Developmental psychopathology is described as a conceptual approach that involves a set of research methods that capitalize on developmental and psychopathological variations to ask questions about mechanisms and processes. Achievements are described in relation to attachment and attachment disorders, autism, schizophrenia, childhood antecedents of adult psychopathology, testing for environmental mediation of risk effects, gene–environment interplay, intellectual and language functioning, effects of mentally ill parents on the children, stress and vulnerability to depression, ethnicity and schizophrenia, and drug response. Continuities and discontinuities over the course of development are discussed in relation to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, antisocial behavior, eating disorders, substance abuse and dependency, pharmacological and behavioral addictions, and a range of other disorders. Research challenges are considered in relation to spectrum concepts, the adolescent development of a female preponderance for depression, the mechanisms involved in age differences in response to drugs and to lateralized brain injury, the processing of experiences, the biological embedding of experiences, individual differences in response to environmental hazards, nature–nurture integration, and brain plasticity.

Progress in the field of developmental psychopathology is appraised in general and with regard to the particular lens of our understanding of the development of disorder. In general, the outpouring of research on various features of disorder and underlying processes could not have even been imagined 25 years ago. The progress is dazzling. At the same time, work on the development of disorders, beginning with antecedent patterns of adaptation, pales in comparison with work on the correlates of disorder. However, progress has been made. It is well established that the brain develops in the context of experience and that organism and environment continually interact over time. Something is now known about pathways leading to certain disorders and what initiates and impels individuals along them. If developmental psychopathology is to completely fulfill its promise of offering new ways of conceptualizing disorder and new guidance for prevention and intervention, much more work on developmental processes and a new way of exploring the development of disorder will be needed. Such a path is suggested.

The disciplines of developmental psychopathology and behavior genetics are concerned with many of the same questions about the etiology and course of normal and abnormal behavior and about the factors that promote typical development despite the presence of risk. The goal of this paper is to summarize how research in behavior genetics has shed light on questions that are central to developmental psychopathology. We briefly review the origins of behavior genetics, summarize the findings that have been gleaned from several decades of quantitative and molecular genetics research, and describe future directions for research that will delineate gene function as well as pathways from genes to brain to behavior. The importance of environmental contributions, at both genetic and epigenetic levels, will be discussed. We conclude that behavior genetics has made significant contributions to developmental psychopathology by documenting the interplay among risk and protective factors at multiple levels of the organism, by clarifying the causal status of risk exposures, and by identifying factors that account for change and stability in psychopathology. As the tools to identify gene function become increasingly sophisticated, and as behavioral geneticists become increasingly interdisciplinary in their scope, the field is poised to make ever greater contributions to our understanding of typical and atypical development.

We provide a theoretical and empirical basis for the claim that individual differences exist in developmental plasticity and that phenotypic plasticity should be a subject of study in its own right. To advance this argument, we begin by highlighting challenges that evolutionary thinking poses for a science of development and psychopathology, including for the diathesis–stress framework that has (fruitfully) guided so much empirical inquiry on developmental risk, resilience, and dysregulation. With this foundation laid, we raise a series of issues that the differential-susceptibility hypothesis calls attention to, while highlighting findings that have emerged over just the past several years and are pertinent to some of the questions posed. Even though it is clear that this new perspective on Person × Environment interaction is stimulating research and influencing how hypotheses are framed and data interpreted, a great many topics remain that need empirical attention. Our intention is to encourage students of development and psychopathology to treat phenotypic plasticity as an individual-difference construct while exploring unknowns in the differential-susceptibility equation.

The momentum of genomic science will carry it far into the future and into the heart of research on typical and atypical behavioral development. The purpose of this paper is to focus on a few implications and applications of these advances for understanding behavioral development. Quantitative genetics is genomic and will chart the course for molecular genomic research now that these two worlds of genetics are merging in the search for many genes of small effect. Although current attempts to identify specific genes have had limited success, known as the missing heritability problem, whole-genome sequencing will improve this situation by identifying all DNA sequence variations, including rare variants. Because the heritability of complex traits is caused by many DNA variants of small effect in the population, polygenic scores that are composites of hundreds or thousands of DNA variants will be used by developmentalists to predict children's genetic risk and resilience. The most far-reaching advance will be the widespread availability of whole-genome sequence for children, which means that developmentalists would no longer need to obtain DNA or to genotype children in order to use genomic information in research or in the clinic.

In the past decade, there have been exciting advances in the field of behavioral epigenetics that have provided new insights into a biological basis of neural and behavioral effects of gene–environment interactions. It is now understood that changes in the activity of genes established through epigenetic alterations occur as a consequence of exposure to environmental adversity, social stress, and traumatic experiences. DNA methylation in particular has thus emerged as a leading candidate biological pathway linking gene–environment interactions to long-term and even multigenerational trajectories in behavioral development, including the vulnerability and resilience to psychopathology. This paper discusses what we have learned from research using animal models and from studies in which the translation of these findings has been made to humans. Studies concerning the significance of DNA methylation alterations in outcomes associated with stress exposure later in life and dysfunction in the form of neuropsychiatric disorders are highlighted, and several avenues of future research are suggested that promise to advance our understanding of epigenetics both as a mechanism by which the environment can contribute to the development of psychiatric disorders and as an avenue for more effective intervention and treatment strategies.

The development of socioemotional functioning is a complex process that occurs over a protracted time period and requires coordinating affective, cognitive, and social faculties. At many points in development, the trajectory of socioemotional development can be deleteriously altered due to a combination of environmental insults and individual vulnerabilities. The result can be psychopathology. However, researchers are just beginning to understand the neural and genetic mechanisms involved in the development of healthy and disordered socioemotional functioning. We propose a translational developmental neuroscience framework to understand the transactional process that results in socioemotional functioning in both healthy and disordered populations. We then apply this framework to healthy socioemotional development, pediatric anxiety, pediatric depression, and autism spectrum disorder, selectively reviewing current literature in light of the framework. Finally, we examine ways that the framework can help to frame future directions of research on socioemotional development and translational implications for intervention.

Developmental psychopathology is not characterized by adherence to one specific theory but instead serves as an organizational framework in which research is driven by a number of key assumptions. In the developmental psychopathology approach, two primary assumptions emphasize the importance of systems thinking and the utility of multilevel analyses. As will be illustrated here, these emphases are inextricably linked: a systems approach necessitates a multilevel approach, such that a level of organization must bring coherence to a level of mechanisms. Given this assumption, coming to an integrative understanding of the relation between levels is of central importance. One broad framework for this endeavor is relational developmental systems, which has been proposed by certain theorists as a new paradigm for developmental science. The implications of embracing this framework include the potential to connect developmental psychopathology with other approaches that emphasize systems thinking and that take an integrative perspective on the problem of levels of analysis.

Since this journal's inception, the field of adolescent brain development has flourished, as researchers have investigated the underpinnings of adolescent risk-taking behaviors. Explanations based on translational models initially attributed such behaviors to executive control deficiencies and poor frontal lobe function. This conclusion was bolstered by evidence that the prefrontal cortex and its interconnections are among the last brain regions to structurally and functionally mature. As substantial heterogeneity of prefrontal function was revealed, applications of neuroeconomic theory to adolescent development led to dual systems models of behavior. Current epidemiological trends, behavioral observations, and functional magnetic resonance imaging based brain activity patterns suggest a quadratic increase in limbically mediated incentive motivation from childhood to adolescence and a decline thereafter. This elevation occurs in the context of immature prefrontal function, so motivational strivings may be difficult to regulate. Theoretical models explain this patterning through brain-based accounts of subcortical–cortical integration, puberty-based models of adolescent sensation seeking, and neurochemical dynamics. Empirically sound tests of these mechanisms, as well as investigations of biology–context interactions, represent the field's most challenging future goals, so that applications to psychopathology can be refined and so that developmental cascades that incorporate neurobiological variables can be modeled.

The endophenotype is central to modern developmental psychopathology studies. It is used in studies seeking to connect the genetic substrates of the panoply of major mental disorders with processes, tapped by laboratory and other assessment measures, in the genotype to a behavior/psychopathology pathway. Proposed originally by Gottesman and Shields (1972; Shields & Gottesman, 1973) 41 years ago, the endophenotype concept has gained widespread traction in psychopathology research since the Gottesman and Gould (2003) review. Other concepts broadly related to the endophenotype notion have also generated discussion in experimental and developmental psychopathology research. One is the intermediate phenotype, a concept proffered as a putative alternative formulation to the endophenotype. Another concept in this intellectual vein is biomarker. The terms endophenotype, intermediate phenotype, and biomarker have often been used interchangeably in the psychiatric literature, yielding conceptual confusion. However, these three terms are not fungible. The recent Research Domain Criteria proposal from the National Institute of Mental Health has emphasized selected underlying processes thought to be of developmental etiologic significance to psychopathology. These selected processes will be the focus of energetic future research efforts, many of which will make use of the endophenotype and biomarker research paradigms. In this context, the concepts of endophenotype, intermediate phenotype, and biomarker are examined critically and contrasted in terms of meaning, intention, clarity, and intellectual history. This analysis favors use of the endophenotype concept in genetically informed laboratory and neuroscience studies of psychopathology. The term intermediate phenotype is perhaps best restricted to its originally defined meaning in genetics. Biomarker is used to denote objectively measured biological antecedents or consequences of normal or pathogenic processes or a physiologic response to a therapeutic intervention.

Research on the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenocortical (HPA) axis has emerged as a vital area within the field of developmental psychopathology in the past 25 years. Extensive animal research has provided knowledge of the substrates and physiological mechanisms that guide development of stress reactivity and regulation using methods that are not feasible in humans. Recent advances in understanding the anatomy and physiology of the HPA axis in humans and its interactions with other stress-mediating systems, including accurate assessment of salivary cortisol, more sophisticated neuroimaging methods, and a variety of genetic analyses, have led to greater knowledge of how psychological and biological processes impact functioning. A growing body of research on HPA axis regulation and reactivity in relation to psychopathology has drawn increased focus on the prenatal period, infancy, and the pubertal transition as potentially sensitive periods of stress system development in children. Theories such as the allostatic load model have guided research by integrating multiple physiological systems and mechanisms by which stress can affect mental and physical health. However, almost none of the prominent theoretical models in stress physiology are truly developmental, and future work must incorporate how systems interact with the environment across the life span in normal and atypical development. Our theoretical advancement will depend on our ability to integrate biological and psychological models. Researchers are increasingly realizing the importance of communication across disciplinary boundaries in order to understand how experiences influence neurobehavioral development. It is important that knowledge gained over the past 25 years has been translated to prevention and treatment interventions, and we look forward to the dissemination of interventions that promote recovery from adversity.

In this paper, I propose a roadmap for the integration of culture in developmental psychopathology. This integration is pressing because culture continues to be somewhat disconnected from theory, research, training, and interventions in developmental psychopathology, thus limiting our understanding of the epigenesis of mental health. I argue that in order to successfully integrate culture into developmental psychopathology, it is crucial to (a) study cultural development, (b) consider both individual-level and social-level cultural processes, (c) examine the interplay between culture and biology, and (d) promote improved and direct cultural assessment. I provide evidence in support of each of these guidelines, present alternative conceptual frameworks, and suggest new lines of research. Hopefully, that these directions will contribute to the emerging field of cultural development and psychopathology, which focuses on the elucidation of the cultural processes that initiate, maintain, or derail trajectories of normal and abnormal behavior.

Although considerable research has examined the relations between parental behavior and a range of child developmental outcomes, much of this work has been conducted at a very broad level of behavioral analysis. A developmental psychopathology framework and recent research conducted within this framework point to the need for models of parenting and child psychopathology that offer greater specificity regarding processes that may be implicated in the effects of these relationships. In addition, recent animal work and some human work has focused more on the proximal biological and social mechanisms through which parenting affects child outcomes. Our conceptualization of parenting effects acknowledges that family and child factors are embedded in a dynamic biological and social context that is key to understanding developmental trajectories of child adjustment. In this paper, we review two areas of research that are illuminating the biological processes underlying links between parenting and child psychopathology: molecular genetics and psychophysiology. We adopt a biopsychosocial perspective on developmental psychopathology that implies that a set of hierarchically organized, but reciprocally interacting, processes, from the genetic to the environmental, provide the essential elements of both normative and nonnormative development (Gottlieb, 2007). New directions stimulated by this general approach are discussed, with an emphasis on the contextual and developmental issues and applications implied by such a perspective.

Attachment theory has been generating creative and impactful research for almost half a century. In this article we focus on the documented antecedents and consequences of individual differences in infant attachment patterns, suggesting topics for further theoretical clarification, research, clinical interventions, and policy applications. We pay particular attention to the concept of cognitive “working models” and to neural and physiological mechanisms through which early attachment experiences contribute to later functioning. We consider adult caregiving behavior that predicts infant attachment patterns, and the still-mysterious “transmission gap” between parental Adult Attachment Interview classifications and infant Strange Situation classifications. We also review connections between attachment and (a) child psychopathology; (b) neurobiology; (c) health and immune function; (d) empathy, compassion, and altruism; (e) school readiness; and (f) culture. We conclude with clinical–translational and public policy applications of attachment research that could reduce the occurrence and maintenance of insecure attachment during infancy and beyond. Our goal is to inspire researchers to continue advancing the field by finding new ways to tackle long-standing questions and by generating and testing novel hypotheses.

Although children's security in the context of the interparental relationship has been identified as a key explanatory mechanism in pathways between family discord and child psychopathology, little is known about the inner workings of emotional security as a goal system. Thus, the objective of this paper is to describe how our reformulation of emotional security theory within an ethological and evolutionary framework may advance the characterization of the architecture and operation of emotional security and, in the process, cultivate sustainable growing points in developmental psychopathology. The first section of the paper describes how children's security in the interparental relationship is organized around a distinctive behavioral system designed to defend against interpersonal threat. Building on this evolutionary foundation for emotional security, the paper offers an innovative taxonomy for identifying qualitatively different ways children try to preserve their security and its innovative implications for more precisely informing understanding of the mechanisms in pathways between family and developmental precursors and children's trajectories of mental health. In the final section, the paper highlights the potential of the reformulation of emotional security theory to stimulate new generations of research on understanding how children defend against social threats in ecologies beyond the interparental dyad, including both familial and extrafamilial settings.

The last 25 years have witnessed tremendous changes in our ability to detect autism very early in life and provide interventions that can significantly influence children's outcomes. It was once questioned whether autism could be recognized before children had developed language and symbolic play skills; now changes in early behaviors, as well as structural brain changes, have been documented in infants 6–12 months of age who later develop autism. Advances in brain imaging and genetics offer the possibility of detecting autism before the syndrome is fully manifest, thereby reducing or preventing symptoms from developing. Whereas the primary mode of behavioral intervention a few decades ago relied on operant conditioning, recent approaches integrate the methods of applied behavioral analysis within a developmental, relationship-focused intervention model that are implemented by both parents and clinicians. These interventions have been found to have positive effects on children's developmental trajectory, as measured by both behavioral and neurophysiological assessments. Future approaches will likely combine both behavioral and pharmacological treatments for children who have less robust responses to behavioral interventions. There has been a paradigm shift in the way that autism is viewed, evolving from a lifelong condition with a very poor prognosis to one in which significant gains and neuroplasticity is expected, especially when the condition is detected early and appropriate interventions are provided. The grand challenge for the future is to bridge the tremendous gap between research and the implementation of evidence-based practices in the broader community, both in the United States and worldwide. Significant disparities in access to appropriate health care for children with autism exist that urgently require advocacy and more resources.

Chronic, severe irritability is common in childhood and is very impairing. Furthermore, childhood irritability predicts suicidality, social impairment, and depressive and anxiety disorders in adulthood. Focusing on both normative and pathologic development, we review the construct of irritability from its origins in aggression and disruptive behavior research to its contemporary relevance for affective psychopathology. We then describe two broad neurocognitive systems that show promise in differentiating irritable from nonirritable youths: aberrant processing of emotional stimuli and impaired context-sensitive regulation. We suggest behavioral, neurocognitive, and physiologic measures that may aid in studying severe irritability and assessing its therapeutics. Finally, we argue for therapeutic trials targeting severe irritability that address emotional aspects of irritability in addition to the associated disruptive behavior.

The domains of self-regulation, self-control, executive function, inattention, and impulsivity cut across broad swathes of normal and abnormal development. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is a common syndrome that encompasses a portion of these domains. In the past 25 years research on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder has been characterized by dramatic advances in genetic, neural, and neuropsychological description of the syndrome as well as clarification of its multidimensional phenotypic structure. The limited clinical applicability of these research findings poses the primary challenge for the next generation. It is likely that clinical breakthroughs will require further refinement in describing heterogeneity or clinical/biological subgroups, renewed focus on the environment in the form of etiological events as well as psychosocial contexts of development, and integration of both with biological understanding.

Research on child and adolescent mental health problems has burgeoned since the inaugural issue of Development and Psychopathology was published in 1989. In the quarter century since, static models of psychopathology have been abandoned in favor of transactional models, following the agenda set by editor Dante Cicchetti and other proponents of the discipline. The transactional approach, which has been applied to autism, depression, self-injury, and delinquency, (a) specifies vulnerabilities and risk factors across multiple levels of analysis spanning genes to cultures, (b) identifies multifinal and equifinal pathways to psychopathology, and (c) transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries. However, as noted by Rutter and Sroufe (2000), specific mechanisms of continuity, discontinuity, and comorbidity of psychopathology must be identified if we wish to understand etiology fully. In this article, we present a model of early-onset externalizing behavior in which comorbidities and continuities are viewed as ontogenic processes: products of complex longitudinal transactions between interdependent individual-level vulnerabilities (e.g., genetic, epigenetic, allostatic) and equally interdependent contextual risk factors (e.g., coercive parenting, deviant peer group affiliations, neighborhood criminality). Through interactions across levels of analysis, some individuals traverse along the externalizing spectrum, beginning with heritable trait impulsivity in preschool and ending in antisociality in adulthood. In describing our model, we note that (a) the approach outlined in the DSM to subtyping externalizing disorders continues to obscure developmental pathways to antisociality, (b) molecular genetics studies will likely not identify meaningful subtypes of externalizing disorder, and (c) ontogenic trait approaches to psychopathology are much more likely to advance the discipline in upcoming years.