Table 1.
Description of the lifecourse theoretical models tested in the current analysis, using exposure to abuse as an example
| Life course model tested | Definition | Number of Variables |
Specific variables entered into the LARS model |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accumulation of risk (by duration) | Sum of the total number of time periods of exposure to a specific adversity. To test whether the total number of time periods of exposure to a given adversity explains the most variance in psychopathology outcomes. | 1 | abuse_accumulation=count of the number of time periods exposed to abuse (range 0–6) |
| Sensitive period | A single developmental time period at which there can be exposure to adversity. To test if presence vs. absence of a given adversity at a specific time period explains the most variance in psychopathology outcomes. | 6 | abuse_period1= exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) at time period 1 (18 months) ; abuse_period2= exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) at time period 2 (30 months); abuse_period3= exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) at time period 3 (42 months); abuse_period4= exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) at time period 4 (57 months); abuse_period5= exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) at time period 5 (69 months); abuse_period6= exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) at time period 6 (81 months) |
| Recency | Sum of the total number of time periods of exposure to a given adversity, with each time period weighted by the age in years of the child during the exposure. To test if temporal proximity to adversity events explains the most variance in psychopathology outcomes. | 1 | abuse_recency= abuse_period1 exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0)*(18/12) + abuse_period2 exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) *(30/12) + abuse_period3 exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) *(42/12) + abuse_period4 exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) *(57/12) + abuse_period5 exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) *(69/12) + abuse_period6 exposed (1) vs. unexposed (0) *(81/12) |
For each type of adversity, we generated three sets of encoded variables: (a) a single variable denoting the total number of time periods of exposure to a given adversity, to test the accumulation hypothesis (coded as 0–6); (b) a set of variables indicating presence vs. absence of the adversity at a specific developmental stage, to test the sensitive period hypothesis; and (c) a single variable denoting the total number of time periods of exposure, with each exposure linearly weighted by age (in months) of the child during the measurement time period, to test the recency hypothesis; this variable assumed a linear increase in the effect of exposure over time and weighted more recent exposures more heavily than distally-occurring ones, allowing us to determine whether more recent exposures were more impactful (Smith et al., 2016). This weighted recency variable is distinguished from the last sensitive period model, which captures only the most recent exposure.