Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Clinical Psychological Science
- 1 Trends in the Evolving Discipline of Clinical Psychology
- 2 Defining and Redefining Phenotypes
- 3 Building Models of Psychopathology Spanning Multiple Modalities of Measurement
- Part II Observational Approaches
- Part III Experimental and Biological Approaches
- Part IV Developmental Psychopathology and Longitudinal Methods
- Part V Intervention Approaches
- Part VI Intensive Longitudinal Designs
- Part VII General Analytic Considerations
- Index
- References
3 - Building Models of Psychopathology Spanning Multiple Modalities of Measurement
from Part I - Clinical Psychological Science
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 March 2020
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Clinical Psychological Science
- 1 Trends in the Evolving Discipline of Clinical Psychology
- 2 Defining and Redefining Phenotypes
- 3 Building Models of Psychopathology Spanning Multiple Modalities of Measurement
- Part II Observational Approaches
- Part III Experimental and Biological Approaches
- Part IV Developmental Psychopathology and Longitudinal Methods
- Part V Intervention Approaches
- Part VI Intensive Longitudinal Designs
- Part VII General Analytic Considerations
- Index
- References
Summary
There is currently tension in the field of psychopathology regarding recent scientific initiatives that seek to incorporate neurobiological concepts and measures into models of psychopathology, particularly with regard to significant methodological challenges facing such endeavors. In order to establish multimodal models of psychopathology that include brain and behavioral indicators along with report-based measures, a methodological strategy is needed for addressing basic psychometric issues common to lab-task measures. This chapter describes an iterative psychoneurometric research strategy to addressing such issues. This approach focuses on neurobehavioral traits – i.e., latent dispositions that manifest in brain and behavioral responses within lab tasks as well as in self-reported proclivities. The chapter provides an overview of this approach and illustrates its use in developing a multimodal model for inhibitory control capacity (inhibition-disinhibition), a neurobehavioral trait that confers liability for externalizing forms of psychopathology (substance problems, delinquency, and aggression) as well as internalizing disorders marked by pervasive and unregulated distress. It discusses how the psychoneurometric approach can be extended to other neurobehavioral traits (e.g., threat sensitivity) that operate as liabilities for psychopathology, and how multimodal models of core trait liabilities can serve as anchors for an integrative, measurement-based framework for understanding, assessing, and treating mental health problems.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Balsis, S., Choudhury, B. S., Geraci, L., & Patrick, C. J. (2018). Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment: A Review and Illustrations Focusing on Item Response Theory Techniques. Assessment, 25, 360–373.Google Scholar
Bari, A., & Robbins, T. W. (2013). Inhibition and Impulsivity: Behavioral and Neural Basis of Response Control. Progress in Neurobiology, 108, 44–79.Google Scholar
Borsboom, D., Cramer, A., & Kalis, A. (2019). Brain Disorders? Not Really: Why Network Structures Block Reductionism in Psychopathology Research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 42, e2.Google Scholar
Brennan, G. M., & Baskin-Sommers, A. R. (2018). Brain-Behavior Relationships in Externalizing: P3 Amplitude Reduction Reflects Deficient Inhibitory Control. Behavioural Brain Research, 337, 70–79.Google Scholar
Buchman-Schmitt, J. M., Brislin, S. J., Venables, N. C., Joiner, T. E., & Patrick, C. J. (2017). Trait Liabilities and Specific Promotive Processes in Psychopathology: The Example of Suicidal Behavior. Journal of Affective Disorders, 216, 100–108.Google Scholar
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A, Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafo, M. R. (2013). Power Failure: Why Small Sample Size Undermines the Reliability of Neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 365–376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S., & Johnson, S. L. (2018). Impulsive Reactivity to Emotion and Vulnerability to Psychopathology. American Psychologist, 73, 1067–1078.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castellanos-Ryan, N., Struve, M., Whelan, R., Banaschewski, T., Barker, G. J., Bokde, A. L., …, & the IMAGEN Consortium (2014). Neural and Cognitive Correlates of the Common and Specific Variance across Externalizing Problems in Young Adolescence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 171(12), 1310–1319.Google Scholar
Clark, L. A., Cuthbert, B., Lewis-Fernández, R., Narrow, W. E., & Reed, G. M. (2017). Three Approaches to Understanding and Classifying Mental Disorder: ICD-11, DSM-5, and the National Institute of Mental Health’s Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18, 72–145.Google Scholar
Creswell, K. G., Wright, A. G., Flory, J. D., Skrzynski, C. J., & Manuck, S. B. (2019). Multidimensional Assessment of Impulsivity-Related Measures in Relation to Externalizing Behaviors. Psychological Medicine, 49, 1678–1690.Google Scholar
Hicks, B. M., Bernat, E. M., Malone, S. M., Iacono, W. G., Patrick, C. J., Krueger, R. F., & McGue, M. (2007). Genes Mediate the Association between P3 Amplitude and Externalizing Disorders. Psychophysiology, 44, 98–105.Google Scholar
Iacono, W. G., Carlson, S. R., Malone, S. M., & McGue, M. (2002). P3 Event-Related Potential Amplitude and the Risk for Disinhibitory Disorders in Adolescent Boys. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 750–757.Google Scholar
Iacono, W. J., Malone, S. M., & McGue, M. (2003). Substance Use Disorders, Externalizing Psychopathology, and P300 Event-Related Potential Amplitude. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 48, 147–178.Google Scholar
Iacono, W. G., Malone, S. M., & McGue, M. (2008). Behavioral Disinhibition and the Development of Early-Onset Addiction: Common and Specific Influences. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 325–348.Google Scholar
Insel, T. R., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2015). Brain Disorders? Precisely. Science, 348, 499–500.Google Scholar
Insel, T., Cuthbert, B., Garvey, M., Heinssen, R., Pine, D. S., Quinn, K., ... & Wang, P. (2010). Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): Toward a New Classification Framework for Research on Mental Disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 748–750.Google Scholar
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2011). Excess Significance Bias in the Literature on Brain Volume Abnormalities. Archives of General Psychiatry, 68, 773–780.Google Scholar
Kendler, K. S., Prescott, C. A., Myers, J., & Neale, M. C. (2003). The Structure of Genetic and Environmental Risk Factors for Common Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders in Men and Women. Archives of General Psychiatry, 60, 929–937.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. (1992). Analysis of the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix by Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 165–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F., Watson, D., Achenbach, T. M., Althoff, R. R., Bagby, M., …, & Zimmerman, M. (2017). The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A Dimensional Alternative to Traditional Nosologies. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126, 454–477.Google Scholar
Kozak, M. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2016). The NIMH Research Domain Criteria Initiative: Background, Issues, and Pragmatics. Psychophysiology, 53(3), 286–297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kramer, M. D., Patrick, C. J., Krueger, R. F., & Gasperi, M. (2012). Delineating Physiologic Defensive Reactivity in the Domain of Self-Report: Phenotypic and Etiologic Structure of Dispositional Fear. Psychological Medicine, 42(6), 1305–1320.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F. (1999). The Structure of Common Mental Disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 921–926.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Hicks, B. M., Patrick, C. J., Carlson, S. R., Iacono, W. G., & McGue, M. (2002). Etiologic Connections among Substance Dependence, Antisocial Behavior and Personality: Modeling the Externalizing Spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111, 411–424.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Kotov, R., Watson, D., Forbes, M. K., Eaton, N. R., Ruggero, C. J., … & Bagby, R. M. (2018). Progress in Achieving Quantitative Classification of Psychopathology. World Psychiatry, 17(3), 282–293.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2007). Linking Antisocial Behavior, Substance Use, and Personality: An Integrative Quantitative Model of the Adult Externalizing Spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116(4), 645–666.Google Scholar
Kwako, L. E., Momenan, R., Litten, R. Z., Koob, G. F., & Goldman, D. (2016). Addictions Neuroclinical Assessment: A Neuroscience-Based Framework for Addictive Disorders. Biological Psychiatry, 80(3), 179–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2014). The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): An Analysis of Methodological and Conceptual Challenges. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 62, 129–139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2017). Psychology’s Replicability Crisis and the Grant Culture: Righting the Ship. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 12, 660–664.Google Scholar
Lilienfeld, S. O., & Treadway, M. T. (2016). Clashing Diagnostic Approaches: DSM-ICD versus RDoC. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 435–463.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An Introduction to the Five‐Factor Model and Its Applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215.Google Scholar
MacKillop, J., Weafer, J., Gray, J. C., Oshri, A., Palmer, A., & de Wit, H. (2016). The Latent Structure of Impulsivity: Impulsive Choice, Impulsive Action, and Impulsive Personality Traits. Psychopharmacology, 233, 3361–3370.Google Scholar
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), The American Council on Education/Macmillan Series on Higher Education. Educational measurement, (pp. 13–103). New York: American Council on Education & Macmillan Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An Integrative Theory of Prefrontal Cortex Function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167–202.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (2010). Mistreating Psychology in the Decades of the Brain. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 716–743.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The Nature and Organization of Individual Differences in Executive Functions: Four General Conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 8–14.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. (2000). The Unity and Diversity of Executive Functions and Their Contributions to Complex “Frontal Lobe” Tasks: A Latent Variable Analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC) (2015). Measuring Human Capabilities: An Agenda for Basic Research on the Assessment of Individual and Group Performance Potential for Military Accession. Committee on Measuring Human Capabilities, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Nelson, L. D., Patrick, C. J., & Bernat, E. M. (2011). Operationalizing Proneness to Externalizing Psychopathology as a Multivariate Psychophysiological Phenotype. Psychophysiology, 48, 64–72.Google Scholar
Nigg, J. T. (2017). Annual Research Review: On the Relations among Self‐Regulation, Self‐Control, Executive Functioning, Effortful Control, Cognitive Control, Impulsivity, Risk‐Taking, and Inhibition for Developmental Psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58, 361–383.Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Bernat, E., Malone, S. M., Iacono, W. G., Krueger, R. F., & McGue, M. K. (2006). P300 Amplitude as an Indicator of Externalizing in Adolescent Males. Psychophysiology, 43, 84–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patrick, C. J., Durbin, C. E., & Moser, J. S. (2012). Conceptualizing Proneness to Antisocial Deviance in Neurobehavioral Terms. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 1047–1071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patrick, C. J., & Hajcak, G. (2016). RDoC: Translating Promise into Progress. Psychophysiology, 53, 415–424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patrick, C. J., Foell, J., Venables, N. C., & Worthy, D. A. (2015). Substance Use Disorders as Externalizing Outcomes. In Beauchaine, T. & Hinshaw, S. (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Externalizing Spectrum Disorders (pp. 38–60). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Iacono, W. G., & Venables, N. C. (2019). Incorporating Neurophysiological Measures into Clinical Assessments: Fundamental Challenges and a Strategy for Addressing Them. Psychological Assessment. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fpas0000713Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Venables, N. C., Yancey, J. R., Hicks, B. M., Nelson, L. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2013). A Construct-Network Approach to Bridging Diagnostic and Physiological Domains: Application to Assessment of Externalizing Psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 902–916.Google Scholar
Perkins, E. R., Yancey, J. R., Drislane, L. D., Venables, N. C., Balsis, S., & Patrick, C. J. (2017). Methodological Issues in the Use of Individual Brain Measures to Index Trait Liabilities: The Example of Noise-Probe P3. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 111, 245–255.Google Scholar
Ramey, T. (2017). NIDA Phenotyping Battery [Webinar]. In Clinical Trials Network Dissemination Library, April 21. Retrieved from https://ctndisseminationlibrary.wordpress.com/2017/04/14/ctn-webinar-nida-phenotyping-battery-april-21-1-2pm-edt/Google Scholar
Sharma, L., Markon, K. E., & Clark, L. A. (2014). Toward a Theory of Distinct Types of “Impulsive” Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis of Self-Report and Behavioral Measures. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 374–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tackett, J. L., Lilienfeld, S. O., Patrick, C. J., Johnson, S. L., Krueger, R. F., Miller, J. D., … & Shrout, P. E. (2017). It’s Time to Broaden the Replicability Conversation: Thoughts for and from Clinical Psychological Science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), 742–756.Google Scholar
Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. (2008). Exploring Personality through Test Construction: Development of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. In Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.), Handbook of Personality Theory and Testing: Personality Measurement and Assessment (Vol. 2, pp. 261–292). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Vaidyanathan, U., Patrick, C. J., & Bernat, E. M. (2009). Startle Reflex Potentiation during Aversive Picture Viewing as an Indicator of Trait Fear. Psychophysiology, 46, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Venables, N. C., Foell, J., Yancey, J. R., Kane, M. J., Engle, R. W., & Patrick, C. J. (2018a). Quantifying Inhibitory Control as Externalizing Proneness: A Cross-Domain Model. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(4). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2167702618757690Google Scholar
Venables, N. C., Hicks, B. M., Yancey, J. R., Kramer, M. D., Nelson, L. D., Strickland, C. M., … & Patrick, C. J. (2017). Evidence of a Prominent Genetic Basis for Associations between Psychoneurometric Traits and Common Mental Disorders. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 115, 4–12.Google Scholar
Venables, N. C., & Patrick, C. J. (2012). Validity of the Externalizing Spectrum Inventory in a Criminal Offender Sample: Relations with Disinhibitory Psychopathology, Personality, and Psychopathic Features. Psychological Assessment, 24, 88–100.Google Scholar
Venables, N. C., Yancey, J. R., Kramer, M. D., Hicks, B. M., Krueger, R. F., Iacono, W. G., Joiner, T. J., & Patrick, C. J. (2018b). Psychoneurometric Assessment of Dispositional Liabilities for Suicidal Behavior: Phenotypic and Etiological Associations. Psychological Medicine, 48, 463–472.Google Scholar
Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The Five Factor Model and Impulsivity: Using a Structural Model of Personality to Understand Impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 669–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yancey, J. R., Venables, N. C., Hicks, B. M., & Patrick, C. J. (2013). Evidence for a Heritable Brain Basis to Deviance-Promoting Deficits in Self-Control. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 309–317.Google Scholar
Yancey, J. R., Venables, N. C., & Patrick, C. J. (2016). Psychoneurometric Operationalization of Threat Sensitivity: Relations with Clinical Symptom and Physiological Response Criteria. Psychophysiology, 53(3), 393–405.Google Scholar
Young, S. E., Friedman, N. P., Miyake, A., Willcutt, E. G., Corley, R. P., Haberstick, B. C., & Hewitt, J. K. (2009). Behavioral Disinhibition: Liability for Externalizing Spectrum Disorders and Its Genetic and Environmental Relation to Response Inhibition across Adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118, 117–130.Google Scholar
Young, S. E., Stallings, M. C., Corley, R. P., Krauter, K. S., & Hewitt, J. K. (2000). Genetic and Environmental Influences on Behavioral Disinhibition. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 96, 684–695.Google Scholar