Table 2.

Significant covariances and paths of parallel process latent growth models to link sample demographics to childhood adversity, functional network connectivity and (1) externalizing and (2) internalizing behavior.

		95 % CI
	β,p	lower CI	upper CI
Model 1&2: Covariances
Age ↔ Abuse	.10 *	.03	.17
Age ↔ Neglect	.14*	.01	.26
SES ↔ Abuse	−.11*	−.19	−.04
SES ↔ Neglect	−.19*	−.32	−.07
AUD family history ↔ Abuse	.03*	.01	.05
AUD family history ↔ Neglect	.03*	.01	.05
High alcohol use ↔ Abuse	.02*	.00	.03
Model 1: Externalizing behavior
High alcohol use → E Intercept	.19*	.07	.30
SES → E Intercept	−.10*	−.20	−.01
AUD family history → E Intercept	.16*	.06	.27
Scanner → FC Intercept	−.14*	−.25	−.05
Age → FC Intercept	14*	.02	.26
AUD family history → FC Intercept	−.13*	−.25	−.01
AUD family history → FC Slope	−.12*	−.21	−.02
Model 2: Internalizing behavior
AUD family history → I Intercept	.12*	.00	.23
Age → I Intercept	.12*	.00	.23
Age → I Slope	−.18*	−.30	−.06
Scanner → FC Intercept	−.14*	−.25	−.04
Age → FC Intercept	.14*	.02	.24
AUD family history → FC Intercept	−.13*	−.25	−.01
AUD family history → FC Slope	−.11*	−.21	−.02

Note. SES = socioeconomic status, AUD = alcohol use disorder, FC = functional connectivity from dorsal anterior cingulate cortex to regions of the cingulo-opercular network, E = externalizing, I = internalizing, β = regression weight, CI = confidence interval, p(*) = significant paths.