Building an evidence base for DSM-5 conceptualizations of oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder: introduction to the special section

The DSM-5 ADHD and Disruptive Behavior Disorders Work Group recently outlined a research agenda designed to support possible revisions to the diagnostic criteria for oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) and conduct disorder (CD). Some of the areas in need of further investigation include (a) examining the clinical utility of the current diagnostic system in girls, (b) further clarifying the developmental progression from ODD to CD, (c) determining whether facets of ODD symptoms can help explain heterotypic continuity and enhance predictive validity, (d) evaluating the clinical utility of a new subtyping scheme for CD on the basis of the presence of callous-unemotional traits, and (e) comparing the clinical utility of dimensional versus categorical conceptualizations of ODD and CD. This special section was organized in an attempt to provide data on these issues using a diverse array of longitudinal data sets consisting of both epidemiological and clinic-based samples that collectively cover a large developmental span ranging from childhood through early adulthood.     

The Relationship Between Dropout and Outcome in Naturalistic Cognitive Behavior Therapy

Dropout from psychotherapy is frequent and limits the benefits patients can receive from treatment. The study of factors associated with dropout has the potential to yield strategies to reduce it. This study analyzed data from a large sample of adults (N = 1,092) receiving naturalistic cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) to test the hypotheses that dropouts, as compared to completers, had (1) higher symptom severity at treatment termination, (2) a slower rate of symptom change during treatment, and (3) a higher odds that the therapist rated treatment as ending for reasons related to poor outcome. Results showed that although dropouts ended treatment with higher symptom severity than completers, dropouts and completers did not differ in their rate of symptom change during treatment, suggesting that dropouts had higher symptom severity at termination because they received fewer sessions of treatment, not because their symptoms changed at a slower rate. Dropout was also associated with a higher odds of having a therapist-rated termination reason indicating a poor outcome, suggesting that dropout is more likely if patients are dissatisfied with some aspect of the therapy outcome or process. These findings suggest that strategies for monitoring and enhancing patient satisfaction with the process and outcome of treatment may help patients stay in treatment longer and end treatment with fewer symptoms than if they had dropped out.     

Who Will Volunteer? Religiosity, Everyday Racism, and Social Participation Among African American Men

This study explores the relative importance of everyday racism, empathic concern, communalism, and religiosity as predictors of pro-social involvement (i.e., volunteerism and membership in political/social justice organizations) among a sample of African American men (N = 151). Church involvement emerged as a positive predictor of the likelihood that these men were involved in volunteer work as well as the number of hours that men dedicated to volunteer work. Communalism positively predicted the amount of time (in hours per year) that men were involved in volunteer work. Subjective religiosity and the stress of everyday racism were associated with a greater likelihood of being a member of a political–social justice organization. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

“I Believe in Cusk”: The Effect of Explicit Belief Statements on Children’s Reality Status Judgments and Beliefs about Consensus

Children learn about the world through others’ testimony, and much of this knowledge likely comes from parents. Furthermore, parents may sometimes want children to share their beliefs about topics on which there is no universal consensus. In discussing such topics, parents may use explicit belief statements (e.g., “Evolution is real”) or implicit belief statements (e.g., “Evolution happened over millions of years”). But little research has investigated how such statements affect children’s beliefs. In the current study, 4- to 7-year-olds (N = 102) were shown videos of their parent providing either Explicit (“Cusk is real”) or Implicit (“I know about cusk”) belief testimony about novel entities. Then, children heard another speaker provide either Denial (“Cusk isn’t real”) or Neutral (“I’ve heard of cusk”) testimony. Children made reality status judgments and consensus judgments (i.e., whether people agree about the entity’s existence). Results showed that explicit and implicit belief statements differentially influenced children’s beliefs about societal consensus when followed by a denial: explicit belief statements prevented children from drawing the conclusion that there is societal consensus that the entity does not exist. This effect was not related to age, indicating that children as young as 4 use these cues to inform consensus judgments. On the reality status task, there was an interaction with age, showing that only 4-year-olds were more likely to believe in an entity after hearing explicit belief statements. These findings suggest that explicit belief statements may serve as important sources of both children’s beliefs about novel entities and societal consensus.     

Comparative optimism and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic

Past research suggests that being comparatively optimistic about one's risk for disease is associated with benefits to mental health, such as lowered stress and anxiety. However, few studies have longitudinally examined whether comparative optimism has the same protective benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic. The current study examined levels of comparative optimism, changes in comparative optimism over time, and the association between comparative optimism and COVID-related mental and physical health outcomes among a US adult sample during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants completed online surveys at four timepoints, over the course of four weeks in May and June of 2020. Results from paired-samples t-tests revealed that comparative optimism was present, such that participants estimated their risk for COVID-19 as being significantly lower than that of others their age and sex. Results from linear mixed models suggested that people who were more comparatively optimistic reported lower anxiety, depression, and stress. However, at times when people were more comparatively optimistic, they also reported greater depression and poorer sleep quality. Together, the findings suggest that the relationship between comparative optimism and health may be more complex than previously anticipated and further research is needed to examine the potential pathways through which comparative optimism affects health.     

The importance of callous-unemotional traits for extending the concept of psychopathy to children

This study focused on the use of callous-unemotional (CU) traits to identify a subgroup of children with both attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and a conduct problem diagnosis (oppositional defiant disorder [ODD] or conduct disorder [CD] who show characteristics similar to adults with psychopathy. In a clinic-referred sample of children aged 6 to 13 years (N = 154), those with diagnoses of both ADHD and ODD/CD were divided on the basis of teacher ratings of CU traits. Children high on these traits showed features typically associated with psychopathy, such as a lack of fearfulness and a reward-dominant response style. Furthermore, children with CU traits seemed less distressed by their behavior problems. These findings are consistent with research on adults showing that impulsivity and antisocial behavior alone are insufficient to document persons who fit the construct of psychopathy.     

The Listening Partners Program: An Initiative Toward Feminist Community Psychology in Action

The Listening Partners intervention is described and analyzed as a synthesis of feminism and community psychology, within a developmental framework. Working from an empowerment perspective, this social action, peer group intervention supported a community of poor, rural, isolated, young, White mothers to gain a greater voice, claim the powers of their minds, and collaborate in developmental leadership—creating settings that promote their own development and that of their families, peers, and communities. High quality dialogue, individual and group narrative, and collaborative problem-solving were emphasized, in a feminist context affirming diversity, inclusiveness, strengths, social-contextual analyses, and social constructivist perspectives. The power of enacting a synergy of feminism and community psychology is highlighted.     

A recognition advantage for members of higher-status racial groups

The other-race effect (ORE) is a recognition memory advantage afforded to one's racial ingroup versus outgroup. The motivational relevance of the ingroup—because of relationships, belonging and self-esteem—is central to many theoretical explanations for the ORE. However, to date, the motivational relevance of outgroups has received considerably less attention in the ORE literature. Across six experiments, Black, White, Asian and Latinx American participants consistently demonstrated better recognition memory for the faces of relatively higher-status racial/ethnic group members than those of lower-status groups. This higher-status recognition advantage even appeared to override the ORE, such that participants better recognized members of higher-status outgroups—but not an outgroup of equivalent status—compared to members of their own ingroup. However, across a variety of self-reported perceived status measures, status differences between the high- and low-status groups generally did not moderate the documented recognition advantage. These findings provide initial evidence for the potential role of group status in the ORE and in recognition memory more broadly, but future work is needed to rule out alternative explanations.     

Internalization of the model minority myth and sociodemographic factors shaping Asians/Asian Americans' experiences of discrimination during COVID-19

Despite appearing positive, the model minority myth (MMM), or the perception that Asian Americans are “problem-free” minorities, maintains unfair racial hierarchies and discredits the pervasiveness of systemic racism faced by Asian Americans and other Black, Indigenous, and people of Color. This study investigated the role of internalized MMM in Asian/Asian Americans' (A/AA) experiences during the syndemic of COVID-19 and our society's racial reckoning. Using a mixed methods approach, we analyzed A/AA college students' open-ended responses to a query about their experiences as A/AA during COVID-19, which resulted in qualitative themes of Personal and Vicarious Discrimination, Vigilance, Safety due to Ethnicity, Safety due to Environment, and No Difference during COVID-19. We then conducted a series of logistic and linear regression models to examine how internalized MMM and sociodemographic factors (i.e., ethnic group, gender, and generational status) were associated with qualitative themes and quantitative measures of COVID-related discrimination. Overall, findings demonstrated that greater internalized MMM, as well as identifying as South Asian, male, and an international/first-generation immigrant student, were linked to fewer qualitative and quantitative reports of vicarious discrimination. We conclude with implications for research and practice in community psychology that further examine the racialized experiences among A/AA college students and ultimately seek to challenge the MMM and racial hierarchies perpetuating systems of oppression.