The simultaneous assessment of and relations between children's sympathetic and parasympathetic psychophysiology and their reactive and proactive aggression.

The goal of the current study was to examine the link between children's psychophysiology and aggression when both constructs were assessed simultaneously in scenarios designed to provide the opportunity to aggress for either a reactive reason or a proactive reason. Both sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activity (skin conductance) and parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) activity (respiratory sinus arrhythmia or RSA), as well as their interaction, were included as physiological measures. Participants were 35 5th-grade children who were placed in two virtual-peer scenarios; one scenario provided the opportunity to aggress in response to peer provocation (i.e., reactive aggression) and the other scenario provided the opportunity to aggress for instrumental gain (i.e., proactive aggression). Both skin conductance and RSA were assessed at the time that children were given the opportunity to aggress; this simultaneous assessment of psychophysiology and aggression allowed for an examination of in-the-moment relations between the two constructs. For the reactive scenario, RSA moderated the in-the-moment relation between skin conductance and aggression such that the association was positive at low RSA but negative at high RSA. For the proactive scenario, skin conductance negatively predicted aggression in-the-moment, and RSA positively predicted aggression in-the-moment, but their interaction was not a significant predictor of aggression. Theoretical implications for reactive and proactive aggression and underlying physiological processes are discussed.

Relations Between Actual Group Norms, Perceived Peer Behavior, and Bystander Children's Intervention to Bullying.

The goals of the study were (a) to predict children's intervention in bullying situations from class-level norms for intervention, as well as child-level perceptions of the number of peers who would intervene, and (b) to determine whether these predictions held when accounting for children's levels of empathy, prosocial behavior, and callous-unemotional traits. Participants were 751 racially and ethnically diverse fourth- and fifth-grade students (53.8% female) in 43 classes. Participants completed peer nominations about which classmates they perceived would intervene during bullying situations. Empathy and callous-unemotional traits were assessed via self report, whereas prosocial behavior was measured through peer report. Using multilevel modeling, each child's intervention in bullying was positively predicted from class-level norms for intervention (class means for the percentage of children who nominated each child as intervening) but negatively predicted from child-level perceptions of the number of peers who would intervene, after accounting for the 3 child traits. Class-level findings support past research on group norms which suggest that children are more likely to display a behavior if their peers display the same behavior. Child-level findings support the presence of the "bystander effect" in children's bullying episodes, in which children are less likely to intervene if they believe that more peers will do so. Thus, although children were more likely to intervene in classrooms with cultures that made intervention more normative, within the context of each class's culture, children were more likely to intervene if they perceived that fewer peers would do so.

Systematic psychosocial screening in a paediatric cardiology clinic: clinical utility of the Pediatric Symptom Checklist 17.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the clinical utility of the Pediatric Symptom Checklist 17 for identifying psychosocial concerns and improving access to psychology services within a paediatric cardiology clinic. METHOD: Parents of 561 children (aged 4-17 years) presenting for follow-up of CHD, acquired heart disease, or arrhythmia completed the Pediatric Symptom Checklist 17 as part of routine care; three items assessing parental (1) concern for learning/development, (2) questions about adjustment to cardiac diagnosis, and (3) interest in discussing concerns with a behavioural healthcare specialist were added to the questionnaire. A psychologist contacted the parents by phone if they indicated interest in speaking with a behavioural healthcare specialist. RESULTS: Percentages of children scoring above clinical cut-offs for externalising (10.5%), attention (8.7%), and total (9.3%) problems were similar to a "normative" primary-care sample, whereas fewer children in this study scored above the cut-off for internalising problems (7.8%; p<0.01). Sociodemographic, but not clinical, characteristics were associated with Pediatric Symptom Checklist 17 scores. 17% of the parents endorsed concerns about learning/development, and 20% endorsed questions about adjustment to diagnosis. History of cardiac surgery was associated with increased concern about learning/development (p<0.01). Only 37% of the parents expressing psychosocial concerns reported interest in speaking with a psychologist. CONCLUSIONS: The Pediatric Symptom Checklist 17 may not be sensitive to specific difficulties experienced by this patient population. A questionnaire with greater focus on learning/development and adjustment to diagnosis may yield improved utility. Psychology integration in clinics serving high-risk cardiac patients may decrease barriers to behavioural healthcare services.

Children's physiological and emotional reactions to witnessing bullying predict bystander intervention.

Study goals were to explore whether children clustered into groups based on reactions to witnessing bullying and to examine whether these reactions predicted bullying intervention. Seventy-nine children (M = 10.80 years) watched bullying videos in the laboratory while their heart rate (HR) was measured, and they self-reported on negative emotion after each video. Bullying intervention was assessed by school peers. Two groups emerged based on reactions to the bullying videos: The Emotional group (43% of children) displayed HR acceleration and reported high negative emotion, whereas the Unemotional group (57% of children) showed HR deceleration and reported low negative emotion. Group membership predicted bullying intervention, with peers reporting that Emotional children were more likely to stop a bully than Unemotional children.