No abstract

The provocative results of Blair, Marcus, and Boccaccini (2008) suggest that the allegiance effect, previously suggested in psychotherapy outcome studies, may apply to studies of actuarial risk assessment. Despite this finding, the mechanisms of the effect, particularly in assessment research, are unknown and warrant further investigation. We discuss the file drawer effect, selective reporting, and "data massaging" as three potential explanations for allegiance effects in the assessment domain. Furthermore, we offer four suggestions for minimizing allegiance effects and their impact: routinely coding for allegiance in meta-analytic studies, operationalizing allegiance in multiple ways, encouraging collaborations among authors with differing allegiances, and creating study registries to track all dependent variables measured in studies.

This study examined whether personality differences might account for meaningful heterogeneity within and across DSM-IV diagnostic categories for disruptive adolescent boys. In a broader study of personality pathology in adolescence, a national sample of 293 clinicians completed the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure 200-A on randomly selected outpatients aged 14 to 18 in their care. Of 138 boys in the sample, 71 had a diagnosis of Disruptive Behavior Disorders or a history of arrests. Q-factor analysis identified 3 personality subtypes within this subsample: psychopathic (n = 28), social outcast (n = 22), and impulsive delinquent (n = 17). The subtypes differed on external criterion variables indicative of a valid taxonomic distinction, notably personality ratings, clinician-report child behavior checklist subscale scores, and etiologic variables. Personality subtypes converged with subtypes of delinquent boys identified by longitudinal research, and they showed substantial incremental validity in predicting adaptive functioning beyond Disruptive Behavior Disorders diagnoses. Results suggest that dimensional personality assessment in disruptive/delinquent adolescent boys provides information beyond existing diagnoses that may prove useful in prevention, clinical conceptualization, and treatment.

The present study examined the application of the Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) diagnosis to adolescents and investigated the possibility of subtypes of APD adolescents. As part of a broader study of adolescent personality in clinically-referred patients, experienced clinicians provided personality data on a randomly selected patient in their care using the SWAP-II-A personality pathology instrument. Three hundred thirteen adolescents met adult DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for APD. To characterize adolescents with the disorder, we aggregated the data to identify the items most descriptive and distinctive of APD adolescents relative to other teenagers in the sample (N = 950). Q-factor analysis identified five personality subtypes: psychopathic-like, socially withdrawn, impulsive-histrionic, emotionally dysregulated, and attentionally dysregulated. The five subtypes differed in predictable ways on a set of external criteria related to global adaptive functioning, childhood family environment, and family history of psychiatric illness. Both the APD diagnosis and the empirically derived APD subtypes provided incremental validity over and above the DSM-IV disruptive behavior disorders in predicting global adaptive functioning, number of arrests, early-onset severe externalizing pathology, and quality of peer relationships. Although preliminary, these results provide support for the use of both APD and personality-based subtyping systems in adolescents.

This chapter illustrates how an online graduate program for early childhood education and care professionals prepares students to take on leadership and advocacy positions and initiatives in their respective communities. Before students graduate from the program, they must develop and implement an Advocacy Research Project to apply the knowledge and skills they gained throughout the program. Situated in North Carolina, the majority of students complete their ARP in rural communities. This chapter showcases four exemplar projects developed and carried out by students in rural communities. Finally, this chapter offers implications and suggestions for university faculty who aim to prepare students to take on leadership and advocacy roles in rural settings.