Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 2022
Several psychiatric conditions (e.g., substance use, mood, and personality disorders) are charact... more Several psychiatric conditions (e.g., substance use, mood, and personality disorders) are characterized, in part, by greater delay discounting (DD)-a decision-making bias in the direction of preferring smaller, more immediate over larger, delayed rewards. Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is highly comorbid with substance use, mood, and other personality disorders, suggesting that DD may be a process underpinning risk for NPD as well. This meta-analysis examined associations between DD and theoretically distinct, clinically relevant dimensions of narcissism (i.e., grandiosity, entitlement, and vulnerability). Literature searches were conducted and articles were included if they were written in English, published in a peer-reviewed journal, contained measures of DD and narcissism and reported their association, and used an adult sample. Narcissism measures had to be systematically categorized according to clinically relevant dimensions (Grijalva et al., 2015; Wright & Edershile, 2018). Seven studies met inclusion criteria (N = 2,705). DD was positively associated with narcissism (r = .21; 95% confidence interval [.10, .32]), with this association being largely attributable to measures of trait grandiosity that were used in each study (r = .24; 95% confidence interval [.11, .37]). No studies included diagnostic NPD assessments. These findings provide empirical evidence that DD is related to trait narcissism and perhaps risk for NPD (e.g., grandiosity listed in Criterion B of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, alternative model of personality disorders). Considering the positive evidence from this review, and the dearth of research examining DD in individuals with NPD, investigators studying NPD may consider incorporating DD measures in future studies to potentially inform clinical theory and novel adjunctive treatment options.
Importance: Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is efficacious, but comorbid sti... more Importance: Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is efficacious, but comorbid stimulant use and other behavioral health problems often undermine efficacy.
Objective: To examine the association of contingency management, a behavioral intervention wherein patients receive material incentives contingent on objectively verified behavior change, with end-of-treatment outcomes for these comorbid behavioral problems.
Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and reference sections of articles from inception through May 5, 2020. The following search terms were used: vouchers OR contingency management OR financial incentives.
Study Selection: Prospective experimental studies of monetary-based contingency management among participants receiving MOUD.
Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, 3 independent investigators extracted data from included studies for a random-effects meta-analysis.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was the association of contingency management at end-of-treatment assessments with 6 clinical problems: stimulant use, polysubstance use, illicit opioid use, cigarette smoking, therapy attendance, and medication adherence. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to compute weighted mean effect size estimates (Cohen d) and corresponding 95% CIs separately for each clinical problem and collapsing across the 3 categories assessing abstinence and the 2 assessing treatment adherence outcomes.
Results: The search identified 1443 reports of which 74 reports involving 10 444 unique adult participants met inclusion criteria for narrative review and 60 for inclusion in meta-analyses. Contingency management was associated with end-of-treatment outcomes for all 6 problems examined separately, with mean effect sizes for 4 of 6 in the medium-large range (stimulants, Cohen d = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49-0.92]; cigarette use, Cohen d = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.43-1.14]; illicit opioid use, Cohen d = 0.58 [95% CI, 0.30-0.86]; medication adherence, Cohen d = 0.75 [95% CI, 0.30-1.21]), and 2 in the small-medium range (polysubstance use, Cohen d = 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30-0.62]; therapy attendance, d = 0.43 [95% CI, 0.22-0.65]). Collapsing across abstinence and adherence categories, contingency management was associated with medium effect sizes for abstinence (Cohen d = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.47-0.69) and treatment adherence (Cohen d = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84) compared with controls.
Conclusions and Relevance: These results provide evidence supporting the use of contingency management in addressing key clinical problems among patients receiving MOUD, including the ongoing epidemic of comorbid psychomotor stimulant misuse. Policies facilitating integration of contingency management into community MOUD services are sorely needed.
Although U.S. college graduates are at relatively low risk for smoking, 12-15% of U.S. smokers (~... more Although U.S. college graduates are at relatively low risk for smoking, 12-15% of U.S. smokers (~8 million people) are college graduates. Few studies have examined smoking risk among college graduates. To address that gap, the present study examined smoking risk among U.S. college graduates and those who did not graduate from college in a nationally representative sample of adults (National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2011-2017, n = 202,137). We examined smoking risk in association with well-established risk factors: alcohol abuse/dependence, drug abuse/dependence, mental illness, age, sex, race/ethnicity, and poverty status, using group contrasts and Classification and Regression Tree (CART) modeling. Smoking prevalence among U.S. college graduates and non-graduates was 10% and 26%, respectively. College graduates initiated any smoking and daily smoking at a later age and were lighter smokers than smokers who did not graduate college. Within college graduate and non-graduate groups, prevalence rates varied by orders of magnitude across different risk-factor profiles (ranges = 3-37% and 14-73% among graduates and non-graduates, respectively). Past year drug abuse/dependence was a robust predictor of smoking prevalence in both populations. For college graduates, past year alcohol abuse/dependence and mental illness were stronger predictors of smoking compared to those who did not graduate college, for whom race/ethnicity and age were stronger predictors. Overall, smoking risk increases to surprisingly high levels, even among college graduates, when select risk factors co-occur, particularly psychiatric conditions. Socio-demographic risk factors appear to be less robust predictors of smoking risk among college graduates relative to those who did not graduate college.
Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 2020
The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been accompanied by a variety of potentially stressful or... more The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been accompanied by a variety of potentially stressful or traumatic experiences that people may face in daily life (e.g., repeated exposure to morbidity or mortality reports across media platforms, social isolation, contracting COVID-19, supply shortages, lost income, death of a loved one). As such, it is important to consider individual differences that may increase one’s risk for developing stress-related disorders (e.g., posttraumatic stress disorder) or put the health of other people at risk. Individual differences in narcissism—a multifaceted aspect of personality—may be worth examining in association with social health behaviors, stress, and trauma-related outcomes during the current and future pandemics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)
From a perspective broadly informed by Stress and Coping Theory, this review examined whether the... more From a perspective broadly informed by Stress and Coping Theory, this review examined whether theoretically distinct and important dimensions of narcissism (grandiosity and vulnerability) associate with health-related stress-reactivity. Literature searches were conducted and articles were included if they contained a validated baseline assessment of narcissism, a stressor, and a within-person assessment of stress-reactivity (i.e., a baseline and post-stress assessment of a health-related psychological, biological, or behavioural process). Additionally, narcissism measures had to be systematically categorised as assessing grandiosity or vulnerability (see Grijalva, E., Newman, D. A., Tay, L., Donnellan, M. B., Harms, P. D., Robins, R. W., & Yan, T. (2015). Gender differences in narcissism: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 141(2), 261–310. doi:10.1037/a0038231), and narcissism dimensions had to be assessed independently of other constructs. Findings were narratively synthesised within three broad dimensions of stress-reactivity (psychological, biological, and behavioural). Overall, there appear to be relatively consistent patterns that grandiosity and vulnerability are related to altered stress-reactivity. Additionally, grandiosity and vulnerability may differentially influence stress-reactivity depending on the type of stressor and/or indicator of stress-reactivity (e.g., under certain conditions, grandiosity may confer some level of resilience). This review highlights important theoretical and empirical gaps in the emerging narcissism and health literature. Furthermore, this review may help inform methodological considerations for future research, and may also point to physical health outcomes that could conceivably be affected by narcissism over time (e.g., overweight/obesity, cardiovascular disease, HIV/AIDS).
Objectives: This study examined whether self-focused and other-focused resiliency help explain ho... more Objectives: This study examined whether self-focused and other-focused resiliency help explain how early family adversity relates to perceived stress, subjective health, and health behaviors in college women. Participants: Female students (N = 795) participated between October 2009 and May 2010. Methods: Participants completed self-report measures of early family adversity, self-focused (self-esteem, personal growth initiative) and other-focused (perceived social support, gratitude) resiliency, stress, subjective health, and health behaviors. Results: Using structural equation modeling, self-focused resiliency associated with less stress, better subjective health, more sleep, less smoking, and less weekend alcohol consumption. Other-focused resiliency associated with more exercise, greater stress, and more weekend alcohol consumption. Early family adversity was indirectly related to all health outcomes, except smoking, via self-focused and other-focused resiliency. Conclusions: Self-focused and other-focused resiliency represent plausible mechanisms through which early family adversity relates to stress and health in college women. This highlights areas for future research in disease prevention and management.
Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 2022
Several psychiatric conditions (e.g., substance use, mood, and personality disorders) are charact... more Several psychiatric conditions (e.g., substance use, mood, and personality disorders) are characterized, in part, by greater delay discounting (DD)-a decision-making bias in the direction of preferring smaller, more immediate over larger, delayed rewards. Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is highly comorbid with substance use, mood, and other personality disorders, suggesting that DD may be a process underpinning risk for NPD as well. This meta-analysis examined associations between DD and theoretically distinct, clinically relevant dimensions of narcissism (i.e., grandiosity, entitlement, and vulnerability). Literature searches were conducted and articles were included if they were written in English, published in a peer-reviewed journal, contained measures of DD and narcissism and reported their association, and used an adult sample. Narcissism measures had to be systematically categorized according to clinically relevant dimensions (Grijalva et al., 2015; Wright & Edershile, 2018). Seven studies met inclusion criteria (N = 2,705). DD was positively associated with narcissism (r = .21; 95% confidence interval [.10, .32]), with this association being largely attributable to measures of trait grandiosity that were used in each study (r = .24; 95% confidence interval [.11, .37]). No studies included diagnostic NPD assessments. These findings provide empirical evidence that DD is related to trait narcissism and perhaps risk for NPD (e.g., grandiosity listed in Criterion B of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, alternative model of personality disorders). Considering the positive evidence from this review, and the dearth of research examining DD in individuals with NPD, investigators studying NPD may consider incorporating DD measures in future studies to potentially inform clinical theory and novel adjunctive treatment options.
Importance: Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is efficacious, but comorbid sti... more Importance: Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is efficacious, but comorbid stimulant use and other behavioral health problems often undermine efficacy.
Objective: To examine the association of contingency management, a behavioral intervention wherein patients receive material incentives contingent on objectively verified behavior change, with end-of-treatment outcomes for these comorbid behavioral problems.
Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and reference sections of articles from inception through May 5, 2020. The following search terms were used: vouchers OR contingency management OR financial incentives.
Study Selection: Prospective experimental studies of monetary-based contingency management among participants receiving MOUD.
Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, 3 independent investigators extracted data from included studies for a random-effects meta-analysis.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was the association of contingency management at end-of-treatment assessments with 6 clinical problems: stimulant use, polysubstance use, illicit opioid use, cigarette smoking, therapy attendance, and medication adherence. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to compute weighted mean effect size estimates (Cohen d) and corresponding 95% CIs separately for each clinical problem and collapsing across the 3 categories assessing abstinence and the 2 assessing treatment adherence outcomes.
Results: The search identified 1443 reports of which 74 reports involving 10 444 unique adult participants met inclusion criteria for narrative review and 60 for inclusion in meta-analyses. Contingency management was associated with end-of-treatment outcomes for all 6 problems examined separately, with mean effect sizes for 4 of 6 in the medium-large range (stimulants, Cohen d = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49-0.92]; cigarette use, Cohen d = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.43-1.14]; illicit opioid use, Cohen d = 0.58 [95% CI, 0.30-0.86]; medication adherence, Cohen d = 0.75 [95% CI, 0.30-1.21]), and 2 in the small-medium range (polysubstance use, Cohen d = 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30-0.62]; therapy attendance, d = 0.43 [95% CI, 0.22-0.65]). Collapsing across abstinence and adherence categories, contingency management was associated with medium effect sizes for abstinence (Cohen d = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.47-0.69) and treatment adherence (Cohen d = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84) compared with controls.
Conclusions and Relevance: These results provide evidence supporting the use of contingency management in addressing key clinical problems among patients receiving MOUD, including the ongoing epidemic of comorbid psychomotor stimulant misuse. Policies facilitating integration of contingency management into community MOUD services are sorely needed.
Although U.S. college graduates are at relatively low risk for smoking, 12-15% of U.S. smokers (~... more Although U.S. college graduates are at relatively low risk for smoking, 12-15% of U.S. smokers (~8 million people) are college graduates. Few studies have examined smoking risk among college graduates. To address that gap, the present study examined smoking risk among U.S. college graduates and those who did not graduate from college in a nationally representative sample of adults (National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2011-2017, n = 202,137). We examined smoking risk in association with well-established risk factors: alcohol abuse/dependence, drug abuse/dependence, mental illness, age, sex, race/ethnicity, and poverty status, using group contrasts and Classification and Regression Tree (CART) modeling. Smoking prevalence among U.S. college graduates and non-graduates was 10% and 26%, respectively. College graduates initiated any smoking and daily smoking at a later age and were lighter smokers than smokers who did not graduate college. Within college graduate and non-graduate groups, prevalence rates varied by orders of magnitude across different risk-factor profiles (ranges = 3-37% and 14-73% among graduates and non-graduates, respectively). Past year drug abuse/dependence was a robust predictor of smoking prevalence in both populations. For college graduates, past year alcohol abuse/dependence and mental illness were stronger predictors of smoking compared to those who did not graduate college, for whom race/ethnicity and age were stronger predictors. Overall, smoking risk increases to surprisingly high levels, even among college graduates, when select risk factors co-occur, particularly psychiatric conditions. Socio-demographic risk factors appear to be less robust predictors of smoking risk among college graduates relative to those who did not graduate college.
Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 2020
The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been accompanied by a variety of potentially stressful or... more The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been accompanied by a variety of potentially stressful or traumatic experiences that people may face in daily life (e.g., repeated exposure to morbidity or mortality reports across media platforms, social isolation, contracting COVID-19, supply shortages, lost income, death of a loved one). As such, it is important to consider individual differences that may increase one’s risk for developing stress-related disorders (e.g., posttraumatic stress disorder) or put the health of other people at risk. Individual differences in narcissism—a multifaceted aspect of personality—may be worth examining in association with social health behaviors, stress, and trauma-related outcomes during the current and future pandemics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)
From a perspective broadly informed by Stress and Coping Theory, this review examined whether the... more From a perspective broadly informed by Stress and Coping Theory, this review examined whether theoretically distinct and important dimensions of narcissism (grandiosity and vulnerability) associate with health-related stress-reactivity. Literature searches were conducted and articles were included if they contained a validated baseline assessment of narcissism, a stressor, and a within-person assessment of stress-reactivity (i.e., a baseline and post-stress assessment of a health-related psychological, biological, or behavioural process). Additionally, narcissism measures had to be systematically categorised as assessing grandiosity or vulnerability (see Grijalva, E., Newman, D. A., Tay, L., Donnellan, M. B., Harms, P. D., Robins, R. W., & Yan, T. (2015). Gender differences in narcissism: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 141(2), 261–310. doi:10.1037/a0038231), and narcissism dimensions had to be assessed independently of other constructs. Findings were narratively synthesised within three broad dimensions of stress-reactivity (psychological, biological, and behavioural). Overall, there appear to be relatively consistent patterns that grandiosity and vulnerability are related to altered stress-reactivity. Additionally, grandiosity and vulnerability may differentially influence stress-reactivity depending on the type of stressor and/or indicator of stress-reactivity (e.g., under certain conditions, grandiosity may confer some level of resilience). This review highlights important theoretical and empirical gaps in the emerging narcissism and health literature. Furthermore, this review may help inform methodological considerations for future research, and may also point to physical health outcomes that could conceivably be affected by narcissism over time (e.g., overweight/obesity, cardiovascular disease, HIV/AIDS).
Objectives: This study examined whether self-focused and other-focused resiliency help explain ho... more Objectives: This study examined whether self-focused and other-focused resiliency help explain how early family adversity relates to perceived stress, subjective health, and health behaviors in college women. Participants: Female students (N = 795) participated between October 2009 and May 2010. Methods: Participants completed self-report measures of early family adversity, self-focused (self-esteem, personal growth initiative) and other-focused (perceived social support, gratitude) resiliency, stress, subjective health, and health behaviors. Results: Using structural equation modeling, self-focused resiliency associated with less stress, better subjective health, more sleep, less smoking, and less weekend alcohol consumption. Other-focused resiliency associated with more exercise, greater stress, and more weekend alcohol consumption. Early family adversity was indirectly related to all health outcomes, except smoking, via self-focused and other-focused resiliency. Conclusions: Self-focused and other-focused resiliency represent plausible mechanisms through which early family adversity relates to stress and health in college women. This highlights areas for future research in disease prevention and management.
Uploads
Papers by Sulamunn R M Coleman
Objective: To examine the association of contingency management, a behavioral intervention wherein patients receive material incentives contingent on objectively verified behavior change, with end-of-treatment outcomes for these comorbid behavioral problems.
Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and reference sections of articles from inception through May 5, 2020. The following search terms were used: vouchers OR contingency management OR financial incentives.
Study Selection: Prospective experimental studies of monetary-based contingency management among participants receiving MOUD.
Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, 3 independent investigators extracted data from included studies for a random-effects meta-analysis.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was the association of contingency management at end-of-treatment assessments with 6 clinical problems: stimulant use, polysubstance use, illicit opioid use, cigarette smoking, therapy attendance, and medication adherence. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to compute weighted mean effect size estimates (Cohen d) and corresponding 95% CIs separately for each clinical problem and collapsing across the 3 categories assessing abstinence and the 2 assessing treatment adherence outcomes.
Results: The search identified 1443 reports of which 74 reports involving 10 444 unique adult participants met inclusion criteria for narrative review and 60 for inclusion in meta-analyses. Contingency management was associated with end-of-treatment outcomes for all 6 problems examined separately, with mean effect sizes for 4 of 6 in the medium-large range (stimulants, Cohen d = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49-0.92]; cigarette use, Cohen d = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.43-1.14]; illicit opioid use, Cohen d = 0.58 [95% CI, 0.30-0.86]; medication adherence, Cohen d = 0.75 [95% CI, 0.30-1.21]), and 2 in the small-medium range (polysubstance use, Cohen d = 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30-0.62]; therapy attendance, d = 0.43 [95% CI, 0.22-0.65]). Collapsing across abstinence and adherence categories, contingency management was associated with medium effect sizes for abstinence (Cohen d = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.47-0.69) and treatment adherence (Cohen d = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84) compared with controls.
Conclusions and Relevance: These results provide evidence supporting the use of contingency management in addressing key clinical problems among patients receiving MOUD, including the ongoing epidemic of comorbid psychomotor stimulant misuse. Policies facilitating integration of contingency management into community MOUD services are sorely needed.
Objective: To examine the association of contingency management, a behavioral intervention wherein patients receive material incentives contingent on objectively verified behavior change, with end-of-treatment outcomes for these comorbid behavioral problems.
Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and reference sections of articles from inception through May 5, 2020. The following search terms were used: vouchers OR contingency management OR financial incentives.
Study Selection: Prospective experimental studies of monetary-based contingency management among participants receiving MOUD.
Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, 3 independent investigators extracted data from included studies for a random-effects meta-analysis.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was the association of contingency management at end-of-treatment assessments with 6 clinical problems: stimulant use, polysubstance use, illicit opioid use, cigarette smoking, therapy attendance, and medication adherence. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to compute weighted mean effect size estimates (Cohen d) and corresponding 95% CIs separately for each clinical problem and collapsing across the 3 categories assessing abstinence and the 2 assessing treatment adherence outcomes.
Results: The search identified 1443 reports of which 74 reports involving 10 444 unique adult participants met inclusion criteria for narrative review and 60 for inclusion in meta-analyses. Contingency management was associated with end-of-treatment outcomes for all 6 problems examined separately, with mean effect sizes for 4 of 6 in the medium-large range (stimulants, Cohen d = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49-0.92]; cigarette use, Cohen d = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.43-1.14]; illicit opioid use, Cohen d = 0.58 [95% CI, 0.30-0.86]; medication adherence, Cohen d = 0.75 [95% CI, 0.30-1.21]), and 2 in the small-medium range (polysubstance use, Cohen d = 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30-0.62]; therapy attendance, d = 0.43 [95% CI, 0.22-0.65]). Collapsing across abstinence and adherence categories, contingency management was associated with medium effect sizes for abstinence (Cohen d = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.47-0.69) and treatment adherence (Cohen d = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84) compared with controls.
Conclusions and Relevance: These results provide evidence supporting the use of contingency management in addressing key clinical problems among patients receiving MOUD, including the ongoing epidemic of comorbid psychomotor stimulant misuse. Policies facilitating integration of contingency management into community MOUD services are sorely needed.