Self Regulation, Cognitive Capacity and Risk Taking: Investigating Heterogeneity Among Adolescents with Callous-Unemotional Traits

Abstract

The majority of prior work focuses on understanding the association between callous-unemotional (CU) traits and conduct problems, providing limited information on why some youth who score high on CU traits do not engage in conduct problem behaviors. The current study investigated heterogeneity among a sub-sample of adolescents with CU traits (N = 152; Mage = 13.09, SD = 2.76, 45.6% female) identified from a large community sample. Three groups were compared: control, callous-unemotional traits only (CU-only), and combined callous-unemotional and conduct problems (CU + CP). Participants were administered a battery of neuropsychological computerized tasks assessing risk taking, self-regulation and cognitive capacity. Results indicated that youth high on CU traits and low on CP scored higher on self-regulation and were less likely to make risky decisions compared to youth with combined CU + CP. In general, the findings provided information that heterogeneity within CU traits can be explained based on differences in neuro-cognitive functioning. In addition, the characteristics of youth high on CU traits only can provide information for interventions aiming to decrease conduct problems among youth high on these traits.

Resting-state network topology characterizing callous-unemotional traits in adolescence

“…First, while these studies reveal similar differences in each network, the individual studies do not converge on regions or demonstrate the same network across all studies. This is possibly due to the heterogeneity of CU traits (e.g., Fanti et al, 2013;Fanti et al, 2018;Hadjicharalambous & Fanti, 2018;Catherine L. Sebastian et al, 2012) that is not modeled in the above adolescent studies. Ignoring the heterogeneity of CU traits can produce spurious connections that fail to describe the individuals in the sample, whereas modeling this heterogeneity can more accurately characterize network patterns in the brain (Gates & Molenaar, 2012).…”

“…Identifying biomarkers related to callousness could inform development of new interventions and aid faster assessment of treatment response by monitoring treatment outcomes prior to changes being manifested behaviorally (Mayeux, 2004;Perez et al, 2014). However, this has been difficult because CU traits are heterogeneous (i.e., there are multiple variants underlying individual differences; e.g., Fanti et al, 2013;Fanti et al, 2018;Hadjicharalambous & Fanti, 2018; Catherine L. . Prior investigations of neural mechanisms underlying CU traits use methods that do not account for individual heterogeneity.…”

Sex differences in self-regulation in early, middle and late adolescence: A large-scale cross-sectional study

“…Previous studies have also focused on other cognitive domains, such as impulse control ( [46]) in relation to sensation seeking or on emotional control (e.g., [47], [48]). Impulse control is an important aspect of executive functioning (see [2] and [49]), but it is a distinct skill from self-evaluation and self-regulation, which is the focus of our study and its predecessors ( [7], [18], [22], [41]).…”

Executive functioning and emotion recognition in youth with oppositional defiant disorder and/or conduct disorder

“…It has long been recognised that disruptive behaviour may be associated with impaired executive functioning (i.e. cognitive processes necessary for performing goaloriented behaviour), which may lead to decreased self-regulation (Hadjicharalambous and Fanti 2018). Moreover, disruptive behaviour has been linked to impaired facial emotion recognition (Dawel et al 2012).…”