Supplemental Material for Open to Interpretation? Inconsistent Reporting of Lifetime Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Across Two Common Assessments

Open to interpretation? Inconsistent reporting of lifetime nonsuicidal self-injury across two common assessments

10.26686/wgtn.12991478 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Kealagh Robinson ◽

Marc Wilson

Keyword(s):

American Psychological Association ◽

Presentation Order ◽

Future Research ◽

American Psychological ◽

Single Item ◽

Common Assessments ◽

Self Injury ◽

Memory Facilitation ◽

Prevalence Estimates ◽

Nonsuicidal Self Injury

© 2020 american psychological association. Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is typically assessed using either single-item questionnaires or checklists of common behaviors, but preliminary research suggests that checklists produce higher lifetime prevalence rates. In 2 preregistered studies (combined n = 1,364), we tested whether memory cueing afforded by behavioral checklists accounts for this discrepancy. Participants reported their lifetime NSSI history using both a single-item and a checklist, with presentation order randomized across participants. Nearly a third of participants reported inconsistent NSSI histories on the 2 assessments, with participants 1.57 times more likely to report an NSSI history on a checklist than on a single-item. Counter to the memory account, this discrepancy was evident even when participants completed the checklist first, suggesting that the increased prevalence estimates captured by checklists are unlikely to simply reflect memory facilitation. Across the 2 samples, 12.5% of participants would have been incorrectly screened out in 2-step assessments; these participants were more likely to have engaged in NSSI historically, less likely to self-injure by cutting, and (in Study 2 only) were more likely to be men. These studies suggest that the inconsistencies across 2 of the most common NSSI assessments arise because people dissimilar to the lay conceptualization of self-injury are less likely to endorse a single-item, even when they have affirmed engaging in self-injury behaviors on a checklist. We argue that single-item and checklist assessments capture different aspects of NSSI, such that future research should distinguish between behaviorally identified NSSI assessed with behavioral checklists and self-identified NSSI assessed with single-item assessments.

Download Full-text

Open to interpretation? Inconsistent reporting of lifetime nonsuicidal self-injury across two common assessments

10.26686/wgtn.12991478.v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Kealagh Robinson ◽

Marc Wilson

Keyword(s):

American Psychological Association ◽

Presentation Order ◽

Future Research ◽

American Psychological ◽

Single Item ◽

Common Assessments ◽

Self Injury ◽

Memory Facilitation ◽

Prevalence Estimates ◽

Nonsuicidal Self Injury

© 2020 american psychological association. Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is typically assessed using either single-item questionnaires or checklists of common behaviors, but preliminary research suggests that checklists produce higher lifetime prevalence rates. In 2 preregistered studies (combined n = 1,364), we tested whether memory cueing afforded by behavioral checklists accounts for this discrepancy. Participants reported their lifetime NSSI history using both a single-item and a checklist, with presentation order randomized across participants. Nearly a third of participants reported inconsistent NSSI histories on the 2 assessments, with participants 1.57 times more likely to report an NSSI history on a checklist than on a single-item. Counter to the memory account, this discrepancy was evident even when participants completed the checklist first, suggesting that the increased prevalence estimates captured by checklists are unlikely to simply reflect memory facilitation. Across the 2 samples, 12.5% of participants would have been incorrectly screened out in 2-step assessments; these participants were more likely to have engaged in NSSI historically, less likely to self-injure by cutting, and (in Study 2 only) were more likely to be men. These studies suggest that the inconsistencies across 2 of the most common NSSI assessments arise because people dissimilar to the lay conceptualization of self-injury are less likely to endorse a single-item, even when they have affirmed engaging in self-injury behaviors on a checklist. We argue that single-item and checklist assessments capture different aspects of NSSI, such that future research should distinguish between behaviorally identified NSSI assessed with behavioral checklists and self-identified NSSI assessed with single-item assessments.

Download Full-text

Open to interpretation? Inconsistent reporting of lifetime nonsuicidal self-injury across two common assessments.

Psychological Assessment ◽

10.1037/pas0000830 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 32 (8) ◽

pp. 726-738 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Kealagh Robinson ◽

Marc S. Wilson

Keyword(s):

Common Assessments ◽

Self Injury ◽

Nonsuicidal Self Injury

Download Full-text

Nonsuicidal Self-Injury

Crisis ◽

10.1027/0227-5910/a000155 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 33 (3) ◽

pp. 182-182

Keyword(s):

Self Injury ◽

Nonsuicidal Self Injury

Download Full-text

Self-Injurious Behavior vs. Nonsuicidal Self-Injury

Crisis ◽

10.1027/0227-5910/a000127 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 33 (2) ◽

pp. 106-112 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Christopher M. Bloom ◽

Shareen Holly ◽

Adam M. P. Miller

Keyword(s):

Positive Reinforcement ◽

Empirical Investigation ◽

High Stress ◽

Animal Research ◽

Stress Conditions ◽

Human Populations ◽

Pharmacological Interventions ◽

Self Injury ◽

Cns Stimulant ◽

Nonsuicidal Self Injury

Background: Historically, the field of self-injury has distinguished between the behaviors exhibited among individuals with a developmental disability (self-injurious behaviors; SIB) and those present within a normative population (nonsuicidal self-injury; NSSI),which typically result as a response to perceived stress. More recently, however, conclusions about NSSI have been drawn from lines of animal research aimed at examining the neurobiological mechanisms of SIB. Despite some functional similarity between SIB and NSSI, no empirical investigation has provided precedent for the application of SIB-targeted animal research as justification for pharmacological interventions in populations demonstrating NSSI. Aims: The present study examined this question directly, by simulating an animal model of SIB in rodents injected with pemoline and systematically manipulating stress conditions in order to monitor rates of self-injury. Methods: Sham controls and experimental animals injected with pemoline (200 mg/kg) were assigned to either a low stress (discriminated positive reinforcement) or high stress (discriminated avoidance) group and compared on the dependent measures of self-inflicted injury prevalence and severity. Results: The manipulation of stress conditions did not impact the rate of self-injury demonstrated by the rats. The results do not support a model of stress-induced SIB in rodents. Conclusions: Current findings provide evidence for caution in the development of pharmacotherapies of NSSI in human populations based on CNS stimulant models. Theoretical implications are discussed with respect to antecedent factors such as preinjury arousal level and environmental stress.

Download Full-text

Exploring Particular Facets of Cognitive Emotion Regulation and Their Relationships With Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Among Adolescents

Crisis ◽

10.1027/0227-5910/a000566 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 40 (4) ◽

pp. 280-286 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Nir Madjar ◽

Nicole Segal ◽

Gilad Eger ◽

Gal Shoval

Keyword(s):

Emotion Regulation ◽

High School Students ◽

Analysis Of Covariance ◽

Depression Symptoms ◽

Emotion Regulation Strategies ◽

Cognitive Emotion Regulation ◽

School Students ◽

Self Injury ◽

Regulation Strategies ◽

Nonsuicidal Self Injury

Abstract. Background: Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) has been found to be associated with poor emotion regulation. Aims: The goal of this study was to examine the association of multidimensional cognitive emotion regulation strategies with NSSI among adolescents and compare the different patterns of NSSI. Method: A sample of 594 high-school students (54.4% boys; mean age = 14.96 years), from five regional schools across Israel, were assessed for five facets of cognitive emotion regulation strategies (acceptance, refocus on planning, positive refocusing, putting into perspective, and positive reappraisal) and NSSI behaviors using validated scales. Participants were allocated into three groups: repetitive NSSI (more than six occasions of NSSI; 7.1%), occasional NSSI (at least one incident but less than six; 8.3%), and no NSSI (84.6%). Results: Analysis of covariance, controlling for gender and depression symptoms, revealed that students with NSSI reported higher levels of acceptance, but lower levels of refocus on planning and putting into perspective. Limitations: The study used a cross-sectional design, which was a limitation. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that particular cognitive emotion regulation strategies differ substantially in their relationship with NSSI. Adolescents who focus on planning and putting stressful situations into perspective may have increased resilience, whereas adolescents who are accepting of negative events that have happened may be more prone to maladaptive coping behaviors.

Download Full-text