Through the looking glass: the neural basis of self-concept in young adults with antisocial trajectories

Abstract

Self-concept is shaped by social experiences, but it is not yet well understood how the neural and behavioral development of self-concept is influenced by a history of antisocial behavior. In this pre-registered study, we examined neural responses to self-evaluations in young adults who engaged with antisocial behavior in childhood and either desisted or persisted in antisocial behavior. A self-concept task was performed by 94 young adults (age range 18–30-yrs). During the task, participants with a persistent or desistent antisocial trajectory (N = 54), and typically developing young adults (N = 40) rated whether positive and negative traits in different domains (prosocial, physical) described themselves. We examined both the effects of a history of antisocial behavior as well as current heterogeneity in psychopathic traits. Participants endorsed more positive than negative trait statements across domains, which did not differ between antisocial-history groups. However, current psychopathic traits were negatively associated with prosocial self-concept and mPFC activity during self-evaluation. Together, these findings suggest that antisocial tendencies might indeed be reflected in self-concept development of young adults, specifically in the prosocial domain.

A neurocognitive model of early onset persistent and desistant antisocial behavior in early adulthood

“…In line with this idea, recent studies have shown that life-course persistent antisocial behavior–but not desistant trajectories–was characterized by differential cortical and subcortical brain structure ( Carlisi et al, 2020 , 2021 ). However, until recently, possible functional mechanisms that help explain how and why differences between persistent and desistant antisocial developmental trajectories arise remained largely elusive, especially in young adulthood ( van de Groep et al, 2022a , b ). In the current review, we highlight and summarize recent functional neuroimaging studies on social-cognitive information processing (self- and other oriented) showing that, compared to desistant and non-antisocial behavior, persistent antisocial behavior in early adulthood is largely characterized by distinct difficulties in social cognitive functions and related disturbances in underlying brain functioning ( Brazil and Buades-Rotger, 2020 ).…”

“…Longitudinal research generally supports the taxonomy, but additional developmental trajectories have also been identified ( Piquero, 2008 ). One such trajectory consists of individuals with childhood-limited of antisocial behavior who show conduct problems early in life, but desist in adolescence and early adulthood ( Monahan et al, 2013 ; Bevilacqua et al, 2018 ; van de Groep et al, 2022a , b ). Whether antisocial behavior is present and persistent can be measured and operationalized in different ways, with two common approaches involving classification based on clinical, psychiatric diagnoses and symptoms, and classification based on offending patterns based on police registrations ( Bersani and Doherty, 2018 ; Moffitt, 2018 ).…”

“…Alongside other longitudinal studies (see e.g., Poulton et al, 2015 ; Carlisi et al, 2020 ), a Dutch longitudinal childhood arrestee cohort study, called RESIST, has started to identify when and why developmental outcome differences arise between groups with an early onset of antisocial behavior in adolescence and early adulthood ( van de Groep et al, 2022a , b ), with a special focus on psychological and neurobiological functional mechanisms. To study functional mechanisms that underlie differences in mental and behavioral functioning between developmental groups in adolescence, Cohn and colleagues examined a subsample of the childhood arrestee cohort of the RESIST study at age 17 and used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).…”

“…Notably, apart from emotional responsiveness, most research to date has focused on other forms of empathic responsiveness ( Blair, 2005 , 2022a ; Jones et al, 2010 ), including the perception and attribution of intent and beliefs to others (e.g., Bertone et al, 2017 ; Blair, 2022a ), perspective taking (e.g., Lui et al, 2016 ), and responses to other people’s pain (e.g., Marsh, 2013 ). As such, research has been largely ignoring the hypothesized role for internal, self-related processing in antisocial development ( Dodge and Crick, 1990 ; Crick and Dodge, 1994 ; Huesmann, 1998 ; but see Blankenstein et al, 2021 ), at least with regard to self-evaluation (i.e., SIP step 2, van de Groep et al, 2022b ).…”

“…Moreover, only recently have researchers examined the interaction between multiple social information processing steps, including between the first steps (encoding, interpretation, goal selection) and the second steps (identification, selection, monitoring) ( Dodge et al, 2022 ; van de Groep et al, 2022a , b ). In line with this notion, researchers have called for an extension of the SIP model to more closely integrate emotion and cognition across all SIP steps ( Lemerise and Arsenio, 2000 ; Smeijers et al, 2020 ).…”