Poster #37 - Emotion Dysregulation in Young Children with and without Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: The Role of Comorbid Conduct Problems

• In Event: Poster Session 14

Abstract

Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have deficits across self-regulation skills, including emotion regulation (Shaw et al., 2014). Emotion dysregulation (ED) occurs when an individual has difficulty exercising any or all aspects of the ER process which results in the individual functioning below his/her baseline and failing to meet situational goals (Bunford et al., 2015). Children with ADHD who are emotionally dysregulated can be described as being emotionally impulsive, have difficulty regulating their emotions, and can even display inappropriate emotions or moods (Bunford et al., 2015). Given the heterogeneity in ED-related impairments exhibited by children with ADHD, four levels of ED have been identified to better understand these deficits (Graziano & Garcia, 2016): emotion recognition/understanding (ERU), emotional reactivity/negativity/lability (ERNL), emotion regulation (EREG) and callous-unemotional (CU) behaviors/traits. The current study examined the differences in these ED dimensions as it relates to the diagnosis of ADHD and comorbid conduct problems (CP) among young children. The final sample consisted of 322 young children (Mage = 5.47, SD = 0.77; 81.4% Latinx) with the following group composition: ADHD-Only (n = 46), ADHD+CP (n = 129), and Typically Developing (TD; n = 147). Diagnostic status was assessed through a combination of parent structured interview (Shaffer et. al, 2000) and parent/ teacher ratings (Fabiano et al., 2006). ERU was measured via an emotion knowledge task (Denham, 1986). ERNL and EREG were assessed through behavioral coding during two frustration tasks (Goldsmith & Rothbart, 1996). CU was measured via parent/teacher ratings (Frick, 2004).

As seen in Table 1 and Figure 1, a MANCOVA controlling for child age, sex and IQ was conducted to compare diagnostic groups on the ED domains. Within the ERU domain, there was a significant difference between TD and ADHD+CP, such that TD children performed better on the ERU task relative to ADHD+CP (Cohen’s d = 0.38, p < .01), but not ADHD-Only. Within the ERNL domain, there was only a significant difference between TD and ADHD-Only, such that children in the ADHD-Only group were more labile than the TD group (d = 0.41, p < .05), but not the ADHD+CP group. Within the EREG domain, TD children displayed better EREG strategies than ADHD-Only (d = 0.48, p < .05), and ADHD+CP (d = 0.59, p < .001). Lastly, there were significant group differences within the CU domain. Children in the ADHD+CP group were rated as having the highest levels of CU behaviors compared to children in the ADHD-Only (d = 0.98, p <.001) and TD groups (d = 1.65, p < .001). Additionally, children in the ADHD-Only were rated as having higher levels of CU behaviors compared to children in the TD group (d = 0.68, p < .001). The current study clarifies domain specific ED problems among children with ADHD relative to TD children. While children with ADHD-Only show deficits in most ED domains compared to TD children, comorbid CP seems to exacerbate ED problems within ERU, EREG and CU domains, but not ERNL.

Authors

• Melissa Lynn Hernandez, Florida International University
  Presenting Author

• Madeline Curzon, Florida International University

• Luisa Maria Bermeo, Florida Internatioal University

• Anthony Steven Dick, Florida International University

• Paulo A Graziano, Florida International University