Forensic child and Adolescent Psychiatry and mental health in Europe

Background When faced with the discovery of their child’s self-harm, mothers and fathers may re-evaluate their parenting strategies. This can include changes to the amount of support they provide their child and changes to the degree to which they control and monitor their child. Methods We conducted an in-depth qualitative study with 37 parents of young people who had self-harmed in which we explored how and why their parenting changed after the discovery of self-harm. Results Early on, parents often found themselves “walking on eggshells” so as not to upset their child, but later they felt more able to take some control. Parents’ reactions to the self-harm often depended on how they conceptualised it: as part of adolescence, as a mental health issue or as “naughty behaviour”. Parenting of other children in the family could also be affected, with parents worrying about less of their time being available for siblings. Many parents developed specific strategies they felt helped them to be more effective parents, such as learning to avoid blaming themselves or their child for the self-harm and developing new ways to communicate with their child. Parents were generally eager to pass their knowledge on to other people in the same situation. Conclusions Parents reported changes in their parenting behaviours after the discovery of a child’s self-harm. Professionals involved in the care of young people who self-harm might use this information in supporting and advising parents.</p

Compensation method affects risk-taking in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task

Different participant compensation methods may have discrepant effects on decision-making in behavioral measures of risk-taking. Participants in clinical samples tend to receive session-based payment (often in conjunction with decision-based payment), whereas participants in student samples generally receive decision-based payment or no payment at all. This study examined the effect of different methods of participant payment on a behavioral measure of individual differences in risk-taking. Participants completed the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) as well as questionnaire measures of sensation-seeking and impulsivity. Participants who received session-based payment engaged in significantly greater risk-taking in the BART compared to those who were paid based on their decisions and those who were not paid at all (i.e., those who were only compensated with course credit). These effects were not influenced by age, gender, sensation-seeking or impulsivity. These findings provide evidence that different compensation methods significantly influence participants' risk-taking propensity as measured by the BART. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd

Compensation method affects risk-taking in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task

Different participant compensation methods may have discrepant effects on decision-making in behavioral measures of risk-taking. Participants in clinical samples tend to receive session-based payment (often in conjunction with decision-based payment), whereas participants in student samples generally receive decision-based payment or no payment at all. This study examined the effect of different methods of participant payment on a behavioral measure of individual differences in risk-taking. Participants completed the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) as well as questionnaire measures of sensation-seeking and impulsivity. Participants who received session-based payment engaged in significantly greater risk-taking in the BART compared to those who were paid based on their decisions and those who were not paid at all (i.e., those who were only compensated with course credit). These effects were not influenced by age, gender, sensation-seeking or impulsivity. These findings provide evidence that different compensation methods significantly influence participants' risk-taking propensity as measured by the BART. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd

Hot or not: response inhibition reduces the hedonic value and motivational incentive of sexual stimuli.

The motivational incentive of reward-related stimuli can become so salient that it drives behavior at the cost of other needs. Here we show that response inhibition applied during a Go/No-go task not only impacts hedonic evaluations but also reduces the behavioral incentive of motivationally relevant stimuli. We first examined the impact of response inhibition on the hedonic value of sex stimuli associated with strong behavioral-approach responses (Experiment 1). Sexually appealing and non-appealing images were both rated as less attractive when previously encountered as No-go (inhibited) than as Go (non-inhibited) items. We then discovered that inhibition reduces the motivational incentive of sexual appealing stimuli (Experiment 2). Prior Go/No-go status affected the number of key-presses by heterosexual males to view erotic-female (sexually appealing) but not erotic-male or scrambled-control (non-appealing) images. These findings may provide a foundation for developing inhibition-based interventions to reduce the hedonic value and motivational incentive of stimuli associated with disorders of self-control

The person-based approach in practice: Methods for intervention development

The “Person-based Approach” to intervention development uses qualitative and mixed methods to ensure that the process of intervention development takes into account the beliefs, attitudes, needs and context of the particular user group the intervention is designed to target. Qualitative research is used in several ways: in the form of a background literature search, in collecting qualitative data from target users to assess their specific needs, and in “think-aloud” interviews that gather detailed feedback on each aspect of the intervention from target users. This allows iterative development of the intervention to be based directly on the input of the target users. We provide an overview of best practices when using the Person-based Approach, together with examples of aspects of intervention development from previously-developed interventions. Including feedback from target users from the beginning of intervention development results in interventions that are more likely to make a difference in practice

The person-based approach in practice: Methods for intervention development

The “Person-based Approach” to intervention development uses qualitative and mixed methods to ensure that the process of intervention development takes into account the beliefs, attitudes, needs and context of the particular user group the intervention is designed to target. Qualitative research is used in several ways: in the form of a background literature search, in collecting qualitative data from target users to assess their specific needs, and in “think-aloud” interviews that gather detailed feedback on each aspect of the intervention from target users. This allows iterative development of the intervention to be based directly on the input of the target users. We provide an overview of best practices when using the Person-based Approach, together with examples of aspects of intervention development from previously-developed interventions. Including feedback from target users from the beginning of intervention development results in interventions that are more likely to make a difference in practice

The affective consequences of cognitive inhibition: devaluation or neutralization?

Affective evaluations of previously ignored visual stimuli are more negative than those of novel items or prior targets of attention or response. This has been taken as evidence that inhibition has negative affective consequences. But inhibition could act instead to attenuate or "neutralize" preexisting affective salience, predicting opposite effects for stimuli that were initially positive or negative in valence. We tested this hypothesis by presenting trustworthy and untrustworthy faces (Experiment 1), strongly positive and negative photographs (Experiment 2), and monetary gain- and loss-associated patterns (Experiment 3) in a Go/No-Go task and assessing subsequent affective ratings. Evaluations of prior No-Go (inhibited) stimuli were more negative than of prior Go (noninhibited) stimuli, regardless of a priori affective valence. Ratings of No-Go stimuli also became increasingly negative (vs. increasingly neutral) when preexisting salience was increased via stimulus repetition (Experiment 4). Our results suggest inhibition leads to affective devaluation, not affective neutralization