Irritability and Emotional Impulsivity as Core Feature of ADHD and ODD in Children

The categorical approach of diagnosing mental disorders entails the problem of frequently occurring comorbidities, suggesting a more parsimonious structure of psychopathology. In this study, we therefore aim to assess how affective dysregulation (AD) is associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) in children. To assess AD in children aged 8–12 years (n?=?391), we employed the parent version of a newly constructed parent rating scale. Following item reduction, we conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to establish a factorial structure of AD. One core dimension was identified, comprising irritability and emotional impulsivity, and two smaller dimensions, comprising positive emotionality and exuberance. Subsequently, we examined five different latent factor models – a unidimensional model, a first-order correlated factor model, a second-order correlated factor model, a traditional bifactor model, and a bifactor S-1 model, in which the first-order factor AD-Irritability/Emotional Impulsivity (II) was modeled as the general reference factor. A bifactor S-1 model with the a priori defined general reference domain AD-II provided the best fit to our data and was straightforward to interpret. This model showed excellent model fit and no anomalous factor loadings. This still held true, when comparing it to bifactor S-1 models with ADHD/ODD-related reference factors. Differential correlations with emotion regulation skills and the established Parent Proxy Anger Scale validate the interpretation of the different dimensions. Our results suggest that irritability/emotional impulsivity might be a common core feature of ADHD and ODD.

     

Correction to: Irritability and Emotional Impulsivity as Core Feature of ADHD and ODD in Children

Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment -     

Empirically based dimensions of externalizing symptoms in children and adolescents: a multitrait-multisource approach

The present study sought to refine knowledge about the structure underlying externalizing dimensions. From a “top-down” ICD/DSM-based perspective, externalizing symptoms can be categorized into attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and conduct disorder (CD). From a “bottom-up” developmental theory-based perspective, disruptive behaviors can be meaningfully described as aggressive (AGG) and rule-breaking (RB) behaviors. We analyzed five large data sets comprising externalizing symptom ratings obtained with a screening instrument using different sources (parents, teachers, self-ratings) from different samples. Using confirmatory factor analyses, we evaluated several factor models (unidimensional; correlated factors; bifactor (S-1) models) derived from an ICD/DSM- and theory-based perspective. Our optimally fitting models were assessed for measurement invariance across all sources, sample settings, and sex. Following several model-based criteria (model fit indices; factor loadings; omega statistics; model parsimony), we discarded our models stepwise and concluded that both the ICD/DSM-based model with three correlated factors (ADHD, ODD, CD) and the developmental theory-based model with three correlated factors (ADHD, AGG, RB) displayed a statistically sound factor structure and allowed for straightforward interpretability. Furthermore, these two models demonstrated metric invariance across all five samples and across sample settings (community, clinical), as well as scalar invariance across sources and sex. While the dimensions AGG and RB may depict a more empirically coherent view than the categorical perspective of ODD and CD, at this point we cannot clearly determine whether one perspective really outperforms the other. Implications for model selection according to our model-based criteria and clinical research are discussed.

     

Rumination and symptom reports in children and adolescents: Results of a cross-sectional and experimental study

This study explores the relationship between a ruminative response style and symptom reports in children and adolescents of grades 5, 7 and 9 from German secondary schools. Questionnaires were used to assess rumination and symptom reports. A group of children and adolescents (N?=?140) were asked to think first about the items before responding to them (increased attention condition), while a second group (N?=?260) served as control group (standard condition). The assumption was that rumination and also additional attention to the symptoms by instruction would increase the reported frequency of experiencing somatic and psychological symptoms. The results showed significant relations between symptom reports and rumination, which increased with grade. There were sex differences for somatic symptom reports with increased symptom frequencies in girls, which were mediated by rumination. Moreover, instructing participants to think first about the items led to an increase in reported symptoms. It is concluded that an increased attention to symptoms of distress increases symptom reports, which may be induced momentarily by instruction and also more generally by a ruminative response style. Conclusions regarding prevention and concerning instructions in symptom report questionnaires are outlined.     

Memory advantage for produced words and familiar native accents

Our memory is better for words that we have read aloud than for words that we have read silently or have listened to. The present study tested this memory advantage for words with native accent markers that participants were either highly familiar or less familiar. As in previous studies, produced words were subsequently remembered better than listened-to words. In contrast to previous studies that involved a comparison of global foreign accents with standard native accents, in the present study words with highly familiar accent markers were remembered better than words with less familiar accent markers (Experiment 1). The familiar accent advantage was also found when participants could not hear their own productions during the training phase (Experiment 2). When tested with a week delay, produced words were still remembered better than listened-to words, but the advantage for words with familiar accent markers was no longer found (Experiment 3).