Antisocial behavior from a developmental psychopathology perspective

Abstract

This paper reviews research on chronic patterns of antisocial behavior and places this research into a developmental psychopathology framework. Specifically, research suggests that there are at least three important pathways through which children and adolescents can develop severe antisocial behaviors. One group of youth shows antisocial behavior that begins in adolescence, and two groups show antisocial behavior that begins in childhood but differ on the presence or absence of callous-unemotional traits. In outlining these distinct pathways to antisocial behavior, we have tried to illustrate some key concepts from developmental psychopathology such as equifinality and multifinality, the importance of understanding the interface between normal and abnormal development, and the importance of using multiple levels of analyses to advance causal theories. Finally, we discuss how this development model can be used to enhance existing interventions for antisocial individuals.The study of antisocial, criminal, and aggressive behaviors has a long and rich research history (Binder, 1987). This intensive focus from research is not surprising given that these behaviors often operate at a very high cost to society, such as costs to victims of these behaviors and the costs associated with detaining individuals in an effort to protect potential future victims (Krug, Dahlberg, Mercy, Zwi, & Lozano, 2002;Loeber & Farrington, 2001). Of importance, these behaviors have been studied from a number of different perspectives, including anthropological, evolutionary, sociological, psychological, and biological perspectives, to name a few. Research from each of these disciplines provides a unique perspective for understanding the course, causes, and most effective interventions for individuals who show severe antisocial behaviors. In this paper, and in fitting with this special section, we take a developmental psychopathology approach for integrating the large and diverse research literature on antisocial behavior, used broadly to refer to criminal and aggressive behaviors, as well as other behaviors that violate the rights of others or major societal norms.We think that a developmental psychopathology approach for integrating this research could be important for at least two reasons. First, a developmental psychopathology framework provides a very useful way for integrating the diverse research literatures into a coherent causal model. This can help us to understand the developmental mechanisms that can lead to antisocial behavior patterns and to translate this research into implications for prevention and treatment. Second, research on antisocial behavior provides a clear way of illustrating the importance of several key developmental psychopathology concepts, such as equifinality and multifinality, the importance of integrating research on both normal and abnormal development, and the importance of integrating multiple level of analyses (e.g., neurological, social, cognitive, behavioral) for understanding psychopathological...

The Reciprocal Influence of Callous-Unemotional Traits, Oppositional Defiant Disorder and Parenting Practices in Preschoolers

“…Consistent with findings pointing to CU traits as a high-risk indicator in children with disruptive behavior (DB) disorders, there appear to be distinct developmental pathways for CU traits compared to related DB [12,13]. Children with CU traits can be distinguished from children with DB alone on the basis of genetic risk, cognitive and affective characteristics, environmental influences, biological factors, and personality traits [3].…”

Dissociable relations between amygdala subregional networks and psychopathy trait dimensions in conduct‐disordered juvenile offenders

“…Anomalies in these processes have been suggested in relation to the callous and unemotional features of psychopathy [Bird and Viding, 2014; Blair, 2013a; Frick and Viding, 2009], and tentatively ascribed to perturbations within the frontolimbic system discussed here [Aghajani et al, 2016; Anderson and Kiehl, 2012; Blair, 2013a, 2013b; Deeley et al, 2006; Decety et al, 2013b; Michalska et al, 2015; Moul et al, 2012]. Given the alleged interface function the CMA serves between neocortical and visceromotor structures [Bienkowski and Rinaman, 2013; Keifer et al, 2015; Pessoa, 2011], abnormalities in its neural activity and large‐scale connectivity might be particularly detrimental to this frontolimbic system, and contribute plausibly to affective traits of psychopathy.…”

“…The developmental trajectory of psychopathy seemingly begins early in life and includes the presence of nascent psychopathic traits in conduct‐disordered juveniles [Anderson and Kiehl, 2014; Colins et al, 2014; Frick and Viding, 2009; Lynam et al, 2007]. These youngsters with psychopathic tendencies showcase a disproportionate amount of violent and antisocial acts, respond less favorably to treatment, and as such place a substantial economic and emotional burden on society [Anderson and Kiehl, 2014; Corrado et al, 2015; Frick and Viding, 2009; Salekin et al, 2010]. Yet, despite these pressing concerns the pathophysiology of psychopathic traits in these youths remains poorly understood.…”

Sensitivity to parenting in adolescents with callous/unemotional traits: Observational and experimental findings.

“…The APSD and the CU subscale in particular have been extensively validated in developmental and clinical research (P. J. Frick & Viding, 2009;Sylvers et al, 2011;van Zwieten et al, 2013), and have been shown to predict subsequent outcomes, e.g., (Wymbs et al, 2012), including the prediction to adult arrests, e.g., .…”