Genetic Propensity for Delay Discounting and Educational Attainment in Adults Are Associated With Delay Discounting in Preadolescents: Findings From the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study

Le résumé fourni par la source

Higher delay discounting (DD) (i.e., propensity to devalue larger, delayed rewards over immediate, smaller rewards) is a transdiagnostic marker underpinning multiple health behaviors. Although genetic influences account for some of the variability in DD among adults, less is known about the genetic contributors to DD among preadolescents. We examined whether polygenic scores (PGS) for DD, educational attainment, and behavioral traits (i.e., impulsivity, inhibition, and externalizing behavior) were associated with phenotypic DD among preadolescents. Participants included youth (N = 8982, 53% male) from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study who completed an Adjusting Delay Discounting Task at the 1-year follow-up and had valid genetic data. PGS for DD, educational attainment, impulsivity, inhibition, and externalizing behaviors were created based on the largest GWAS available. Separate linear mixed effects models were conducted in individuals most genetically similar to European (EUR; n = 4972), African (AFR; n = 1769), and Admixed American (AMR; n = 2241) reference panels. After adjusting for age, sex, income, and the top ten genetic ancestry principal components, greater PGS for DD and lower educational attainment (but not impulsivity, inhibition, or externalizing) were associated with higher rates of DD (i.e., preference for sooner, smaller rewards) in participants most genetically similar to EUR reference panels. Findings provide insight into the influence of genetic propensity for DD and educational attainment on the discounting tendencies of preadolescents, particularly those most genetically similar to European reference samples, thereby advancing our understanding of the etiology of choice behaviors in this population.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.