Showing papers by "Andres De Los Reyes published in 2012"

Annual Research Review: Embracing not erasing contextual variability in children’s behavior – theory and utility in the selection and use of methods and informants in developmental psychopathology

Abstract: This paper examines the selection and use of multiple methods and informants for the assessment of disruptive behavior syndromes and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, providing a critical discussion of (a) the bidirectional linkages between theoretical models of childhood psychopathology and current assessment techniques; and (b) current knowledge concerning the utility of different methods and informants for key clinical goals. There is growing recognition that children’s behavior varies meaningfully across situations, and evidence indicates that these differences, in combination with informants’ unique perspectives, are at least partly responsible for inter-rater discrepancies in reports of symptomatology. Such data suggest that we should embrace this contextual variability as clinically meaningful information, moving away from models of psychopathology as generalized traits that manifest uniformly across situations and settings, and toward theoretical conceptualizations that explicitly incorporate contextual features, such as considering clinical syndromes identified by different informants to be discrete phenomena. We highlight different approaches to measurement that embrace contextual variability in children’s behavior and describe how the use of such tools and techniques may yield significant gains clinically (e.g., for treatment planning and monitoring). The continued development of a variety of feasible, contextually sensitive methods for assessing children’s behavior will allow us to determine further the validity of incorporating contextual features into models of developmental psychopathology and nosological frameworks. Keywords: Methodology, assessment, development, ADD/ADHD, disruptive behavior, situation specificity, informant discrepancies.

Understanding parent-child social informant discrepancy in youth with high functioning autism spectrum disorders.

Abstract: We investigated discrepancies between parent- and self-reported social functioning among youth with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Three distinct samples showed discrepancies indicating that parents viewed their children as performing one standard deviation below a standardization mean, while youth viewed themselves as comparably-skilled relative to peers. Discrepancies predicted lower parental self-efficacy, and lower youth-reported hostile attributions to peers, marginally-lower depression, and decreased post-treatment social anxiety. Discrepancies predicted outcomes better than parent- or youth-report alone. Informant discrepancies may provide valuable additional information regarding child psychopathology, parental perceptions of parenting stress, and youth treatment response. Findings support a model where abnormal self-perceptions in ASD stem from inflated imputation of subjective experiences to others, and provide direction for improving interventions for youth and parents.

Adolescent Self-Reports of Social Anxiety: Can They Disagree with Objective Psychophysiological Measures and Still Be Valid?

Abstract: We examined self-reported and parent-reported adolescent social anxiety symptoms and objective baseline measures of psychophysiological flexibility in 62 families. Measures completed by 31 adolescents referred for a clinical screening evaluation for social anxiety were compared to an age- and gender-matched community control sample of 31 adolescents (total sample: age range 14 to 17 years; 22 boys and 40 girls; M = 15.32 years; SD = 1.1). Clinic referred adolescents reported significantly fewer social anxiety symptoms than parents reported about adolescents. Further, for all adolescents, self-reported social anxiety symptoms exhibited low correspondence with objective psychophysiological measures. Yet, both measures uniquely discriminated between adolescents on whether they were clinic referred for a social anxiety screening. Further, adolescent self-reported social anxiety symptoms exhibited high levels of internal consistency and convergent validity. Findings indicate that researchers and practitioners should refrain from using disagreements between adolescent self-reports and other measures (e.g., parent report, objective measures) as indicators of the veracity of adolescent self-reports.

Implementing Clinically Feasible Psychophysiological Measures in Evidence-Based Assessments of Adolescent Social Anxiety

Abstract: How clinicians should assess adolescent patients distressed by physiological experiences of social anxiety is often unclear. Clinicians might hypothesize that this component of social anxiety will resolve with treatment of other components (e.g., negative thoughts or behavioral avoidance) and thus focus assessments on these other components. However, research has indicated that expressions of the different components of social anxiety often do not operate in synchrony. Evidence-based assessment and treatment of social anxiety in adolescence is critical because of its potential impact on psychosocial functioning; if left untreated, social anxiety places an adolescent at greater risk for developing substance use problems in adulthood. Practitioners rarely assess adolescents’ physiological experiences, but when they do, they tend to rely on subjective measures (e.g., paper and pencil) rather than on a multimethod approach including objective psychophysiological measures. It is possible that practitioners infrequently utilize objective psychophysiological assessments because they assume that subjective measures comprehensively assess this physiological component of social anxiety. Additionally, practitioners may believe that the use of objective psychophysiological methods is cost-prohibitive. Yet, recent technological innovations have resulted in low-cost, portable instruments to objectively assess psychophysiology in research and practice. In this review, we discuss objective psychophysiological measures of social anxiety in adolescents and provide recommendations for their use in research and practice. We argue that neither subjective nor objective measures alone yield a comprehensive understanding of psychophysiology. Rather, joint use of these measures may greatly improve both the assessment and treatment of adolescent social anxiety.

Using the Subtle Avoidance Frequency Examination in Adolescent Social Anxiety Assessments

Abstract: Individuals with social anxiety use safety behaviors to directly or indirectly avoid social situations (e.g., remaining quiet in a social setting to avoid saying anything embarrassing). Safety behaviors have been hypothesized to prevent the disconfirmation of feared occurrences while in social situations. Further, research indicates that use of safety behaviors garners negative reactions from others while in social situations, indicating a link between such behaviors and social skills deficits. In light of the focus on addressing social skill deficits in current evidence-based treatments for adolescent social anxiety, we examined whether a measure for assessing safety behaviors in adults [Subtle Avoidance Frequency Examination (SAFE; Cuming et al. in J Anxiety Disord 23(7):879–883 2009)] could be used reliably and validly in adolescent assessments. Participants were 40 adolescents (total sample: age range 14–17 years; 14 boys and 26 girls; M = 15.15 years; SD = 0.97) allocated into age- and gender-matched groups in terms of whether they were (n = 20) or were not (n = 20) clinic referred for a social anxiety assessment. Results demonstrate that the SAFE (a) has adequate internal consistency; (b) relates positively and uniquely to a widely used measure of adolescent social anxiety, when considering measures of other distinct psychopathology domains; and (c) differentiates clinic referred from community control adolescents. These findings indicate that the SAFE can be reliably and validly administered in adolescent social anxiety assessments and thus have implications for improvements in treatment monitoring and the study of mechanisms of change for adolescent social anxiety treatments.

“It Depends on What You Mean by ‘Disagree’”: Differences between Parent and Child Perceptions of Parent–Child Conflict

Abstract: We examined a new structured interview of parent–child conflict that assesses parent and child perceptions of behavioral conflict about daily life topics (e.g., doing chores, homework), and whether discrepancies exist on beliefs about these topics. In a sample of 100 parents and children ages 10 to 17 years (M = 13.5 years, 52 males, 57 % African-American), informants could reliably distinguish between perceived behavioral conflicts and perceived discrepant beliefs about topics. These scores were also significantly related to questionnaire reports of parent–child conflict. Parent and child questionnaire reports did not significantly differ, yet on the structured interview, parents reported significantly greater levels of perceived conflict and discrepant beliefs relative to child reports. Additionally, structured interview reports of conflict demonstrated incremental validity by relating to child self-reports of delinquent behaviors, when accounting for questionnaire conflict reports. The findings have implications for increasing understanding of the links between parent–child conflict and psychosocial outcomes.

Compromised Decision Making and the Effects of Manipulating Physical States on Human Judgments

Abstract: Objectives: Nonmorally based decision making between two equitable objects often involves degrading the unchosen object and promoting the chosen object (‘‘postdecisional dissonance’’). One can extinguish these thought processes with the physical act of hand-washing (‘‘clean slate’’ effects; [Lee & Schwarz (2010). Washing away postdecisional dissonance. Science, 328, 709.]). However, clean slate effects might not characterize all nonmorally based decision making, particularly for people who mentally ‘‘get stuck’’ making decisions (i.e., compromised decision making). Design: We administered a clean slate task to 48 undergraduates (64.6% females; mean 5 21.34 years, standard deviation 5 4.06 years; 75% Caucasian), and identified individuals reporting relatively highcompromised versus low-compromised decision making (e.g., self-reported repetitive thought processes and generalized anxiety symptoms). Results: Only individuals reporting relatively highcompromised decision making continued to express postdecisional dissonance even after hand-washing. Conclusions: Behavioral markers of clean slate effects might result in identifying phenotypes associated with psychological concerns typified by compromised decision making.

Domestic dogs' (Canis familiaris) choices in reference to agreement among human informants on location of food.

Abstract: When interacting with others, informants may offer conflicting information or information of varying accuracy. Recent research suggests that young children do not trust all informants equally and are selective in both whom they solicit for information and whose claims they support. We explored whether domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are similarly sensitive to agreement among informants. To this end, we utilized a common human gesture, pointing, to which recent research suggests dogs are sensitive. We conducted two experiments in which an experimenter secretly hid food in one of two clear containers while the dog was distracted. Next, a small group moved to indicate the food’s location using stationary points positioned above the containers. In Experiment 1, two experimenters moved to stand behind the non-baited container, while a third experimenter moved to stand behind the baited container. Then, all directed one static point at the container in front of them. Experiment 2 exactly resembled Experiment 1 with the exception that the single experimenter standing behind the baited container directed two static points at the container (one with each hand). Dogs chose the container indicated by the majority in Experiment 1 significantly more often than chance, but chose the container indicated by the minority in Experiment 2 significantly more often than chance. This suggests that the number of points, not the number of people, more strongly influenced dogs’ choices.

Applying psychometric theory and research to developing a continuously distributed approach to making research funding decisions

Abstract: Scientists and funding agencies have long struggled with identifying optimal methods for allocatingscarce research dollars to pools of research funding proposals. Much of the research has focused onthe unreliability of the subjective peer review ratings used to estimate the scholarly merit of fundingproposals. Yet, psychologists are uniquely positioned to aid in improving the validity of the fundingdecisions based on subjective peer review evaluations. Importantly, no federal funding agency currentlyimplements a decision-making method that goes beyond a traditional dichotomous system for allocatingsupport (i.e., “fund” vs. “not fund” a proposal). However, a robust line of psychometric research indicatesthe superiority of continuous, relative to dichotomous, rating systems for reliably and validly estimatingthe kinds of constructs of interest in peer review evaluations (i.e., domains relevant to estimating thescholarly merit of research proposals). In this paper, we illustrate how applying psychometric researchand theory informs the development of a continuously distributed approach to making research fundingdecisions. This approach allocates a specific degree of support to proposals, commensurate with thecontinuously distributed peer review ratings used at major funding agencies to estimate the scholarlymerit of proposals. Importantly, we illustrate a hypothetical use of the continuously distributed fundingapproach that—relative to a dichotomous funding approach and using the same amount of fundingresources—allocates funding dollars to 260% more funding proposals. We also discuss the strengths andlimitations of a continuously distributed funding approach, as well as its implications for scientists andfunding agencies.Keywords: peer review, psychometrics, research funding, methodology

Applying Psychometric Theory and Research to Developing a Continuously Distributed Approach to Making Research Funding Decisions

Abstract: Scientists and funding agencies have long struggled with identifying optimal methods for allocating scarce research dollars to pools of research funding proposals. Much of the research has focused on the unreliability of the subjective peer review ratings used to estimate the scholarly merit of funding proposals. Yet, psychologists are uniquely positioned to aid in improving the validity of the funding decisions based on subjective peer review evaluations. Importantly, no federal funding agency currently implements a decision-making method that goes beyond a traditional dichotomous system for allocating support (i.e., “fund” vs. “not fund” a proposal). However, a robust line of psychometric research indicates the superiority of continuous, relative to dichotomous, rating systems for reliably and validly estimating the kinds of constructs of interest in peer review evaluations (i.e., domains relevant to estimating the scholarly merit of research proposals). In this paper, we illustrate how applying psychometric research and theory informs the development of a continuously distributed approach to making research funding decisions. This approach allocates a specific degree of support to proposals, commensurate with the continuously distributed peer review ratings used at major funding agencies to estimate the scholarly merit of proposals. Importantly, we illustrate a hypothetical use of the continuously distributed funding approach that — relative to a dichotomous funding approach and using the same amount of funding resources — allocates funding dollars to 260% more funding proposals. We also discuss the strengths and limitations of a continuously distributed funding approach, as well as its implications for scientists and funding agencies.