scholarly journals The different origins of stability and change in antisocial personality disorder symptoms

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. ALEXANDRA BURT ◽  
MATT McGUE ◽  
LATANYA A. CARTER ◽  
WILLIAM G. IACONO

Background. Although adult antisocial personality disorder is generally preceded by a pattern of childhood/adolescent conduct problems, only a subset of those who manifest these developmental precursors go on exhibit significant antisocial behavior in adulthood. To date, however, researchers have yet to resolve the origins of either stability or change in antisocial behavior from childhood/adolescence to adulthood.Method. The present study sought to fill this gap in the literature, making use of a sample of 626 twin pairs from the ongoing Minnesota Twin Family Study (MTFS). Participants were assessed three times between late adolescence and early adulthood. We made use of biometric Cholesky decomposition and latent growth curve modeling techniques, which allow researchers to disambiguate processes of stability and change and evaluate their respective etiologies (i.e. genetic or environmental).Results. Our results revealed that genetic forces were largely responsible for the stability of adult symptoms of antisocial behavior (AAB) from late adolescence through mid-adulthood, while non-shared environmental influences were primarily responsible for change. Importantly, however, although some of the latter represented systematic and long-lasting influence, much of this non-shared environmental variance appeared transient and idiosyncratic.Conclusions. Such findings highlight the enduring impact of genetic influences on AAB, and offer insights into the nature of non-shared environmental influences on development.

Author(s):  
Suzanne Estrada ◽  
Scott Tillem ◽  
Allison Stuppy-Sullivan ◽  
Arielle Baskin-Sommers

Antisocial behavior is a heterogeneous construct that includes a range of behavioral problems and psychopathologies. With regard to classification, children and adolescents may be identified as having conduct disorder or callous–unemotional traits; whereas adults may be identified as having antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy. The adverse consequences of the behaviors and diagnoses related to this construct produce great burdens for the perpetrators, victims, family members, and society at large. Research has focused on identifying various factors contributing to antisocial behavior, with reward processing among one of the most studied. This chapter synthesizes self-report, behavioral, electrophysiological, and neuroimaging literature on reward processing in antisocial behavior across development. Findings are organized regarding key reward constructs within the Positive Valence Systems domain of the Research Domain Criteria matrix. Overall, children with conduct disorder display deficits in action selection, responsivity to reward, and reward prediction that result in risky choices, impaired performance in the face of reward, and poor integration of reward information. By contrast, children with callous–unemotional traits demonstrate poor reward learning and use of reward cues. In adults, those with antisocial personality disorder display deficits in reward valuation; whereas those with psychopathy show context-dependent abnormalities in multiple components of reward processing. Ultimately, an integrative focus on abnormal reward processing across subtypes of individuals who engage in antisocial behavior might help refine the phenotype and improve the prediction of onset and recovery of these disorders.


Author(s):  
Nancy Nyquist Potter

This chapter argues that, in order to distinguish between good and bad defiance, it is inadequate merely to rely on legal or clinical definitions of vice and disorder. Instead, a realistic account of some of the features of phronesis (practical reasoning) is needed. The question examined in this chapter is what qualities or characteristics would make defiant behavior wrong and why. The author claims that sometimes defiant behavior should be seen as virtuous. In order to show that this is not the case, the author begins with a discussion of the features of Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD). By examining what harms are relevant to vicious (bad) defiance and why antisocial behavior shows flawed reasoning, the author enriches her theory of defiance as a virtue, identifies constraints on what can count as virtuous defiance in a person with a mental disorder, and indicates what defiance as a virtue would look like by examining the case of Henry, a person diagnosed with schizophrenia.


2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-69
Author(s):  
John Jairo Cifuentes Gonzalez ◽  
Nora Helena Londoño Arredondo

The objective of this study was to establish the components of the cognitive and psychopathological profile that characterize individuals judicially condemned, discriminating diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder (TPA). Participated 607 people which were divided into two groups: 398 cases (whith TPA) and 209 controls (without TPA). Instruments:  YSQ-L (Young & Brown, 1999), validated by Castrillon et al. (2005), EEC-M (Londoño et al, 2006), the MCMI-II (Millon, 1999) and MINI (Scheehan and Lecrubier, 1999).   Results: Variables associated with antisocial behavior were self-sufficient schemes of self-discipline, right grandeur and emotional privation, cognitive avoidance strategies, and religion, paranoid personality, schizoid, and compulsive and delusional clinical syndrome.   A discriminant function was reported at a rate of 58,3% correct prediction of the classification for the group with TAP cognitive profile with an aggressive reaction (0,680) and cognitive avoidance (0,576).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document