Evidence Base Update on the Assessment of Irritability, Anger, and Aggression in Youth.

OBJECTIVE: Irritability, anger, and aggression have garnered significant attention from youth mental health researchers and clinicians; however, fundamental challenges of conceptualization and measurement persist. This article reviews the evidence base for assessing these transdiagnostic constructs in children and adolescents. METHOD: We conducted a preregistered systematic review of the evidence behind instruments used to measure irritability, anger, aggression, and related problems in youth. Searches were conducted in PsycINFO and PubMed, identifying 4,664 unique articles. Eligibility criteria focused on self- and proxy-report measures with peer-reviewed psychometric evidence from studies in English with youths ages 3-18. Additional measures were found through ancillary search strategies (e.g. book chapters, review articles, test publishers). Measures were screened and coded by multiple raters with acceptable reliability. RESULTS: Overall, 68 instruments met criteria for inclusion, with scales covering irritability (n = 15), anger (n = 19), aggression (n = 45), and/or general overt externalizing problems (n = 27). Regarding overall psychometric support, 6 measures (8.8%) were classified as Excellent, 46 (67.6%) were Good, and 16 (23.5%) were Adequate. Descriptive information (e.g. informants, scales, availability, translations) and psychometric properties (e.g. reliability, validity, norms) are summarized. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous instruments for youth irritability, anger, and aggression exist with varying degrees of empirical support for specific applications. Although some measures were especially strong, none had uniformly excellent properties across all dimensions, signaling the need for further research in particular areas. Findings promote conceptual clarity while also producing a well-characterized toolkit for researchers and clinicians addressing transdiagnostic problems affecting youth.

Cortisol reactivity to a laboratory stressor predicts increases in depressive symptoms in perinatal and nulliparous women during population-level stress.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests a link between stress and depression, especially in high-risk groups. The perinatal period is known as a time of increased risk for depression and pregnancy has been associated with alterations in cortisol levels; however, limited research has assessed cortisol reactivity during pregnancy. Finally, no studies have yet examined whether cortisol reactivity predicts later depressive symptoms during a population-level stressor, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The current study examined whether cortisol reactivity in perinatal and nulliparous women a year before the onset of COVID-19 predicted increases in depressive symptoms during the initial stage of the pandemic. Participants were 68 women (33 pregnant, Mage = 30.6; 35 nulliparous, Mage = 28.4) who, approximately a year before COVID-19, responded to a depressive symptoms questionnaire and completed a psychosocial stress test, during which they provided salivary cortisol samples. Shortly after the onset of pandemic-related closures (April 2020; postpartum for previously pregnant participants), participants completed follow-up questionnaires assessing current depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Analyses showed that cortisol reactivity at baseline predicted increases in depressive symptoms at follow-up. Perinatal and nulliparous women did not differ in this association. LIMITATIONS: The present study was limited by a moderate sample size and heterogeneity in terms of gestational week, restricting inferences about specific stages of pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that cortisol reactivity to a laboratory stressor is a biomarker of risk for increased depressive symptoms during ecological stress in women. Biomarkers like these increase our understanding of depression risk and may help to identify individuals in need of interventions.

Social interpretation inflexibility moderates emotional reactions to social situations in children and adolescents.

Interpretation biases and inflexibility (i.e., difficulties revising interpretations) have been linked to increased internalizing symptoms. Although adolescence is a developmental period characterized by novel social situations and increased vulnerability to internalizing disorders, no studies have examined interpretation inflexibility in adolescents. Additionally, no studies (on adolescents or adults) have examined interpretation flexibility as a protective factor against adverse outcomes of interpersonal events. Using a novel task and a 28-day diary we examined relations among interpretation bias and inflexibility, internalizing symptoms, and negative interpersonal events in a sample of children and adolescents (N = 159, ages 9-18). At baseline, negative interpretation bias was positively correlated with social anxiety symptoms, and positive interpretation bias negatively correlated with social anxiety and depressive symptoms. Inflexible positive interpretations were correlated with higher social anxiety and depressive symptoms, while inflexible negative interpretations were correlated with higher social anxiety. Finally, interpretation inflexibility moderated daily associations between negative interpersonal events and depressive symptoms in daily life, such that higher inflexibility was associated with stronger associations between interpersonal events and subsequent depressive symptoms, potentially increasing depressive symptom instability. These results suggest that interpretation biases and inflexibility may act as both risk and protective factors for adolescent anxiety and depression.

Is Irritability a Top Problem in Youth Mental Health Care? A Multi-informant, Multi-method Investigation.

Irritability is often described as a common problem affecting youth referred for mental health services; however, little is known about the prevalence and nature of irritability as a focus of treatment. We examined assessment data from a diverse sample of youths (N = 206; ages 7-15; 52% male, 48% female; 33% White, 27% Black, 25% Latinx) referred for outpatient treatment of emotional and behavioral concerns. Caregivers and youths completed nomothetic (standardized checklist) and idiographic (free response) measures at intake. Irritability was identified as a top problem (TP) in 58% of cases, commonly reported by caregivers (38%), youths (42%), or both (23%)-rates that were significantly greater than those of other TP domains (depression, anxiety, ADHD, conduct, and defiance). Further analyses identified clinical correlates of irritability TPs, with results supporting the incremental utility of multiple informants and methods. Findings suggest that irritability is among the most common problems for which families seek youth treatment.