Disruptive Behavior Disorders: The Challenge of Delineating Mechanisms in the Face of Heterogeneity

Abstract

Causal pathways to Disruptive Behavior Disorders, even within the same diagnostic category, are varied. Both equifinality and multifinality pose considerable challenges to uncovering underlying mechanisms and understanding varied developmental trajectories associated with Disruptive Behavior Disorders. Uncovering genetic causes requires improved granularity in how we operationalise presentation and developmental trajectories associated with Disruptive Behavior Disorders. If we want to integrate the study of genetic, environmental and neurocognitive factors within a longitudinal framework, we need to improve measurement. Furthermore, brain changes associated with Disruptive Behavior Disorders should not simply be understood as outcomes of genetic and environmental influences, but also as factors that reciprocally influence future social environments over time in ways that are important in contributing to risk and resilience.Advancing the field with regard to these challenges will result in more truly integrated investigation of Disruptive Behavior Disorders, which holds the promise to improve our ability to develop more effective preventative and intervention approaches.Disruptive behaviour disorders (DBDs) in childhood are classified at the level of behaviour.Although current diagnostic categories identify clinically disturbed functioning, they arguably do not identify etiologically delineated groups with distinct risk factor profiles (1,2) something would come as no surprise to mental health practitioners and teachers who work

Early risk factors associated with preschool developmental patterns of single and co-occurrent disruptive behaviors in a population sample.

“…The present findings emphasize that the assessment of early DB should include a range of behaviors to identify distinct and more finely detailed developmental trajectories (Viding & McRory, 2020). Second, they underline the importance of assessing a diversity of risk factors in order to discriminate between those common to multiple patterns of DB and those specific to one pattern or another.…”

Trust and childhood maltreatment: evidence of bias in appraisal of unfamiliar faces

“…Other studies have demonstrated that prior maltreatment experience is also associated with both social isolation and loneliness over time (Hanlon et al, 2020). This pattern of attenuated social networks following maltreatment (including both extent and quality of social relationships), relative to peers, has been termed 'social thinning' (McCrory, 2020;Viding & McCrory, 2020) and is postulated to be one factor contributing to long term psychiatric risk (Wielaard, Hoyer, Rhebergen, Stek, & Comijs, 2018). There is a need for prospective studies, incorporating experimental measures of trust, to investigate whether trust Trust and childhood maltreatment processing is one mechanism which may contribute to social thinning over time.…”

35.2 Trust and Childhood Maltreatment: Evidence of Bias in Appraisal of Unfamiliar Faces

“…Other studies have demonstrated that prior maltreatment experience is also associated with both social isolation and loneliness over time (Hanlon et al, 2020). This pattern of attenuated social networks following maltreatment (including both extent and quality of social relationships), relative to peers, has been termed 'social thinning' (McCrory, 2020;Viding & McCrory, 2020) and is postulated to be one factor contributing to long term psychiatric risk (Wielaard, Hoyer, Rhebergen, Stek, & Comijs, 2018). There is a need for prospective studies, incorporating experimental measures of trust, to investigate whether trust processing is one mechanism which may contribute to social thinning over time.…”