Babel’s preschool teacher told his mother that his behavior will no longer be tolerated and recommended that he be assessed. His teacher explains his behaviors In class as “defiant and disruptive. Almost daily, he actively ignores class rules, such as not talking during reading time, and becomes even more defiant when his violations are addressed by the teacher. His teacher has paused class multiple times to stop him from distracting either the whole class or individual students. She ports that the most troublesome aspects of Babel’s behavior are the frequency of the disruptions and his responses to being reprimanded. Once, when a classmate Went to the teacher after Able ignored her plea that he stop poking her arm, Able became outwardly more motivated to continue poking her relentlessly.
When his teacher explained why his behavior is unacceptable, Able accused the classmate that he had been poking of initiating the incident and provoking him by being “annoying. ” Babel’s teacher reports that he has yet to accept blame or responsibility for any of his misdoings and that he is often ostracizes by his peers. Classmates have called him “annoying’ and ” a tattle-tale. ” Teachers discourage this taunting behavior, but the discrimination has led to further emotional distress within Able which has been exhibited by more frequent moods of frustration and irritability at home (PAP, 2013).
Babel’s behavior has been extremely distressing at home and in school over a duration Of at least eight months, but has not presented a problem elsewhere thus far. His teacher has felt stress due to her inability to get him to obey rules, a lack of time to address his disruptions, and phone calls from parents whose children claim to have en harassed in some way by Abe’. His sister has become distraught over his behavior and his mother has been put under enormous pressure to maintain a trustworthy and reliable nanny.
Due to the duration of his irritable, defiant, and occasionally vindictive behaviors, which have occurred at home and at school, have had negative consequences in his academic, social, and emotional functioning, and have caused distress for several people in his life, Able has been diagnosed with Oppositional Defiant Disorder of a moderate severity. Babel’s defiant, argumentative, and vindictive homonyms put him at risk for developing Conduct Disorder, and his increasing emotional distress due to peer issues at school increases his risk Of developing an emotional disorder (PAP 2013).
Recent research of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is characterized by the emergence of two themes: developmental precursors to the disorder and the dimension of irritability. The study of precursors to ODD are discussed by Dominion and Malta (2013) in their research study which examines the relations between interpretative understanding moral emotional attribution, and sympathy with the ability to predict ODD symptoms.
Burke, Babylon, Rowe, Duke, Steep, Hippies, and Walden (2014) discuss varying dimensionality models of ODD, the identification of irritability by certain symptoms, and the implications of the results for further research on ODD. Dominion and Malta (2013) suggest that the limited success of current ODD treatments may be attributed to the lack of empirical research on the disorders developmental antecedents. Their research responds to this insufficiency by assessing supposed key components in the genesis of antisocial behaviors: social-cognitive development and moral emotions (Dominion & Malta, 2013).
The study analyzes sample of 128 four- and eight-year-old children with ODD and investigates the links been the symptoms of ODD and interpretative understanding, or theory of mind skills, in children (Dominion & Malta, 2013). The research of Dominion and Malta (2013) also analyzes ODD symptoms in relation to sympathy and moral emotion attribution (MEA), and examines the mediating role that each of these may have on each others’ development. The participants of the study include 1 28 English-speaking children and one caregiver each parent assessments (Dominion & Malta, 2013).
The only exclusion criterion is a child tit autism spectrum disorder, and the ethnicities of the participants vary (Dominion & Malta, 2013). Symptoms of ODD in the children are rated by caregivers using ADSM-oriented scales, interpretive understanding ratings are obtained by professionals using the Landed and Chandler’s puppet activity, sympathy is measured by caregiver and child self-reports, and MEA is evaluated using each child’s negative or positive responses to the presentation Of hypothetical vignettes of varying lapses in morality (Dominion & Malta, 2013).
The procedure of the research study involved each child and heir caregiver attending one session at the research lab, the parent providing written consent and the child providing oral agreement, and the child being interviewed for a duration of approximately forty-five minutes by psychology undergraduate students (Dominion & Malta, 2013). The caregiver for each child filled out the symptom questionnaires outside of the interview room during the process (Dominion & Malta, 2013). Dominion and Malta (2013) find that interpretive understanding sympathy, and MEA all influence ODD symptoms.
Ratings of child sympathy by the caregivers play a mediating role on the effect f interpretive understanding on ODD symptoms, and MEA strength significantly influences interpretative understanding in the domain of rule violation (Dominion & Malta, 2013). The research of Dominion and Malta (2013) indicates the necessity Of further research on social-cognitive and affective- moral factors that could potentially precede ODD and help with early prediction, and highlights a possible origin of the rule-violating behavior so prevalent in Babel’s case as a deficit in MEA.
Recent research on ODD also focuses on the importance of irritability and on reaching a consensus guarding which symptoms best identify irritability (Burke et al. , 2014). Burke et al. (2014) introduces the study by explaining how existing data purports that symptoms of ODD represent a unidirectional assembly and are distinct from those of other disorders. Recently, studies have found conflicting evidence regarding the dimensions ODD symptoms are categorized by, which questions the reliability of assessment using the existing ODD model (Burke et al. 2014). Also, inconsistencies exist concerning which symptoms of ODD comprise which dimensions (Burke et al. , 2014). Burke et al. (2014) suggests hat a factor model of the disorder may help solve these conflicts surrounding the concept of diagnostic irritability. The study tests single and multi-dimensional models of ODD including factor and competing models, analyzes various elements of measurement within symptoms, and aims to identify the extent to which specific dimensions relate to each other and general ODD symptoms (Burke et al. 2014). The study also attempts to determine if there is a distinguishing dimension Of irritability within ODD, if one model of ODD is superior to all other models, and if there is an additional general dimension of ODD (Burke et al. 2014). ODD symptom data of five community samples of five- to eighteen-year-old boys and girls is evaluated by Burke et. Al (2014) using assorted measurement scales and care-giver reports.
Methods of assessing symptom presence, frequency, and severity are the Revised Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children, Parent Version, Child Symptom Inventory-4, Child and Adolescent Psychopathology Scale, Developmental and Well-Being Assessment, and Emory Diagnostic Rating Scale (Burke et al. , 2014). The data is analyzed using five models of ODD dimensionality and two models of irritability, which identify irritability as either touchy, angry, and spiteful, or touchy, angry, and frequent loss Of temper (Burke et al. 2014). Burke el al. (2014) concludes that the best model for symptoms of ODD is a general factor model in which irritability and oppositional behavior factors exist alongside a general ODD factor, and in which irritability and oppositional behaviors significantly correlate with each other (Burke et al. , 2014). This model is consistently better across multiple samples and is made up of eight general ODD items, each correlated with either an irritability or an oppositional behavioral dimension (Burke et. ‘, 2014).