Rule-governance, correspondence training, and discrimination learning: A developmental analysis of covert conduct problems.

Abstract

A developmental model of covert conduct problems is described. Three social processes increase risk for early covert conduct problems. First, parents and other social agents fa il to reinforce children 's compliance to explicit commands and instructions. Second, there is a fa ilure to transfer rule -giving and rule -following from extemal verbal stimuli and contingencies to children's self-description of behavior-consequence relationships. Third, correspondence between children's words and future (promise keeping) or past (truth-telling) behavior is inadequately established. Early covert conduct problems may also result fr om the acquisition and rehearsal of non-normative, deviant rules in family and peer settings. As such, covert conduct problems reflect acquisition of non-normative rules as a result of active deviancy training and deficits in rule govemance and word-behavior correspondence.

The Relationship of Impulsivity-Inattention and Verbal Ability to Overt and Covert Antisocial Behaviors in Children

“…Although contrary to the results expected from the proposed model (Nigg and Huang-Pollock 2003), the findings suggest that verbal skills may prove useful for children engaging in covert antisocial behaviors, perhaps by increasing children's capacity to successfully plan and implement such behavior, and to do so in a way to avoid negative consequences (Snyder et al 2006(Snyder et al , 2010. The non-significant relationship between covert antisocial behaviors and verbal ability in the regression analyses and their negative bivariate correlation are different than the results reported by Barker et al (2007); however, verbal abilities and inattention-impulsivity were found to ''work together'' in different ways for overt and covert antisocial behaviors.…”

“…The distinction between overt and covert antisocial behavior has been further supported by the evidence suggesting different familial characteristics (Kazdin 1992), social functions (Snyder et al 2006), and peer contingencies (Snyder et al 2008). This evidence suggests that the distinction between overt and covert forms is important for a better understanding of the development and progression of antisocial behavior, and of the development and heritability of psychopathy (Fontaine et al 2008).…”

“…fighting and disobedience of authority), and covert antisocial behaviors refer to actions in which the child engages in more surreptitious behaviors to avoid external social consequences (e.g. lying and stealing; Snyder et al 2006).…”

“…The deleterious effects of antisocial behavioral problems and the progression of deviant behaviors from childhood through adolescence (Nigg et al 2004) and adulthood (Tremlay 2010) have been documented in many investigations of the pathways leading to deviance. Research on the progression of antisocial behaviors has led to many discoveries regarding distinct forms (Achenbach and Edelbrock 1991;Loeber and Schmaling 1985;Willoughby et al 2001;Tremlay 2010) and functions (Snyder et al 2006) of deviance. These investigations underscore the importance of distinguishing different forms of antisocial behaviors and the divergent pathways characterizing their development.…”

Gender Differences in Predicting Antisocial Behaviors: Developmental Consequences of Physical and Relational Aggression

“…Examples of covert acts include lying, stealing, cheating, running away, truanting and drug use. It has been hypothesized that these behaviors are executed to actively avoid or escape detection (Snyder, et al 2006). Although differentiation in the forms of antisocial behavior has been well substantiated, less is known about potential risk factors and gender differences associated with the appearance and growth of covert antisocial behaviors.…”