do you mostly speak before thinking things out?”), 16 measure Venturesomeness (e.g., “Would you enjoy parachute jumping?” and “Do you sometimes like doing things that are a bit frightening?”), read more and 19 measure Empathy (e.g., “Does it worry you when others are worrying and panicky?” and “Would you feel sorry for a lonely stranger in a group?”). Answers are marked as “Yes” or “No.” read less
Internal Self-Efficacy Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 20-25 min
Access Measure
The Internal Self-Efficacy Task was designed to capture individual differences in the tendency to set challenging goals. In the first stage (Stage 1: Piece-rate real effort task), participants are given three minutes in which they need to complete as many matches as possible in a real-effort slider-matching task. In this task, participants touch the computer screen to move a slider read more to its “goal” position (i.e., match the slider to the goal). Participants are told that they will be paid 10 KSH (~ 0.10 USD) for each correct match. After completing this task, participants are asked how many matches they think they completed and how confident they are in this answer. In the second stage (Stage 2: Goal-setting) participants are told that they will again complete the real-effort slider-matching task for a three-minute interval but with a different payment scheme. Specifically, participants are told to specify a match target, and that, if they meet the target, they will receive 20 KSH (~ 0.20 USD) multiplied by this target (e.g., someone who says they will make 10 matches will receive 200 KSH if they meet or exceed the target, but 0 KSH (0 USD) if they do not meet this target). This non-linear payment scheme encourages people to set realistic goals. In the third and final stage (Stage 3) participants complete the three-minute real-effort slider-matching task. At the end of the task they are told whether or not they met their target goal, allowing for measurement of “endogenous effort” (number correct) and examination of the relationship between the target and effort. A novel metric was designed to score this task. The score is defined: SX=Ya/(1+| Ya- Y|) Where Y is the actual performance in the second round and Ya is the goal for that round. This measure was chosen to be increasing in the goal set but decreasing in the inaccuracy of the goal. read less
Information Sampling Task
Self-Regulation Task | 12 min
Access Measure
The Information Sampling Task (IST) is a behavioral measure of reflection impulsivity that assesses the amount of information people accrue prior to making to a decision. Participants are asked to determine the color of the majority of items on a computer screen display for a total of 20 trials. At the start of each trial this display consists of a read more square grid comprised of 25 grey boxes arranged in 5 rows and 5 columns. Participants have the opportunity to test boxes one at a time to learn more information in order to make their decision. Immediately after each test the selected box changes from grey to one of two colors (e.g., yellow or green). Participants can select as many boxes as they prefer and as quickly or slowly as they prefer during this sampling phase. Then, at any time during the information gathering process participants may choose to stop their sampling and instead select one of two colored panels at the bottom of the screen to indicate their decision about the correct answer for the current display (e.g., yellow or green). A feedback screen appears for two seconds after participants make their decision. For correct answers the feedback message reads: “Correct! You have won [x] points.” For incorrect answers the feedback message reads: ‘“Wrong! You have lost 100 points.” During a jittered intertrial interval of at least 1 second participants can view their current earnings displayed on the screen. The 20 trials are presented in blocked design with two conditions with counterbalanced order. In the Fixed Win condition, 100 points are won for each correct answer, and 100 points are lost for each incorrect answer. Critically, the earnings and losses for this condition are not dependent on the number of sampled boxes prior to the decision. In contrast, in the Decreasing Win condition, the total possible win for correct answers begins at 250 points and decreases by 10 points for each box sampled. The losses are always 100 points for this condition. The following dependent measures may be compared for the two conditions: the average number of boxes opened before committing to a decision, the probability of a correct answer at the point of the decision (i.e., taking into account the available sampled information), and the number of incorrect decisions.read less
Intertemporal Choice Task with Discount Titrating
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Intertemporal Task with Discount Titrating is a brief behavioral task that measures delay discounting, which is the tendency to discount the value of rewards to be received in the future. This tendency is reflected by a preference for small rewards received sooner over larger rewards received later. On each trial participants are asked to make an intertemporal choice. That read more is, they must decide between two options differing in the time they would be received: a sooner, smaller reward and a later, larger reward. In this variant of the task, the later, larger rewards are systematically titrated in small increments to determine the value at which the later, larger rewards are sufficiently abundant that participants opt to for them instead of the sooner, smaller rewards. The task is presented in two phases. In all trials in the first phase, participants choose between the sooner reward being given right away (i.e., today) and the later reward being given at some fixed point in the future (e.g., 3 months). The smaller, sooner reward remains the same for all trials (e.g., $50), whereas the later, larger amounts increase by a set increment from each trial to the next one (e.g., trial 1: $55, trial 2: $60, trial 3: $65, …, trial 11: $105). In contrast, in all trials in the second phase, participants choose between the sooner reward being given in the near future (e.g., 2 months) and the later reward being given substantially further in the future (e.g., 5 months). Again, as in the first phase, the smaller, sooner reward remains the same for all trials (e.g., $30), whereas the later, larger amounts increase by a set increment from each trial to the next one (e.g., trial 1: $35, trial 2: $40, trial 3: $45, …, trial 11: $85). The dependent measure is the switching point corresponding to the minimum later reward value at which the participant opts for the later reward rather than the sooner reward. A lower switching point reflects greater delay discounting. read less
Keep Track Task
Self-Regulation Task | 6 min
Access Measure
The Keep Track Task measures the cognitive process of updating and monitoring working memory. In each trial, participants are first presented with a set of categories. Possible categories include: (1) animals, (2) colors, (3) countries, (4) distances, (5) metals, and (6) relatives. Next, target categories remain at the bottom of the screen, and 15 words are presented sequentially. These words read more are exemplars from the six possible categories, with 2-3 words from each category. Participants are required to remember the last (most recent) word presented for each of the target categories, and to write them down at the end of the trial. For example, if one of the target categories is “color” and participants first see “yellow” and then, later, “blue” (and no other color words), they are supposed to write down “blue” at the end of the trial. The dependent measure is the proportion of words the participant identifies correctly. read less
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6+)
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 10 min
Access Measure
The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6+) is a 6-item self-report measure of psychological distress intended to be used as a quick tool to assess risk for serious mental illness in the general population. On the first critical item, participants indicate how often they have had six different feelings or experiences during the past 30 days using a 5-point Likert scale: read more 4 (All of the time), 3 (Most of the time), 2 (Some of the time), 1 (A little of the time), and 0 (None of the time). The feelings and experiences for this first item are the following: “nervous, ” “hopeless, ”, “restless or fidgety, ” “so depressed that nothing could cheer you up, ” “that everything was an effort, ” and “worthless.” The next item assesses the extent to which the feelings are typical for the person. The remaining items assess to what extent these experiences led to functional impairment. Specifically, they assess how many days that people were totally unable to work due to the feelings, how many days their productivity was at least halved by the feelings, how many times they saw a health professional about the feelings, and how often physical health problems seemed to be the primary causes of the feelings. The total score for the scale is computed by summing the points for the six experiences within the first item of the scale. read less
Kirby Delay-Discounting Task
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
The Kirby Delay-Discounting Task (DDT) is a measure of temporal discounting, the tendency for people to prefer smaller, immediate monetary rewards over larger, delayed rewards. Participants complete a series of 27 questions that each require choosing between a smaller, immediate reward (e.g., $25 today) versus a larger, later reward (e.g., $35 in 25 days). The 27 items are divided into read more three groups according to the size of the larger amount (small, medium, or large). Modeling techniques are used to fit the function that relates time to discounting. The main dependent measure of interest is the steepness of the discounting curve such that a more steeply declining curve represents a tendency to devalue rewards as they become more temporally remote.read less
Local-Global Task
Self-Regulation Task | 8 min
Access Measure
The local-global task measures interference from other features when asked to identify either global or local features of a stimulus. In the local-global task, subjects see large letters (e.g., H or X) made up of smaller letters (e.g., H or X). Subjects are instructed to respond to either the global feature (the large letter) or the local feature (the smaller read more letters that make up the larger letter) while ignoring the non-instructed feature. Subjects tend to be faster and more accurate when the local and global features match (e.g., an H made up of H’s) than when they differ (e.g., an H made up of X’s). The local-global interference effect is particularly large when subjects are asked to focus on the local level. read less
Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) is a 15-item self-report survey that measures the tendency to be fully aware of one’s experience in the present moment without distraction or forgetfulness. Participants indicate whether they frequently or infrequently experience each item using a 6-point Likert scale: 1 (Almost Always), 2 (Very Frequently), 3 (Somewhat Frequently), 4 (Somewhat Infrequently), 5 (Very Infrequently), read more and 6 (Almost Never). The scale was developed with the understanding that people likely have better conscious access to information about their tendency to be mindless rather than mindful. As a result, the total score for the MAAS is computed by reverse-scoring and then summing all items. Examples of items include the following: “I find it difficult to stay focused on what’s happening in the present, ” “I do jobs or tasks automatically, without being aware of what I’m doing, ” and “I snack without being aware that I’m eating.” read less
Motor Selective Stop Signal
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
The motor selective stop-signal task measures the ability to engage response inhibition selectively to specific responses. In this task, cues are presented to elicit motor responses (e.g., right hand responses, left hand responses). A stop-signal is presented on some trials, and subjects must stop if certain responses are required on that trial (e.g., right hand responses) but not others (e.g., read more left hand responses) if a signal occurs. In contrast to a simple stop-signal task in which all actions are stopped when a stop-signal is presented, this task aims to be more like stopping in “the real world” in that certain motor actions must be stopped (e.g., stop pressing the accelerator at a red light) but others should proceed (e.g., steering the car and/or conversing with a passenger). Commonly, stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), the main dependent measure for response inhibition in stopping tasks, is prolonged in the motor selective stopping task when compared to the more canonical simple stopping task. This prolongation of SSRT is taken as evidence of the cost of engaging inhibition that is selective to specific effectors or responses.read less
Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness
Self-Regulation Self-report | 2 min
Access Measure
The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness is a 32 item self-report measure composed of the following 8 subscales: (i) Noticing: awareness of uncomfortable, comfortable and neutral bodily sensations; (ii) Not-Distracting: the tendency to not ignore or distract oneself from sensations of pain or discomfort; (iii) Not-Worrying: the tendency to not react with emotional distress or worry to sensations of read more pain or discomfort; (iv) Attention Regulation: the ability to sustain and control attention to bodily sensation; (v) Emotional Awareness: the awareness of the connection between bodily sensations and emotional states; (vi) Self-Regulation: the ability to regulate psychological distress by attention to bodily sensations; (vii) Body Listening: actively listening to the body for insight; and (viii) Trusting: experiencing one’s body as safe and trustworthy. Individuals rate items based on a 6 point Likert scale from 0-5 with ‘0’ indicating ‘Never’ and ‘5’ indicating ‘Always’. Total scores are obtained through reverse coding items 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and summing all items. Sub-scale scores can be calculated and itemized descriptions are available free from the Osher Center for Integrative Mindfulness (OCIM) (https://www.osher.ucsf.edu/maia/). Higher total scores and subscale scores indicate higher levels of positive awareness. The primary purpose in developing the MAIA was to aid in delineating between beneficial versus maladaptive interoceptive attention; the latter being associated with hypochondriasis, somatization and anxiety disorders while adaptive attention has been widely associated with positive health outcomes and enhanced resilience. Since its inception in 2012 the MAIA has been translated into 16 languages and implemented extensively in both cross sectional and longitudinal studies. The MAIA is available free from the University of California OCMI webpage at (https://www.osher.ucsf.edu/maia/) read less
Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire: Control vs. Impulsivity Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) is a 276-item self-report measure of a broad range of personality traits. It assesses 11 personality traits: control vs. impulsivity (the present measure), well-being, social potency, achievement, social closeness, stress reaction, aggression, alienation, harm avoidance, traditionalism, and absorption in experiences and thoughts. Participants are asked to indicate whether each item is true or false for read more them. Items about control vs. impulsivity assess whether participants report being “reflective, ” “cautious, ” “careful, ” “level-headed, ” and “sensible, ” and whether they make “detailed plans.” Items are summed to compute a total score for each trait. Higher total scores for the control-vs.-impulsivity trait reflect acting rationally, preferring to plan one’s actions, making decisions carefully, and lack of spontaneity. read less
Multiple Price List Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 15-20 min
Access Measure
The Multiple Price List Task measures delay discounting, which is the tendency to discount value in the future (e.g., a lower subjective value of money at a later date relative to an earlier date). This tendency is often reflected by a preference for small rewards received sooner over larger rewards received later. In this task, participants make 48 decisions. read more Twenty-four of these decisions are in the gains domain, and 24 decisions are in in the losses domain. These decisions occur for three compared times: (1) 2 vs. 4 weeks from today, (2) today vs. 4 weeks from today, and (3) today vs. 2 weeks from today. In the gains domain, participants choose between a smaller, sooner reward, or a larger, later reward. The early amount gained is always 400 KSH (a monetary unit equivalent to ~4 USD), and the later amount gained is either 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1, 200 KSH, or 1, 600 KSH. In the losses domain, participants are given a 1, 600 KSH endowment to start with, and are asked to choose between a smaller, sooner loss or a larger, later loss. Parallel to the amounts added in the gains domain, for the losses domain, the early amount subtracted is always 400 KSH (a monetary unit), and the later amount subtracted is either 340 KSH, 400 KSH, 440 KSH, 500 KSH, 700 KSH, 800 KSH, 1, 200 KSH, or 1, 600 KSH. The Multiple Price List task is designed to measure parameters of a discounting model on an individual level. Participants are assumed to discount the future in a quasi-hyperbolic way (Laibson, 1997) and be utility-maximizing. If this is true and utility is linear in income, then the points at which participants switch from accepted the early payment/loss to the later payment/loss or vice versa identify their precise discounting function. This function is characterized by two parameters. The first is a discounting parameter, commonly referred to by the Greek letter delta, which indicates the rate at which the subjective value of monetary rewards declines over time. For example, if a participant is indifferent between 400 KSH tomorrow and 800 KSH in two days, their decision would be characterized by a discount parameter of 0.5. The other parameter, often represented by the Greek letter beta, characterizes present-biasedness. Present-bias is the tendency for monetary rewards now to be higher in subjective value than those at any future date, regardless of how soon the “future” is. This parameter is estimated by dividing the discount rate in the near frame (today vs. 2 weeks from today) by the discount rate in the far frame (2 weeks from today vs. 4 weeks from today). These parameters are measured separately for each participant separately in the gains and losses domains.read less
NIH Self-Efficacy Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 0-5 min
Access Measure
The NIH Toolbox Self-Efficacy Scale is a 10-item self-reported measure that assesses belief in one’s capacity to manage and have control over meaningful events in life. Children answer questions (e.g., “I can manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough”; “When I have a problem, I can find several ways to solve it”) using a 5-point Likert read more response scale (1=Never, 2=Almost Never, 3=Sometimes, 4=Fairly Often, 5=Very Often). Total self-efficacy score ranges from 10-50. read less
Parent Cognition Scale
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 15-20 min
Access Measure
The Parent Cognition Scale (PCS) is a 30-item self-report measure designed to assess the degree to which parents endorse dysfunctional child-responsible and parent-causal attributions for child misbehavior. Respondents are asked to think about a target child’s misbehavior over the past 2 months and to rate various possible causes for their child’s misbehavior on a 6-point Likert scale that ranges from read more 1 (always true) to 6 (never true); when scoring, each item is reverse scored so that higher scores indicate greater endorsement. This measure yields a Child-Responsible subscore (which draws from items such as "My child thinks that s/he is the boss") and a Parent-Causal subscore (which draws from items such as "I'm not structured enough with my child").read less
Parent-Child Coercion Scale
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 2 min
Access Measure
This 9-item self-report scale assesses a parent's perception of how much coercion characterizes their relationship with their child.
Parent-Child Interaction Protocol
Interpersonal & Social Processes Observational | 30 min
Access Measure
This parent-child interaction protocol has been successfully used in over 20 years of research to elicit a wide range of harsh/overreactive and lax/permissive discipline in parent-toddler interactions. Parent-child interaction typically takes place in a small room containing a chair for the parent and three low tables. Objects that are attractive to children in this age range, but are not typically read more considered toys (e.g., a manual typewriter, an old school bell, a sealed glass jar of hard candy) were on the tables. The parent is instructed that the child is forbidden to touch these objects. The interaction consists of three tasks that present the parent with typical but challenging situations for the parent and child. First, the parent is instructed to supervise the child for a maximum of 10 minutes in putting a set of toys into a plastic bin. Then the parent gives the child another set of toys and is instructed to have the child play independently while the parent engages in a 10-minute simulated phone conversation with the experimenter. Finally, the parent is told to have the child play quietly and independently on a mat while the parent completes questionnaires for 10 minutes. The parent is told to handle the child and the situations in the manner the parent feels is most appropriate. The parent wears a "bug-in-the-ear device" to allow communications between the parent and experimenter. The experimenter cues the parent when the parent should proceed to the next situation but offers no advice or instruction about how to handle the child. The interaction can be scored in a variety of ways, based on experimenter interest. Some prior research has coded observed discipline behavior of the parent, as well as positive or negative child behavior.read less
Parent-Rated Stress (NIH Perceived Stress Scale)
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 0-5 min
Access Measure
The NIH Toolbox Perceived Stress Survey is a 10-item parent report measure of the stress experienced by children ages 8 to 12 years old. It assesses how unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overloaded respondents believe that their children find their lives. It is comprised of 10 items from the original Perceived Stress Scale developed for adults. Participants are asked to respond to read more questions (e.g., "How often did your child seem able to control life's irritations?"; "How often did difficulties pile up so high that your child did not seem able to overcome them?") with how frequently each statement describes their perceptions of their child's stress in the last month on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Very Often). Scores are obtained by reversing responses to the four positively stated items and then summing across all scale items. The mean score is generated; higher scores are indicative of greater perceived stress.read less
Pearlin Mastery Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | 5 min
Access Measure
The Pearlin Mastery Scale consists of seven items designed to assess one aspect of psychological coping resources (Mastery). Example items include, “Sometimes I feel that I am being pushed here and there in life” (reverse-scored) and “What happens to me in the future mostly depends on me.” Response options range from 1, strongly disagree, to 7, strongly agree. Higher scores read more indicate greater mastery. read less
Physiological Linkage and Relationship Quality
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience, Interpersonal & Social Processes Physiological | 10-15 min
Physiological linkage is a measure of the similarity of physiological responding of two interacting people. Relationship partners engage in a 10-15 minute discussion about an identified area of unresolved conflict and disagreement in their relationship. During the interaction, measures of peripheral physiological activity are monitored from each partner (heart rate and measures of bodily movement have proven to be particularly read more useful). A number of statistical approaches have been used in the literature to characterize the degree of linkage or synchrony between partners' physiological responding. We are currently computing linkage during short 20-second moving time windows (windows are overlapped by one second) using lagged cross-correlations. These correlations can be averaged or the number of windows in which linkage correlations are significant can be counted. Correlations can be examined with the sign preserved (i.e., in-phase or out-of-phase linkage) or as an absolute value. This measure may be useful non-verbal measure that is sensitive to coercive communications in dyadic interactions (validation for this purpose has not been accomplished yet). It may also be useful for characterizing these processes in larger groups (e.g., parents and child).read less
Pittsburgh Stress Battery
Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Task | 45 min
The Pittsburg Stress Battery (PSB) is a standardized means of evaluating cardiovascular (CV) reactions as a response to acute stressors which have been linked to an increased risk for cardiovascular disease. It was developed at the University of Pittsburg School of Medicine’s Psychiatric Institute. The original protocols vary but normally consisted of three tasks designed to maximize various psychological demands: read more a visual short term memory task (scanning), an accuracy evaluation (targeting), and a cognitive motor/reflex task (tracking). For example, the original protocol was designed to require participants use minimal motor skills tasks were completed on a joystick or keypad. The protocol consisted of (1) identifying the placement of a series of dots after they vanish from the screen (scanning) (2) shooting and hitting a target moving across the top of the computer screen (targeting) (3) moving the cursor over a specified area with directional commands reversed (tracking). Additionally, the battery has been modified in various trials, for example, by including The Stroop Task (see this task listed separately in this same Measures Repository), arithmetic task evaluations, and/or cold-pressor experiences. Although tests may vary, all task batteries are designed with the goal of increasing a participant’s CV reactions. Between each task participants are allowed a resting period. Between each task participants are allowed a resting period in some protocols they are asked to participate in a minimally invasive task designed to elicit stable cardiovascular measures between testing including minimally cognitively invasive questionnaires. Multiple measures of cardiovascular reactivity are administered during each test and have included continuous heart rate measures using electrocardiogram (EKG) devices, measures of preejection period (PEP) elicited through evaluation of cardiograph waveforms as well as discrete measures of systolic blood and diastolic blood pressure. read less
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS)
Self-Regulation, Stress Reactivity & Stress Resilience Self-report | 7 min
Access Measure
The Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is a 20-item self-report questionnaire used to measure the emotions of the respondent’s child during the past few weeks. The items are grouped into the two subscales with 10 items each: positive affect and negative affect. The respondent is asked to read several words which describe different feelings and emotions and enter read more a number that corresponds to the value on a scale to indicate the extent to which his/her child feels this way on average. The 5-item Likert scale ranges from 1 (“Very slightly or not at all”) to 5 (“Extremely”). Higher scores on Positive Affect indicate greater intensity of positive emotions, and higher scores on Negative Affect indicate greater intensity of negative emotions. read less
Probabilistic Selection Task
Self-Regulation Task | 14 min
Access Measure
The probabilistic selection task assesses the tendency to learn from positive versus negative outcomes. Participants are trained to select between abstract stimuli associated with different probabilities of giving a reward (e.g., a stimulus that results in reward 70% of the time vs. one that results in reward 30% of the time). Participants learn three probability pairings: 80/20, 70/30, and 60/40, read more and eventually learn to select the higher probability outcome. Testing involves selecting amongst novel pairings (e.g., 80/40). The participant's bias towards learning from positive vs. negative outcomes is assessed by their relative success on high-probability pairings (80/70) vs. low-probability pairings (20/30). Greater success on high-probability pairings indicates a tendency to learn from positive outcomes, whereas greater success on low-probability pairings indicates a tendency to learn from negative outcomes.read less
Psychological Refractory Period Paradigm Task
Self-Regulation Task | 12 min
Access Measure
The Psychological Refractory Period (PRP) task measures information processing limits. In PRP tasks, subjects are presented with two different stimuli in rapid succession, each of which acts as the imperative stimulus for a different choice reaction time (choice RT) task using a different set of responses. The duration between the onset of the two stimuli, the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), read more is manipulated across trials. The main dependent measure is the speed of responding, especially for the second task in the sequence, as a function of SOA. read less
Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System (RMICS)
Interpersonal & Social Processes Observational | 4 min
Access Measure
The Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System (RMICS) is an event-based system designed to code observed dyadic behavior. Behavior is defined broadly to include all observable actions (i.e. affective, motoric, paralinguistic, and linguistic). The RMICS was designed to measure frequencies of behavior and behavioral patterns (i.e. sequences) between intimate partners during conflicts. The RMICS is the second-generation extension of the Marital read more Interaction Coding System (MICS), the oldest and most widely used couples observational system (Heyman, 2001). Although originally designed to code conflict behavior (see Couples Conflict Task for details about structured couples conflict interactions), the RMICS has been used to code of wide variety of structured dyadic conversations (e.g., analogue problem-solving tasks, social support tasks, and sibling conversations). The RMICS comprises three negative codes (low-intensity hostility, high-intensity hostility, dysphoric affect), two positive codes (low-intensity positivity, high-intensity positivity), one neutral (constructive problem discussion/solution), and one other. Coders assign a code to each speaker and listener turn, contingent on the verbal, nonverbal, and paraverbal content within. For example, an utterance such as, “You make me sick, ” would be awarded a high-intensity hostility code because it suggests abject disgust—classified as one of the seven types of psychological abuse by the RMICS. RMICS coding can be done in approximate real time (i.e., 10-15 min. coding for a 10-min. interaction). Coders code both partners simultaneously. What is done with the code is determined by investigator interest. Some examples of variables of interest might be frequency of hostile codes, or sequential analyses that would identify how often a certain code follows another code. read less
Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test is a behavioral task that assesses non-verbal, analytic intelligence. Participants are presented with a display showing a matrix (e.g., a 3 x 3 grid consisting of three rows with three cells in each row). With the exception of the cell on the bottom right, each of the other cells in the display is occupied by a read more complex visual stimulus. Participants’ task is to determine which of eight other possible stimuli is the correct entry for the single empty cell. In order to answer correctly on each trial, participants must carefully analyze the display to determine a complex set of rules that governs the relationships among the elements that compose the stimuli. For example, both of the following rules may apply to the display in a single trial. First, the quantity of particular elements appearing in the cells of each row may increase from the left cell (one black square) to the middle cell (two black squares) to the right cell (three black squares). Second, a particular element of the complex stimuli has the same property for each cell in a given row (a rectangular bar always with the same orientation), but this property varies for cells in the left column (horizontal orientation), cells in the middle column (vertical orientation), and cells in the right column (diagonal orientation). The task advances in a progressive way such that the trials become increasingly difficult. The dependent measure is the number of correctly answered items in the entire set. read less
Recent Probes Task
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
This behavioral task indexes the degree to which participants can resist proactive interference from recently encountered but no-longer-relevant information. Participants are asked to remember a small number of items called the target set (e.g., 4 letters) over a short retention interval, followed by a recognition probe (e.g., a single letter). Probes can either be positive (i.e., a member of the read more target set) or negative (i.e., not a member of the target set). Additionally, probes can be recent (i.e., a member of the target set from the previous trial) or non-recent. Therefore, on a given trial, the probe can be a recent positive (a member of the current trial and the preceding trial memory set), non-recent positive (a member of the current trial but not the preceding trial memory set), recent negative (a member of the preceding trial but not the current trial memory set), or non-recent negative (not a member of the current trial or the preceding trial memory set). Participants are asked to give one response if the probe was part of the memory set for that trial and a different response if the probe was not part of the memory set for that trial. The main dependent measure compares speed and accuracy on recent negative probes to non-recent negative probes, with the typical result being a performance decrement on recent vs non-recent negative probes. This relative performance decrement is evidence of failure to resist proactive interference. read less
Risk Preferences Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Risk Preferences Task is a behavioral measure of risky decision-making that occurs in three series. In each series, participants must choose to draw a ball from one of two jars: Jar A or Jar B. Jar A and Jar B each contain two balls with an equal probability of being chosen at random (50%). The first round is an read more unpaid practice round, after which Series 1-3 occur. In Series 1 (choices over gains), the participant begins with 1000 KSH (KSH is a monetary unit; 100 KSH is ~ 1 USD), and makes 10 decisions about which jar to choose from. Jar A contains a blue ball worth 400 KSH and a red ball worth 300 KSH, and Jar B contains an orange ball worth 50 KSH and a green ball with a value that varies from 620 KSH to 1300 KSH. For Series 2, the participant receives an additional 1000 KSH endowment. Series 2 (choices over losses) also comprises 10 decisions, in which Jar A contains a blue ball (400 KSH loss) and a red ball (300 KSH loss), and Jar B contains an Orange ball (50 KSH loss) and a green ball (540 KSH loss to 830 KSH loss). For Series 3, the participant receives an additional 350 KSH endowment. In Series 3 (choices over gains and losses), Jar A contains a red ball (gain of 10 KSH, 40 KSH or 250 KSH) and a blue ball (loss of 40 KSH or 80 KSH), and Jar B contains a green ball (gain of 300 KSH) and an orange ball (loss of 110 KSH, 140 KSH, 160 KSH, or 210 KSH). The task is scored following the methodology in Tanaka, Camerer & Nguyen (2010). It is assumed that participant decisions are utility-maximizing in a prospect theory framework. This model is characterized by parameters for risk aversion and loss aversion which differ across participants. An iterative process allows the researcher to derive the set of values for these parameters which would rationalize each participant’s choices. For more details, see section II.B of Tanaka, Camerer & Nguyen (2010) read less
Selection-Optimization-Compensation Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Selection-Optimization-Compensation Questionnaire (SOCQ) is a 12-item self-report scale designed to measure the extent to which people use the principles of selection, optimization, and compensation to manage their resources in order to maximize beneficial outcomes and minimize adverse ones. According to the Selection-Optimization-Compensation framework (SOC), opportunities and resources vary over the lifespan, and adaptively navigating these changing conditions involves three read more components. First, the selection of possible goals is necessary in light of limited resources (e.g., time, energy) at different stages of life. Elective selection involves the use of self-regulatory processes to choose one or several goals from among many possible goals. In contrast, loss-based selection involves adapting to lacking resources that were previously available earlier in life. Second, the optimization of available internal resources (e.g., cognitive control) or external resources (e.g., friends’ advice) is used to best serve one’s chosen goals. Third, compensation is needed when resources are limited or lacking so that one substitutes a different means to achieve the same goal. Each SOCQ item consists of a pair of opposing statements that each correspond to hypothetical individuals called Person A and Person B. Participants indicate for each item which statement best represents them. In all of the following examples, the SOC target is listed first followed by a non-SOC distractor, but the order of conditions is randomized in each item of the actual SOCQ. Three items measure elective selection (e.g., Person A: “I concentrate all my energy on a few things” vs. Person B: “I divide my energy among many things”). Three items measure loss-based selection (e.g., Person A: “When I can’t do something important the way I did before, I look for a new goal” vs. Person B: “When I can’t do something important the way I did before, I distribute my energy among many things”). Three items measure optimization (e.g., Person A: “I make every effort to achieve a given goal” vs. Person B: “I prefer to wait for a while and see if things will work out by themselves”). Three items measure compensation (e.g., Person A: “When things don't go as well as they used to, I keep trying other ways of doing it until I can achieve the same result I used to” vs. Person B: “When things don't go as well as they used to, I accept it”). The dependent measures are the number of SOC targets endorsed within each of the four subscales: elective selection, loss-based selection, optimization, and compensation. Additionally, a composite index is computed by summing the four subscales totals. read less
Shape Matching Task
Self-Regulation Task | 20 min
Access Measure
The shape matching task assesses cognitive control, or resistance to distraction. Participants are presented with probe and target shapes and must decide whether they are the same shape. On some trials a distractor shape will be present, which the participant is instructed to ignore. The primary dependent measure is the difference in response time and accuracy between when the distractor read more is present versus absent. read less
Shift Task
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Shift Task was designed to understand reinforcement learning (RL) in a complex, multidimensional environment. In this task, participants are presented with three stimuli characterized by three dimensions: (1) color, (2) texture, and (3) shape. Each of these dimensions has three different exemplars (e.g., shape could be circle, square, or triangle), so that, across the three stimuli, each exemplar from read more each dimension is represented once. The combinations of the three dimensions differ across presentations. One exemplar of one dimension (e.g., the triangle exemplar from the shape dimension) is associated with a 75% probability of reward; stimuli without this characteristic are associated with a 25% probability of reward. Participants select one of the three stimuli on each presentation, and are instructed to try to get as many points (“rewards”) as possible. Thus participants are incentivized to learn which exemplar is associated with a greater probability of reward. The rewarded exemplar is switched every 15-25 trials without notifying the participants. This switch could be to a different exemplar from the same dimension (e.g., from triangle to square) or to a different dimension (e.g., shape/triangle to color/red). Switching patterns are analyzed to determine the balance between a computationally efficient process of serial-hypothesis-testing – attending to one feature at a time – versus a fully Bayesian procedure taking advantage of all available probabilistic information. read less
Short Self-Regulation Questionnaire
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Short version of the Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SSRQ) is a 31-item self-report measure of the ability to regulate behavior to achieve one’s goals. Participants indicate the extent to which they agree with each item using a 5-point Likert scale: 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Somewhat Disagree), 3 (Neutral), 4 (Somewhat Agree), and 5 (Strongly Agree). The measure has one total scale read more computed by summing the items (after reverse-coding certain items, as needed). Examples of items include the following: “Once I have a goal, I can usually plan how to reach it, ” “I have a lot of willpower, ” and “As soon as I see a problem or challenge, I start looking for possible solutions.” read less
Simon Task
Self-Regulation Task | 8 min
Access Measure
The Simon Task is a behavioral measure of interference/conflict resolution. In this task participants are asked to respond to visual stimuli by making a rightward response to one stimulus (e.g., a circle) and a leftward response to another (e.g., a square). The stimuli are sometimes presented on the right side of the display and sometimes on the left. The location/side read more of the display on which the stimuli appear is irrelevant to accurate performance on the task, but it influences participants’ patterns of responding by either matching (i.e., congruent trials) or not matching (i.e., incongruent trials) the side (left or right) of the correct button press associated with the shape. The main dependent measures of interest contrasts reaction time and accuracy for congruent trials (e.g., a circle on the right side of the screen) vs incongruent trials (e.g., a circle on the left side of the screen). This Simon Effect is indicated by lower accuracy and/or longer reaction time for incongruent vs congruent trials. This effect is taken as a measure of interference or conflict between a goal-relevant dimension (i.e., the identity of the shape) and a non-goal-relevant dimension (i.e., the location of the shape). read less
Simple Reaction Time Task
Self-Regulation Task | 3 min
Access Measure
The Simple Reaction Time (RT) Task measures the basic cognitive processes of perception and response execution. The task requires that participants make one specific response (e.g., a spacebar press) whenever any stimulus (e.g., a shape) appears on the screen. Typically, there is only one stimulus that repeats throughout the experiment. This straightforward task engages certain basic processes, such as perception read more and response execution, without requiring more complicated processes such as attentional focusing (i.e., resisting distraction) or response inhibition (i.e., stopping a motor action). The main dependent measure is the speed of responding.read less
Spatial Span Task
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Spatial Span Task is a behavioral measure of working memory capacity, the cognitive ability to store and manage information on a transient basis. It is an analog to the Digit Span Task. On each trial participants are presented with an array of geometric shapes such as white squares appearing on a computer screen. On each trial the squares change read more from white to a different color in a sequence with variable orders and colors. The task exists with two variants: forward-span and backward-span. In the forward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the squares in the order they changed color by typing keys corresponding to each square via keypress. In the backward-span variant, at the end of each list participants attempt to recall the squares in the reverse order that they changed color. The difficulty level is systematically increased by varying the number of boxes on each trial from two boxes (easiest) to nine boxes (most difficult). The dependent measure, spatial span, is the maximum number of boxes correctly recalled. read less
Stimulus Selective Stop Signal Task
Self-Regulation Task | 22 min
Access Measure
The Stimulus Selective Stop-Signal Task measures two fundamental processes of cognitive control: response inhibition and response selection. The task is a variant of the simple Stop-Signal Task in which participants are asked to stop responding to one particular stimulus called the “stop signal” (e.g., an orange stimulus) but not to a second stimulus called the “ignore signal” (e.g., a blue read more stimulus). This task has the benefit of ecological validity in that it matches the way stopping of behavior occurs in some real-world contexts. That is, in some real-world circumstances, stopping must occur in response to certain stimuli (e.g., a red light) but not in response to other similar stimuli (e.g., a green light). The stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), the main dependent measure for response inhibition in stopping tasks, is prolonged in the stimulus selective stopping task when compared to the more canonical simple Stop-Signal Task. read less
Stop Signal Task
Self-Regulation Task | 30 min
Access Measure
The Stop-Signal Task is designed to measure motor response inhibition, one aspect of cognitive control. On each trial of this task participants are instructed to make a speeded response to an imperative "go" stimulus except on a subset of trials when an additional "stop signal" occurs, in which case participants are instructed that they should make no response. The Independent read more Race Model describes performance in the Stop-Signal Task as a race between a go process that begins when the go stimulus occurs and a stop process that begins when the stop signal occurs. According to this model, whichever independent process reaches completion first determines the resulting behavior; earlier completion of the go process results in an overt response (i.e., stop-failure), whereas earlier completion of the stop process results in successful inhibition. The main dependent measure, stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), can be computed such that lower SSRT indicates greater response inhibition. One variant of the task measures proactive slowing, the tendency for participants to respond more slowly in anticipation of a potential stopping signal. This variant often uses multiple probabilities of a stop signal (e.g., 20% and 40%) to manipulate participants’ expectancies about the likelihood of a stop signal occurring. The extent of slowing in the higher compared to the lower stop probability conditions is an index of proactive slowing/control. read less
Stroop Task
Self-Regulation Task | 8 min
Access Measure
The Stroop task is a seminal measure of cognitive control. Successful performance of the task requires the ability to overcome automatic tendencies to respond in accordance with current goals. On each trial of the task, a color word (e.g., “red”, “blue”) is presented in one of multiple ink colors (e.g., blue, red). Participants are instructed to respond based upon the read more ink color of the word, not the identity of the word itself. When the color and the word are congruent (e.g., “red” in red ink), the natural tendency to read the word facilitates performance, resulting in fast and accurate responding. When the color and the word are incongruent (e.g., “red” in blue ink), the strong, natural tendency to read must be overcome to respond to the ink color. The main dependent measure in the Stroop task is the “Stroop Effect, ” which is the degree of slowing and the reduction in accuracy for incongruent relative to congruent trials.read less
Stroop-like Arrows Task
Self-Regulation Self-report | 10-15 min
Access Measure
The Stroop-like Arrows Task aims to measure aspects of executive control, such as attentional control and inhibitory control. This adaptation of the Stroop-like Arrows Task consists of a series of 30 red and blue arrows (stimuli), which participants must respond to by pressing a “button” (a green rectangle) either in the congruent direction of the arrow (when it is red) read more or in the incongruent direction of the arrow (when it is blue). In other words, when the arrow is red and points to the left, the respondent should press the button to the left. On the other hand, when the arrow is blue and points to the left, the respondent should press the button to the right. Respondents must complete the task as quickly as possible. Responses are scored as either correct or incorrect, and reaction times are recorded by trial type. Significantly longer response times and lower frequency of correct responses to incongruent stimuli are interpreted as evidence of a “Stroop-like” effect. The number of arrows that a participant identifies correctly on average per second is used as a measure of overall performance.read less
Task-Switching Task
Self-Regulation Task | 24 min
Access Measure
Task-switching tasks index the control processes involved in reconfiguring the cognitive system to support a new stimulus-response mapping. In this task, subjects are presented with a task cue followed by a colored number (between 1-4 or 6-9). The cue indicates whether to respond based on parity (odd/even), magnitude (greater/less than 5), or color (orange/blue). Trials can present the same cue read more and task, or can switch the cue or the task. Responses are slower and less accurate when the cue or task differs across trials (i.e. a switch) compared to when the current cue or task remains the same (i.e. a repeat). read less
Theories of Willpower Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Theories of Willpower Scale measures beliefs about the consequences of mental exertion. Specifically, the scale measures whether someone sees mental exertion as a limited versus unlimited resource. The scale consists of 12 items, six assess beliefs about strenuous mental activity (e.g., “Your mental stamina fuels itself. Even after strenuous mental exertion, you can continue doing more of it”) and read more six assess beliefs about resisting temptations (e.g., “Resisting temptations makes you feel more vulnerable to the next temptations that come along”). Answers are scored from 1, strongly agree, to 6, strongly disagree, and all items are pooled to create a total scale score. read less
Three Factor Eating Questionnaire-R18
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Three Factor Eating Questionnaire Revised, 18-item (TFEQ-R18) measures dietary restraint. There are three different factors: (1) Cognitive Restraint, comprised of six items (e.g., “I consciously hold back at meals in order not to gain weight), (2) Uncontrolled Eating, comprised of nine items (e.g., “When I see a real delicacy, I often get so hungry that I have to eat read more right away”), and (3) Emotional Eating, comprised of three items (e.g., “When I feel blue, I often overeat”). Responses are scored on a 4-point scale, and anchors can vary across items (e.g., definitely true to definitely false, or never to at least once a week). Means are computed for each subscale (as long as at least half of the items have been answered) and are transformed to correspond to a 0-100 scale score.read less
Tower of London
Self-Regulation Task | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Tower of London task is an ostensible measure of planning ability. In this task, participants are presented with colored disks stacked vertically in three possible positions (the “start” state), and are instructed to move them one at a time until they match a given configuration (the “goal” state). Each trial can vary in difficulty, requiring different numbers of moves read more or including different numbers of disks. Difficult trials may also require moves that result in a series of configurations that do not match the “goal, ” but that are required in order to solve the task (“subgoal chunks”). Dependent variables can include preplan times (i.e. time between task introduction and the first move), move times, excess moves made (i.e. number of moves exceeding the minimum needed to solve the task), and number of trials in which the task was completed with the minimum number of moves. read less
Two-Stage Task
Self-Regulation Task | 26 min
Access Measure
This task assess two types of reinforcement learning (RL): model-free and model-based RL. In this task, participants make two sequential decisions that navigate them through two "stages" defined by different stimuli. First-stage choices are associated with one of two second stages (e.g., 2a and 2b): one first-stage choice leads to 2a 70% of the time and 2b 30% of the read more time, while the opposite is true of the other first-stage choice (i.e. 2a occurs 30% of the time and 2b occurs 70% of the time). Each second-stage choice is associated with some probability of receiving a reward. This probability changes slowly over time, requiring continuous learning in order to succeed at the task. Because the goal of the subject is to maximize rewards in the second stage, ideal performance would entail identifying the most rewarding second stage (e.g., 2a) and making first-stage choices that make this result more likely (e.g., the first-stage choice that results in 2a 70% of the time). read less
UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale is a 59-item measure of factors that could lead to impulsive behaviors. It was derived by including existing scales of impulsivity in factor analysis. Participants respond to each item using a 4-point Likert scale: 1 (Agree Strongly), 2 (Agree Some), 3 (Disagree Some), and 4 (Disagree Strongly). There are five subscales: Positive Urgency, Negative Urgency, read more Lack of Premeditation, Lack of Perseverance, and Sensation Seeking. Positive Urgency measures the tendency to act impulsively due to positive affect. Twelve items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I am in great mood, I tend to get into situations that could cause me problems”). Negative Urgency measures the tendency to act impulsively due to negative affect. Twelve items contribute to this score (e.g., “When I am upset, I often act without thinking”). Lack of Premeditation refers to the tendency to act rashly without first reflecting upon the decision to act. Eleven items contribute to this score (e.g., “I am not one of those people who blurt out things without thinking”). Lack of Perseverance involves a tendency not to complete projects. Ten items contribute to this score (e.g., example of a reverse-coded item: “Unfinished tasks really bother me”). Sensation Seeking involves motivation to experience novelty. Twelve items contribute to this score (e.g., “I would like to learn to fly an airplane”). read less
Video-Mediated Affective Recall
Interpersonal & Social Processes Self-report | 60 min
Access Measure
The Video-Mediated recall procedure is a self-reported measure of remembered emotional responses and cognitions during a previous experience of social interaction with a close other such as one’s romantic partner or one’s child. The video-mediated recall procedure is a procedure by which parents and/or a member of a couple view a videotape of their interaction with their partner or child. read more While watching the video, they use a dial to rate their experienced emotion and/or cognitions moment-by-moment during the interaction task. The measure can be scored in a variety of ways depending on investigator interest. For example, previous research has scored the measure using average attributions rated over the episode, the proportion of negative to positive affect, and average child behavior during the task (see measured section below for details). read less
Writing Task
Self-Regulation Task | 5 min
Access Measure
This is an exploratory task, intended to identify behavioral features of self-regulation. Participants are asked to write for 5 minutes in response to the prompt "what happened in the last month?" The data will be analyzed using standard methods for sentiment analysis as well as advanced methods for natural language processing.
Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The 56-item Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZPTI) measures individual differences in time-orientation, or tendency to focus on different aspects of the past, present, and future. The measure consists of five subscales, with answers scored from 1, very uncharacteristic [of me], to 5, very characteristic [of me]. The subscales are: (1) Past-Negative, including 10 items such as, “I think about the read more bad things that have happened to me in the past, ” (2) Present-Hedonistic, including 15 items such as, “Taking risks keeps my life from becoming boring, ” (3) Future, including 13 items such as, “I complete projects on time by making steady progress, ” (4) Past-Positive, including nine items such as, “It gives me pleasure to think about the past, ” and (5) Present-Fatalistic, including nine items such as, “Often luck pays off better than hard work.” read less
Zuckerman Sensation Seeking Scale-V
Self-Regulation Self-report | Time Not Specified
Access Measure
The Zuckerman Sensation-Seeking Scale-V (SSS-V) consists of 40 forced-choice questions designed to assess individual differences in optimal level of stimulation. For example, one choice might be, “I would like to learn to fly an airplane” (indicating greater sensation-seeking) versus “I would not like to learn to fly an airplane” (indicating lower sensation-seeking). The SSS-V can be scored as a general read more measure of sensation-seeking by summing all items, but can also be split into four 10-item factors: (1) Thrill and Adventure Seeking (TAS; e.g., parachute jumping), (2) Experience Seeking (ES; e.g., exploring strange cities or towns alone), (3) Disinhibition (DIS; e.g., desiring varied sexual experiences), and (4) Boredom Susceptibility (BS; e.g., preference for unpredictable friends).read less