Dynamic systems methods for models of developmental psychopathology

Abstract

A survey of dynamic systems (DS) methods appropriate for testing systems-based models in developmental psychopathology is provided. The rationale for developing new methods for the field is reviewed first. In line with other scholars, we highlight the fundamental incompatibility between developmentalists' organismic, open systems models and the mechanistic research methods with which these models are tested. Key DS principles are explained and their commensurability with developmental psychopathologists' core theoretical concerns are discussed. Next, a survey of research designs and methodological techniques currently being used and refined by developmental DS researchers is provided. The strengths and limitations of each approach are discussed throughout this review. Finally, we elaborate on one specific dynamic systems method, state space grids, which addresses many of the limitations of previous DS techniques and may prove most useful for the discipline. This approach was developed as a middle road between DS methods that are mathematically heavy on the one hand and purely descriptive on the other. Examples of developmental and clinical studies that have applied state space grids are reviewed and suggestions for future analyses are made. We conclude with some implications for the application of this new methodology for studying change processes in clinical research.

Toward an integration of family systems and developmental psychopathology approaches

“…perspectives are regarded as operating within open systems. In open systems, functioning is conceptualized as an ongoing transactional interplay between an active changing organism in a dynamic changing context~Cicchetti, 1993; Cicchetti & Tucker, 1994;Granic & Hollenstein, 2003;S. Minuchin & Fishman, 1981!. Given the interdependency among components in an open system, holism is accepted as a basic principle in each approach.…”

Perceived criticism: Associations with perceiver characteristics and interpersonal behaviour

“…While this may seem a daunting mission indeed, recent developments in the methodology of the dynamic systems approach (e.g. Granic and Hollenstein, 2003;Granic, 2005) might help to make the enterprise both feasible and rewarding.…”

Client's immersed and distanced speech and therapist's interventions in emotion-focused therapy for depression: an intensive analysis of a case study

“…Additionally, as a SSG allows representing the temporal evolution of the dyadic exchange, each line and arrow between circles (and cells) depicts the trajectory and the succession of exchanges, given the direction from one interaction to another. Finally, the hollow circle represents the first behavior occurrence in the session (Granic & Hollenstein, 2003;Hollenstein, 2007Hollenstein, , 2015Ribeiro et al, 2011). To specify with an example, a dyad may start a session with an exploratory intervention from the therapist how are you today?, followed by a client attributive statement I'm sad (depicted by a hollow circle in a cell that intersects therapist exploratory intervention and client attributive statement) and then, in the next turntaking, the therapist can use an action intervention let's talk about it.…”