Cited by 90Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Conceptualizing the neurobiology of non-suicidal self-injury from the perspective of the Research Domain Criteria Project

Open access
Westlund Schreiner, Melinda, Klimes-Dougan, Bonnie, Begnel, Erin D., Cullen, Kathryn R.·2015·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Abstract

Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) commonly starts in adolescence and is associated with an array of negative outcomes. Neurobiological research investigating NSSI is in its early stages and most studies have examined this behavior within the context of specific diagnoses. However, the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative encourages researchers to examine brain-behavior relationships across diagnoses. This review on the neurobiology associated with NSSI is organized using the domains proposed by RDoC: Negative Valence, Positive Valence, Cognitive, Social Processes, and Arousal/Regulatory Systems. Evidence of neurobiological anomalies is found in each of these domains. We also propose future research directions, especially in regard to human development. Future NSSI studies should address this behavior independent of diagnosis, examine relevant constructs across multiple units of analysis, and assess how systems change across development and course of illness. These advances will be essential for guiding neurobiologically informed intervention and prevention strategies to target NSSI. In doing so, we may prevent the associated negative outcomes across the lifespan.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.09.011

Cites

95 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Westlund Schreiner, M., Klimes-Dougan, B., Begnel, E. D., & Cullen, K. R.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-10
Volume
57
Pages
381-391
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2178519976
Cited by
90
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
0.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (K23-MH090421)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
non-suicidal self-injury, neurobiology, Research Domain Criteria, brain-behavior relationship, negative valence systems, positive valence systems, cognitive systems, social processes, adolescence, human development, prevention, intervention
MeSH terms
Humans, Human Development, Self-Injurious Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review