No abstract

The aim of this multi-informant twin study was to determine the relative role of genetic and environmental factors in explaining variation in trait resilience in adolescents. Participants were consenting families (N = 2,638 twins in 1,394 families), from seven national cohorts (age 12–18 years, both sexes) of monozygotic and dizygotic twins reared together. Questionnaire data on the adolescents’ Ego-resilience (ER89) was collected from mothers, fathers and twins, and analysed by means of multivariate genetic modelling. Variance in trait resilience was best represented in an ADE common pathways model with sex limitation. Variance in the latent psychometric resilience factor was largely explained by additive genetic factors (77% in boys, 70% in girls), with the remaining variance (23 and 30%) attributable to non-shared environmental factors. Additive genetic sources explained more than 50% of the informant specific variation in mothers and fathers scores. In twins, additive and non-additive genetic factors together explained 40% and non-shared environmental factor the remaining 60% of variation. In the mothers’ scores, the additive genetic effect was larger for boys than for girls. The non-additive genetic factor found in the twins’ self ratings was larger in boys than in girls. The remaining sex differences in the specific factors were small. Trait resilience is largely genetically determined. Estimates based on several informants rather than single informants approaches are recommended.

Objective: To examine the effectiveness of a transdiagnostic program (i.e., EMOTION) targeting symptoms of anxiety and depression in school children by comparing the intervention condition (EC) to a control condition (CC). Method: A clustered randomized design was used with schools as the unit of randomization. Children (N = 1,686) aged 8-12 years in 36 schools completed screening using the Multidimensional Anxiety Scale (MASC-C) and The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire Short version (SMFQ). Scoring 1 SD above a population-based mean on anxiety and/or depression, 873 children were invited to participate. Intent-to-treat analyses were performed, and mixed effects models were used. Results: Analyses revealed significant reductions of anxious and depressive symptoms as reported by the children, where children in the intervention condition EC had almost twice the reduction in symptoms compared to the control condition CC. For parent report of the child's depressive symptoms, there was a significant decrease of symptoms in the intervention condition EC compared to CC. However, parents did not report a significant decrease in anxious symptoms in the intervention condition EC as compared to CC. Conclusion: A transdiagnostic prevention program, provided in schools, was successful in reducing youth-reported symptoms of anxiety and depression, and parent-reported depression. The EMOTION program has the potential to reduce the incidence of anxious and depressive disorders in youth.

This study's aim was to determine whether resilience scales could predict adjustment over and above that predicted by the five-factor model (FFM). A sample of 1,345 adolescents completed paper-and-pencil scales on FFM personality (Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children), resilience (Ego-Resiliency Scale [ER89] by Block & Kremen, the Resilience Scale [RS] by Wagnild & Young) and adaptive behaviors (California Healthy Kids Survey, UCLA Loneliness Scale and three measures of school adaptation). The results showed that the FFM scales accounted for the highest proportion of variance in disturbance. For adaptation, the resilience scales contributed as much as the FFM. In no case did the resilience scales outperform the FFM by increasing the explained variance. The results challenge the validity of the resilience concept as an indicator of human adaptation and avoidance of disturbance, although the concept may have heuristic value in combining favorable aspects of a person's personality endowment.

In two studies, we examined the genetic and environmental sources of the unfolding of personality trait differences from childhood to emerging adulthood. Using self-reports from over 3000 representative German twin pairs of three birth cohorts, we could replicate previous findings on the primary role of genetic sources accounting for the unfolding of inter-individual differences in personality traits and stabilizing trait differences during adolescence. More specifically, the genetic variance increased between early (ages 10-12 years) and late (ages 16-18 years) adolescence and stabilized between late adolescence and young adulthood (ages 21-25 years). This trend could be confirmed in a second three-wave longitudinal study of adolescents' personality self-reports and parent ratings from about 1400 Norwegian twin families (average ages between 15 and 20 years). Moreover, the longitudinal study provided evidence for increasing genetic differences being primarily due to accumulation of novel genetic influences instead of an amplification of initial genetic variation. This is in line with cumulative interaction effects between twins' correlated genetic makeups and environmental circumstances shared by adolescent twins reared together. In other words, nature × nurture interactions rather than transactions can account for increases in genetic variance and thus personality variance during adolescence.