Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41826747›Full record

ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2026

Are neural and behavioural measures of cognitive control associated with adaptive and maladaptive risk-taking in adolescence and young adulthood?

Montana Hunter, Patrick Skippen, Sara Lo Templio, Daniel Barker, Patricia T Michie, Frini Karayanidis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Montana HunterSchool of Psychology and Vision Sciences, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK. mrh45@leicester.ac.uk.
Patrick SkippenFunctional Neuroimaging Laboratory, School of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Sara Lo TemplioHuman Dimensions of Natural Resources, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Daniel BarkerHunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.
Patricia T MichieFunctional Neuroimaging Laboratory, School of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Frini KarayanidisFunctional Neuroimaging Laboratory, School of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council DP120100340Australian Research Council DP170100756
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk-taking in young people is often attributed to a mismatch between slowly maturing cognitive control networks and overactive reward networks, leading to impulsive actions. However, evidence is inconsistent, and these models do not account for individual differences or differentiate between adaptive and maladaptive risk-taking. More recent theories seek to address these limitations; yet most evidence relies on self-report rather than neural measures of control and reward systems. This study explores cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between cognitive control and adaptive and maladaptive risk-taking in 15-35-year-olds assessed 2 to 4 years apart (n = 73). Cognitive control was assessed with behavioural and EEG (i.e., switch positivity) measures derived from a cued-trials task-switching paradigm. Risk Adjustment (i.e., adaptive risk-taking) and Impulsivity (i.e. maladaptive risk-taking) were measured using the Cambridge Gambling Task and Information Sampling Task, respectively. Linear mixed-effects models were used to examine relationships between these measures, how they change over time, and the impact of age. Cognitive control and Impulsivity peaked in young adulthood. Risk Adjustment increased slightly over time, but not significantly, and not significantly differ by age. An increase Switch Positivity amplitude from Time 1 to Time 2 was associated with a decrease in Impulsivity, regardless of age. Initial cognitive control did not predict changes in Risk Adjustment or Impulsivity. These findings support models that emphasise individual variability in cognitive control as more accurate predictors of impulsive behaviour than age alone. They also highlight the need for consistent definitions of constructs, such as cognitive control, impulsivity, and risk-taking, across different measurement levels.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalCognitionExecutive FunctionImpulsive BehaviorRisk-TakingAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleRewardYoung AdultCognitive controlEEGImpulsivityRisk-takingTask-switching

Identifiers

PMID41826747
PMCPMC13384997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.