JCCAP FDF/2019

Future Directions Address 1: "Future Directions in Adversity and Mental Health"
Presented by Kate McLaughlin, Ph.D.

Description
Research has shown that experiences of childhood adversity are more common than previously thought among children in the US. Furthermore, children who have experienced more than six instances of childhood adversity are five times more likely than their peers to develop at least one clinical manifestation of psychopathology by adulthood. Yet, many current approaches to child psychopathology have a tendency to lump vastly different experiences of adversity together - a practice that has likely served to further complicate efforts to identify an underlying neurological mechanism linking childhood adversity and trauma.

In her address, McLaughlin identifies level of threat and level of deprivation as two distinct contextual axes of childhood adversity, influencing underlying neurological mechanisms and eventual manifestation of psychopathology in distinctly different ways.

The threat exposure axis pertains to the harm or threat of harm that a child may experience during their developmental years. As McLaughlin discusses, threat exposure influences neural systems involved in fear learning and salience processing. This adaptive response to growing up in a dangerous environment can be essential for the child’s survival in the short term, but as children grow up these changes can result in increased emotional reactivity and poor emotion regulation. McLaughlin details how her lab used brain maps to identify and track possible neurological mechanisms that explain a significant portion of the relationship between childhood trauma and the general psychopathology (p) factor.

Pulling in additional lab data, McLaughlin explains that sustained childhood exposure to threat results in children having a harder time distinguishing between what is safe and what is dangerous, and likely perceiving a broader set of stimuli to be potentially dangerous compared to children who have never experienced trauma. McLaughlin states that a key additional implication of this data is that the poor cross talk between the amygdala and hippocampus that occurs as a result of trauma serves as a direct predictor of higher levels of psychopathology across the board.

McLaughlin then shifts the focus of her discussion to discuss possible mechanisms linking the p factor and deprivation during key developmental years. McLaughlin begins by stating that children with inadequate exposure to caregivers are not exposed to many of the stimuli necessary for optimal learning and development, including language, nurturing, and complex interpersonal stimulation. It is hypothesized that the result of this deprivation is an exaggerated experience of synaptic pruning, wherein unused neural circuits are destroyed. While synaptic pruning is an important component of neural development, exaggerated synaptic pruning can lead to a dramatic reduction in the density of areas of the brain relating to language processing, social cognition, attention, executive function, and working memory, describing how these data apply to children growing up in poverty in the US.

Watch the YouTube video recording of the address here.

Future Directions Address 2: "Future Directions in Mediators of Treatment"
Presented by Philip Kendall, Ph.D.

Description
How do psychological therapies work? How can we enhance treatment to improve outcomes? Questions of mediation lie at the heart of these inquiries. In this address, Dr. Philip Kendall delineates some of the issues confronting tests of treatment mediation in youth mental health and suggests future directions in research on addressing these issues.

Kendall begins his address by defining predictors, moderators, and mediators within the context of clinical psychology. In contrast to both predictors and moderators, a mediator is a variable that has implications for possible mechanisms. A change in a mediating variable will tell you something about the possible mechanism of change in outcome. Importantly, mediators have temporal precedence and can help explain observed outcomes within a clinical or experimental setting. As Kendall points out, there are very few instances of mediation in child and adolescent outcome studies. In order to identify a mediating variable, one has to test each possible variable in order to understand all of the potential mediating factors. Additionally, there is a need for full temporal precedence in measurement and identification of a mediator. In identification and analysis of mediating variables, weekly study is ideal. However, surveying participants at such a high frequency over the course of a trial can be challenging, since responses tend to decrease in complexity and frequency over time if a significant incentive is not offered. Because of this tendency, psychologists must balance the intrusive quality of such measurements against the minimum amount of inquiries necessary to properly identify and examine a mediating variable. As Kendall mentions, burst-style surveying presents a possible solution to upholding this balance.

Kendall discusses in detail the limitations of prior group-based approaches, pointing out the dangers of assuming that change over time is equivalent across participants, that change occurs as a result of the same mechanism, and that change is linear. Kendall emphasizes the need for more frequent measurement in mediator analysis, highlighting the use of dynamical systems approaches to test potential mechanisms of mediation.

Kendall concludes his discussion by touching on several potential novel study designs to best facilitate medication, emphasizing Bayesian approaches. To summarize his discussion, Kendall leaves the audience with several mechanisms of incorporating mediation analysis into their research: implementing high-frequency data collection methods, establishing temporal precedence, and considering the use of person-centered approaches.

Watch the YouTube video recording of the address here.

Future Directions Address 3: "Future Directions in Immunology and Mental Health"
Presented by Greg Miller, Ph.D.

Description
An established body of research has identified significant disparities in health outcomes between racial and ethnic groups, patterning linearly by socioeconomic status (SES). These disparities start early in life, continue throughout the life course, and cannot be explained by genetics, lifestyle choices, or lack of access to healthcare alone.

In this address, Miller seeks to identify both the biological mechanisms linking childhood disadvantage with risk for health problems across the lifespan, as well as potential protective/vulnerability factors that could be used to assess health risk, with the end goal of using these results to inform better policy and practice.

Miller begins by conceptualizing the immune system as a key interface between the social environment and physical/mental health. In his discussion of the immune interface, Miller places special focus on non-resolving, low-grade inflammation as an identified underlying factor in many chronic health conditions that pattern by SES.

As Miller explains, childhood socioeconomic disadvantages put kids at greater risk of negative social and physical exposures. These experiences profoundly shape our our brains develop, and how our brain/body system learns to engage with stressors. Kids who live in low SES environments display an exaggerated immune response compared with their peers. This exaggerated immune response hangs around in stem and progenitor cells, perpetuating a cycle of negative health outcomes throughout the lifespan.

However, as Miller notes, having a nurturing mother has been shown to almost completely negate the pro-inflammatory effects of SES, pointing toward a great potential for parenting interventions to stop this pro-inflammatory cycle. Starting as early as pregnancy, Miller discusses multiple novel horizons for parenting and child development interventions focused on decreasing the gap in health outcomes by racial/ethnic groups and SES.

Watch the YouTube video recording of the address here.

Future Directions Address 4: "Future Directions in Parent-Child Separation"
 Presented by Kathryn Humphreys, Ph.D.

Description
Modern societies have long since struggled to understand how to best provide care for orphaned/neglected children. As issues involving child/caregiver separation become increasingly present in the political and cultural spotlight amidst immigration debates, the relationship between early childhood adversity by way of neglect and later manifestation of psychopathology has become especially relevant.

As Humphreys emphasizes, the presence of a nurturing relationship between a caregiver and a child is absolutely essential for normal development. In almost every domain of psychopathology there exists a correlation between early live separation/neglect and later risk of psychiatric illness, suggesting that there is something about the caregiver/child separation itself that is traumatizing.

Throughout her discussion, Humphreys incorporates data to back up her claim that children who are separated from their caregivers (such as immigrants at the US/Mexico border) are hit with a "double whammy" of trauma, both from losing the presence of a committed caregiver, and from having to navigate adverse conditions without the presence of that caregiver. Pre- and post-separation adverse experiences can compound the effect of this double trauma, leading to increased rates of attachment disorders, internalizing/externalizing disorders, and callous-unemotional traits in these children.

Given the importance of attachment processes in early life, Humphreys discusses how timing and sensitive developmental periods may be particularly relevant in the study of parent-child separations. In addition to discussing multiple neurological mechanisms of stress stemming from neglect, Humphreys frames adolescence as a second sensitive period in development, in addition to the first five years of life. As Humphreys explains, the plasticity associated with adolescence, taken in conjunction with the face that development does not end with infancy, points to the potential for interventions focused on building healthy caregiver/child relationships during adolescence and late childhood to impact the later physical and mental health of children who experienced early-live neglect in a positive manner.

Watch the YouTube video recording of the address here.

Strategies for Improving Writing Clarity
Presented by Andres De Los Reyes, Ph.D.

Description
People tend to be drawn to and understand information best when it is communicated to them in the form of a narrative or “story” rather than a list of facts. However, researchers rarely receive formal training on leveraging narrative tools when writing about their academic work. In this workshop, Dr. Andres De Los Reyes describes evidence-based strategies for consistently applying narrative structure to academic work, with a focus on preparing manuscripts for submission to peer-reviewed academic journals. This includes his description of the and-but-therefore approach to writing and how this narrative structure can be utilized in academic writing as a way to make scientific information more interesting to consume and memorable to the audience.

Job Options in Academia
Presented by Susan White, Ph.D and Matthew Lerner, Ph.D. 

Description
Graduate training in fields relevant to child and adolescent mental health (e.g., Education, Psychiatry, Psychology, and Social Work) prepares trainees for careers in a variety of policy, research, and practice settings. While there are many options one can take with a career in mental health, academic jobs are among the most common and include traditional academic settings such as R1 research universities and research positions in a medical school, the government, or a research center. Another big consideration is whether or not to go for a job with tenure track (which is like a probationary period that typically lasts about 6 years) especially because these positions are very difficult to come by. There are also considerations to be made on whether to take a position that requires/allows teaching and service work like serving on an editorial board. Research finds that the best predictor of success in academia is: department reputation. Drs. White and Lerner give advice on the timeline of when to apply and resources to use on your applications such as your advisor, organization, and practice. They also provide brief discussion on job interviews which mostly consist of job talks in academia. Lastly, the give advice on negotiating a job offer with the most important piece of advice being to get everything in writing when negotiating a position.

Preparing a Training Grant
Presented by Deborah A.G. Drabick, Ph.D. and Tara Peris, Ph.D. 

Description
Submitting a training grant involves considering multiple factors that focus on not only a proposed study but also a concrete plan for developing the skills needed to execute this study. By construction, these applications carry many expectations, requirements, and complicated forms. In this workshop, Drs. Deborah Drabick and Tara Peris leverage their years of experience with extramural funding to clarify the process of submitting a training grant, and provide attendees with concrete tools for submitting successful training grant applications. Training grants are important because they offer opportunities to graduate students and post-docs that may not otherwise be available and provide additional mentorship and consultation. There are several types of training grants that typically fall into either F grant class or K grant class. Based on the type of grant you are applying for, the information needed to apply will vary; however, picking your topic and telling your story will always be required. In doing this, you should describe what you are interested in researching, the current state of the field, and how your research will address gaps you have identified in the current research. Grants are typically reviewed on a scale of 1-9 in 5 areas which are then compiled into an overall impact score. Reviewers then meet and discuss the top 50% of the grant applications and make a decision on who will receive funding.

Responding to Peer Review
Presented by Andres De Los Reyes, Ph.D.

Description
Publishing academic work often involves submitting scholarly manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals. A key component of the publishing process involves receiving commentary about your work from peers in your field and satisfactorily responding to such commentary. Despite it being a core feature of the publishing process, researchers rarely receive formal training on responding to peer review commentary. In this workshop, Dr. Andres De Los Reyes describes evidence-based strategies for responding to peer review commentary, including strategies for how to compose cover letters for responding to such commentary. Along these lines, Dr. De Los Reyes details how to respond to peer reviews line by line to ensure all comments have been addressed. Additionally, he outlines how to respectfully respond to and address comments from a reviewer that you may not agree with.

Job Search and Negotiation
 Presented by Deborah A.G. Drabick, Ph.D. and Tara Peris, Ph.D. 

Description
In this workshop Drs. Deborah Drabick and Tara Peris provide advice when it comes to searching for jobs and negotiating job offers. They give practical advice for determining when to go on the job market, where are the best places to search for job openings, how to write a good cover letter that will catch an employer's attention, and where to find resources that will assist in the preparation for a job interview. It is always good to monitor list-servs from APA, ABCT, and other relevant groups for job postings as well as checking APA psyc careers and following up via word of mouth. When applying for jobs, you should have your CV up to date and a cover letter ready that details your experiences and qualifications. They also detail how to advocate for yourself, negotiate salary and benefits, and how to get a lab startup package when given a job offer. When negotiating you can negotiate on salary, title, space, start-up funds, time between moving from your current place to your new job, protected time, parking, childcare, and housing. You should always ask for more than what you want since you are negotiating and will not get everything you ask for. Lastly, the remind you to always be gracious when interviewing and negotiating job offers as well as to send thank you notes to those you interact with during the process.

Preparing a Grant Post-Ph.D
 Presented by Joshua Langberg, Ph.D. and Susan White, Ph.D. 

Description
Submitting your first grant as a Ph.D. can appear on the surface to be a daunting task, with many expectations, requirements, and complicated forms. In this workshop, we leverage years of experience with extramural funding to explain the grant submission process, and provide attendees with concrete tools for submitting successful applications via multiple post-Ph.D. mechanisms, including project grants and K Series, F Series, and T Series applications. K Series grants are most often used to fund early career research, F Series are individual fellowships, and T Series are institutional training grants. Each grant will have different elements specific to that grant; however, each will require picking a topic/telling your story, showing preliminary data, forming a team, and budgeting. It is important to establish a timeline for writing the grant and submitting materials to ensure that everything is submitted on time. You should ideally have multiple grants under review at one time to maximize the chance of having a successfully funded grant. Once you have written one, it is easy to tweak it to meet the requirements of other grant applications. Lastly, ask others in the field for examples of grants they have written and ask them to review yours before submitting.

Strategies for Developing a Research Program
 Presented by Andres De Los Reyes, Ph.D. 

Description
Our first two writing workshops dealt with applying narrative tools to academic work and responding to peer review commentary, with the key goal of publishing a single journal article. How might you use these tools to connect separate articles together into a larger story? In research, our larger stories are the “research programs” we build from years of work and multiple articles. These are the stories we take with us “on the road” when interviewing for jobs and applying for grants. In this workshop, we discover how narrative devices commonly used in filmmaking actually help us weave related but distinct articles together into the “story” of an entire body of work.

Networking at Conferences
 Presented by Deborah A.G. Drabick, Ph.D. and Matthew Lerner, Ph.D. 

Description
To an early career scientist, attending professional meetings can be an overwhelming experience, with many opportunities to not only learn new things but also connect with like-minded scholars in the field. In this workshop, Drs. Deborah Drabick and Matthew Lerner demystify the process of networking at conferences, and provide attendees with concrete tools for developing and maintaining professional relationships with conference attendees. The presenters discuss how to approach a researcher who you are interested in building a connection with and how to maximize the time you have to speak with them and to make yourself stand out. Drs. Drabick and Lerner also discuss how to have a meaningful discussion that can carry into a long-term professional relationship such as collaborations on research projects. It is also important to be mindful of how you are carrying yourself and what your interactions look like as you never know who is around and watching. Having a go to question can be a good way to start the conversation such as asking what the current state of that person's research is or discussing the current state of the literature in their field of study. Always make sure you know about the person's research before approaching them and consider how their work can inform yours. It is also important to attend their session if they are speaking at the conference or event so you can be informed on their current work and research goals.

Work-Life Balance
Presented by Joshua Langberg, Ph.D. and Sarah Racz, Ph.D.

Description
Sometimes it feels like everyone in our field is “always on task” and unable to “unplug”. But is that a realistic view of how we balance our work lives with our lives outside of work? In this workshop, Drs. Joshua Langberg and Sarah Racz discuss the competing demands placed on us across our various work, family, and social spheres; and strategies to manage these demands in the necessary pursuit of healthy, balanced lives. They begin with practical advice such as knowing what your priorities are and how you operationalize them. Then map your schedule so you have a clear picture of your time and your commitments. From there you will need to make choices out of the time items you have left on your priorities and what time you have left in the day. By having routine and structure for each day, you are able to maximize your time and make conscious choices of what you are spending your day doing. They also recommend being flexible, but organized when creating a work-life balance as sometimes things in your schedule may shift and you need to quickly adjust. Being organized may look like keeping a calendar and/or to do list as well as using family management apps. It is also important to communicate with others in your household about your schedule and set up a plan that works for all of you. Lastly, it is important to advocate for yourself and to know your rights and responsibilities if you are a working parent when it comes to parental leave and time off.

John L. Cooley

 * Received Ph.D. from the University of Kansas

About the award recipient
John is a recipient of the 2019 Future Directions Launch Award in Adversity. After receiving his Ph.D. in Clinical Child Psychology from University of Kansas in 2018, he worked as a NIMH T32 postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus. He is currently a tenure-track Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychological Sciences at Texas Tech University, where his lab is guided by two overarching questions: “Why are some children and adolescents more impacted by peer victimization/bullying than others?” and “How can we address the mental health needs of peer-victimized/bullied youth?" More specifically, John’s lab is focused on investigating a) factors that influence risk for peer victimization/bullying and their associated negative outcomes, b) methods for identifying victims of peer aggression in need of intervention, and c) prevention and intervention approaches. Learn more about John's lab here: www.peerrelationslab.com

Watch the YouTube video recording of the remarks here.

Erin Kang

 * Ph.D. Candidate at Stony Brook University at the time of the award

About the award recipient
Erin received the 2019 Future Directions Launch Award in Treatment. She earned her Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology in 2020 at Stony Brook University under the mentorship of Dr. Matthew Lerner. She is currently a tenure-track Assistant Professor in the Psychology Department at Montclair State University, where her lab focuses on understanding how the processing of social information shapes, and is shaped by, social experience in autistic youth and those with related neurodevelopmental disorders. This focus on social plasticity, or capacity to learn from and adapt to their complex social environments, includes the role of social experiences, affective processing, and neural plasticity that underlie this capacity. Learn more about Erin's lab here: www.erinkanglab.com

Watch the YouTube video recording of the remarks here.

Nicole Lorenzo

 * Ph.D. candidate at Florida International University at the time of the award

About the award recipient
Nicole received the 2019 Future Directions Launch Award in Treatment. After receiving her Ph.D. in Clinical Science at Florida International University in 2019, she worked as a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Maryland, College Park. Currently, she is a tenure-track Assistant Professor in the psychology department at American University. Her research focuses on the transactional processes involved in parent-child interactions, examining how these processes develop and the impact of factors like temperament and parent mental health. This developmental work informs her intervention work which seeks to understand how we can refine and individualize treatment targets to develop early intervention programs that are accessible and scalable for families and providers, particularly those from underserved and underrepresented backgrounds. Learn more about Nicole's work here: www.researchgate.net/profile/Nicole_Lorenzo

Watch the YouTube video recording of the remarks here.