Toward a multimodal measurement model for the neurobehavioral trait of affiliative capacity

Abstract

A growing body of research supports the value of a multimodal assessment approach, drawing on measures from different response modalities, for clarifying how core biobehavioral processes relate to various clinical problems and dimensions of psychopathology. Using data for 507 healthy adults, the current study was undertaken to integrate self-report and neurophysiological (brain potential) measures as a step toward a multimodal measurement model for the trait of affiliative capacity (AFF) – a biobehavioral construct relevant to adaptive and maladaptive social-interpersonal functioning. Individuals low in AFF exhibit a lack of interpersonal connectedness, deficient empathy, and an exploitative-aggressive social style that may be expressed transdiagnostically in antagonistic externalizing or distress psychopathology. Specific aims were to (1) integrate trait scale and brain potential indicators into a multimodal measure of AFF and (2) evaluate associations of this multimodal measure with criterion variables of different types. Results demonstrated (1) success in creating a multimodal measure of AFF from self-report and neural indicators, (2) effectiveness of this measure in predicting both clinical-diagnostic and neurophysiological criterion variables, and (3) transdiagnostic utility of the multimodal measure at both specific-disorder and broad symptom-dimension levels. Our findings further illustrate the value of psychoneurometric operationalizations of biobehavioral trait dimensions as referents for clarifying transdiagnostic relationships between biological systems variables and empirically defined dimensions of psychopathology.

Testing for Sex Differences in the Nomological Network of the Triarchic Model of Psychopathy in Incarcerated Individuals

“…Based on the literature, we anticipated that sex would moderate the expression of meanness in particular with regard to distress symptomatology and personality. As meanness involves dysfunction in affective and affiliative systems (Palumbo et al, 2020;Viding & McCrory, 2019), its expression was hypothesized to be influenced by gender norms and females' socialization to be warm and cooperative (Eagly, 2009). Although no Sex x Meanness interaction effects were significant in this sample, some approached significance, with meanness tending to relate more strongly to increases in BHS Lack of Motivation and decreases in DSHI Versatility in females than males.…”

Refining the link between psychopathy, antisocial behavior, and empathy: a meta-analytical approach across different conceptual frameworks

“…Although affective traits of psychopathy share the externalizing etiological pathway with disinhibition-impulsive traits, it is important to highlight that these dimensions correspond to two distinct factors of the externalizing spectrum (Nelson & Foell, 2018). Affective-meanness traits are specifically related with callous-aggression and low affiliative capacity toward others, while disinhibition is framed within the purest externalizing factor (Nelson & Foell, 2018;Palumbo et al, 2020). Affective, callous, and meanness traits can be viewed as an agentic disaffiliation in most interpersonal relations, which is combined with a motivational style in which excitement and empowerment through cruelty are actively pursued without any regard for others .…”

“…For those individuals high in affective-meanness traits, exploitation is the primary mean of relating, including by deceit and coercion. They tend to resort to intimidation to control others in a context of emotional coolness and indifference and to exhibit a callous pattern of aggression that is more predatory, premeditated, and instrumental in nature (Paiva et al, 2020a;Palumbo et al, 2020;van Dongen et al, 2017).…”

Connecting quantitatively derived personality–psychopathology models and neuroscience

“…The articles included in this special issue offer excellent examples of research on the interrelations between neural systems and quantitative, dimensional models of personality-psychopathology. Empirical studies in this issue used a variety of neuroscientific methodologies, spanning functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI; Hyatt et al, 2020;Neumann, 2020;Sun et al, 2020;Weiss et al, 2021), electrophysiology (event-related potentials [ERPs]; Palumbo et al, 2020;Suzuki, Novak, Ait Oumeziane, Foti, & Samuel, 2020), positron emission tomography (PET; Gerritsen et al, 2020), and structural neuroimaging (Lahey et al, 2020). A number of quantitative methodologies were also employed, including structural equation modeling (SEM; e.g., Neumann, 2020) and "psychoneurometric" operationalizations (e.g., Palumbo et al, 2020).…”

“…Empirical studies in this issue used a variety of neuroscientific methodologies, spanning functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI; Hyatt et al, 2020;Neumann, 2020;Sun et al, 2020;Weiss et al, 2021), electrophysiology (event-related potentials [ERPs]; Palumbo et al, 2020;Suzuki, Novak, Ait Oumeziane, Foti, & Samuel, 2020), positron emission tomography (PET; Gerritsen et al, 2020), and structural neuroimaging (Lahey et al, 2020). A number of quantitative methodologies were also employed, including structural equation modeling (SEM; e.g., Neumann, 2020) and "psychoneurometric" operationalizations (e.g., Palumbo et al, 2020). Given the different strengths and weaknesses of various individual analytic approaches used in the literature, these articles highlight the power of triangulating evidence from multiple neuroscience and quantitative methods for uncovering the neurobiological bases of the personality-psychopathology continuum.…”