1 / 23

Direction of Causation Modeling Between Measures of Distress and Parental Bonding

Direction of Causation Modeling Between Measures of Distress and Parental Bonding. N.A. GILLESPIE 1 , D. DUFFY 1 , G. ZHU 1 , A.C. HEATH 2 , N.G. MARTIN 1. 1 Queensland Institute of Medical Research and University of Queensland, Joint Genetics Program, Brisbane, Australia.

lilac
Download Presentation

Direction of Causation Modeling Between Measures of Distress and Parental Bonding

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Direction of Causation Modeling Between Measures of Distress and Parental Bonding N.A. GILLESPIE1, D. DUFFY1, G. ZHU1, A.C. HEATH2, N.G. MARTIN1 1 Queensland Institute of Medical Research and University of Queensland, Joint Genetics Program, Brisbane, Australia. 2 Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA Supported by NIH grants AA04535, AA07728, and AA10249 and NHMRC (Australia) grants 941177 and 971232.

  2. Relationship between Parental Bonding and Psychiatric Symptoms • Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) (Parker) - Maternal and Paternal Care and Overprotection - Low Care and High Overprotection  Depression and Anxiety - Replicates across populations • PBI stable over time - During and after depressive episodes - Not artifact of previous depression episodes - Children’s and Parent’s self-ratings (Care r=0.44, Overprotection r=0.55)

  3. Causes of association between variables A B Unidirectional causation A B Unidirectional causation A B Reciprocal causation A C Indirect causation (common A and / or C effects) B Instrumental variable methods - Restrictive assumptions - Unfeasible for psychiatric epidemiology and behavioural sciences Panel / Longitudinal Data - Costly - Underlying assumptions and errors of inference Random Assignment to experimental and control Groups - Unethical and unworkable Twin Data Avoids difficulties mentioned & cost effective Causal inferences possible using cross-sectional data      

  4. B  A A  B 1 1 E C E C C E C E eA cA cA eA eA cA cA eA At1 At2 At1 At2 iB iB iA iA MZ=c2iB MZ=(a2+d2)c2iB DZ=(½a2+¼d2)c2iB DZ=c2iB Bt1 Bt2 Bt1 Bt2 eB dB dB eB eB dB dB eB aB aB aB aB A A A A D E D E E D E D 1MZ, ¼DZ 1MZ, ¼DZ 1MZ, ½DZ 1MZ, ½DZ

  5. Previous findings • Depression (CESD) and Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) - Unidirectional Model: Parental Behaviour Depression • Results equivocal with inclusion of error measures • Common additive genetic factor model provided the best fit Limitations of DOC models • Failure to included measurement error leads to biased estimates - Reduced statistical power to resolve alternate causal hypotheses - Unless can estimate error (test-retest) or assume it is negligible 

  6. Objective • To test DOC hypotheses between Parental Bonding and psychiatric symptoms using multiple measures of the target variables • Multiple Indicator Model (Heath et al. 1992) • Inclusion of test-retest data or error terms not required • Assumes that measurement error occurs at the level of indicator variables for the PBI and psychiatric symptom measure

  7. Method Sample • Combined community-based sample of: - 3041 Female twin individuals (25-45yrs) Alcohol Cohort Study 1 - 4397 Female twin individuals (18-28yrs) Alcohol Cohort Study 2 Psychiatric symptom measures • Both cohorts received a 33 item self-report symptom inventory - 19 items from Symptom Checklist-90 (Derogatis et al.,1973) - 14 items from Delusion Symptoms States Inventory (Foulds & Bedford, 1975) • Recently experienced psychological distress: “Recently have blamed myself for things” “Recently have experienced pain or tension in neck/head” • (1) ‘not-at-all’ (2) ‘a little’ (3) ‘a lot’ (4) ‘unbearably’

  8. Parenting Measures • 7 item self-report Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) - 2 Care items “Made me feel I was not wanted” - 5 Overprotection items “Tried to make me dependent on him/her” • “When you were growing up, how much were your mother and father (or someone like mother and father) like this?” • (1) ‘not-at-all’ (2) ‘ a little’ (3) ‘somewhat’ (4) ‘a lot’

  9. Factor analysis of psychiatric symptoms Based on inter-item polychoric correlations with Promax rotation: - Depression - Anxiety - Somatic Distress - Sleep Disturbance Factor analysis of PBI items Based on inter-item polychoric correlations with Promax rotation: - Autonomy - Overprotection - Coldness Authoritarianism, Protectiveness, and Warmth (Kendler)

  10. Reliability r  Depression .60 .86 Anxiety .56 .83 Somatization Distress .71 .75 N = 420 Parental Autonomy .65 .80 Parental Overprotection .70 .77 Parental Coldness .60 .75 N = 393 Twin correlations MZ DZ twin pairs=969 twin pairs=608 .37 .14 .43 .26 .34 .19 .50 .36 .47 .34 .61 .35

  11. Univariate Analyses Variance components WLS Estimates of best fitting models Variable A C E D AGE 2 df Overprotection .27 .20 .53 .00 1.06 5 Coldness .62 .37 .01 6.99 6 Autonomy .31 .18 .50 .01 8.99 5 Depression .31 .65 .04 3.50 6 Anxiety .41 .56 .03 1.62 6 Somatic Distress .34 .65 .01 4.85 6

  12. E C A Independent-Pathway model for ratings of ParentalColdness, Autonomy and Overprotection Model 2 df p AIC - Independent Pathway 9.17 15 .87 -20.83 COLD OVERP AUTO C C C A E E A A E

  13. Common-Pathway model for ratings of ParentalColdness, Autonomy and Overprotection E C A .24 .49 .27 PARENTING .64 .44 .12 COLD OVERP AUTO .49 .16 .28 . 00 .33 .21 .12 .17 .03 C C C A E E A A E Model 2 df p AIC - Independent Pathway 9.17 15 .87 -20.83 - Common Pathway 13.39 19 .82 -24.61

  14. E C A Independent Pathway model for ratings of ratings of ratings of Depression, Anxiety, and Somatic Distress Model 2 df p AIC - Independent Pathway 19.50 15 .19 -10.50 ANX DEP SOM C C C A E E A A E

  15. E C A DISTRESS Common Pathway model for ratings of ratings of ratings of Depression, Anxiety, and Somatic Distress .06 .52 .42 Model 2 df p AIC - Independent Pathway 19.50 15 .19 -10.50 - Common Pathway 24.06 19 .19 -13.94 .61 .48 .67 DEP ANX SOM .31 .00 .00 .12 .22 .00 .08 .11 .42 C C C A E E A A E

  16. Model 2 df 2 AIC Full Bivariate 145.66 107 -69.34 A A C E C E PARENTING DISTRESS COLD OVERP AUTON DEP ANX SOM A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E Full Bivariate Model with Multiple Indicators

  17. Model 2 df 2 AIC Full Bivariate 145.66 107 -69.34 Reciprocal 146.00 108 .34 -70.00 A A C E C E PARENTING DISTRESS COLD OVERP AUTON DEP ANX SOM A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E Reciprocal Causation Model with Multiple Indicators

  18. Model 2 df 2 AIC Full Bivariate 145.66 107 -69.34 Reciprocal 146.00 108 .34 -70.00 Distress Parenting 161.74 109 16.08 -56.26 A A C E C E PARENTING DISTRESS COLD OVERP AUTON DEP ANX SOM A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E Uni-directional Model with Multiple Indicators

  19. Model 2 df 2 AIC Full Bivariate 145.66 107 -69.34 Reciprocal 146.00 108 .34 -70.00 Distress Parenting 161.74 109 16.08 -56.26 Parenting Distress 146.71 109 1.05 -71.29 A A C E C E PARENTING DISTRESS COLD OVERP AUTON DEP ANX SOM A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E Uni-directional Model with Multiple Indicators

  20. Model 2 df 2 AIC Full Bivariate 145.66 107 -69.34 Reciprocal 146.00 108 .34 -70.00 Distress Parenting 161.74 109 16.08 -56.26 Parenting Distress 146.71 109 1.05 -71.29 No causation 376.29 110 230.63 156.29 A A C E C E PARENTING DISTRESS COLD OVERP AUTON DEP ANX SOM A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E A C E No Causation Model with Multiple Indicators

  21. Final Uni-directional Model with Multiple Indicators Model 2 df 2 AIC Full Bivariate 145.66 107 -69.34 Reciprocal 146.00 108 .34 -70.00 Distress Parenting 161.74 109 16.08 -56.26 Parenting Distress 146.71 109 1.05 -71.29 No causation 376.29 110 230.63 156.29 Final 151.26 116 5.60 -80.74 A A E C E PARENTING DISTRESS .20 .25 .45 .38 .55 + .18 .56 .63 .52 .49 .16 .67 COLD OVERP AUTON DEP ANX SOM C E A C E C E C E A E A E .36 .13 .21 .11 .40 .17 .26 .21 .14 .49 .11 .37

  22. Conclusion - Almost 50% of variance in Distress attributable to additive genetic effects - Considerable proportion of variance in Parenting due to common environmental effects - Recollections of Parenting appear to have a causative effect of symptoms of distress

  23. Limitations - Extrapolation of findings to males - Retrospective reports of parental style - Kendler - Parental self-ratings of parental style large due to C - Twins ratings of parental style largely due to A, C, E - Correlations between parents and offspring 0.10 - 0.29 - Correlations between twins 0.37 - 0.63 - Results can only be considered a ‘partial reflection’ of true parenting - PBI is not exhaustive measure

More Related