Although covariance structure analysis is used increasingly to analyze nonexperimental data, important statistical requirements for its proper use are frequently ignored. Valid conclusions about the adequacy of a model as an acceptable representation of data, which are based on goodness-of-fit test statistics and standard errors of parameter estimates, rely on the model estimation procedure being appropriate for the data. Using analogies to linear regression and anova, this review examines conditions under which conclusions drawn from various estimation methods will be correct and the consequences of ignoring these conditions. A distinction is made between estimation methods that are either correctly or incorrectly specified for the distribution of data being analyzed, and it is shown that valid conclusions are possible even under misspecification. A brief example illustrates the ideas. Internet access is given to a computer code for several methods that are not available in programs such as EQS or LISREL.

Much is known about outcome following traumatic brain injury (TBI) in school-age children; however, recovery in early childhood is less well understood. Some argue that such injuries should lead to good outcome, because of the plasticity of the developing brain. Other purport that the young brain is vulnerable, with injury likely to result in a substantial impairment (H. G. Taylor & J. Alden, 1997). The aim of this study was to examine outcomes following TBI during early childhood, to plot recovery over the 30 months postinjury, and to identify predictors of outcome. The study compared 3 groups of children sustaining mild, moderate, and severe TBI, ages 2.0 to 6.11 years at injury, with healthy controls. Groups were comparable for preinjury adaptive and behavioral function, psychosocial characteristics, age, and gender. Results suggested a strong association between injury severity and outcomes across all domains. Further, 30-month outcome was predicted by injury severity, family factors, and preinjury levels of child function. In conclusion, children with more severe injuries and lower preinjury adaptive abilities, and whose families are coping poorly, are at greatest risk of long-term impairment in day-to-day skills, even several years postinjury.

These data show that smaller hippocampal volumes are present from the onset of illness. While these findings would support the neurodevelopmental model of schizophrenia, the finding of smaller left hippocampal volume in patients with first-episode schizophrenia and affective psychosis does not support the prediction that smaller hippocampi are specific to schizophrenia. The association of smaller right hippocampal volumes with increased illness duration in chronic schizophrenia suggests either that there is further neurodegeneration after illness onset or that bilateral small hippocampi predict chronicity.

Both CAT and GCC are effective in reducing externalising psychopathology in teenagers with sub-syndromal or full-syndrome borderline [corrected] personality disorder. Larger studies are required to determine the specific value of CAT in this population.

The natural variability of pitch naming ability in the population (known as absolute pitch or AP) provides an ideal method for investigating individual differences in pitch processing and auditory knowledge formation and representation. We have demonstrated the involvement of different cognitive processes in AP ability that reflects varying skill expertise in the presence of similar early age of onset of music tuition. These processes were related to different regions of brain activity, including those involved in pitch working memory (right prefrontal cortex) and the long-term representation of pitch (superior temporal gyrus). They reflected expertise through the use of context dependent pitch cues and the level of automaticity of pitch naming. They impart functional significance to structural asymmetry differences in the planum temporale of musicians and establish a neurobiological basis for an AP template. More generally, they indicate variability of knowledge representation in the presence of environmental fostering of early cognitive development that translates to differences in cognitive ability.