Luna C. Muñoz Centifanti

Profiles of the forms and functions of self-reported aggression in three adolescent samples

In the current study, we addressed several issues related to the forms (physical and relational) and functions (reactive and proactive) of aggression in community (n = 307), voluntary residential (n = 1,917), and involuntarily detained (n = 659) adolescents (ages 11-19 years). Across samples, boys self-reported more physical aggression and girls reported more relational aggression, with the exception of higher levels of both forms of aggression in detained girls. Further, few boys showed high rates of relational aggression without also showing high rates of physical aggression. In contrast, it was not uncommon for girls to show high rates of relational aggression alone, and these girls tended to also have high levels of problem behavior (e.g., delinquency) and mental health problems (e.g., emotional dysregulation and callous-unemotional traits). Finally, for physical aggression in both boys and girls, and for relational aggression in girls, there was a clear pattern of aggressive behavior that emerged from cluster analyses across samples. Two aggression clusters emerged, with one group showing moderately high reactive aggression and a second group showing both high reactive and high proactive aggression (combined group). On measures of severity (e.g., self-reported delinquency and arrests) and etiologically important variables (e.g., emotional regulation and callous-unemotional traits), the reactive aggression group was more severe than a nonaggressive cluster but less severe than the combined aggressive cluster.

Throwing Caution to the Wind: Callous-Unemotional Traits and Risk Taking in Adolescents

Developmental research suggests that adolescents may be highly influenced by their peers to take risks. Although youths with callous-unemotional (CU) traits engage in high-risk behaviors in the form of antisocial behavior and aggression, little is known about their decision making, particularly when their peers are present. Youths high on CU traits may be most susceptible to influence, especially when rewards are involved, or they may be highly rational relative to their low CU peers and less susceptible to social peer pressures. The present study used a gambling task with 675 youths (female n = 348), ages 16 to 20 years (M = 16.9, SD = .8). The majority were White British (64%). We experimentally manipulated whether youths made decisions in groups with peers or individually. All members of the group reported on their CU traits. Using multilevel modeling to control for group-level effects, youths with higher levels of CU traits were found to be less sensitive to accruing rewards on the gambling task than youths low on these traits. When in groups, male participants with higher levels of CU traits made quicker decisions to take risks than male participants lower on CU traits, particularly after punishment. Youths with CU traits are distinct in showing a lack of emotion and this may facilitate heightened rationality in responding to rewards. However, results suggest that male adolescents who are high on CU traits may react to the possible frustration of losing by attempting to gain back rewards quickly when their peers are watching.

Callous‐unemotional traits and impulsivity: distinct longitudinal relations with mind‐mindedness and understanding of others

Background Problems in understanding other peoples mental states may relate to distinct personality traits that are associated with early externalizing behavior. A distinction between theory of mind (ToM) and empathy has proven important in shedding light on the problems in understanding other minds encountered by children high on callous‐unemotional (CU) traits and exhibiting impulsivity. The aim of this study was to investigate whether childrens early ToM and emotion understanding abilities predicted CU traits and impulsivity at age 10. A further aim was to explore whether the quality of the parent–child relationship very early in the development indirectly or directly predicted the childrens CU traits and impulsivity. Method We examined whether ToM and empathy skills might differentially relate to personality traits associated with externalizing behaviors (i.e., impulsivity and CU traits). We examined these relations over time in a longitudinal cohort of 96 boys and girls using follow‐back analyses, incorporating measures of maternal mind‐mindedness (appropriate mind‐related talk) to examine the possible role of parent–child interaction quality. Results Appropriate mind‐related talk indirectly predicted CU traits (at age 10 years) via its effect on childrens emotion understanding. ToM predicted impulsive/irresponsible traits, but ceased to be significant when controlling for externalizing behaviors. Conclusion The present findings demonstrate that parents who remark appropriately on their infants mental states may help the child to understand emotions and may mold an empathic understanding of others, thereby preventing CU traits.

The habitual female offender inside: How psychopathic traits predict chronic prison violence.

Psychopathy is considered one of the best predictors of violence and prison misconducts and is arguably an important clinical construct in the correctional setting. However, we tested whether psychopathy can be used to predict misconducts in prison environments for women as has been done for men. To date, few studies exist that examine and validate this association in female offender samples. The present study included 182 ethnically diverse female offenders. The aim was to prospectively predict violent and nonviolent misconducts over a 9-month period using official records of prior violent criminal history (e.g., homicide, manslaughter, assault), and self-report measures of psychopathy, impulsivity, and empathy. Using negative binomial regression, we found that past violent criminal history, and callous and antisocial psychopathic traits were predictors of violent misconducts, whereas antisocial psychopathic traits and impulsivity best predicted nonviolent misconducts. Although empathy was negatively associated with psychopathy it was not a significant predictor of violent or nonviolent misconducts. Statistical models, which included impulsivity, were considered the most parsimonious at predicting misconducts. Our findings demonstrate how risk-factors found to be reliable in male offender samples, such as psychopathic traits, impulsivity, and past violent criminal history, generalize to female offenders for predicting nonviolent and violent misconducts. One notable difference is the importance of callous psychopathic traits when predicting chronic violent misconducts by female offenders. In sum, there are more similarities in psychopathy and impulsivity than differences in the prediction of misconducts among men and women. (PsycINFO Database Record

How does restricted and repetitive behavior relate to language and cognition in typical development

Relations between restricted and repetitive behavior at age 26 months and childrens concurrent (N = 203) and later (n = 161) social cognition and language development were investigated. Restricted and repetitive behavior was assessed using two scales: sensory and motor repetitive behaviors and rigidity/routines/restricted interests. Language was assessed at ages 26 and 51 months; social cognition was assessed at ages 26 (symbolic play) and 51 and 61 months (theory of mind). Sensory and motor repetitive behavior was negatively related to childrens (a) language performance at 26 and 51 months, (b) instructed symbolic play at 26 months, and (c) theory of mind performance at 51 and 61 months. Path analyses showed that childrens sensory and motor repetitive behavior at age 26 months was related to lower receptive verbal ability and theory of mind at 51 months, which led to lower theory of mind at 61 months. Rigidity/routines/restricted interests at 26 months were unrelated to concurrent and later social cognition and language. These results are discussed in terms of the pathways via which sensory and motor repetitive behavior might impact negatively on development.

Types of Relational Aggression in Girls Are Differentiated by Callous-Unemotional Traits, Peers and Parental Overcontrol

Adolescent girls often perpetrate aggression by gossiping and spreading rumours about others, by attempting to ruin relationships and by manipulating and excluding others. Further, males and females engage in reactive and proactive relational aggression differently. In this study, we examined the individual, peer and parental contextual factors that best explained the use of reactive and proactive relational aggression in girls. Female participants (n = 614; ages 11–18 years) completed questionnaires on aggression, callous-unemotional (CU) traits, delinquency, peer delinquency, gender composition of their peer group, resistance to peer influence and perceived parental overcontrol. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the effects of individual, peer- and parent-related variables on the likelihood of being classified as a low aggressor, reactive aggressor or proactive/reactive aggressor. Girls in the combined reactive/proactive aggression group were younger, had greater CU traits, a lower proportion of male peers and greater perception of parental control than both the reactive and low aggressive groups. Both highly aggressive groups were more delinquent and had greater peer delinquency than the low aggressive group. This study suggests those girls who show relational aggression for the purpose of gaining status and revenge feel restrained by their parents and may gravitate toward relationships that support their behaviour.

Proactive and Reactive Aggression Subgroups in Typically Developing Children: The Role of Executive Functioning, Psychophysiology, and Psychopathy

This study aimed to assess whether groups of aggressive children differed on psychopathic traits, and neuropsychological and neurobiological measures of prefrontal functioning consistent with the objectives of their aggression—reactive or proactive. Including 110 typically developing children (9–11 years), a latent class analysis identified a low aggression group, a high reactive aggression group, and a mixed (high reactive and proactive) aggression group. Results show high callous–unemotional traits and low resting respiratory sinus arrhythmia increased the likelihood of children being in the mixed aggression group, when compared to the reactive and low aggression groups. However, deficits in planning and inhibitory control increased the likelihood of children being in the reactive aggression group, when compared to the mixed and low aggression groups. Executive functioning deficits did not differentiate the mixed group from the low aggression group. These findings highlight psychobiological and executive functioning differences that may explain heterogeneity in childhood aggression.

Adolescents as perpetrators of aggression within the family

Although family violence perpetrated by juveniles has been acknowledged as a potentially serious form of violence for over 30years, scientific studies have been limited to examining the incidence and form of home violence. The present study examined the prevalence of family aggression as perpetrated by youths; we examined groups drawn from clinic-referred and forensic samples. Two audits of case files were conducted to systematically document aggression perpetrated by referred youths toward their family members. The purpose of the first audit was fourfold: i) to identify the incidence of the perpetration of family aggression among clinical and forensic samples; ii) to identify whether there were any reports of weapon use during aggressive episodes; iii) to identify the target of family aggression (parents or siblings); and iv) to identify the form of aggression perpetrated (verbal or physical). The second audit aimed to replicate the findings and to show that the results were not due to differences in multiple deprivation indices, clinical diagnosis of disruptive behavior disorders, and placement into alternative care. A sampling strategy was designed to audit the case notes of 25 recent forensic Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) cases and 25 demographically similar clinic-referred CAMHS cases in the first audit; and 35 forensic cases and 35 demographically similar clinic-referred CAMHS cases in the second audit. Using ordinal chi-square, the forensic sample (audit 1=64%; audit 2=82.9%) had greater instances of family violence than the clinical sample (audit 1=32%; audit 2=28.6%). They were more likely to use a weapon (audit 1=69%; audit 2=65.5%) compared to the clinical sample (audit 1 and 2=0%). Examining only the aggressive groups, there was more perpetration of aggression toward parents (audit 1, forensic=92%, clinical=75%; audit 2, forensic=55.17%, clinical=40%) than toward siblings (audit 1, forensic=43%, clinical=50%; audit 2, forensic=27.58%, clinical=30%). Based on these findings, we would urge professionals who work within the child mental health, particularly the forensic area, to systematically collect reports of aggression perpetrated toward family members.

Strong evidence that callous–unemotional traits are not related to risk-taking task performance

A hypothesized association between callous–unemotional (CU) traits and risk-taking may account for the link between CU traits and real-world risky behaviors, such as illegal behavior. Prior findings show that reward and punishment responsivity differs in relation to CU traits, but is not associated with general risk-taking. However this has only been examined previously with one task, only with a frequentist framework, and with limited interpretation. Here, we expand to another task and to Bayesian analyses. A total of 657 participants (52% female) completed the Inventory of Callous–Unemotional Traits, the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (essentially a gambling task), and the Stoplight driving task, which repeatedly presents participants with riskier or less risky choices to make while driving. We found strong evidence for the null model, in which there is no relation between the two risk-taking tasks and CU traits (R 2 = 0.001; BF 10 = 1/60.22). These results suggest that general risk-taking does not underlie the real-world risky behavior of people with CU traits. Alternative explanations include a different method of valuing certain outcomes.