[Questioning disruptive disorder with emotional dysregulation]. / Questionner le trouble disruptif avec dysrégulation émotionnelle.

Disruptive Emotional Dysregulation Disorder (DEDD) responds to an increase in diagnoses of clastic crises, reactive depression and bipolarity in children and adolescents. Emerging in the 1990s, EDD has become an issue for practitioners, parents and teachers alike, and has become an integral part of the landscape of paediatric and child psychiatric disorders. Its diagnostic complexity is accentuated by criteria that include persistent and disproportionate outbursts of anger, often confused with other pathologies, especially as diagnostic tools are few and far between. Professionals in the field know little about EDD, preferring to diagnose more familiar disorders.

The Affective Side of Disruptive Behavior: Toward Better Understanding, Assessment, and Treatment.

Historically, much of the progress made in youth mental health research can be classified as focusing on externalizing problems, characterized by disruptive behavior (e.g. aggression, defiance), or internalizing problems, characterized by intense negative affect (e.g. depression, anxiety). Until recently, however, less attention has been given to topics that lie somewhere in between these domains, topics that we collectively refer to as the affective side of disruptive behavior. Like the far side of the moon, the affective side of disruptive behavior captures facets of the phenomenon that may be less obvious or commonly overlooked, but are nonetheless critical to understand. This affective side clarifies socially disruptive aspects of traditionally "externalizing" behavior by elucidating proximal causation via intense negative affect (traditionally "internalizing"). Such problems include irritability, frustration, anger, temper loss, emotional outbursts, and reactive aggression. Given a recent explosion of research in these areas, efforts toward integration are now needed. This special issue was developed to help address this need. Beyond the present introductory article, this collection includes 4 empirical articles on developmental psychopathology topics, 4 empirical articles on applied treatment/assessment topics, 1 evidence base update review article on measurement, and 2 future directions review articles concerning outbursts, mood, dispositions, and youth psychopathology more broadly. By deliberatively investigating the affective side of disruptive behavior, we hope these articles will help bring about better understanding, assessment, and treatment of these challenging problems, for the benefit of youth and families.

Irritability across adolescence: Examining longitudinal trajectory, stability, and associations with psychopathology and functioning at age 18.

BACKGROUND: Irritability, marked by diminished frustration tolerance, holds significant implications for youth mental health treatment. Despite prior research on irritability trajectories, understanding of individual differences during adolescence remains limited. This study examines the stability and trajectory of irritability across ages 12-18, investigating associations with psychopathology and functioning at age 18. METHODS: A community sample of families with 3-year-old children (N = 518) was recruited via commercial mailing lists. Irritability was assessed at ages 12, 15, and 18 using the Affective Reactivity Index. Psychopathology at age 18 was evaluated with the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia, and functioning was assessed through the UCLA Life Stress Interview. Measurement invariance analyses and latent growth curve modeling were conducted within a structural equation modeling (SEM) framework. RESULTS: Configural, metric, and scalar invariance models were supported. Elevated irritability at age 12 predicted adverse outcomes at age 18, including increased psychotropic medication use, mental health treatment, suicidal ideation, self-injury, and psychiatric disorders. Importantly, these associations persisted even after accounting for corresponding variables at age 12. The trajectory of irritability during early adolescence significantly predicted heightened risks for various outcomes at age 18, including suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, disruptive behavior disorders, and impaired interpersonal functioning. DISCUSSION: Limitations include using only youth-reported data at age 18, limited generalizability from a mostly White, middle-class sample, and insufficient exploration of the broader developmental trajectory of irritability. Nevertheless, the findings emphasize the crucial role of irritability's trajectory in influencing various psychopathological and functional outcomes in late adolescence.

What I see, what you say: How cross-method variation sharpens characterization of irritability in early childhood.

OBJECTIVES: Identification of clinically significant irritability in preschool age is important to implement effective interventions. However, varying informant and measurement methods display distinct patterns. These patterns are associated with concurrent and future mental health concerns. Patterns across multi-informant methods in early-childhood irritability may have clinical utility, identifying risk for impaired psychosocial functioning. METHODS: Using data from the Multidimensional Assessment of Preschoolers Study (N = 425), latent profile analysis identified irritability patterns through the parent-reported Multidimensional Assessment Profile Scales-Temper Loss (MAPS-TL), parent-reported interviewer-rated Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment (PAPA), and observer-rated Disruptive Behavior Diagnostic Observation Schedule (DB-DOS). These profiles were characterized on protective factors, global functioning, and mental health syndromes, concurrently and at early school age and preadolescent follow-up. RESULTS: Fit indices favored a five-class model: Low All, High Observation with Examiner (high DB-DOS Examiner Context), High All, High Parent Report (high MAPS-TL/PAPA), and Very High Parent Report (very high MAPS-TL/PAPA). Whereas Low All and High Observation with Examiner exhibited strong psychosocial functioning, remaining profiles showed impaired psychosocial functioning, with the Very High Parent Report group showing higher impairment at follow-ups, ds = 0.37-1.25. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-informant measurements of irritability may have utility for clinical prediction, and future studies should test utility for diagnostic precision.

Irritability in Youths: A Critical Integrative Review.

Irritability, defined as proneness to anger that may impair an individual's functioning, is common in youths. There has been a recent upsurge in relevant research. The authors combine systematic and narrative review approaches to integrate the latest clinical and translational findings and provide suggestions for addressing research gaps. Clinicians and researchers should assess irritability routinely, and specific assessment tools are now available. Informant effects are prominent, are stable, and vary by age and gender. The prevalence of irritability is particularly high among individuals with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder, and mood and anxiety disorders. Irritability is associated with impairment and suicidality risk independent of co-occurring diagnoses. Developmental trajectories of irritability (which may begin early in life) have been identified and are differentially associated with clinical outcomes. Youth irritability is associated with increased risk of anxiety, depression, behavioral problems, and suicidality later in life. Irritability is moderately heritable, and genetic associations differ based on age and comorbid illnesses. Parent management training is effective for treating psychological problems related to irritability, but its efficacy in treating irritability should be tested rigorously, as should novel mechanism-informed interventions (e.g., those targeting exposure to frustration). Associations between irritability and suicidality and the impact of cultural context are important, underresearched topics. Analyses of large, diverse longitudinal samples that extend into adulthood are needed. Data from both animal and human research indicate that aberrant responses to frustration and threat are central to the pathophysiology of irritability, revealing important translational opportunities.

Neural Responses to Intranasal Oxytocin in Youths With Severe Irritability.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the neural impact of intranasal oxytocin on emotion processing areas in youths with severe irritability in the context of disruptive mood and behavior disorders. METHODS: Fifty-two participants with severe irritability, as measured by a score ≥4 on the Affective Reactivity Index (ARI), with diagnoses of disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) and/or disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD) were randomly assigned to treatment with intranasal oxytocin or placebo daily for 3 weeks. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at the end of the trial; the primary outcomes were measures of irritability on the ARI and ratings on the Clinical Global Impressions severity scale (CGI-S) focusing on DBD and DMDD symptoms, and secondary outcomes included the CGI improvement scale (CGI-I) and ratings of proactive and reactive aggressive behavior on the Reactive-Proactive Aggression Questionnaire. Forty-three participants (22 in the oxytocin group and 21 in the placebo group) completed pre- and posttreatment functional MRI (fMRI) scans with the affective Stroop task. RESULTS: Youths who received oxytocin showed significant improvement in CGI-S and CGI-I ratings compared with those who received placebo. In the fMRI data, blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) responses to emotional stimuli in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex and posterior cingulate cortex were significantly reduced after oxytocin compared with placebo. These BOLD response changes were correlated with improvement in clinical severity. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides initial and preliminary evidence that intranasal oxytocin may induce neural-level changes in emotion processing in youths with irritability in the context of DBDs and DMDD. This may lead to symptom and severity changes in irritability.

Utility of Multiple Specifiers for Subtyping Oppositional Defiant Problems: Investigating Multiple Psychopathy Dimensions as Specifiers.

Past research has speculated that using grandiose-manipulative (GM) and daring-impulsive (DI) traits, rather than solely callous-unemotional (CU) traits, could better inform subtyping youths with behavioral problems. However, this approach remains largely untested. To further enhance our understanding of this matter, the current study utilized self-report (n = 2,381) and parent-report (n = 1,846) data to examine the utility of three psychopathic dimensions as specifiers for oppositional defiant problems (ODP). Findings showed that ODP was a significant predictor of negative outcomes, while the GM, CU, and DI traits emerged as significant predictors of theoretically and clinically relevant external variables (e.g., conduct problems and proactive aggression), independent of ODP (and age, gender, and socioeconomic status), forming the potential foundation for the development of specifiers for ODP. Furthermore, children presenting ODP alongside heightened levels of the three psychopathic traits demonstrated notably higher scores in important external variables compared to other groups, including but not confined to the subgroup of children with ODP and high CU trait levels. Findings provide preliminary support for employing GM and DI traits as specifiers for ODP. However, more comprehensive evaluations of these specifiers' utility would help inform ongoing discussions before definitively concluding they should be included in diagnostic manuals.

An expert opinion on the pharmacological interventions for Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD).

INTRODUCTION: Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD) was officially introduced as a new diagnostic entity in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), under the category of depressive disorders. AREAS COVERED: A comprehensive overview and a critical commentary on the currently investigated psychopharmacological approaches for the treatment of DMDD have been here provided. EXPERT OPINION: Behavioral and psychosocial interventions should be considered as first-line treatment strategies. When ineffective or partially effective, psychopharmacological strategy is recommended. Overall, pharmacological strategy should be preferred in those individuals with psychiatric comorbidities (e.g. ADHD). Indeed, so far published studies on pharmacological strategies in DMDD are scant and heterogeneous (i.e. age, assessment tools, symptomatology profile, comorbidity, and so forth). Therefore, DMDD psychopharmacological guidelines are needed, particularly to guide clinicians toward the patient's typical symptom profile who could benefit from psychopharmacological strategy.

Impulsivity as key bridge symptoms in cross-sectional and longitudinal networks of ADHD and ODD.

BACKGROUND: Impulsivity is viewed as key to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and disruptive behavior disorders (DBD). Yet, to date, no work has provided an item-level analysis in longitudinal samples across the critical developmental period from childhood into adolescence, despite prior work suggesting items exhibit differential relevance with respect to various types of impairment. The current study conducted a novel longitudinal network analysis of ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) symptoms between childhood and adolescence, with the important applied prediction of social skills in adolescence. METHODS: Participants were 310 children over-recruited for clinical ADHD issues followed longitudinally for six years in total with gold standard diagnostic procedures and parent and teacher ratings of symptoms and social outcomes. RESULTS: Findings from baseline, Year 3, and Year 6 suggested Difficulty waiting turn, Blurts, and Interrupts/intrudes were key bridge items across cross-sectional and longitudinal parent-reported DBD networks. Furthermore, shortened symptom lists incorporating these symptoms were stronger predictors of teacher-rated social skills 5 years later compared to total DBD scores. CONCLUSIONS: Such findings are consistent with the trait impulsivity theory of DBD and ADHD and may inform useful screening tools and personalized intervention targets for children at risk for DBD during adolescence.

Editorial: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Stimulant Medication, and Criminality: Commentary and Caution.

Pioneering longitudinal studies of boys with hyperactivity by Satterfield et al.1 indicated that one of the most deleterious outcomes associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is later antisocial behaviors. This risk grows when ADHD is accompanied by severe behavior problems.2 Though most children with ADHD will not go on to engage in criminal behavior, dimensional measures of externalizing behavior problems as well as categorical diagnoses of oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder have strong associations with ADHD. Moreover, cross-sectional studies of incarcerated adults indicate that 20% to 30% meet diagnostic criteria for ADHD.3 These associations between childhood ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder and later criminal behavior beg the question of whether treatment of ADHD can reduce the severity of, or in some cases prevent, criminal behavior.

Novel Oppositional Defiant Disorder or Conduct Disorder 24 Months After Traumatic Brain Injury in Children and Adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to identify predictive factors of new-onset or novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder assessed 24 months after traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: Children ages 5 to 14 years who had experienced TBI were recruited from consecutive hospital admissions. Soon after injury, participants were assessed for preinjury characteristics, including psychiatric disorders, socioeconomic status (SES), psychosocial adversity, and family function, and the presence and location of lesions were documented by MRI. Psychiatric outcomes, including novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder, were assessed 24 months after injury. RESULTS: Of the children without preinjury oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, or disruptive behavior disorder not otherwise specified who were recruited in this study, 165 were included in this sample; 95 of these children returned for the 24-month assessment. Multiple imputation was used to address attrition. The prevalence of novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder was 23.7 out of 165 (14%). In univariable analyses, novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder was significantly associated with psychosocial adversity (p=0.049) and frontal white matter lesions (p=0.016) and was marginally but not significantly associated with SES. In the final multipredictor model, frontal white matter lesions were significantly associated with novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder (p=0.021), and psychosocial adversity score was marginally but not significantly associated with the outcome. The odds ratio of novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder among the children with versus those without novel depressive disorder was significantly higher for girls than boys (p=0.025), and the odds ratio of novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder among the children with versus those without novel attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was significantly higher for boys than girls (p=0.006). CONCLUSION: Approximately 14% of children with TBI developed oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder. The risk for novel oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder can be understood from a biopsychosocial perspective. Sex differences were evident for comorbid novel depressive disorder and comorbid novel ADHD.

Development of symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder from preschool to adolescence: the role of bullying victimization and emotion regulation.

BACKGROUND: Childhood oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is associated with adverse outcomes which can continue to impair life well into adulthood. Identifying modifiable etiological factors of ODD is therefore essential. Although bullying victimization and poor emotion regulation are assumed to be risk factors for the development of ODD symptoms, little research has been conducted to test this possibility. METHODS: A sample (n = 1,042) from two birth cohorts of children in the city of Trondheim, Norway, was assessed biennially from age 4 to 14 years. Parents and children (from age 8) were assessed with clinical interviews to determine symptoms of ODD, children reported on their victimization from bullying, and teachers reported on children's emotion regulation. RESULTS: Oppositional defiant disorder symptoms increased from age 4 to 6, from age 8 to 10, and then started to wane as children entered adolescence. A Random Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model revealed that increased emotion regulation predicted a reduced number of ODD symptoms across development (ß = -.15 to -.13, p < .001). This prediction was equally strong for the angry/irritable and argumentative/defiant dimensions of ODD. No longitudinal links were observed between bullying victimization and ODD symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Improving emotion regulation skills may protect against ODD symptoms throughout childhood and adolescence.

Long-term cortisol secretion in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: roles of sex, comorbidity, and symptom presentation.

Low activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPAA) has been found in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The condition may be related to the reduced attention regulation capacity and/or to comorbid oppositional defiant or conduct disorder (ODD/CD). Sex differences are probable but not sufficiently studied. We analyzed the HPAA activity and sympathetic nervous system reactivity (SR) in children with ADHD while accounting for ADHD symptom presentation, comorbidity, and sex differences. The sample comprised 205 children, 98 (61 boys, 37 girls) with ADHD and 107 (48 boys, 59 girls) healthy controls. DSM-5 phenotypic symptom presentation and comorbid ODD/CD were assessed using clinical interviews. Hair cortisol concentration (HCC) was used to assess the long-term, cumulative activity of the HPAA. SR was assessed via skin conductance response (SCR). For control purposes, comorbid internalizing symptoms and indicators of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) were assessed. Children were medication naive. Boys presenting with predominantly inattentive symptoms (ADHD-I) showed lower HCC than healthy boys. Girls presenting with combined symptoms (ADHD-C) showed higher HCC than did healthy girls (p's < 0.05, sex-by-group interaction, F (2,194) = 4.09, p = 0.018). Boys with ADHD plus ODD/CD showed a blunted SR (p < 0.001, sex-by-group interaction, F (2,172) = 3.08, p = 0.048). Adjustment for ACE indicators led to non-significant differences in HCC but did not affect differences in SR. HCC constitutes an easily assessable, reliable, and valid marker of phenotypic ADHD-related features (i.e. symptom presentation and comorbidity). It indicates more homogenous subgroups of ADHD and might point to specifically involved pathophysiological processes.

Executive function in children with disruptive mood dysregulation disorder compared to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder, and in children with different irritability levels.

Addressing current challenges in research on disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD), this study aims to compare executive function in children with DMDD, children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and children with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). We also explore associations between irritability, a key DMDD characteristic, and executive function in a clinical sample regardless of diagnosis. Our sample include children (6-12 years) referred to child psychiatric clinics. Measures of daily-life (parent-reported questionnaire) and performance-based (neuropsychological tasks) executive function were applied. Identifying diagnoses, clinicians administered a standardized semi-structured diagnostic interview with parents. Irritability was assessed by parent-report. First, we compared executive function in DMDD (without ADHD/ODD), ADHD (without DMDD/ODD), ODD (without DMDD/ADHD) and DMDD + ADHD (without ODD). Second, we analyzed associations between executive function and irritability using the total sample. In daily life, children with DMDD showed clinically elevated and significantly worse emotion control scores compared to children with ADHD, and clinically elevated scores on cognitive flexibility compared to norm scores. Children with DMDD had significantly less working memory problems than those with ADHD. No differences were found between DMDD and ODD. Increased irritability was positively associated with emotional dyscontrol and cognitive inflexibility. For performance-based executive function, no diagnostic differences or associations with irritability were observed. We discuss how, in daily life, children with high irritability-levels get overwhelmed by feelings without accompanying regulatory capacities.

Neuropsychological mechanisms of social difficulties in disruptive mood dysregulation disorder versus oppositional defiant disorder.

Children with Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD) or Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) are characterized by irritability and social difficulties. However, the mechanisms underlying these disorders could be different. This study explores differences in social cognition and executive function (EF) across DMDD and ODD and the influence of these factors and their interaction on social problems in both groups. Children with DMDD (n = 53, Mage = 9.3) or ODD (n = 39, Mage = 9.6) completed neuropsychological tasks measuring social cognition (Theory of Mind and Face-Emotion Recognition) and EF (cognitive flexibility, inhibition, and working memory). Parents reported social problems. More than one-third of the children with DMDD and almost two-thirds of those with ODD showed clear difficulties with Theory of Mind. Most children with DMDD (51-64%) or ODD (67-83%) showed difficulties with EF. In children with DMDD, worse EF (ß = -.36) was associated with more social problems, whereas in children with ODD, better EF (ß = .44) was associated with more social problems. In those with ODD, but not in those with DMDD, the interaction between social cognition and EF contributed to the explained variance of social problems (ß = -1.97). Based on the observed interaction pattern, enhanced EF may lead to increased social problems among children with ODD who also exhibit social cognition difficulties. This study suggests the existence of distinct neuropsychological mechanisms underlying the social issues observed in children with DMDD versus those with ODD.

Differential Effects of Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder Comorbidity in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder on Social Cognition and Empathy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate social cognition and empathy properties in children among Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD) + Attention and Hyperactivity Disorder(ADHD); ADHD and healthy controls from Türkiye. METHODS: Twenty-two children with DMDD were compared to matched 30 children with ADHD and 60 healthy controls. We administered Affective Reactivity Index (ARI), KaSi Empathy Scale, Kiddie-SADS, and Reading Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET) to evaluate Theory of Mind skills to all study participants. RESULTS: DMDD + ADHD group had lower performance in ToM skills and empathy than in two groups. The ARI scores were found to be statistically significantly higher in the DMDD group than in two groups. It was also found that ARI, empathy, and ToM scores were significantly related in children with DMDD + ADHD. CONCLUSION: These results might be important to understand the difficulties in social functioning and interpersonal relationship in children with DMDD and ADHD. Children with DMDD may attend specific therapeutic programs which include specific techniques in social cognition, emotion regulation, and irritability.

Emotion regulation as central to psychopathology across childhood and adolescence: a commentary on Nobakht et al. (2023).

An important goal of clinical/developmental research is to identify factors contributing to the onset and maintenance of psychopathology - particularly factors that could be modified through intervention. Large-scale, multi-informant, longitudinal studies provide valuable opportunities for testing such etiological hypotheses, as illustrated by Nobakht et al.'s recent six-wave cohort study spanning ages 4-14. At a within-person level, emotion regulation (ER) deficits consistently predicted oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) symptoms (including both irritability and defiance), whereas victimization did not. These results comport with growing evidence highlighting ER's centrality to ODD and psychopathology more broadly. While the ER findings carry promising implications, caution is warranted in interpreting the results for victimization given that its association with psychopathology is well-documented. More research is needed to test precise questions about within- and between-person processes involving ER, victimization, and psychopathology across development. Pressing research questions include whether, how, and when youths' ER can be modified, and with what effects on clinical outcomes.

START NOW: a cognitive behavioral skills training for adolescent girls with conduct or oppositional defiant disorder - a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Conduct disorder (CD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) both convey a high risk for maladjustment later in life and are understudied in girls. Here, we aimed at confirming the efficacy of START NOW, a cognitive-behavioral, dialectical behavior therapy-oriented skills training program aiming to enhance emotion regulation skills, interpersonal and psychosocial adjustment, adapted for female adolescents with CD or ODD. METHODS: A total of 127 girls were included in this prospective, cluster randomized, multi-center, parallel group, quasi-randomized, controlled phase III trial, which tested the efficacy of START NOW (n = 72) compared with standard care (treatment as usual, TAU, n = 55). All female adolescents had a clinical diagnosis of CD or ODD, were 15.6 (±1.5) years on average (range: 12-20 years), and were institutionalized in youth welfare institutions. The two primary endpoints were the change in number of CD/ODD symptoms between (1) baseline (T1) and post-treatment (T3), and (2) between T1 and 12-week follow-up (T4). RESULTS: Both treatment groups showed reduced CD/ODD symptoms at T3 compared with T1 (95% CI: START NOW = -4.87, -2.49; TAU = -4.94, -2.30). There was no significant mean difference in CD/ODD symptom reduction from T1 to T3 between START NOW and TAU (-0.056; 95% CI = -1.860, 1.749; Hedge's g = -0.011). However, the START NOW group showed greater mean symptom reduction from T1 to T4 (-2.326; 95% CI = -4.274, -0.378; Hedge's g = -0.563). Additionally, secondary endpoint results revealed a reduction in staff reported aggression and parent-reported irritability at post assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Although START NOW did not result in greater symptom reduction from baseline to post-treatment compared with TAU, the START NOW group showed greater symptom reduction from baseline to follow-up with a medium effect size, which indicates a clinically meaningful delayed treatment effect.

Evidence-Based Assessment of DSM-5 Disruptive, Impulse Control, and Conduct Disorders.

The assessment of oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, antisocial personality disorder, and intermittent explosive disorder-the Disruptive, Impulse Control and Conduct Disorders-can be affected by biases in clinical judgment, including overestimating concerns about distinguishing symptoms from normative behavior and stigma associated with diagnosing antisocial behavior. Recent nosological changes call for special attention during assessment to symptom dimensions of limited prosocial emotions and chronic irritability. The present review summarizes best practices for evidence-based assessment of these disorders and discusses tools to identify their symptoms. Despite the focus on disruptive behavior disorders, their high degree of overlap with disruptive mood dysregulation disorder can complicate assessment. Thus, the latter disorder is also included for discussion here. Good practice in the assessment of disruptive behavior disorders involves using several means of information gathering (e.g., clinical interview, standardized rating scales or checklists), ideally via multiple informants (e.g., parent-, teacher-, and self-report). A commitment to providing a full and accurate diagnostic assessment, with careful and attentive reference to diagnostic guidelines, will mitigate concerns regarding biases.