Download Developmental Psychopathology I

1
Developmental Psychopathology: Pathways
by
Gabriella Kortsch
This paper describes the nature of developmental pathways using a multi-tiered
approach: by definition, by an investigation of the manner in which the pathways concept
furthers the aims of developmental psychopathology, by specific examples, e.g., Rutter’s (1989)
turning points in development model, as well as the cascade model (Patterson, DeGarmo, &
Knutson, 2000) that found “a progression that moves from hyperactive to antisocial behavior” (p.
102), the cumulative continuities model of pathways (Caspi, 2000; Kagan, Snidman, Zentner, &
Peterson, 1999), and the mediational model (Holmbeck, 1997; Schwartz & Proctor, 2000) and
finally, by examining how theorists have conceptualized and operationalized these models. The
implications of the pathways concept for intervention and prevention efforts are also explored.
Developmental pathways as a concept can be simply defined as a group of persons with
a common developmental history (Tubman, unpublished). Moreover, Cummings, Davies &
Campbell (2000) indicate that these “pathways of development are dynamic and ever subject to
change” (p. 55) and that it is a mistake “to assume that pathways between early and later
developments are relatively simple and straightforward” (p.12). Deviant or abnormal pathways
might be termed as the grouping of much smaller numbers of individuals in a direction that
deviates from more generalized, and thus more ‘normal’ pathways. Moreover, using Sroufe’s
(Cummings, et al., 2000) branching tree metaphor, “developmental pathways can be thought of
in terms of the successive branchings toward or away from the trunk, with the trunk serving to
represent normative development” (p. 122).
The concept of pathways is central to the contextualistic approach found in
developmental psychopathology with contributions that range from affording a greater
understanding of childhood disorders, to demonstrating the timing of specific behaviors in
development, as well as the moments in an individual’s life that signify both minor and major life
turning points that are instrumental in causing the individual to continue along the same
pathway or to deviate or progress to another more deviant, more normal, or homeostatic one
(Cummings, Davies & Campbell, 2000).
Researchers (e.g., Caspi, 2000; Holmbeck, 1997; Kagan, Snidman, Zentner, &
Peterson, 1999; Patterson, DeGarmo, & Knutson, 2000; Rutter, 1989; Schwartz & Proctor,
2000) have elaborated a number of pathways models. Caspi’s (2000) longitudinal Dunedin
study examined the effect of temperamental differences on life-course development, as well as
“personality structure, interpersonal relations, psychopathology, and crime in adulthood” (p.
158). He noted that continuities were evident over time: “undercontrolled 3-year-olds grew up to
be impulsive, unreliable, and antisocial” (p. 158), while “inhibited 3-year-olds were more likely to
be unassertive and depressed” (p. 158). Kagan, et al. (1999) showed similar findings of
cumulative continuity or the continuity of expression over time with behavioral inhibition. Thus,
cumulative continuity is one pathways model that was conceptualized by Caspi (2000) under the
assumption that “early emerging temperamental differences shape the course of development,
its problematic presentations and healthful outcomes” (p. 167), and conceptualized by Kagan, et
al. (1999) by a growing consensus that “the appearance of symptoms that presumably reflect
states of anxiety or fear is most likely for those who inherit a temperamental diathesis” (p. 209).
Caspi (2000) then proceeded to gather evidence by studying personality continuities from the
first three years of life in the case of 1037 male and female children, reassessing these children
eight more times over a period of 18 years until they reached the age of 21 in order to discover
whether temperamental qualities observed at age three continued to be present both
homotypically and heterotypically at all other age reassessments. Kagan et al. (1999) gathered
evidence longitudinally as well, by classifying children at age four months into one of four
2
temperamental groups, and then reassessing these children twice in the second year of age,
once in the fourth year, and again at age seven.
The pathways model other researchers (e.g., Holmbeck, 1997; Schwartz & Proctor,
2000) have utilized is a mediational model offering a causal pathway. Specifically, Schwartz and
Proctor (2000) studied the mediating roles of emotion regulation capacities and social cognitive
biases, finding that “violent victimization was associated with negative social outcomes through
the mediation of emotion dysregulation” (p. 670), while “witnessed violence was linked only to
aggressive behavior” (p. 670), indicating that social information processing appeared to mediate
this association. These authors conceptualized this model by drawing on prior studies that have
consistently found relatively strong evidence linking exposure to community violence and
symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression, as well as aggression and
other disruptive behavior problems (Schwartz, & Proctor, 2000). They then operationalized the
model by studying 285 elementary school children in low income urban South Central Los
Angeles where crime rates are among the highest in the Los Angeles region. The children
completed self-reports about their prior exposure to violence and violent victimization, teachers
reported on the children’s capacities for emotional self-regulation, and researchers groupadministered interviews that assessed children’s social cognition.
Patterson, DeGarmo, & Knutson (2000) use a cascade model of pathways,
hypothesizing that “hyperactivity defines the first stage and that antisocial problems define a
second stage in a progression that leads eventually to early-onset delinquency” (p. 91). This
was operationalized by means of a structural equation model that demonstrated that “a latent
construct for hyperactivity was significantly related to a latent construct for antisocial problems”
(p. 91). The sample consisted of 206 families and their fourth-grade boys who were assessed
for hyperactivity, boy antisocial behavior, child delinquency, and followed from the age of 10
through 22. Further, parent discipline was observed in the home, and assessments of parent
antisocial behavior were also made.
Finally, Rutter (1989) uses a life turning point model for pathways. In this model resides
a manner of microcosm of all previously discussed models due to its lifespan perspective,
although Rutter’s model places particular emphasis on the timing and nature of experiences of
an individual, key life transitions as well as their negotiation, i.e., the specific reasons for taking
a particular decision, how it was taken, as well as its social context and any further specific
characteristics of elements related to the decision. Finally, “the individual differences in the
meaning of, and response to, such transitions” (p. 27) must be taken into account. Rutter makes
reference to a number of longitudinal studies demonstrating that life turning point decisions
(e.g., planful competence, mate selection, reasons for marrying, etc.), are frequently influenced
by factors in early childhood that are not under the individual’s control, such as the type of
schooling and parenting received, which in turn may have highly negative repercussions on the
manner in which those life turning point decisions are taken.
While the cumulative continuities model, the cascade model, and the life turning point
model for pathways are by necessity longitudinal, offering information over a period of a number
of years in the developmental trajectory of children and young people, as well as in later points
of the life span, the mediational model offers much more rapidly accessible information due to
the fact that much of the research may be retrospective in nature, specifically in the cases
referred to in this paper, regarding the incidence of violent victimization or witnessed violence,
and then linked to later (and current) social outcomes. Nevertheless, the life turning point model
appears to be a much more all-encompassing model with a greater focus on the global
contextualistic environment of an individual with regards to his or her development, yet with the
capacity to zoom in on any element or point of the life span, while the other models offer more
narrow, or focused views of specific aspects of the developmental trajectory. Indeed, Rutter
(1989) notes, “life transitions have to be considered both as end products of past processes and
as instigators of future ones” (p. 46).
3
Equifinality and multifinality, two pathways concepts, offer developmental psychopathology potent tools in its search for “interindividual differences in intraindividual change
processes” (Tubman, unpublished). In other words, this field of inquiry seeks to ascertain why
specific situations bring about normative outcomes for some individuals and pathological
outcomes for others, and why other sequelae, similar for a large group of individuals, have
nevertheless come about through multiple and highly distinct paths. Two girls, both sexually
abused by their fathers, from similar socio-economic backgrounds, and whose parents
eventually divorce, nevertheless show extreme differences in the choices they make as they
grow up, and come to totally divergent points as adults. Their early developmental pathway was
similar, but the outcome was one of multifinality.
Moreover, pathways aid in the study and understanding of “transformation of patterns of
adaptation and maladaptation over time” (Cicchetti & Sroufe, 2000, p. 259), which is another
fundamental aspect of this research. An example of this would be children who live in a ghetto
and who adapt to their extremely negative circumstances by learning how to be street wise, and
yet may deviate from mere street smartness to delinquency and antisocial behavior over the
course of their teenage and early adult years.
Pathways are also instrumental in the exploration of the multiple risk and protective
factors and their interplay (Chicchetti & Sroufe, 2000), which form another one of the key issues
involved in this field of study. An example noted by these authors refers to the finding that
successful high-risk families were more restrictive and “controlling in their parenting than were
successful low-risk families. Thus, controlling parenting may be a risk factor for one group and a
protective factor for another group of families” (p. 257).
Pathways further offer much insight into resilience studies, another core factor of
developmental psychopathology. Clearly, similar pernicious circumstances in childhood do not
result in similar outcomes in all instances, since some children demonstrate “strong self-striving
toward resilience” (Cicchetti & Sroufe, 2000, p. 257). Why this occurs, and what exactly is
different in children who show resilience (Masten & Curtis, 2000), resulting in a positive outcome
despite marked trauma, poverty, or abuse, is central to this line of research. As Lengua,
Sandler, West, Wolchik, & Curran (1999) point out, a child whose threat appraisal is less
negative, or more realistic, and who is equipped with positive emotionality may be more resilient
in coping with divorce than another child, with more negative threat appraisal and less positive
emotionality, even in circumstances that are less negative in the latter case.
Finally, the pathways concept also offers insight into whether adaptive or maladaptive
behaviors are manifested as continuous or discontinuous along a developmental continuum of
normality and pathology (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 1999; Rutter & Sroufe, 2000). Examples may be
found in the Caspi (2000) and Kagan, et al. (1997) material presented earlier.
The possibility of prevention and intervention efforts is also at the heart of the pathways
model. “An in-depth understanding of the developmental processes and pathways that precede
and account for the development of clinical disorders may make it possible to intervene
effectively in mental health problems” (Cummings, Davies & Campbell, 2000, p. 5). For
example, in the cascade model of pathways offered by Patterson, et al., (2000), the “process
may start because an extremely active and difficult infant is interacting with a relatively
nonresponsive (noncontingent) caretaker” (p. 93). This knowledge may be of considerable utility
in the elaboration of preventive measures aimed at educating and training parents. Likewise, as
Rutter (1989) points out, the understanding of the processes giving rise to such varied pathways
in individuals’ lives, “should provide useful leads for both prevention and treatment through
improved knowledge on how changes take place” (p. 46).
This paper has illustrated the nature of developmental pathways using a multi-tiered
approach: by definition, by an investigation of the manner in which the pathways concept
furthers the aims of developmental psychopathology, by specific examples of pathways models,
4
by examining how theorists have conceptualized and operationalized these models, and by
exploring the implications of the pathway concept for intervention and prevention efforts.
Clearly, the study of developmental pathways can and should be given considerable weight in
developmental psychopathology due to the eminently diverse manner by which the pathways
concept illuminates many key questions of this field of inquiry.
Dr. Kortsch maintains a private practice in Spain. Should you be interested in further
information about her work, please visit www.advancedpersonaltherapy.com
© Gabriella Kortsch, 2001.
References
Caspi, A. (2000). The child is the father of the man: Personality continuities from
childhood to adulthood. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 78, 158-172.
Cichetti, D., & Rogosch, F.A. (1999). Conceptual and methodological issues in
developmental psychopathology research. In P.C. Kendall, J.N. Butcher, & G.N. Holmbeck
(Eds.), Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology. (2nd ed., pp. 433-465). New York:
Wiley.
Cicchetti, D., & Sroufe, L.A. (2000). Editorial: The past as prologue to the future: The
times, they’ve been a-changin’. Development and Psychopathology, 12, 255-264.
Cummings, E.M., Davies, P.T., & Campbell, S.B. (2000). Developmental Psychopathology
and Family Process. New York: The Guilford Press.
Holmbeck, G.N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the
study of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology
literatures. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 65, 599-610.
Kagan,J., Snidman, N., Zentner, M., & Peterson, E. (1999). Infant temperament and
anxious symptoms in school age children. Development and Psychopathology, 11, 209-224.
Lengua, J.L., Sandler, I.N., West, S.G., Wolchik, S.A., & Curran, P.J. (1999). Emotionality
and self-regulation, threat appraisal, and coping in children of divorce. Development and
Psychopathology, 11, 15-37.
Masten, A.S., & Curtis, W.J. (2000). Integrating competence and psychopathology:
Pathways toward a comprehensive science of adaptation in development. Development and
Psychopathology, 12, 529-550.
Patterson, G.R., DeGarmo, D.S., & Knutson, N. (2000). Hyperactive and antisocial
behaviors: Comorbid or two points in the same process? Development and Psychopathology,
12, 91-106.
Rutter, M. (1989). Pathways from childhood to adult life. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 30, 23-51.
5
Rutter, M. (1990). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. In J. Rolf, A. S.
Masten, D. Cicchetti, K. H. Neuchterlein, & E. Weintraub (Eds.). Risk and protective factors in
the development of psychopathology (pp. 181-214). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schwartz, D., & Proctor, L.J., (2000). Community violence exposure and children’s social
adjustment in the school peer group: The mediating roles of emotion regulation and social
cognition. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 68, 670-683
Tubman, J. (unpublished). CLP 6168. Class 10/17/01