Loosening the reins or tightening them?:Complex relationships between parenting, effortful control, and adolescent psychopathology

Background Adolescents face major developmental tasks such as increasing individuation and establishing autonomy. These developmental tasks increase demands on adolescent self-control, hereby putting youth with poor effortful control at risk for psychopathology. Specific parenting behaviors might be warranted to buffer against this risk. Objective This study was designed to examine parenting-related risk and protective factors in the associations between effortful control and adolescent psychopathology. We hypothesized that youth with poor effortful control require more parental involvement (i.e., lower autonomy granting) to help complete these developmental tasks and subsequently avoid psychopathology. Methods Via adolescent self-reports (N = 809), associations between effortful control, perceived parenting (i.e., psychological control and autonomy support), and externalizing (i.e., interpersonal aggression and rule-breaking) and internalizing problems (i.e., depressive and anxiety problems) were examined. Results Regression analyses supported our hypothesis in boys: higher levels of autonomy support exacerbated the negative association between effortful control and rule-breaking. In contrast, in girls this was the case for lower levels of autonomy support. For both genders, low autonomy support and psychological control exacerbated negative associations between effortful control and internalizing problems. No buffering effects of parenting were found. Conclusions Low effortful control is associated with psychopathology in adolescents, but parenting can affect this association in several ways, depending on the type of psychopathology and the adolescent’s gender. Future research should focus on finding ‘optimal’ levels of parental control that can help avoid psychopathological problems in youth with poor effortful control

Social support, attachment and externalizing behavior in forensic patients with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

This study was designed to provide more insight into the relationship between social support and externalizing behavior in forensic patients with ADHD. Because ADHD is highly associated with psychosocial impairment, we expected poor social support and attachment insecurity (i.e., preoccupied, fearful, and dismissive attachment) to be associated with higher levels of externalizing behaviors in forensic patients with ADHD. Self-reports of 32 forensic male outpatients with ADHD (M age = 35.34) were compared with self-reports of healthy (n = 32; M age = 33.84), and ‘at risk’ control males with (a history of) psychological problems (n = 30; M age = 36.47) from the general population. In addition, associations between social support, attachment and externalizing behaviors (i.e., aggression, antisociality, anger and hostility) were examined within the sample as a whole. Analyses of variance showed that forensic patients with ADHD had higher levels of externalizing behaviors and insecure attachment, and lower levels of secure attachment compared to both healthy and at risk controls. Multivariate regression analyses showed that social support was not associated with any of the externalizing behaviors, after accounting for attachment. In contrast, insecure attachment was associated with higher levels of all externalizing behaviors examined. Finally, insecure attachment best explained antisociality and hostility, suggesting that attachment is more important than other psychopathological risk factors that distinguish the different groups

Cognitive-motivational, interpersonal, and behavioral functioning in relationship to treatment and research engagement in forensic patients with ADHD

Objectives:  To provide more insight into treatment and research responsivity in offenders with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Method: Via self-reports and patients' scores on cognitive computer tasks, it was examined whether poorer cognitive-motivational, interpersonal, and behavioral functioning were related to treatment no-shows, longer treatment time duration intervals, and no-show at the research appointment in 52 forensic outpatients with ADHD (Mage = 35.3, SD = 9.38). Treatment adherence was tracked for 10 appointments after research participation.  Results:  Regression analyses showed that higher self-reported impulsivity was associated with research no-show, and more alcohol use with longer treatment time intervals. Yet, self-reported delay aversion was associated with fewer treatment no-shows, and, uncontrolled for alcohol use, impulsivity was associated with shorter treatment time intervals in a subsample of patients.  Conclusions:  These preliminary results indicate that externalizing behaviors increase the risk for nonadherence in forensic ADHD patients, but that cognitive-motivational problems also motivate patients to be more engaged