Considering the Role of Physiological Rewards in the Relationship Between Impulsivity and Decision Making

Abstract

Individual levels of impulsivity and anticipated physiological rewards (i.e., thrill) associated with offending have both been recognized as important aspects of the criminal decision-making calculus. However, the extant literature does not have a clear understanding of the dynamics between the two constructs and crime, specifically how physiological rewards matter in the impulsivity-offending relationship. Using the dual-process framework of decision making, this thesis explores first whether impulsivity influence offending indirectly through perceived physiological rewards, and second whether individuals are differentially susceptible to physiological rewards according to their levels of impulsivity (i.e. moderation). These hypotheses are tested using two waves of the Pathways to Desistance study. The results provide support that physiological rewards partially mediate the relationship between impulsivity and offending, yet there is no statistically significant moderating relationship.