the emphasis on multiple levels of analyses, developmental psychopathology is well poised to integrate knowledge across diverse scientific disciplines into a multidisciplinary effort. Many scientists may only study one of these systems; thus, developmental psychopathology encourages collaboration and interdisciplinary research to study how these systems interact and influence one another.
Exploring Both Risk and Protective Factors to Delineate Pathways of Risk and Resilience
Another key principle of developmental psychopathology is examining both risk and protective factors to understand pathways of risk and resilience. Risk factors increase the likelihood of a negative outcome, whereas protective factors buffer against risk, decrease the likelihood of adverse outcomes, and promote successful outcomes. The remaining chapters in this book will include discussions of risk and protective factors for various forms of psychopathology. Risk factors can be acute stressful events, such as experiencing a trauma, exposure to violence, family divorce, or chronic adversity, such as living in poverty, negative parenting behavior, or parent mental illness. It is important to note that risk factors are not deterministic as not all individuals at risk develop psychopathology, but they increase the probability for adverse outcomes. Resilience refers to the capacity to avoid adverse outcomes and adapt successfully and competently, despite being at risk or experiencing adversity (Masten, 2007). This connects with our previously mentioned concept of multifinality, which suggests that a variety of outcomes (both adaptive and maladaptive) can emanate from common risk factors (see Figure 2.4). The study of protective factors is important for understanding family and child strengths that can reduce the impact of risk factors and lead to positive developmental outcomes. Ultimately, developmental psychopathologists hope to understand and identify at‐risk individuals and what factors may mitigate this risk to improve prevention and intervention efforts.
FIGURE 2.4 Common Risk and Protective Factors in Child Outcomes. Risk Factors Increase the Likelihood of a Negative Outcome, Whereas Protective Factors Buffer Against Risk, Decrease the Likelihood of Adverse Outcomes, and Promote Successful Outcomes
Involving Reciprocal, Transactional Models of Influence in the Field’s Causal Models
Lastly, developmental psychopathology involves reciprocal transactional models of influence. What does that mean? For a long time, researchers believed in a linear model of development, such as early brain injury causing child development of cognitive, social, or emotional problems. However, this belief ignores children with brain injuries that develop normally and children with developmental problems without evidence of a brain injury.
Additionally, the “nature or nurture” debate assumed that developmental outcomes were a product of either nature (genetics, biology) or nurture (parenting, environment) alone. Later on, theorists began to adopt a more transactional model of development (Sameroff & Chandler, 1975). It is now accepted that concepts of nature and nurture are not as easily separated as once thought.
On the nature side, the field of epigenetics has demonstrated that even when individuals have the same genetic “code,” the environment can influence the expression of genes or which genes “turn on.” On the nurture side, research has shown that children’s inherent individual personality, temperament, or other traits can influence how their parent responds to them. Thus, in the transactional model, a child’s outcomes are a product of the continuous, dynamic, reciprocal interactions of the child and experiences provided by their family and social context (Sameroff & Mackenzie, 2003). The remaining chapters in this book will give concrete examples of gene–environment interactions that have been discovered.
Compare a linear model with a transactional model for understanding developmental problems. Figure 2.5 shows that birth complications predict poor language and social skills in childhood. In a transactional model, a normally non‐anxious mother may have increased anxiety after experiencing adverse birth complications, and then interact with her infant in an apprehensive and inconsistent manner. Due to these parenting practices, the infant may exhibit difficulties with self‐regulation and temperament, which decreases the mother’s engagement with her child. This lack of social or verbal interaction with her infant may contribute to the child’s slower development (Sameroff & Mackenzie, 2003).
Think about your family. Do you and your siblings have the same personality? Do your parents interact with each of you in exactly the same way? Even though we might share similar genes and environments with our siblings, many complex interactions explain why we have different personalities, behaviors, and interactions with our parents and friends.
FIGURE 2.5 Contrasting Linear and Transactional Models for Explaining Developmental Problems
Developmental Psychopathology Research Methodology
The complex nature of the developmental psychopathology requires a variety of advanced methods to study its questions. This section will provide a brief overview of the methods used to study developmental psychopathology; these methods will be discussed further in subsequent chapters. The key principles of developmental psychopathology directly inform the methods used to study it. Developmental psychopathology research is often longitudinal, examines risk and protective factors, maps trajectories of traits or behaviors, and incorporates multiple levels of analyses across disciplines. Thus, the field must utilize research designs and statistical methods that can appropriately address these types of research questions.
RESEARCH DESIGNS
Longitudinal
The developmental psychopathology perspective emphasizes the significance of prospective longitudinal research designs that follow a sample of individuals across time for multiple time points. If a researcher wants to investigate the association between childhood maltreatment and development of depression in adolescence, they could design a prospective longitudinal study that first examines a sample of young children and asks parents about maltreatment experiences and depression symptoms. Then, researchers would follow up during adolescence for another report of depression symptoms. This method allows researchers to study how depression symptoms develop from early childhood to adolescence and ask about current maltreatment experiences in early childhood.
Cross‐sectional
A cross‐sectional design occurs when researchers do not sample variables over time. Researchers may assess development in children over different ages, rather than following the same children over time. An advantage is that the study may be more feasible in that participants do not have to be followed over time.
Retrospective research methodologies are also widely used in developmental studies. Retrospective studies ask subjects to report on prior experiences, such as exposure to life stress, maltreatment, or other life experiences that occurred prior to the current point in time. An important note is that there are often differing results from studies that use retrospective versus prospective designs (Baldwin et al., 2019).