In network approaches to psychopathology, disorders result from the causal interplay between symptoms (e.g., worry → insomnia → fatigue), possibly involving feedback loops (e.g., a person may engage in substance abuse to forget the problems that arose due to substance abuse). The present review examines methodologies suited to identify such symptom networks and discusses network analysis techniques that may be used to extract clinically and scientifically useful information from such networks (e.g., which symptom is most central in a person's network). The authors also show how network analysis techniques may be used to construct simulation models that mimic symptom dynamics. Network approaches naturally explain the limited success of traditional research strategies, which are typically based on the idea that symptoms are manifestations of some common underlying factor, while offering promising methodological alternatives. In addition, these techniques may offer possibilities to guide and evaluate therape...

http://www.psychosystems.org/files/Literature/borsboomcramerannualreview.pdf

Network Analysis: An Integrative Approach to the Structure of Psychopathology

Child and adolescent patients may display mental health concerns within some contexts and not others (e.g., home vs. school). Thus, understanding the specific contexts in which patients display concerns may assist mental health professionals in tailoring treatments to patients' needs. Consequently, clinical assessments often include reports from multiple informants who vary in the contexts in which they observe patients' behavior (e.g., patients, parents, teachers). Previous meta-analyses indicate that informants' reports correlate at low-to-moderate magnitudes. However, is it valid to interpret low correspondence among reports as indicating that patients display concerns in some contexts and not others? We meta-analyzed 341 studies published between 1989 and 2014 that reported cross-informant correspondence estimates, and observed low-to-moderate correspondence (mean internalizing: r = .25; mean externalizing: r = .30; mean overall: r = .28). Informant pair, mental health domain, and measurement method moderated magnitudes of correspondence. These robust findings have informed the development of concepts for interpreting multi-informant assessments, allowing researchers to draw specific predictions about the incremental and construct validity of these assessments. In turn, we critically evaluated research on the incremental and construct validity of the multi-informant approach to clinical child and adolescent assessment. In so doing, we identify crucial gaps in knowledge for future research, and provide recommendations for "best practices" in using and interpreting multi-informant assessments in clinical work and research. This article has important implications for developing personalized approaches to clinical assessment, with the goal of informing techniques for tailoring treatments to target the specific contexts where patients display concerns. (PsycINFO Database Record

The validity of the multi-informant approach to assessing child and adolescent mental health.

Child and adolescent patients may display mental health concerns within some contexts and not others (e.g., home vs. school). Thus, understanding the specific contexts in which patients display concerns may assist mental health professionals in tailoring treatments to patients’ needs. Consequently, clinical assessments often include reports from multiple informants who vary in the contexts in which they observe patients’ behavior (e.g., patients, parents, teachers). Previous meta-analyses indicate that informants’ reports correlate at low-to-moderate magnitudes. However, is it valid to interpret low correspondence among reports as indicating that patients display concerns in some contexts and not others? We meta-analyzed 341 studies published between 1989 and 2014 that reported cross-informant correspondence estimates, and observed low-to-moderate correspondence (mean internalizing: r = .25; mean externalizing: r = .30; mean overall: r = .28). Informant pair, mental health domain, and measurement method moderated magnitudes of correspondence. These robust findings have informed the development of concepts for interpreting multi-informant assessments, allowing researchers to draw specific predictions about the incremental and construct validity of these assessments. In turn, we critically evaluated research on the incremental and construct validity of the multi-informant approach to clinical child and adolescent assessment. In so doing, we identify crucial gaps in knowledge for future research, and provide recommendations for “best practices” in using and interpreting multi-informant assessments in clinical work and research. This article has important implications for developing personalized approaches to clinical assessment, with the goal of informing techniques for tailoring treatments to target the specific contexts where patients display concerns.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm?abstractid=2632484

The Validity of the Multi-Informant Approach to Assessing Child and Adolescent Mental Health

Researchers use multiple informants' reports to assess and examine behavior. However, informants' reports commonly disagree. Informants' reports often disagree in their perceived levels of a behavior (“low” versus “elevated” mood), and examining multiple reports in a single study often results in inconsistent findings. Although researchers often espouse taking a multi-informant assessment approach, they frequently address informant discrepancies using techniques that treat discrepancies as measurement error. Yet, recent work indicates that researchers in a variety of fields often may be unable to justify treating informant discrepancies as measurement error. In this review, the authors advance a framework (Operations Triad Model) outlining general principles for using and interpreting informants' reports. Using the framework, researchers can test whether or not they can extract meaningful information about behavior from discrepancies among multiple informants' reports. The authors provide supportive evide...

/pdf/principles-underlying-the-use-of-multiple-informants-reports-1ep0rblteu.pdf

Principles Underlying the Use of Multiple Informants' Reports

The current state of the literature regarding psychosocial treatments for schizophrenia is reviewed within the frameworks of the recovery model of mental health and the expanded stress-vulnerability model. Interventions targeting specific domains of functioning, age groups, stages of illness, and human service system gaps are classified as evidence-based practices or promising practices according to the extent to which their efficacy is currently supported by meta-analyses and individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Evidence-based practices include assertive community treatment (ACT), cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for psychosis, cognitive remediation, family psychoeducation, illness self-management training, social skills training, and supported employment. Promising practices include cognitive adaptive therapy, CBT for posttraumatic stress disorder, first-episode psychosis intervention, healthy lifestyle interventions, integrated treatment for co-occurring disorders, interventions targeting older individuals, peer support services, physical disease management, prodromal stage intervention, social cognition training, supported education, and supported housing. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Psychosocial Treatments for Schizophrenia

A manual-search experiment with rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) explored dynamic object individuation in the tunnel effect: Subjects watched as a lemon rolled down a ramp and came to rest behind a tunnel (Occluder 1) and then as a kiwifruit emerged and became occluded at the end of its path behind a screen (Occluder 2). When the kiwifruit emerged at about the time that the lemon should have (had it continued its motion), subjects searched for food only behind Occluder 2—apparently perceiving the lemon to have transformed into a kiwifruit on the basis of spatiotemporally continuous motion. In contrast, when a brief pause interrupted the occlusion of the lemon and the emergence of the kiwifruit, monkeys searched for food behind both occluders. With further control conditions, this experiment demonstrates a spatiotemporal bias—similar to a bias found in adult visual perception—in the computation of object persistence in the context of a dynamic correspondence problem.

Dynamic Object Individuation in Rhesus Macaques A Study of the Tunnel Effect

Humans frequently interact with strangers absent prior direct experience with their behavior. Some conjecture that this may have favored evolution of a cognitive system within the hominoid clade or perhaps the primate order to assign reputations based on third-party exchanges. However, non-primate species’ acquisition of skills from experienced individuals, attention to communicative cues, and propensity to infer social rules suggests reputation inference may be more widespread. We utilized dogs’ sensitivity to humans’ social and communicative cues to explore whether dogs evidenced reputation-like inference for strangers through third-party interactions. Results indicated dogs spontaneously show reputation-like inference for strangers from indirect exchanges. Further manipulations revealed that dogs continued to evidence this ability despite reduction of specific components of the observed interactions, including reduction of visual social cues (i.e., face-to-face contact between the participants in the interaction) and the nature of the recipient (i.e., living, animate agent versus living, inanimate self-propelled agent). Dogs also continued to demonstrate reputation-like inference when local enhancement was controlled and in a begging paradigm. However, dogs did not evidence reputation-like inference when the observed interaction was inadvertent.

Reputation-like inference in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris).

No definitive or gold standard outcome measure exists to test the efficacy of the mental disorder treatments examined within randomized controlled trials. As a result, researchers often evaluate efficacy via multiple outcome measures administered within a single controlled trial. This practice commonly yields inconsistent findings as to a treatment's efficacy. To address the issue of inconsistent findings, increasingly (and paradoxically) controlled trials include designations of a single measure as a primary outcome and other measures as secondary outcomes. In this paper, we review recent work highlighting the limitations of this approach to testing efficacy. In discussing how these limitations outweigh the strengths of the primary outcome method, we argue that this method needs to be replaced with an approach that addresses its limitations. In doing so, we outline the basic principles of a research agenda to develop such a replacement approach. The approach (Standardized Replication Rate [SRR] Approach) would focus on the extent to which multiple outcome measures within a controlled trial yield replicable effects, relative to the characteristics of the outcome measures and the treatment(s) examined within the trial. A research agenda focused on developing the SRR Approach would increase accountability for both reporting and interpreting controlled trials evidence.

Shannon M.A. Kundey

Papers

Principles Underlying the Use of Multiple Informants' Reports

Dynamic Object Individuation in Rhesus Macaques A Study of the Tunnel Effect

Reputation-like inference in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris).

The End of the Primary Outcome Measure: A Research Agenda for Constructing its Replacement

The end of the primary outcome measure: A research agenda for constructing its replacement☆