Profiles of autonomic stress responsivity in a sample of justice-involved youth: Associations with childhood trauma exposure and emotional and behavioral functioning.

A limited number of studies have begun to investigate how the coordinated actions of distinct physiological systems may be related to the development of psychopathology. However, the form taken by these patterns of coordination as well as their antecedents and developmental implications remain to be clarified. The Adaptive Calibration Model (ACM) proposes four prototypical patterns of physiological stress responsivity and corresponding behavioral patterns, which are further tied to varying levels of childhood adversity. The current study is among the first to investigate whether patterns of sympathetic and parasympathetic stress responsivity predicted by the ACM generalize to a sample of justice-involved youth with disproportionately high rates of childhood trauma exposure. Psychophysiological and self-report data were collected from 822 justice-involved youth (182 girls) ages 12-19 years. Latent profile analyses yielded five profiles of physiological responsivity that largely corresponded to the patterns proposed by the ACM. Further, these profiles demonstrated predicted associations with self-reported emotionality and adjustment. Trauma exposure was associated with a lower likelihood of membership in one of the profiles showing blunted physiological responsivity. Our discussion highlights ways in which insights from the ACM may inform understanding about linkages between physiology and adjustment.

Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency.

Beginning January 2014, Psychological Science gave authors the opportunity to signal open data and materials if they qualified for badges that accompanied published articles. Before badges, less than 3% of Psychological Science articles reported open data. After badges, 23% reported open data, with an accelerating trend; 39% reported open data in the first half of 2015, an increase of more than an order of magnitude from baseline. There was no change over time in the low rates of data sharing among comparison journals. Moreover, reporting openness does not guarantee openness. When badges were earned, reportedly available data were more likely to be actually available, correct, usable, and complete than when badges were not earned. Open materials also increased to a weaker degree, and there was more variability among comparison journals. Badges are simple, effective signals to promote open practices and improve preservation of data and materials by using independent repositories.

To Trust is to Survive: Toward a Developmental Model of Moral Injury.

Research on trauma- and stressor-related disorders has recently expanded to consider moral injury, or the harmful psychological impact of profound moral transgressions, betrayals, and acts of perpetration. Largely studied among military populations, this construct has rarely been empirically extended to children and adolescents despite its relevance in the early years, as well as youths' potentially heightened susceptibility to moral injury due to ongoing moral development and limited social resources relative to adults. Application of the construct to young persons, however, requires theoretical reconceptualization from a developmental perspective. The present paper brings together theory and research on developmentally-oriented constructs involving morally injurious events, including attachment trauma, betrayal trauma, and perpetration-induced traumatic stress, and describes how they may be integrated and extended to inform a developmentally-informed model of moral injury. Features of such a model include identification of potentially morally injurious events, maladaptive developmental meaning-making processes that underlie moral injury, as well as behavioral and emotional indicators of moral injury among youth. Thus, this review summarizes the currently available developmental literatures, identifies the major implications of each to a developmentally-informed construct of moral injury, and presents a conceptual developmental model of moral injury for children and adolescents to guide future empirical research.

Estimating the Prevalence of Transparency and Reproducibility-Related Research Practices in Psychology (2014-2017).

Psychologists are navigating an unprecedented period of introspection about the credibility and utility of their discipline. Reform initiatives emphasize the benefits of transparency and reproducibility-related research practices; however, adoption across the psychology literature is unknown. Estimating the prevalence of such practices will help to gauge the collective impact of reform initiatives, track progress over time, and calibrate future efforts. To this end, we manually examined a random sample of 250 psychology articles published between 2014 and 2017. Over half of the articles were publicly available (154/237, 65%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [59%, 71%]); however, sharing of research materials (26/183; 14%, 95% CI = [10%, 19%]), study protocols (0/188; 0%, 95% CI = [0%, 1%]), raw data (4/188; 2%, 95% CI = [1%, 4%]), and analysis scripts (1/188; 1%, 95% CI = [0%, 1%]) was rare. Preregistration was also uncommon (5/188; 3%, 95% CI = [1%, 5%]). Many articles included a funding disclosure statement (142/228; 62%, 95% CI = [56%, 69%]), but conflict-of-interest statements were less common (88/228; 39%, 95% CI = [32%, 45%]). Replication studies were rare (10/188; 5%, 95% CI = [3%, 8%]), and few studies were included in systematic reviews (21/183; 11%, 95% CI = [8%, 16%]) or meta-analyses (12/183; 7%, 95% CI = [4%, 10%]). Overall, the results suggest that transparency and reproducibility-related research practices were far from routine. These findings establish baseline prevalence estimates against which future progress toward increasing the credibility and utility of psychology research can be compared.

A network analysis of posttraumatic stress disorder and dissociation in trauma-exposed adolescents.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and dissociation have long been recognized to co-occur, leading the DSM-5 to introduce a dissociative subtype of PTSD into its nomenclature. Most research to date on the dissociative subtype has focused on adults. The current study aimed to extend this research to an adolescent sample and to examine symptom-level associations between PTSD and dissociation using network analysis. The analysis was conducted with 448 trauma-exposed detained US adolescents (24.55% female; mean age 15.98 ± 1.25 years). A network consisting of 20 DSM-5 PTSD symptoms was constructed, followed by a network consisting of 20 PTSD symptoms and five dissociative items. Expected influence bridge centrality was estimated to examine items with the most/strongest cross-construct connections (i.e. between PTSD and dissociation). The PTSD symptoms concentration problems, amnesia and recurrent memories and the dissociative items depersonalization, derealisation and can't remember things that happened had the highest bridge centrality values. These symptom-level associations extend our understanding of the PTSD-dissociation relationship by pointing to specific symptoms of PTSD and dissociation that may drive the co-morbidity between the two constructs. These findings may inform future intervention efforts.

An empirical assessment of transparency and reproducibility-related research practices in the social sciences (2014-2017).

Serious concerns about research quality have catalysed a number of reform initiatives intended to improve transparency and reproducibility and thus facilitate self-correction, increase efficiency and enhance research credibility. Meta-research has evaluated the merits of some individual initiatives; however, this may not capture broader trends reflecting the cumulative contribution of these efforts. In this study, we manually examined a random sample of 250 articles in order to estimate the prevalence of a range of transparency and reproducibility-related indicators in the social sciences literature published between 2014 and 2017. Few articles indicated availability of materials (16/151, 11% [95% confidence interval, 7% to 16%]), protocols (0/156, 0% [0% to 1%]), raw data (11/156, 7% [2% to 13%]) or analysis scripts (2/156, 1% [0% to 3%]), and no studies were pre-registered (0/156, 0% [0% to 1%]). Some articles explicitly disclosed funding sources (or lack of; 74/236, 31% [25% to 37%]) and some declared no conflicts of interest (36/236, 15% [11% to 20%]). Replication studies were rare (2/156, 1% [0% to 3%]). Few studies were included in evidence synthesis via systematic review (17/151, 11% [7% to 16%]) or meta-analysis (2/151, 1% [0% to 3%]). Less than half the articles were publicly available (101/250, 40% [34% to 47%]). Minimal adoption of transparency and reproducibility-related research practices could be undermining the credibility and efficiency of social science research. The present study establishes a baseline that can be revisited in the future to assess progress.

Scientific Utopia III: Crowdsourcing Science.

Most scientific research is conducted by small teams of investigators who together formulate hypotheses, collect data, conduct analyses, and report novel findings. These teams operate independently as vertically integrated silos. Here we argue that scientific research that is horizontally distributed can provide substantial complementary value, aiming to maximize available resources, promote inclusiveness and transparency, and increase rigor and reliability. This alternative approach enables researchers to tackle ambitious projects that would not be possible under the standard model. Crowdsourced scientific initiatives vary in the degree of communication between project members from largely independent work curated by a coordination team to crowd collaboration on shared activities. The potential benefits and challenges of large-scale collaboration span the entire research process: ideation, study design, data collection, data analysis, reporting, and peer review. Complementing traditional small science with crowdsourced approaches can accelerate the progress of science and improve the quality of scientific research.

Data availability, reusability, and analytic reproducibility: evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal Cognition.

Access to data is a critical feature of an efficient, progressive and ultimately self-correcting scientific ecosystem. But the extent to which in-principle benefits of data sharing are realized in practice is unclear. Crucially, it is largely unknown whether published findings can be reproduced by repeating reported analyses upon shared data ('analytic reproducibility'). To investigate this, we conducted an observational evaluation of a mandatory open data policy introduced at the journal Cognition. Interrupted time-series analyses indicated a substantial post-policy increase in data available statements (104/417, 25% pre-policy to 136/174, 78% post-policy), although not all data appeared reusable (23/104, 22% pre-policy to 85/136, 62%, post-policy). For 35 of the articles determined to have reusable data, we attempted to reproduce 1324 target values. Ultimately, 64 values could not be reproduced within a 10% margin of error. For 22 articles all target values were reproduced, but 11 of these required author assistance. For 13 articles at least one value could not be reproduced despite author assistance. Importantly, there were no clear indications that original conclusions were seriously impacted. Mandatory open data policies can increase the frequency and quality of data sharing. However, suboptimal data curation, unclear analysis specification and reporting errors can impede analytic reproducibility, undermining the utility of data sharing and the credibility of scientific findings.