Early risk pathways to physical versus relational peer aggression: The interplay of externalizing behavior and corporal punishment varies by child sex

Children who aggress against their peers may use physical or relational forms, yet little research has looked at early childhood risk factors and characteristics that uniquely predict high levels of relational versus physical aggression in preadolescence. Accordingly, the main aim of our study was to link early corporal punishment and externalizing behavior to children's physical and relational peer aggression during preadolescence and to examine how these pathways differed by sex. Participants were 193, 3‐year‐old boys (39%) and girls who were reassessed following the transition to kindergarten (5.5 years) and preadolescence (10.5 years). A series of autoregressive, cross‐lagged path analyses were conducted to examine the relationships between child externalizing problems and corporal punishment at ages 3 and 5.5 years, and their association with physical and relational aggression at age 10.5. Multiple group analysis was used to determine whether pathways differed by sex. Three developmental pathways were identified: (i) direct associations between stable childhood externalizing problems and later physical aggression; (ii) a direct pathway from early corporal punishment to preadolescent relational and physical peer aggression; and (iii) an indirect pathway from early corporal punishment to later physical aggression via continuing externalizing problems in middle childhood. Child sex moderated the nature of these pathways, as well as the direction of association between risk and outcome variables. These data advance our understanding of the etiology of distinct forms of peer aggression and highlight the potential for more efficacious prevention and intervention efforts in the early childhood years.

     

Dominance as Expressed and Inferred Through Speaking Time

Differences in speaking time during a group interaction are hypothesized to reflect differences in individual dominance. In order to test this assumption and to identify potential moderator variables influencing the strength of the predicted association, a meta‐analysis was conducted. Whether speaking time is used to convey dominance to the same extent that it is used in inferring dominance was tested by contrasting studies concerned with dominance expressed in speaking time with studies of inferred dominance based on speaking time. Overall, and for the investigated subcategories of studies, the relationship between dominance and speaking time was significant. The strength of the associations, however, differed considerably due to the influence of moderator variables. The results showed that inferred dominance studies showed stronger associations between speaking time and dominance as opposed to the expressed dominance studies. Additionally, if dominance was expressed due to dominance‐role assignments, the association between speaking time and dominance was stronger than if individuals with different levels of trait dominance interacted. For men, the association between speaking time and dominance was stronger than for women, and same‐gender groups showed stronger associations than opposite‐gender groups. Also, increasing group size intensified the strength of the association linearly.     

Decomposing implicit associations about life and death improves our understanding of suicidal behavior

The Death/Suicide Implicit Association Test (IAT) is effective at detecting and prospectively predicting suicidal thoughts and behaviors. However, traditional IAT scoring procedures used in all prior studies (i.e., D-scores) provide an aggregate score that is inherently relative, obfuscating the separate associations (i.e., “Me = Death/Suicide,” “Me = Life”) that might be most relevant for understanding suicide-related implicit cognition. Here, we decompose the D-scores and validate a new analytic technique called the Decomposed D-scores (“DD-scores”) that creates separate scores for each category (“Me,” “Not Me”) in the IAT. Across large online volunteer samples (N > 12,000), results consistently showed that a weakened association between “Me = Life” is more strongly predictive of having a history of suicidal attempts than is a stronger association between “Me = Death/Suicide.” These findings replicated across three different versions of the IAT and were observed when calculated using both reaction times and error rates. However, among those who previously attempted suicide, a strengthened association between “Me = Death” is more strongly predictive of the recency of a suicide attempt. These results suggest that decomposing traditional IAT D-scores can offer new insights into the mental associations that may underlie clinical phenomena and may help to improve the prediction, and ultimately the prevention, of these clinical outcomes.     

Affective-Evaluative Learning in Humans: A Form of Associative Learning or Only an Artifact?

The status of evaluative conditioning (EC) as a distinct form of associative learning was called in question by Field and Davey (1997, 1998, 1999), who argued that in the typical visual EC paradigm, nonassociative visual concept learning is responsible for the evaluative changes observed. Especially, the use of only within-subject control conditions instead of independent control groups was criticized. The present three experiments show (a) that EC effects can be demonstrated within another sensory modality than visual perception and (b) that EC effects are demonstrable in a between-subject design (including a successful replication attempt). A further result was that these EC effects do not require participants' conscious awareness. The data provide no support for an artifactual account of EC but suggest an interpretation of EC as a form of associative learning.     

No question has a single answer: Integrating discrepant models in family therapy training

Todd and Greenberg use a co-supervisory model with predoctoral psychology family therapy interns, but with Todd using a structural/strategic model and Greenberg a symbolic-experiential model. They focus on the isomorph of cotherapist trainees replaying family problems and the traineers replaying trainee problems. Their model involves using the trainee's creative confusion/tension to help each of them to integrate individually appropriate configurations as their training continues over a year.The authors wish to acknowledge the editorial comments and helpful advice of Carl A. Whitaker, MD, and Milton L. Greenberg, MFT, in the development of this paper from earlier drafts. They would also like to acknowledge significant contributions from Drs. Glenn Bronley, Paul Coleman, Chad Glang, Beverly Keith, Tracy Lewis, Charles Lock-wood, Wesley Matsui, Rita McKenzie, Timothy Weber, Ms. Holly DeVore, Lee Ann Lockwood, and Misty Weber. Christopher Weber made a special contribution as the program's first child therapist.     

Systemic strategies for dealing with problem children in institutional settings

Family therapy when a problem child enters residential treatment is complicated and treacherous because of the need to coordinate what may often be competing hierarchies (parental, residential, school). If the goal of residential treatment truly is one of deinstitutionalization, of reintegrating the child into his/her home, school, and community, the family therapist must see to it that the parental hierarchy is the primary one and that all institutional hierarchies are kept secondary. This paper presents, through a discussion of the forces that operate as institutionalization of children progresses and through case illustrations, a framework in which family therapy can be conducted within a residential treatment setting.The author expresses appreciation to Barbara DiCocco, MSW, Phyllis Stern, MA, John Rhead, PhD, and Karen Meckler, MD, for their helpful comments on the initial draft of this article and to Linda McClure, MSW, and Larry McAvoy for their administrative support.     

Maps and mapmaking: Developing the systemic paradigm of family functioning

This paper presents the Systemic Paradigm of Family Functioning (SPFF) as an organizing framework for integrating models of family therapy. Therapists can use the SPFF to understand and integrate existing models of family therapy and to create their own personal models of family therapy. The SPFF framework highlights the interrelationships among the four generic models which dominate the field of family therapy. Personal models of family therapy are based on maps of family functioning derived from one of these more generic models.