ebook img

Antisocial behavior from a developmental psychopathology PDF

21 Pages·2009·0.17 MB·English
by  
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Antisocial behavior from a developmental psychopathology

DevelopmentandPsychopathology21(2009),1111–1131 Copyright#CambridgeUniversityPress,2009 doi:10.1017/S0954579409990071 Antisocial behavior from a developmental psychopathology perspective PAULJ.FRICKaANDESSIVIDINGb aUniversityofNewOrleans;andbUniversityCollegeLondon Abstract Thispaperreviewsresearchonchronicpatternsofantisocialbehaviorandplacesthisresearchintoadevelopmental psychopathologyframework.Specifically,researchsuggeststhatthereareatleastthreeimportantpathwaysthroughwhich childrenandadolescentscandevelopsevereantisocialbehaviors.Onegroupofyouthshowsantisocialbehaviorthat beginsinadolescence,andtwogroupsshowantisocialbehaviorthatbeginsinchildhoodbutdifferonthepresenceor absenceofcallous–unemotionaltraits.Inoutliningthesedistinctpathwaystoantisocialbehavior,wehavetriedto illustratesomekeyconceptsfromdevelopmentalpsychopathologysuchasequifinalityandmultifinality,theimportance ofunderstandingtheinterfacebetweennormalandabnormaldevelopment,andtheimportanceofusingmultiple levelsofanalysestoadvancecausaltheories.Finally,wediscusshowthisdevelopmentmodelcanbeusedtoenhance existinginterventionsforantisocialindividuals. The study of antisocial, criminal, and aggres- proachforintegratingthelargeanddiversere- sivebehaviorshasalongandrichresearchhis- search literature on antisocial behavior, used tory (Binder, 1987). Thisintensive focus from broadlyto refer to criminal andaggressive be- research is not surprising given that these be- haviors, as well as other behaviorsthat violate haviors often operate at a very high cost to therightsofothersormajorsocietalnorms. society,suchascoststovictimsofthesebehav- We think that a developmental psychopathol- iors and the costs associated with detaining ogy approach for integrating this research could individuals in an effort to protect potential fu- beimportantforatleasttworeasons.First,adevel- ture victims (Krug, Dahlberg, Mercy, Zwi, & opmentalpsychopathologyframeworkprovidesa Lozano, 2002; Loeber & Farrington, 2001). veryusefulwayforintegratingthediverseresearch Ofimportance,thesebehaviorshavebeenstud- literaturesintoacoherentcausalmodel.Thiscan ied from a number of different perspectives, help us to understand the developmental mecha- including anthropological, evolutionary, soci- nismsthatcanleadtoantisocialbehaviorpatterns ological, psychological, and biological per- andtotranslatethisresearchintoimplicationsfor spectives, to name a few. Research from each preventionandtreatment.Second,researchonan- ofthesedisciplinesprovidesauniqueperspec- tisocialbehaviorprovidesaclearwayofillustrating tive for understanding the course, causes, and theimportanceofseveralkeydevelopmentalpsy- most effective interventions for individuals chopathology concepts, such as equifinality and who show severe antisocial behaviors. In this multifinality,theimportanceofintegratingresearch paper, and in fitting with this special section, onbothnormalandabnormaldevelopment,andthe we take a developmental psychopathologyap- importanceofintegratingmultiplelevelofanalyses (e.g., neurological, social, cognitive, behavioral) forunderstandingpsychopathologicalconditions. Address correspondence and reprint requeststo: Paul One broad question that is often raised in J. Frick, Department of Psychology, University of New taking a developmental psychopathology per- Orleans, 2001 Geology and Psychology Building, New Orleans,LA70148;E-mail:[email protected]. spective on antisocial behavior is whether or 1111 1112 P.J.FrickandE.Viding not patterns of antisocial behavior should or sion (DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Asso- shouldnotbeconsideredapsychopathological ciation,2000)betweenargumentative,noncom- condition, psychiatric disorder, or mental ill- pliant, and oppositional behaviors subsumed ness (Richters & Cicchetti, 1993; Wakefield, under the diagnosis ofoppositionaldefiantdis- Pottick,& Kirk, 2002). We think that a devel- order and the aggressive, destructive, deceitful, opmental psychopathology perspective cannot andnorm-violating behaviorsofconduct disor- completely address this question because the der.Otherdistinctionshavebeenmadebetween answerislargelydependentonhowonedefines overt conduct problems involving direct con- “mentaldisorder”(Lilienfeld,&Marino,1995; frontation (e.g., arguing, fighting, stealing with Wakefield,1992). Thisis,ifa mentaldisorder confrontation) and covert conduct problems is defined solely as a pattern of behavior that that do not involve confrontation (e.g., lying, causes harm for a person (e.g., leads to or stealing without confrontation; Snyder et al., putshimorheratriskforimpairmentsinpsy- 2008)orbetweenaggressivebehaviorthatisre- chological, social, oroccupational functioning active(e.g.,inresponsetorealorperceivedpro- or for violating the rights of others), then im- vocation) or proactive (e.g., premeditated or for pairing levels of antisocial behavior would fit instrumental gain) in nature (Card & Little, well within such a definition of a disorder. In 2006;Marsee&Frick,2007).Stillothermethods contrast, other definitions, such as those that classify youth based on the trajectory of their requirethe disruptionof some internalmecha- antisocial behavior over time, such as whether nism in the person (e.g., Wakefield, 1992), the behavior is high and stable, low and stable, mayfit forsome antisocial individuals butnot highanddeclining,orlowandincreasing(Broidy others.Adevelopmentalpsychopathologicalper- etal.,2003;LaCourse,Depere,&Loeber,2008). spectivecanhelptodefinethevariousdifferent Afurtherclassificationconcern,andonethat causalpathwaysthatmayleadtoantisocialbe- isparticularlyrelevanttothefocusofthisspecial havior,someofwhichfitparticulardefinitions issue, isthe relationship between antisocial be- of mental disorders and others that do not. havior patterns and personality disorders. For Further, this perspective can uncover factors someclassificationsystems,includingthe most (e.g.,biological, social) that candisrupt a per- recentversionsoftheDSM(AmericanPsychiat- son’snormaldevelopmentandleadtotheprob- ricAssociation,1980,1987,2000),chronicpat- lematicbehavior,againdefiningsomepatterns ternsofsevereantisocialbehaviorandantisocial that may fit with certain definitions of mental personalitydisorderareconsideredsynonymous disorders and othersthat do not. Thus, the de- concepts (Robins, 1978). However, there have velopmental psychopathology perspective can been several alternative approaches to classify- provideawayofconceptualizingantisocialbe- ingantisocial individualsthatfocusontheper- havior and its causes that informs the debate sonalitytraitsthatmayunderliethechronicanti- regarding criteria for a disorder, but it cannot social behavior. For example, individuals with determinethe“best”methodfordifferentiating chronic patterns of antisocial behavior can be disorderedandnondisorderedindividuals.This classified based on their pattern of scores on issue is largely dependent on the purpose for the Big Five personality dimensions. Specifi- makingthisdistinction. cally, antisocial individuals often are low on Another broad classification issue relates to the personality dimensions of agreeableness thegreatdiversityofbehaviorssubsumedunder andconscientiousness(Lynam&Widiger,2001). the rubric of antisocial behavior (Frick et al., Another example of this approach using per- 1993). This large and heterogeneous set of be- sonality features focuseson the affective (e.g., haviors has led to numerous attemptsto define lack of empathy and guilt) and interpersonal meaningful subtypes of antisocial youth based (e.g., callous use of others and narcissism) on the particular pattern of behaviors they ex- characteristics that have been hallmarks of the hibit (fora review,see Frick &Marsee,2006). construct of psychopathy (Cleckley, 1976; Some examples include the distinction made Hare, 1993; Lykken, 1995). This research has in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of indicated that not all individuals who show Mental Disorders—Fourth Edition, Text Revi- chronic antisocial and criminal behavior show Developmentalpsychopathologyandantisocial 1113 elevatedlevelsofpsychopathictraits.Infact,it between children who begin showing severe isonlyaminorityofantisocialindividualswho conduct problems and antisocial behavior in do so. However, the subgroup of antisocial childhood versus thosewhose onset of antiso- individualswithpsychopathictraitsshowapar- cialbehaviordoesnotemergeuntiladolescence ticularlysevereandviolentpatternofbehavior (Moffitt,1993,2003;Patterson,1996).Children (Hemphill, 2007; Leistico, Salekin, DeCoster, inthechildhood-onsetgroupoftenbeginshow- & Rogers 2008; Porter & Woodworth, 2006) ingmildconductproblemsasearlyaspreschool and distinct cognitive and emotional deficits orearlyelementaryschool,andtheirbehavioral compared with other antisocial individuals problems tend to increase in rate and severity (Blair,Mitchell,&Blair,2005;Patrick,2007). throughout childhood and into adolescence A common theme of all of these issues in- (Lahey & Loeber, 1994). In contrast, the ado- volved in the classification of antisocial indi- lescent-onset group does not show significant vidualsistherecognitionthatthereareimportant behavioralproblemsinchildhood,buttheybe- subgroupsofantisocialindividualsthatneedto gin exhibiting significant antisocial and delin- bedefinedbyanyclassificationsystem.Further, quentbehaviorcoincidingwiththeonsetofado- mostoftheapproachesthathavebeenusedtode- lescence (Moffitt, 2003). In addition to the finemorehomogeneoussubgroupsofantisocial different patterns of onset, the childhood-onset individualshavereliedondifferencesinthebe- groupismorelikelytoshowaggressivebehav- havioral manifestations (e.g., type of behavior, iorsinchildhoodandadolescence,andismore trajectory of behavior over time) or differences likelytocontinuetoshowantisocialandcriminal in personality traits (e.g., Big Five dimensions; behaviorintoadulthood(forareview,seeFrick presenceofpsychopathictraits)tomakedistinc- &Loney,1999). tions within antisocial youth. We would argue Forexample,Farrington,Gallagher,Morley, thatadevelopmentalpsychopathologyapproach St.Ledger,andWest(1988)reportedthatboys should emphasize potential differences in the who were arrested prior to age 12 showed al- developmental mechanisms that may underlie most twice as many convictions at two later thesebehavioralmanifestationsorpersonalityfea- points in time (between the ages of 16 and 18 tures.Thereasonforthisemphasisisthatsome- andbetweentheagesof22and24).Similarly, times different behavioral manifestations may Robins (1966) reported that boys referred to a reflect different development processes under- mental health clinic for antisocial behavior lyingthebehavior.However,itisalsopossible prior to age 11 were twice as likely to receive thatthesamebehavioralpattern(e.g.,highand adiagnosisofanantisocialpersonalitydisorder stable levels of antisocial behavior) can come asanadult,comparedtoboyswhobeganshow- about through very different developmental ing antisocial behaviorafterage 11. As afinal mechanisms. Thus, in the following sections, example,Moffitt,Caspi,Harrington,andMilne we outline a model for understanding patterns (2002) reported that, within a birth cohort of of severe antisocial behavior that focuses 539 males born in New Zealand and followed largely on the developmental processes that throughage26,the45menwhohaddisplayed can explain some of the differences in the be- significant conduct problems prior to adoles- havioralmanifestationsorassociatedpersonal- cencewere more likely to have had acriminal itytraitsdisplayedbyantisocialindividuals. conviction(55%)andtohaveagreaternumber ofconvictions(M¼6.9,SD¼11.5)asadults thanthe121menwhoshowedsignificantcon- TheConceptsofEquifinalityand duct problems starting in adolescence (34%; MultifinalityandSubgroups M ¼ 3.5, SD ¼ 10.8). Both groups, however, ofAntisocialYouth differedfromcontrolswithouthistoriesofcon- ductproblems(17%;M¼0.6,SD¼3.1).The Thechildhood-versusadolescent-onset difference was more dramatic when the focus distinction was on convictions for violent offenses, with Anumberofreviewsoftheliteraturehavesum- the early-onset group being much more likely marized research supporting the distinction (38%) to be convicted as an adult than either 1114 P.J.FrickandE.Viding the adolescent-onset (14%) or control (5%) onset group develop their problem behavior groups. throughatransactionalprocessinvolvingadif- Thus, the childhood and adolescent sub- ficult and vulnerable child (e.g., impulsive, types of antisocial youth show very different withverbaldeficits)whoexperiencesaninade- trajectoriesofantisocialbehavior,bothinterms quate rearing environment (e.g., poor parental oftheirpatternsofonsetandlife-coursetrajec- supervision, poor quality schools). This dys- tory. However, if these were the only differ- functional transactional process disrupts the encesbetweengroups,thismethodforsubtyp- child’ssocializationleadingtopoorsocialrela- ing would not be much different from other tionswithpersonsbothinside(e.g.,parentsand approachesthathavefocusedonthedifferentbe- siblings)andoutsidethefamily(e.g.,peersand havioral trajectories of antisocial behavior over teachers).Thesedisruptionsleadtoenduringvul- time. Of importance, there is now a rather ex- nerabilitiesthatcannegativelyaffectthe child’s tensive body of research to suggest that the psychosocial adjustment across multiple devel- twogroupsalsodifferonanumberofdisposi- opmentalstages. tional and contextual risk factors that seem to Incontrast,childrenintheadolescent-onset implicate different developmental processes pathway have problemsthat are more likely to in the disruptive behaviors of the two groups be limited to adolescence and show fewer risk (Moffitt, 2002). To summarize these findings, factors. Thus, this group is conceptualized as childhood-onset conduct problems seem to be showinganexaggerationofthenormativepro- more strongly related to neuropsychological cess of adolescent rebellion (Moffitt, 2003). (e.g.,deficitsinexecutivefunctioning)andcogni- Thatis, alladolescentsshow some levelof re- tive (e.g., low intelligence) deficits (Fergusson, belliousness to parents and other authority Lynsky,&Horwood,1996;Kratzer&Hodgins, figures (Brezina & Piquero, 2007). This rebel- 1999;Piquero,2001;Raine,Yaralian,Reynolds, liousness ispartof aprocessbywhich thead- Venables,&Mednick,2002).Further,thechild- olescent begins to develop his or her autono- hood-onsetgrouphasbeenreportedtoshowmore mous sense of self and his or her unique temperamental and personality risk factors, identity.AccordingtoMoffitt(2003),thechild such as impulsivity (McCabe, Hough, Wood, in the adolescent-onset group engages in anti- & Yeh, 2001; Silverthorn, Frick, & Reynolds, socialanddelinquentbehaviorsasamisguided 2001),attentiondeficits(Fergussonetal.,1996), attempttoobtainasubjectivesenseofmaturity and problems in emotional regulation (Moffitt, and adult status in a way that is maladaptive Caspi, Dickson, Silva, & Stanton, 1996). This (e.g., breaking societal norms) but encouraged grouphasalsobeenshowntocomefromhomes byanantisocialpeergroup.Giventhattheirbe- withgreaterfamilyinstability,morefamilycon- haviorisviewedasanexaggerationofaprocess flict, and with parents who use less effective specific to adolescence, and not because of an parenting strategies (Aguilar, Sroufe, Egeland, enduringvulnerability,theirantisocialbehavior & Carlson, 2000; McCabe et al., 2001; Patter- is less likely to persist beyond adolescence. son&Yoerger,1997;Woodward,Fergusson,& However,theymaystillhaveimpairmentsthat Horwood, 2002). When children within the persist into adulthood because of the conse- adolescent-onsetgroupdifferfromcontrolchil- quencesoftheiradolescentantisocialbehavior dren without conduct problems, it is often in (e.g.,acriminalrecord,droppingoutofschool, showing higher levels of rebelliousness and substanceabuse;Moffitt&Caspi,2001). being more rejecting of conventional values (Dandreaux & Frick, 2009; Moffitt et al., Callous–unemotional(CU)traitsand 1996). subgroupsofantisocialyouth The different outcomes and risk factors for the two subtypes of antisocial individuals have This distinction between the childhood and led to theoretical models that propose very adolescent-onset patterns of antisocial behav- different causal mechanisms operating across iorsillustratesasubgroupingapproachforanti- the two groups. For example, Moffitt (2003) socialindividualsthatproposesdifferentdevel- has proposed that children in the childhood- opmental mechanisms underlying the problem Developmentalpsychopathologyandantisocial 1115 behavioracross groups.Thus,this isanexam- dependentsamples.Tenofthesestudiesshowed ple of the important concept in developmental aconcurrent association between CU traits and psychopathology of equifinality, which pro- measuresofaggressive,antisocial,ordelinquent poses that the same developmental outcome behaviorand14studiesshowedapredictivere- (e.g., antisocial behavior) can result from very lationship with follow-up intervals ranging different developmental processes (Cicchetti from6monthsto10years.Theseauthorsfurther &Rogosch,1996).Itisimportantthatresearch reportedon5studiesshowingthatCUtraitswere hasbegunextendingtheconceptofequifinality associated with poorer treatment outcomes. Of forunderstandingantisocialyouthbyexploring importance, these studies included community whether additional distinctions can be made (n¼6),clinic-referred(n¼4),andforensic(n¼ within groups who show a childhood onset to 13)samples,andtheyincludedsamplesranging theirantisocialbehavior. inagefrom4to20. This distinction is based on the presence Oneimportantissueininterpretingthisbody ofacallousandunemotionalinterpersonalstyle ofresearchisthatCUtraitsseemtopredictlater characterizedbyalackofguiltandempathyand antisocial behavior even after controlling for acalloususeofothers.Itissimilartothedistinc- other risk factors (e.g., past criminal offenses, tion made within samples of antisocial adults druguse,delinquentpeers;Salekin,2008).Fur- usingtheconstructofpsychopathythatwasde- ther,theassociationbetweenCUtraitsandag- scribedpreviously.Asnotedpreviously,within gressive behavior could explain some of the incarceratedadults,thepresenceofpsychopathic typologies proposed for understanding aggres- traitshasproventodesignateanimportantsub- sive individuals. That is, youth with CU traits groupofantisocialindividualwhoshowamore notonlyshowamoresevereandpervasivepat- severe, violent, and difficult to treat pattern of ternofaggressivebehaviorbuttheyalsotendto antisocial behavior (Hemphill, 2007; Leistico showaggressionthatisbothreactiveandproac- et al., 2008; Porter & Woodworth, 2006). tive in nature (Enebrink, Andershed, & Lang- They also show a number of different back- strom, 2005; Frick, Cornell, Barry, Bodin, & ground and emotional characteristics that Dane, 2003; Kruh, Frick, & Clements, 2005). seemtosuggestauniqueetiologytotheiranti- In contrast, antisocial youth without CU traits social behavior (Blair et al., 2005; Patrick, tend to show less aggression overall and, 2007). There is growing evidence that the when they do show aggressive behavior, it same may be true for antisocial youth who tends to be largely reactive in nature. Further, showCUtraits. manyofthesocial–cognitiveandaffectivedif- Specifically,youthwho show the childhood ferencesthathavebeenfoundbetweenreactive onset to their antisocial behavior tend to score andproactiveaggressionmaybeduetothedif- higher on measures of CU traits than those ferencesintheirassociationwithCUtraits(Mu- who show an adolescent onset (Dandreaux noz,Frick,Kimonis,&Aucoin,2008;Pardini, &Frick,2009;Moffittet al.,1996;Silverthorn Lochman,&Frick,2003;Waschbusch,Walsh, et al., 2001). Further, several recent qualitative Andrade,King,&Carrey,2007). (Frick & Dickens,2006;Frick& White,2008) For example, Pardini et al. (2003) studied and quantitative (Edens, Campbell, & Weir, detained adolescents’ (ages 11–18) responses 2007; Leistico et al., 2008) reviews have been to eight vignettes depicting peers involved in publishedshowing that CUtraitsare predictive aggressive acts in various age-appropriate so- of a more severe, stable, andaggressive pattern cial contexts. Youth were asked to respond to of behavior in antisocial youth. For example, questionsaskinghowlikelyandhowimportant Edens et al. (2007) conducted a quantitative variouspossibleoutcomestotheaggressivein- meta-analyses of 21 nonoverlapping samples terpersonal situations were. In this ethnically showing that measures that include CU traits diverse sample of boys and girls, CU traits wereassociatedwithgeneralorviolentrecidivism wereassociatedwithresponsesindicatingaten- with effect sizes of r ¼ .24 or .25, respectively. dencytoemphasizethepositiveandrewarding FrickandDickens(2006) reportedonaqualita- aspects of aggression, tovalue the importance tivereviewof24publishedstudiesusing22in- of being dominant in aggressive interactions, 1116 P.J.FrickandE.Viding and to minimize the potential for punishment CU traits designate an important subgroup of for being aggressive. All of these social cog- antisocialyouth,thatdifferbothintheseverity nitivefactorshavebeenassociatedwithproac- andstabilityoftheirbehaviorbutalsoonimpor- tiveaggressioninpastresearch(Dodge&Pettit, tant emotional, cognitive, and social charac- 2003). Similarly, Munoz et al. (2008) studied teristics. These latter findings could suggest 85 boys (ages 13–18) who had been detained distinct etiologicalmechanisms leading totheir for delinquent behavior. They reported that antisocialbehavior.Asaresult,liketheresearch those who showed high rates of both reactive reviewed on the childhood and adolescent- and proactive aggression showed lower levels onset distinction, this research provides addi- of emotional reactivity to provocation, consis- tionalevidencesupportingtheconceptofequi- tent with past research on adolescents who finality in understanding the development of show proactive aggression (e.g., Pitts, 1997). antisocialbehaviorinyouth. However,thisreducedreactivitytoprovocation Before discussing the different etiological wasonlyfoundforthosewhowerealsohighon mechanisms and their relationship with normal CUtraits.Finally,Frick,Cornell,Bodin,Dane, developmental processes, it is also important Barry, and Loney (2003) reported that a ten- tonotethat research onCUtraits alsosupports dency to attribute hostile intent to the actions therelatedconceptofmultifinality,whichrecog- of others (i.e., a hostile attribution biase) that nizesthatthesameriskfactorscanhavemultiple has been associated with reactive forms of ag- developmentaloutcomes.Specifically,asnoted gression was only found in boys with conduct previously,onecharacteristicofyouthwithCU problemswhodidnotshowCUtraits. traitsisthepresenceofafearless,thrillseeking, FrickandWhite(2008)providedacompre- andbehaviorallyuninhibitedtemperament.Con- hensive review of this research on the social, sistentwiththeimportanceofthistemperament cognitive,andemotionalcharacteristicsofanti- for the development of CU traits, Cornell and social youth with and without CU traits. First, Frick (2007) reported that preschool children they reviewed four studies showing that the whowereratedbytheirteachersasbeingbehav- conduct problems in youth without CU traits iorally uninhibited were more at risk for show- are more strongly related to dysfunctional par- ing problems in empathy and guilt than other entingpractices(seealsoEdens,Skopp,&Ca- children.However,theyalsoreportedthatunin- hill, 2008). Second, they reviewed 10 studies hibited preschoolers showed enhanced con- showing differences in how antisocial youth science development if they experienced con- with and without CU traits process emotional sistent discipline and a parenting style that stimuli, with youth high on CU traits showing emphasized a strong and obedience-oriented deficitsintheprocessingofnegativeemotional (i.e.,authoritarian)approachtoparenting.These stimuli and, even more specifically, deficits to authorssuggestedthattheunderarousalexhibited signs of fear and distress in others. Third, an- by fearless children may require parents to other10studieswerereviewedshowingdistinct incorporate stronger methods of socialization cognitive characteristics of antisocial youth that bring arousal levels into an optimal range with CU traits, such as being less sensitive to for the child to internalize parental norms for punishment cues, especially when a reward prosocial behavior (Fowles & Kochanska, orientedresponsesetisprimed,showingmore 2000; Kochanska, DeVet, Goldman, Murray, positive outcome expectancies in aggressive &Putnam,1994).Thus,thesametemperamen- situations with peers, and being more likely tal risk factor (i.e., fearless and uninhibited) to exhibit verbal deficits than other antisocial could have different outcomes (i.e., normal or youth. Fourth, they reviewed seven studies deficient conscience development) depending showingthatyouthwithCUtraitshaveunique onthetypeofparentingthechildexperiences. personality characteristics, such as showing AsimilarpossibilityhasbeenproposedbyPat- more fearless or thrill seeking behaviors and rick(inpress)whosuggeststhatthesametem- lesstraitanxietyorneuroticism. peramentoffearlessnesscanleadsomechildren Thus, taken together, there is now a fairly tobecome“bold”andothers“mean”depending substantial body of research to suggest that onthepresenceofothertemperamentaltraitsor Developmentalpsychopathologyandantisocial 1117 dependingonthepresenceofcertaintypesofso- associations between a fearless temperament cializingenvironments. andlowerscoresonmeasuresofconsciencede- velopment. Further, this research has led to a numberoftheoriestoexplainthislink.Forex- TheInterfaceBetweenNormaland ample, fearless children may be less likely to AbnormalDevelopment experience transgression-related arousal in re- sponse to behavior that has been punished by Understandingdevelopmentalmechanisms others (Kochanska, 1993; Newman, 1987). In The research reviewed in the previous section addition, children with this temperament may clearly suggests that there are important sub- be less likely to experience empathic arousal groupsofantisocialyouthwhoareatdifferen- linked to the distress in others (Blair, 1999). tialriskforcontinuingtheirantisocialbehavior Inshort,thetemperamentaldeficitsindifferent intoadulthoodandwhoshowdifferentpatterns aspects of emotional reactivity could make ofrisk factorsthatcouldsuggestetiologies in- itmoredifficultforachildtodevelopappropri- volving distinct developmental mechanisms. ate levels of guilt, empathy, and other dimen- As noted previously, based on the differences sions of conscience that, at its extreme, could inthecourseandcorrelatestoantisocialbehav- result in CU traits and severe patterns of anti- ior for youth with adolescent-onset antisocial socialbehavior.Consistentwiththistheoretical behavior, Moffitt (2003) proposed that these model, Pardini (2006) reported that the asso- childrenshowanexaggerationofthenormative ciationbetweenfearlessnessandviolentdelin- process of adolescent rebellion. In contrast, quency was mediated by the presence of CU childreninthechildhood-onsetgroupshowsig- traitsinasampleofadjudicatedadolescents. nificantproblemsinadjustmentacrossmultiple As noted previously, children with child- developmental stages. Further, as also noted hood-onset antisocial behavior but without above,theyalsoshowmorenumerousandmore CUtraitsshowverydifferentdispositional(e.g., severe dispositional and environmental risk impulsivity, low verbal intelligence, poor emo- factors associated with their behavior problems. tional regulation) and contextual (e.g., higher However, within this group, those who show rates of family dysfunction) risk factors. Most CU traits seem to show different characteristics importantly, the children in this group show that could suggest some differences in which high rates of anxiety (Andershed, Gustafson, developmental mechanisms may be involved Kerr & Stattin, 2002; Frick, Lilienfeld, Ellis, intheirantisocialpropensities. Loney, & Silverthorn, 1999; Pardini, Lochman, Specifically, the research reviewed pre- & Powell, 2007), they do not typically show viously suggests that children with CU traits problems in empathy and guilt (Pardini et al., designate agroupof childrenwith severecon- 2003),andtheyappeartobedistressedbytheef- duct problems who show a distinct tempera- fects of their behavior on others (Loney, Frick, mental style, characterized by a preference for Clemens, Ellis, & Kerlin, 2003; Pardini et al., dangerousandnovelstimuli,areward-oriented 2003).Thus,theantisocialbehaviorinthisgroup responsestyle,andalackofreactivitytoemo- doesnotseemtobeeasilyexplainedbydeficitsin tional stimuli that signify distress in others. consciencedevelopment. The bold and fearlesstemperamental style has Given the many different types of risk fac- been variously labeled as low fearfulness tors that are found in this group, it is likely (Rothbart&Bates,1998),lowbehavioralinhi- thatthereareanumberofdifferentcausalpro- bition (Kagan & Snidman, 1991), low harm cessesthatcouldleadtotheimpulsiveandanti- avoidance (Cloninger, 1987), or high daring socialbehaviorexhibitedbytheseyouth(Frick (Lahey & Waldman, 2003). Of importance, & Morris, 2004). For example, in this group, therehavebeenanumberofstudiesofnormally thereisastrongassociationbetweenineffective developingchildrendocumentingbothconcur- parenting practices and their antisocial behav- rent (e.g., Fowles & Kochanska, 2000; Ko- ior. Thus, it is possible that children in this chanska,Gross,Lin,&Nichols,2002)andpre- grouparenotsocializedadequatelyand,asare- dictive (Rothbart, Ahadi, & Hershey, 1994) sult,donotlearntoappropriatelyregulatetheir 1118 P.J.FrickandE.Viding behavior in response to environmental contin- Potentialgenderdifferences gencies(Kochanskaetal.,2002).Anothercon- sistentfindingforantisocialyouthwithoutCU Ingeneral,themajorityofresearchonantisocial traitsisthattheyoftenhaveproblemsregulating behaviorinyouthhasfocusedonthesamplesof their emotions. That is, children in this group boys. Thus, the applicability of these develop- appear to show a temperament characterized mental modelsto girls is open to question. One by strong emotional reactivity, a deficit in the consistentfindingisthatachildhoodonsettose- skillsneededtoadequatelyregulatetheiremo- vere antisocial and aggressive behavior is much tional reactivity, or both (Frick & Morris, rarer in girlsthan in boys (Hipwell et al., 2002; 2004).Theseproblemsinemotionalregulation Moffitt & Capsi, 2001; White & Piquero, can result in the child committing impulsive 2004). However, despite the predominance of and unplanned aggressive and antisocial acts adolescent onset in antisocial girls, there is evi- for which he or she may be remorseful after- dence that girls with severe conduct problems ward but may still have difficulty controlling show poor outcomes in adulthood and show a in the future (Pardini et al., 2003). Such prob- largenumberofthedispositionalandcontextual lemsinregulatingemotionwouldalsoexplain risk factorsthat are more characteristic of child- the findings that the aggressive behavior dis- hood-onsetantisocialbehavior inboys(Frick& playedbythisgrouptendstobeconfinedtore- Dickens,2006). active forms of aggression (Frick, Kimonis, Toreconcilethesefindings,Silverthornand Dandreaux,&Farrell,2003;Kruhetal.,2005). Frick(1999)proposedamodificationofthede- velopmental model outlined abovewhich they labeledasadelayed-onsetpathwaytoantisocial Differenttypesofdeviationsfromnormal behaviorforgirls.Theseauthorsproposedthat development antisocialandaggressivebehavioringirlsshow Thus, this developmental model of antisocial the same causal mechanisms asthose outlined behaviorspecifiesthreesubgroupsofantisocial previouslyforchildhood-onsetboys.However, individualsthatdifferonthedevelopmentaltra- theirsevereantisocialbehaviorisoftendelayed jectory of their antisocial behavior and on the until adolescence coinciding with biological developmentalmechanismsthatseemtobein- (e.g., hormonal changes associated with pu- volved in their problem behavior. Like symp- berty) and psychosocial (e.g., less parental tomsofmostformsofpsychopathology,some monitoring and supervision; greater contact level of antisocial and aggressive behavior is withdeviantpeers)changesthatencouragean- normal in children and adolescents (Moffitt tisocialbehavioringirlswithpredisposingvul- et al., 1996). Therefore, it is critical to deter- nerabilities (e.g., CU; problems in emotional mine the relationship between normal and ab- regulation).Inaninitialtestofthistheory,adju- normalpatternsofantisocialbehavior.Thede- dicatedadolescentgirlswholargelyshowedan velopmental models outlined above illustrate adolescent onset to their antisocial behavior two ways that abnormal antisocial behavior alsoshowedhighlevelsofCUtraits,problems can differ from normal development. Specifi- with impulse control, and a number of other cally, the problems in adjustment experienced social and temperamental vulnerabilities that by the adolescent-onset group seem to be weremoresimilartochildhood-onsetboysthan more specific to a single developmental stage to adolescent-onset boys (Silverthorn et al., (i.e., adolescence) and result from a failure to 2001).Despitethisinitialpositivefinding,addi- adequatelyadjusttothedevelopmentaldemands tionaltestsofthismodelhavebeenmoremixed (e.g.,separationandindividuationfromparents) (Laheyetal.,2006;McCabeetal.,2001;Moffitt ofthatstage.Incontrast,bothgroupswhoshow &Caspi,2001;White&Piquero,2004). a childhood onset to their antisocial behavior Asaresultoftheseconflictingfindings,the showriskfactors(e.g.,emotionalandcognitive predictionsmadefromthedelayed-onsettheory deficits) that negatively affect development requirefurthertesting.Also,itispossiblethat, across multiple stages, albeit in different ways although many girls may not show the overt forthetwogroups. antisocialandaggressivebehaviorpriortoado- Developmentalpsychopathologyandantisocial 1119 lescence,theymayshowotherformsofantiso- thisresearchsuggeststhatsomepatternsofan- cialbehaviorsuchasrelationalaggression.Re- tisocial behavior are more stable than others. lationalaggressioncanbedefinedasbehaviors Unfortunately, there are no clear guidelines to thatseektoharmanotherchild’ssocialrelation- suggestwhatlevelofstabilityinantisocialbe- ships (e.g., telling lies about them, excluding havior would be sufficient towarrant designa- themfromsocialevents)ratherthanphysically tion as a personality disorder. Further, even if harming the child (Crick & Grotpeter, 1996) apatternofbehaviorisnothighlystable,such Several studies have shown that when girls as adolescent-onset conduct problems, it may behave aggressively, they are more likely to stillleadtosignificantimpairmentsandwarrant chooserelationalaggression(ratherthanphysi- treatment (Dandreaux & Frick, 2009; Moffitt cal or overt aggression) as a strategy for use etal.,1996). withinthepeergroup(Crick,1996;Crick,Ca- The issue of stability may be even more sas,&Mosher,1997;Crick&Grotpeter,1995; important if one focuses on the personality Lagerspetz,Bjo¨rkqvist,&Peltonen,1988;Os- traits that may lead to antisocial behavior. trov & Keating, 2004). Of importance, rela- That is, an important consideration is whether tionalaggressionsharessomeofthesamerisk CUtraitsarestableenoughinchildrenorado- factors as those reviewed previously as being lescents to warrant the designation of “traits” associated with antisocial behavior, including thatimpliessomelevelofcontinuityacrossde- impulsivity (Zalecki & Hinshaw, 2004) and velopment (Edens, Skeem, Cruise, & Cauf- CU traits (Marsee & Frick, 2007). Therefore, mann, 2001; Seagrave & Grisso, 2002). There itmaybethatgirlswithriskfactorsforantiso- arenowanumberofstudiesshowingthatthese cial behavior display relational aggressive be- traitsarerelativelystablefromlatechildhoodto haviors prior to adolescence, giving them the earlyadolescence both when assessed byself- appearance of showing an adolescent onset, if report (Munoz&Frick,2007)orbyparentre- suchbehaviorsarenotassessed. port (Frick, Kimonis, et al., 2003). For exam- ple, Frick, Kimonis, et al. (2003) reported a stability estimate of .71 using an intraclass Stablepersonalitytraitsversus correlation coefficient across 4 years for CU developmentaltransitions traits in a sample of children with an average Asnotedpreviously,thereissomedebateasto ageof10.65attheinitialassessment.Thislevel whether antisocial personality should be de- of stability for parent report is much higher finedsolelybyaconsistentpatternofantisocial than is typically reported for parent ratings of behaviororbytheunderlyingpersonalitytraits others aspects of children’s adjustment (Ver- that can lead to this pattern of behavior. In ei- hulst, Koot, & Berden, 1990). With respect to thercase,thereissomeassumptionofstability younger children, Dadds, Frazer, Frost, and across development. In fact, many definitions Hawes (2005) found moderate 1-year stability of antisocial personality disorder require the estimates for parent-reported CU traits (r ¼ presenceofantisocialbehaviorstartinginchild- .55)inacommunitysampleofAustralianchil- hoodoradolescence(AmericanPsychiatricAs- drenwhowere4to9yearsofage.Usingamore sociation, 2000). Prospective studies of either extendedfollow-upperiod(i.e.,9years),Obra- clinicreferred(Lahey,Loeber,Burke,&Apple- dovic, Pardini, Long, and Loeber (2007) re- gate,2005;Robins,1966)orcommunitypartic- ported relatively highrates of stability for par- ipants(Moffittetal.,2002)havesuggestedthat ent (r ¼ .50) but modest levels of stability for between 14 and 54% of children with severe teacher ratings (r ¼ .27) ratings of CU traits conduct problems will showan antisocial per- for boys between the ages of 8 and 16. Bloni- sonality disorder as adults. Further, as noted gen, Hicks, Kruger, Patrick, and Iacono previously, children with a childhood onset to (2006) reported that CU traits were relatively their conduct problems (Moffitt, 2003) and stable (r ¼ .60) from late adolescence (age those with CU traits (Frick & Dickens, 2006; 17) into early adulthood (age 24). Further, Frick & White, 2008) seem to show a more Loney, Taylor, Butler, and Iacono (2007) re- stable pattern of antisocial behavior. Thus, ported that CU traits in adolescence (ages 16– 1120 P.J.FrickandE.Viding 18)weresignificantlystable(intraclasscorrela- traits.Inrecentyears,therehavebeensubstantial tioncoefficient¼.40)overa6-yearfollow-up increases in the number of studies exploring period. Finally, two studies have shown that biological vulnerabilities to antisocial behav- measuresofCUtraitsassessedpriortoadoles- ior(Raine&Yang,2006).Inthissection,wepro- cenceweresignificantlyassociatedwithsimilar vide a selective review of genetic and brain measures in adulthood, even after controlling imaging(focusingonfunctionalmagneticreso- forotherchildhoodriskfactors(Burke,Loeber, nance imaging [fMRI]) studies with antisocial &Lahey,2007;Lynam,Caspi,Moffitt,Loeber, individualsand,inparticular,reviewingseveral &Stouthamer-Loeber,2007). areasofresearchthatcouldadvanceourunder- Basedonthesefindings,thestabilityofCU standing of the different developmental path- ratingsacrossdevelopmentappearstobebetter waystoantisocialbehavior. orequivalenttoothertraitindicesacrosschild- hoodtoadolescenceandearlyadulthood.How- Behavioralgeneticstudies ever, there is no agreed on metric regarding whatlevelofstabilitywouldwarranttheclassi- There have been a large number of studies fication ofa “stable trait.” Critically,evenrea- showing moderate heritability and nonshared sonablyhighlevelsofstabilitywouldnotimply environmental influence, as well as modest that CU traits are unchangeable. For example, shared environmental influence on antisocial Frick, Kimonis, et al. (2003) reported that, behavior (e.g., Mason & Frick, 1994; Rhee & despitethehighlevelofstabilityinthesetraits Waldman, 2002). In other words, individual across their 4-year study period, there were a differencesinsusceptibilitytoantisocialbehav- significant number of youth who decreased in ior have both a heritable and environmental their level of CU traits over the course of the component. In recent years, there have been study (for a similar pattern of change over a severallinesofresearchthathaveattemptedto longerperiodofdevelopment,seealsoLynam go beyond this basic partitioning of genetic etal.,2007).Further,thisdecreaseinthelevel and environmental influencesto antisocial be- ofCUtraitswasrelatedtothelevelofconduct havior that could be especially important for problemsdisplayedbythechild,thesocioeco- understandingthedifferentdevelopmentalpath- nomic status of the child’s parents, and the waysthatmayleadtoseverepatternsofantiso- quality of parenting the child received. Thus, cialbehavior. CUtraitsdoappeartobeatleastsomewhatmal- First,twinandadoptionstudieshavedemon- leable and changes in their level across devel- strated several important types of gene–envi- opment seem to be influenced by factors in ronmentcorrelationsandgene–environmentin- thechild’spsychosocialenvironment. teractions. For example, risk factors that have been traditionally conceptualized as environ- mental (e.g., parenting reactions) mayactually TheImportanceofMultipleLevels beevokedpartlybytheheritabletemperamental ofAnalysis features of the child (gene–environment corre- Fromthereviewprovidedabove,itisclearthat lation; Larsson, Viding, Rijsdijk, & Plomin, subgroupsofantisocialyouthdifferinanumber 2008).Further,geneticallyinfluencedindividual ofimportantwaysbehaviorally.Thatis,theycan differences in the sensitivity to environmental differintheirtimingofonset,thestabilityoftheir riskfactorssuchasmaltreatment(gene–environ- behavior, and the level and type of aggression ment interaction) are also important in explain- that is displayed. Further, we have also noted ingvarianceinantisocialbehavior.Specifically, severalwaysthatthesesubgroupsdifferintheir research has suggested that genes regulating emotional, cognitive, social, and interpersonal serotonergic neurotransmission, in particular functioning.Understandingdifferencesoneach monoamine oxidase A (MAOA), are important of these levels provides important information forexplainingindividualdifferencesinantiso- forchartingthevariedmechanisms(e.g.,deficits cialbehavior(Buckholtz&Meyer-Lindenberg, in conscience; poor emotional regulation) that 2008). However, the genetic vulnerability to maybeinvolvedinthedevelopmentofantisocial antisocial behavior conferred by the MAOA

Description:
This paper reviews research on chronic patterns of antisocial behavior and begins in adolescence, and two groups show antisocial behavior that begins in
See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.