Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T19:09:56.604Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - Clinical Psychological Science

An Evolving Field

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2020

Edited by
Aidan G. C. Wright  and
Michael N. Hallquist
Aidan G. C. Wright
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Michael N. Hallquist
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology , pp. 1 - 30
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Almagor, M., Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. G. (1995). The Big Seven Model: A Cross-Cultural Replication of the Basic Dimensions of Natural Language Trait Descriptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 300–307.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. (1954). Technical Recommendations for Psychological Tests and Diagnostic Techniques. Psychological Bulletin, 51(2, Pt. 2), 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentall, R. P. (Ed.) (1990). Reconstructing Schizophrenia. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bergsholm, P. (2016). Is Schizophrenia Disappearing? The Rise and Fall of the Diagnosis of Functional Psychoses: An Essay. BMC Psychiatry, 16, 387. Retrieved from https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12888-016-1101-5Google Scholar
Bilder, R. M., Howe, A. G., & Sabb, F. W. (2013). Multilevel Models from Biology to Psychology: Mission Impossible? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 917–927.Google Scholar
Blashfield, R. K., Reynolds, S. M., & Stennett, B. (2012). The Death of Histrionic Personality Disorder. In Widiger, T. A. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Personality Disorders (pp. 603–627). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bridgman, P. W. (1927). The Logic of Modern Physics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cannon, T. D., & Keller, M. C. (2006). Endophenotypes in the Genetic Analyses of Mental Disorders. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 2, 267–290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carnap, R. (1936). Testability and Meaning. Philosophy of Science, 3, 419–471.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1937). Testability and Meaning ‒ Continued. Philosophy of Science, 4, 1–40.Google Scholar
Caspi, A., Houts, R. M., Belsky, D. W., Goldman-Mellor, S. J., Harrington, H., Israel, S., … Moffitt, T. E. (2014). The P Factor: One General Psychopathology Factor in the Structure of Psychiatric Disorders? Clinical Psychological Science, 2(2), 119–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, H. (2004). Inventing Temperature: Measurement and Scientific Progress. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, H. (2009). Operationalism. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/operationalism/Google Scholar
Chodoff, P. (1982). Hysteria and Women. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 139(5), 545–551.Google Scholar
Clark, L. A. (2005). Temperament as a Unifying Basis for Personality and Psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114(4), 505–521.Google Scholar
Cloninger, C. R. (1998). The Genetics and Psychobiology of the Seven-Factor Model of Personality. In Silk, K. R. (Ed.), Biology of Personality Disorders (pp. 63–92). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct Validity in Psychological Tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Raad, B., Barelds, D. P. H., Levert, E., Ostendorf, F., Mlačić, B., Blas, L. D., … Katigbak, M. S. (2010). Only Three Factors of Personality Description Are Fully Replicable across Languages: A Comparison of 14 Trait Taxonomies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 160–173.Google Scholar
Feigl, H. (1950). Existential Hypotheses. Philosophy of Science, 17, 35–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, A. (1986). The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism, and the Quantum Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, B. L., & Klein, D. N. (2014). A Review of Selected Candidate Endophenotypes for Depression. Clinical Psychology Review, 34(5), 417–427.Google Scholar
Gottesman, I. I., & Gould, T. D. (2003). The Endophenotype Concept in Psychiatry: Etymology and Strategic Intentions. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 636–645.Google Scholar
Gottesman, I. I., & McGue, M. (2015). Endophenotypes. In Cautin, R. L. & Lilienfeld, S. O. (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology (Vol. II, pp. 1068–1075). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Gottesman, I. I., & Sheilds, J. (1972). Schizophrenia Genetics: A Twin Study Vantage Point. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Guloksuz, S., & van Os, J. (2017). The Slow Death of the Concept of Schizophrenia and the Painful Birth of the Psychosis Spectrum. Psychological Medicine, 48, 229–244.Google Scholar
Guttman, L. (1954). A New Approach to Factor Analysis: The Radex. In Laxarsfeld, P. S. (Ed.), Mathematical Thinking in the Social Sciences (pp. 258–348). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Heinzmann, G., & Stump, D. (2017). Henri Poincaré. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=poincareGoogle Scholar
Hyman, S. E. (2010). The Diagnosis of Mental Disorders: The Problem of Reification. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 155–179.Google Scholar
Israel, H., & Goldstein, B. (1944). Operationism in Psychology. Psychological Review, 51(3), 177–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jablensky, A. (2010). The Diagnostic Concept of Schizophrenia: Its History, Evolution, and Future Prospects. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 12(3), 271–287.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. N. (1994). Jackson Personality Inventory ‒ Revised. London, Ontario: Research Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, M. (1983). A Woman’s View of DSM-III. American Psychologist, 38(7), 786–792.Google Scholar
Kendler, K. S., & Neale, M. C. (2010). Endophenotype: A Conceptual Analysis. Molecular Psychiatry, 15(8), 789–797.Google Scholar
Köhler, S., Vasilevsky, N. A., Engelstad, M., Foster, E., McMurry, J., Aymé, S., … Robinson, P. N. (2017). The Human Phenotype Ontology in 2017. Nucleic Acids Research, 45(Database issue), D865‒D876.Google Scholar
Kroenke, K., Strine, T. W., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Berry, J. T., & Mokdad, A. H. (2009). The PHQ-8 as a Measure of Current Depression in the General Population. Journal of Affective Disorders, 114(1), 163–173.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. In Lakatos, I. & Musgrave, A. (Eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (pp. 91–196). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenzenweger, M. F. (2013). Endophenotype, Intermediate Phenotype, Biomarker: Definitions, Concept Comparisons, Clarifications. Depression and Anxiety, 30(3), 185–189.Google Scholar
Mach, E. (1903). Critique of the Concept of Temperature (McCormack, T. J., Trans.). In Carus, P. (Ed.), The Open Court: A Monthly Magazine Volume XVII (pp. 154–161). Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Mackinnon, D. M., Waismann, F., & Kneale, W. C. (1945). Symposium: Verifiability. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 19, 101‒164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maraun, M. D. (1997). Appearance and Reality: Is the Big Five the Structure of Trait Descriptors. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(5), 629–647.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An Introduction to the Five Factor Model and Its Implications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215.Google Scholar
Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical Risks and Tabular Asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the Slow Progress of Soft Psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46(4), 806–834.Google Scholar
Meehl, P. E. (1986). Paul E. Meel Extended Autobiography. Retrieved from http://meehl.umn.edu/sites/g/files/pua1696/f/139autoextended.pdfGoogle Scholar
Meehl, P. E. (1990). Appraising and Amending Theories: The Strategy of Lakatosian Defense and Two Principles That Warrant It. Psychological Inquiry, 1(2), 108–141.Google Scholar
Micale, M. S. (1993). On the “Disappearance” of Hysteria. Isis, 84, 496–526.Google Scholar
Micale, M. S. (2008). Hysterical Men. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G. A., & Rockstroh, B. (2013). Endophenotypes in Psychopathology Research: Where Do We Stand? Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 9, 177–213.Google Scholar
Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., du Sert, N. P., … Ioannidis, J. P. (2017). A Manifesto for Reproducible Science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1, 0021. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021Google Scholar
Norton, J. D. (2010). How Hume and Mach Helped Einstein Find Special Relativity. In Dickson, M. & Domski, M. (Eds.), Discourse on New Method: Reinvigorating the Marriage of History and Philosophy of Science (pp. 359–386). La Salle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
Pap, A. (1953). Reduction Sentences and Open Concepts. Methodos, 5, 3–30.Google Scholar
Pap, A. (1958). Semantics and Necessary Truth. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Parnas, J., & Bovet, P. (2015). Psychiatry Made Easy: Operation(al)ism and Some of Its Consequences. In Kendler, K. S. & Parnas, J. (Eds.), Philosophical Issues in Psychiatry III: The Nature and Sources of Historical Change (pp. 190–212). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Plomin, R., & Daniels, D. (1987). Why Are Children in the Same Family so Different from One Another. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 1–16.Google Scholar
Poincaré, H. (1905/2007). Non-Euclidean Geometries. MacTutor History of Mathematics Archive. Retrieved from www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Extras/Poincare_non-Euclidean.htmlGoogle Scholar
Poldrack, R., Kittur, A., Kalar, D., Miller, E., Seppa, C., Gil, Y., … Bilder, R. (2011). The Cognitive Atlas: Toward a Knowledge Foundation for Cognitive Neuroscience. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 5(17). Retrieved from www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fninf.2011.00017Google Scholar
Poldrack, R. A., & Yarkoni, T. (2016). From Brain Maps to Cognitive Ontologies: Informatics and the Search for Mental Structure. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 587–612.Google Scholar
Ribes-Iñesta, E. (2003). What Is Defined in Operational Definitions? The Case of Operant Psychology. Behavior and Philosophy, 31, 111–126.Google Scholar
Robins, E., & Guze, S. B. (1970). Establishment of Diagnostic Validity in Psychiatric Illness: Its Application to Schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 126(7), 983–986.Google Scholar
Schaffner, K. F. (2012). A Philosophical Overview of the Problems of Validity for Psychiatric Disorders. In Kendler, K. S. & Parnas, J. (Eds.), Philosophical Issues in Psychiatry II: Nosology (pp. 169–189). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffner, K. F., & Tabb, K. (2015). Hempel as a Critic of Bridgman’s Operationalism: Lesson for Psychiatry from the History of Science. In Kendler, K. S. & Parnas, J. (Eds.), Philosophical Issues in Psychiatry III: The Nature and Sources of Historical Change (pp. 213–220). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, M. A., Wiggins, O. P., & Norko, M. A. (1995). Prototypes, Ideal Types, and Personality Disorders: The Return to Classical Phenomenology. In Livesley, W. J. (Ed.), The DSM-IV Personality Disorders (pp. 417–432). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Showalter, E. (1985). The Female Malady. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Sklar, L. (2000). Convention, Role of. In Newton-Smith, W. H. (Ed.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Science (pp. 56–64). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stevens, S. S. (1935). The Operational Definition of Psychological Concepts. Psychological Review, 42(6), 517–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, J. A. (2014). Stabilizing Mental Disorders: Prospects and Promises. In Kincaid, H. & Sullevin, J. A. (Eds.), Classifying Psychopathology: Mental Kinds and Natural Kinds (pp. 257–281). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sullivan, J. A. (2017). Coordinated Pluralism as a Means to Facilitate Integrative Taxonomies of Cognition. Philosophical Explorations, 20(2), 129–145.Google Scholar
Sydenham, T. (1734). The Whole Works of That Excellent Practical Physician, Dr. Thomas Sydenham (Pechey, J., Trans. 10 edn.). London: W. Feales.Google Scholar
Trillat, E. (1995). Conversion Disorder and Hysteria: Clinical Section. In Berrios, G. E. & Porter, R. (Eds.), A History of Clinical Psychiatry (pp. 433–441). London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Turkheimer, E. (2000). Three Laws of Behavior Genetics and What They Mean. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(5), 160–164.Google Scholar
Turkheimer, E. (2016). Weak Genetic Explanation 20 Years Later: Reply to Plomin et al. (2016). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 24–28.Google Scholar
Turkheimer, E. (2017). The Hard Question in Psychiatric Nosology. In Kendler, K. S. & Parnas, J. (Eds.), Philosophical Issues in Psychiatry IV (pp. 27–44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Turkheimer, E., Ford, D. C., & Oltmanns, T. F. (2008). Regional Analysis of Self-Reported Personality Disorder Criteria. Journal of Personality, 76(6), 1587–1622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkheimer, E., & Gottesman, I. I. (1991). Is H2 = 0 a Null Hypothesis Anymore. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 410–411.Google Scholar
Turner, J. A., & Laird, A. R. (2012). The Cognitive Paradigm Ontology: Design and Application. Neuroinformatics, 10(1), 57–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Loo, H. M., & Romejin, J.-W. (2015). Psychiatric Comorbidity: Fact or Artifact. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 36, 41–60.Google Scholar
Walter, M. L. (1990). Science and Cultural Crisis: An Intellectual Biography of Percy Williams Bridgman (1882‒1961). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Welsh, G. S. (1956). Factor Dimensions A and R. In Welsh, G. S. & Dahlstrom, W. G. (Eds.), Basic Reading on the MMPI in Psychology and Medicine (pp. 264–281). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, J. S. (1968). Personality Structure. Annual Review of Psychology, 19, 293–350.Google Scholar
Zachar, P. (2014). A Metaphysics of Psychopathology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zanderson, M., Henrikson, M. G., & Parnas, J. (2019). A Recurrent Question: What Is Borderline. Journal of Personality Disorders, 33, 341–369.Google Scholar

References

Balsis, S., Choudhury, B. S., Geraci, L., & Patrick, C. J. (2018). Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment: A Review and Illustrations Focusing on Item Response Theory Techniques. Assessment, 25, 360–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bari, A., & Robbins, T. W. (2013). Inhibition and Impulsivity: Behavioral and Neural Basis of Response Control. Progress in Neurobiology, 108, 44–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borsboom, D., Cramer, A., & Kalis, A. (2019). Brain Disorders? Not Really: Why Network Structures Block Reductionism in Psychopathology Research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 42, e2.Google Scholar
Brennan, G. M., & Baskin-Sommers, A. R. (2018). Brain-Behavior Relationships in Externalizing: P3 Amplitude Reduction Reflects Deficient Inhibitory Control. Behavioural Brain Research, 337, 70–79.Google Scholar
Buchman-Schmitt, J. M., Brislin, S. J., Venables, N. C., Joiner, T. E., & Patrick, C. J. (2017). Trait Liabilities and Specific Promotive Processes in Psychopathology: The Example of Suicidal Behavior. Journal of Affective Disorders, 216, 100–108.Google Scholar
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A, Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafo, M. R. (2013). Power Failure: Why Small Sample Size Undermines the Reliability of Neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 365–376.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S., & Johnson, S. L. (2018). Impulsive Reactivity to Emotion and Vulnerability to Psychopathology. American Psychologist, 73, 1067–1078.Google Scholar
Castellanos-Ryan, N., Struve, M., Whelan, R., Banaschewski, T., Barker, G. J., Bokde, A. L., …, & the IMAGEN Consortium (2014). Neural and Cognitive Correlates of the Common and Specific Variance across Externalizing Problems in Young Adolescence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 171(12), 1310–1319.Google Scholar
Clark, L. A., Cuthbert, B., Lewis-Fernández, R., Narrow, W. E., & Reed, G. M. (2017). Three Approaches to Understanding and Classifying Mental Disorder: ICD-11, DSM-5, and the National Institute of Mental Health’s Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18, 72–145.Google Scholar
Creswell, K. G., Wright, A. G., Flory, J. D., Skrzynski, C. J., & Manuck, S. B. (2019). Multidimensional Assessment of Impulsivity-Related Measures in Relation to Externalizing Behaviors. Psychological Medicine, 49, 1678–1690.Google Scholar
Hicks, B. M., Bernat, E. M., Malone, S. M., Iacono, W. G., Patrick, C. J., Krueger, R. F., & McGue, M. (2007). Genes Mediate the Association between P3 Amplitude and Externalizing Disorders. Psychophysiology, 44, 98–105.Google Scholar
Iacono, W. G., Carlson, S. R., Malone, S. M., & McGue, M. (2002). P3 Event-Related Potential Amplitude and the Risk for Disinhibitory Disorders in Adolescent Boys. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 750–757.Google Scholar
Iacono, W. J., Malone, S. M., & McGue, M. (2003). Substance Use Disorders, Externalizing Psychopathology, and P300 Event-Related Potential Amplitude. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 48, 147–178.Google Scholar
Iacono, W. G., Malone, S. M., & McGue, M. (2008). Behavioral Disinhibition and the Development of Early-Onset Addiction: Common and Specific Influences. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 325–348.Google Scholar
Insel, T. R., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2015). Brain Disorders? Precisely. Science, 348, 499–500.Google Scholar
Insel, T., Cuthbert, B., Garvey, M., Heinssen, R., Pine, D. S., Quinn, K., ... & Wang, P. (2010). Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): Toward a New Classification Framework for Research on Mental Disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 748–750.Google Scholar
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2011). Excess Significance Bias in the Literature on Brain Volume Abnormalities. Archives of General Psychiatry, 68, 773–780.Google Scholar
Kendler, K. S., Prescott, C. A., Myers, J., & Neale, M. C. (2003). The Structure of Genetic and Environmental Risk Factors for Common Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders in Men and Women. Archives of General Psychiatry, 60, 929–937.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. (1992). Analysis of the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix by Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 165–172.Google Scholar
Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F., Watson, D., Achenbach, T. M., Althoff, R. R., Bagby, M., …, & Zimmerman, M. (2017). The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A Dimensional Alternative to Traditional Nosologies. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126, 454–477.Google Scholar
Kozak, M. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2016). The NIMH Research Domain Criteria Initiative: Background, Issues, and Pragmatics. Psychophysiology, 53(3), 286–297.Google Scholar
Kramer, M. D., Patrick, C. J., Krueger, R. F., & Gasperi, M. (2012). Delineating Physiologic Defensive Reactivity in the Domain of Self-Report: Phenotypic and Etiologic Structure of Dispositional Fear. Psychological Medicine, 42(6), 1305–1320.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F. (1999). The Structure of Common Mental Disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 921–926.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Hicks, B. M., Patrick, C. J., Carlson, S. R., Iacono, W. G., & McGue, M. (2002). Etiologic Connections among Substance Dependence, Antisocial Behavior and Personality: Modeling the Externalizing Spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111, 411–424.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Kotov, R., Watson, D., Forbes, M. K., Eaton, N. R., Ruggero, C. J., … & Bagby, R. M. (2018). Progress in Achieving Quantitative Classification of Psychopathology. World Psychiatry, 17(3), 282–293.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2007). Linking Antisocial Behavior, Substance Use, and Personality: An Integrative Quantitative Model of the Adult Externalizing Spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116(4), 645–666.Google Scholar
Kwako, L. E., Momenan, R., Litten, R. Z., Koob, G. F., & Goldman, D. (2016). Addictions Neuroclinical Assessment: A Neuroscience-Based Framework for Addictive Disorders. Biological Psychiatry, 80(3), 179–189.Google Scholar
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2014). The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): An Analysis of Methodological and Conceptual Challenges. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 62, 129–139.Google Scholar
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2017). Psychology’s Replicability Crisis and the Grant Culture: Righting the Ship. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 12, 660–664.Google Scholar
Lilienfeld, S. O., & Treadway, M. T. (2016). Clashing Diagnostic Approaches: DSM-ICD versus RDoC. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 435–463.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An Introduction to the Five‐Factor Model and Its Applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215.Google Scholar
MacKillop, J., Weafer, J., Gray, J. C., Oshri, A., Palmer, A., & de Wit, H. (2016). The Latent Structure of Impulsivity: Impulsive Choice, Impulsive Action, and Impulsive Personality Traits. Psychopharmacology, 233, 3361–3370.Google Scholar
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), The American Council on Education/Macmillan Series on Higher Education. Educational measurement, (pp. 13–103). New York: American Council on Education & Macmillan Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An Integrative Theory of Prefrontal Cortex Function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167–202.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (2010). Mistreating Psychology in the Decades of the Brain. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 716–743.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The Nature and Organization of Individual Differences in Executive Functions: Four General Conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 8–14.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. (2000). The Unity and Diversity of Executive Functions and Their Contributions to Complex “Frontal Lobe” Tasks: A Latent Variable Analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC) (2015). Measuring Human Capabilities: An Agenda for Basic Research on the Assessment of Individual and Group Performance Potential for Military Accession. Committee on Measuring Human Capabilities, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Nelson, L. D., Patrick, C. J., & Bernat, E. M. (2011). Operationalizing Proneness to Externalizing Psychopathology as a Multivariate Psychophysiological Phenotype. Psychophysiology, 48, 64–72.Google Scholar
Nigg, J. T. (2017). Annual Research Review: On the Relations among Self‐Regulation, Self‐Control, Executive Functioning, Effortful Control, Cognitive Control, Impulsivity, Risk‐Taking, and Inhibition for Developmental Psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58, 361–383.Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Bernat, E., Malone, S. M., Iacono, W. G., Krueger, R. F., & McGue, M. K. (2006). P300 Amplitude as an Indicator of Externalizing in Adolescent Males. Psychophysiology, 43, 84–92.Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Durbin, C. E., & Moser, J. S. (2012). Conceptualizing Proneness to Antisocial Deviance in Neurobehavioral Terms. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 1047–1071.Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., & Hajcak, G. (2016). RDoC: Translating Promise into Progress. Psychophysiology, 53, 415–424.Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Foell, J., Venables, N. C., & Worthy, D. A. (2015). Substance Use Disorders as Externalizing Outcomes. In Beauchaine, T. & Hinshaw, S. (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Externalizing Spectrum Disorders (pp. 38–60). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Iacono, W. G., & Venables, N. C. (2019). Incorporating Neurophysiological Measures into Clinical Assessments: Fundamental Challenges and a Strategy for Addressing Them. Psychological Assessment. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fpas0000713Google Scholar
Patrick, C. J., Venables, N. C., Yancey, J. R., Hicks, B. M., Nelson, L. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2013). A Construct-Network Approach to Bridging Diagnostic and Physiological Domains: Application to Assessment of Externalizing Psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 902–916.Google Scholar
Perkins, E. R., Yancey, J. R., Drislane, L. D., Venables, N. C., Balsis, S., & Patrick, C. J. (2017). Methodological Issues in the Use of Individual Brain Measures to Index Trait Liabilities: The Example of Noise-Probe P3. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 111, 245–255.Google Scholar
Ramey, T. (2017). NIDA Phenotyping Battery [Webinar]. In Clinical Trials Network Dissemination Library, April 21. Retrieved from https://ctndisseminationlibrary.wordpress.com/2017/04/14/ctn-webinar-nida-phenotyping-battery-april-21-1-2pm-edt/Google Scholar
Sharma, L., Markon, K. E., & Clark, L. A. (2014). Toward a Theory of Distinct Types of “Impulsive” Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis of Self-Report and Behavioral Measures. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 374–408.Google Scholar
Tackett, J. L., Lilienfeld, S. O., Patrick, C. J., Johnson, S. L., Krueger, R. F., Miller, J. D., … & Shrout, P. E. (2017). It’s Time to Broaden the Replicability Conversation: Thoughts for and from Clinical Psychological Science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), 742–756.Google Scholar
Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. (2008). Exploring Personality through Test Construction: Development of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. In Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.), Handbook of Personality Theory and Testing: Personality Measurement and Assessment (Vol. 2, pp. 261–292). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Vaidyanathan, U., Patrick, C. J., & Bernat, E. M. (2009). Startle Reflex Potentiation during Aversive Picture Viewing as an Indicator of Trait Fear. Psychophysiology, 46, 75–85.Google Scholar
Venables, N. C., Foell, J., Yancey, J. R., Kane, M. J., Engle, R. W., & Patrick, C. J. (2018a). Quantifying Inhibitory Control as Externalizing Proneness: A Cross-Domain Model. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(4). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2167702618757690Google Scholar
Venables, N. C., Hicks, B. M., Yancey, J. R., Kramer, M. D., Nelson, L. D., Strickland, C. M., … & Patrick, C. J. (2017). Evidence of a Prominent Genetic Basis for Associations between Psychoneurometric Traits and Common Mental Disorders. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 115, 4–12.Google Scholar
Venables, N. C., & Patrick, C. J. (2012). Validity of the Externalizing Spectrum Inventory in a Criminal Offender Sample: Relations with Disinhibitory Psychopathology, Personality, and Psychopathic Features. Psychological Assessment, 24, 88–100.Google Scholar
Venables, N. C., Yancey, J. R., Kramer, M. D., Hicks, B. M., Krueger, R. F., Iacono, W. G., Joiner, T. J., & Patrick, C. J. (2018b). Psychoneurometric Assessment of Dispositional Liabilities for Suicidal Behavior: Phenotypic and Etiological Associations. Psychological Medicine, 48, 463–472.Google Scholar
Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The Five Factor Model and Impulsivity: Using a Structural Model of Personality to Understand Impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 669–689.Google Scholar
Yancey, J. R., Venables, N. C., Hicks, B. M., & Patrick, C. J. (2013). Evidence for a Heritable Brain Basis to Deviance-Promoting Deficits in Self-Control. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 309–317.Google Scholar
Yancey, J. R., Venables, N. C., & Patrick, C. J. (2016). Psychoneurometric Operationalization of Threat Sensitivity: Relations with Clinical Symptom and Physiological Response Criteria. Psychophysiology, 53(3), 393–405.Google Scholar
Young, S. E., Friedman, N. P., Miyake, A., Willcutt, E. G., Corley, R. P., Haberstick, B. C., & Hewitt, J. K. (2009). Behavioral Disinhibition: Liability for Externalizing Spectrum Disorders and Its Genetic and Environmental Relation to Response Inhibition across Adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118, 117–130.Google Scholar
Young, S. E., Stallings, M. C., Corley, R. P., Krauter, K. S., & Hewitt, J. K. (2000). Genetic and Environmental Influences on Behavioral Disinhibition. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 96, 684–695.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×