Construct Validity of Adolescent Antisocial Personality Disorder

This study examined the construct validity of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) diagnosed in adolescence. Boys and girls were grouped by history of DSM-III-R conduct disorder (CD) and ASPD: Controls (n=340) had neither diagnosis; CD Only (n=77) had CD by age 17 but no ASPD through age 20; Adolescent ASPD (n = 64) had ASPD by age 17. The Adolescent ASPD group was then compared to 20 young adult men who met criteria for ASPD (ASPD group). As expected, the Adolescent ASPD group had significantly more depression and substance use disorders, a greater performance>verbal IQ discrepancy, more deviant peers, and poorer academic functioning than the CD Only group and Controls. The Adolescent ASPD and ASPD groups did not differ on most variables. Results support the construct validity of Adolescent ASPD and suggest that such a diagnosis could help identify adolescents at risk for persistent antisocial behavior. Jeanette Taylor is an Assistant Professor at Florida State University. She received her Ph.D. in 1999 from the University of Minnesota. Her research examines biological, cognitive, and environmental influences on personality disorders and substance use disorders. Irene J. Elkins is a Co-investigator at the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research. She received her Ph.D. in 1993 from the University of Kansas and is a member of the Society for Research on Psychopathology. Her major research interests include the relationship of personality, ADHD, and antisocial behavior to substance abuse, as well as gene-environment interrelationships. Lisa Legrand is a Research Associate with the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research at the University of Minnesota. She received her Ph.D. in 2003 from the University of Minnesota. Her major research interests include gene-environment interplay in the development of externalizing psychopathology. Dawn Peuschold is a Senior Clinical Forensic Psychologist at the Hennepin Country District Court and an instructor at the University of Minnesota. She completed a post-doctoral fellowship in forensic psychology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School after receiving her Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Minnesota. She is interested in risk factors for reoffense in juveniles. William G. Iacono is a Distinguished McKnight University Professor at the University of Minnesota, the institution from which he received his Ph.D. in psychology. He conducts longitudinal studies of adolescent twins and adoptees aimed at understanding the development of adult adjustment and mental health.     

Does Familiarity Breed Contempt? The Impact of Information on Mass Attitudes toward Congress

Two features of citizen response to Congress can be taken as grounds for concern. First, Americans know relatively little about Congress, and especially about congressional procedures and policy output. Second, Congress typically emerges as the least respected political institution. Although these matters are troubling when viewed individually, more disturbing is the dilemma posed when knowledge and attitudes toward Congress are viewed in tandem. It appears that citizens who know Congress the best like Congress the least. Consequently, a sophisticated polity and a well-respected legislature seem fundamentally incompatible. This article seeks to resolve this dilemma, contending that there is nothing about knowledge per se that leads citizens to view Congress unfavorably. Rather, differences in knowledge levels alter the considerations citizens bring to bear when evaluating Congress, with the best-informed individuals constructing judgments on the basis of the most relevant Congress-specific criteria while less knowledgeable citizens employ readily available but more peripheral criteria.