The development of child mental health problems has been associated with experiences of adversity and dysregulation of stress response systems; however, past research has largely focused on externalizing or internalizing problems (rather than their co-occurrence) and single physiological systems in high-risk adolescent samples. The present study examined whether cumulative family adversity, functioning in the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (i.e., cortisol) and the parasympathetic nervous system (i.e., respiratory sinus arrhythmia [RSA]), and their interactions, predicted trajectories of co-occurring externalizing and internalizing problems among young children. Participants included 338 socioeconomically and racially diverse children (M age = 5.32 years, SD = .32; male = 51.8%) from a community sample. Family adversity (assessed with six measures) and child daily cortisol output and resting RSA were assessed in kindergarten. Parents, teachers, and children reported on children's externalizing and internalizing psychopathology up to three times from kindergarten to grade 1. Latent class growth analyses identified stable trajectories of externalizing and internalizing psychopathology. Trajectories were combined to create groups: co-occurring externalizing and internalizing (13.1%), externalizing-only (14.0%), internalizing-only (11.3%), and low problems (61.3%). Family adversity and resting RSA significantly positively predicted co-occurring group membership. Tests for interactions showed adversity did not significantly interact with physiological indicators to predict group membership. However, the two physiological systems interacted, such that higher and lower daily cortisol predicted internalizing group membership for children with lower and higher resting RSA, respectively. Findings support the importance of considering family context and multiple physiological systems to inform understanding of the development of mental health problems, and their co-occurrence, in early childhood.

BACKGROUND: Maladaptive family environments harm child development and are passed across generations. Childhood interventions may break this intergenerational cycle by improving the family environments children form as adults. The present study investigates this hypothesis by examining follow-up data collected 18 years after the end of the childhood Fast Track intervention designed to prevent externalizing problems. METHODS: We examined whether Fast Track assignment from grades 1 to 10 prevented the emergence of maladaptive family environments at age 34. A total of 400 (n = 206 in intervention condition, n = 194 controls) Fast Track participants who were parents at age 34 were surveyed about 11 aspects of their current family environment. The hypotheses and analytic plan were preregistered at https://osf.io/dz9t5 and the Fast Track trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01653535). RESULTS: Multiple group linear regression models revealed that mothers who participated in the Fast Track intervention as children had lower depression symptoms, alcohol problems, drug problems, corporal punishment use, and food insecurity compared to control group mothers. All effects were modest in magnitude. However, for these same mothers, the Fast Track intervention had no effect on cannabis problems, experiences of romantic partner violence, or maternal use of physical aggression or warmth with their children. Additionally, mothers in the Fast Track intervention group reported higher levels of family chaos than those in the control group, but this effect may be a byproduct of the higher number of children per household in the intervention group. No intervention effects were found for fathers who participated in the Fast Track intervention as children. CONCLUSIONS: Childhood assignment to Fast Track has some beneficial effects for girls, but not boys, on the family environments these individuals formed as adults 18 years later.

People with schizophrenia demonstrate impairments in selective attention, working memory, and executive function. Given the overlap in these constructs, it is unclear if these represent distinct impairments or different manifestations of one higher-order impairment. To examine this question, we administered tasks from the basic cognitive neuroscience literature to measure visual selective attention, working memory capacity, and executive function in 126 people with schizophrenia and 122 healthy volunteers. Patients demonstrated deficits on all tasks with the exception of selective attention guided by strong bottom-up inputs. Although the measures of top-down control of selective attention, working memory, and executive function were all intercorrelated, several sources of evidence indicate that working memory and executive function are separate sources of variance. Specifically, both working memory and executive function independently contributed to the discrimination of group status and independently accounted for variance in overall general cognitive ability as assessed by the MATRICS battery. These two cognitive functions appear to be separable features of the cognitive impairments observed in schizophrenia.

In comparison to batteries of standard neuropsychological tests, cognitive neuroscience tests may offer a more specific assessment of discrete neurobiological processes that may be aberrant in schizophrenia. However, more information regarding psychometric properties and correlations with standard neuropsychological tests and functional measures is warranted to establish their validity as treatment outcome measures. The N-back and AX-Continuous Performance Task (AX-CPT) are two promising cognitive neuroscience tests designed to measure specific components of working memory and contextual processing respectively. In the current study, we report the psychometric properties of multiple outcome measures from these two tests as well as their correlations with standard neuropsychological measures and functional capacity measures. The results suggest that while the AX-CPT and N-back display favorable psychometric properties, they do not exhibit greater sensitivity or specificity with functional measures than standard neurocognitive tests.