Cited by 906Child Abuse and TraumaChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentResilience and Mental Health

Beyond Cumulative Risk: A Dimensional Approach to Childhood Adversity

Open access
McLaughlin, Katie A., Sheridan, Margaret A.·2016·Current Directions in Psychological Science

Abstract

Children who have experienced environmental adversity—such as abuse, neglect, or poverty—are more likely to develop physical and mental health problems, perform poorly at school, and have difficulties in social relationships than children who have not encountered adversity. What is less clear is how and why adverse early experiences exert such a profound influence on children’s development. Identifying developmental processes that are disrupted by adverse early environments is the key to developing better intervention strategies for children who have experienced adversity. Yet much existing research relies on a cumulative-risk approach that is unlikely to reveal these mechanisms. This approach tallies the number of distinct adversities experienced to create a risk score. This risk score fails to distinguish between distinct types of environmental experiences, implicitly assuming that very different experiences influence development through the same underlying mechanisms. We advance an alternative model. This novel approach conceptualizes adversity along distinct dimensions, emphasizes the central role of learning mechanisms, and distinguishes between different forms of adversity that might influence learning in distinct ways. A key advantage of this approach is that learning mechanisms provide clear targets for interventions aimed at preventing negative developmental outcomes in children who have experienced adversity.

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 · 10.1177/0963721416655883

Cites

36 of 36 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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Sheridan MA McLaughlin KA Fox NA Zeanah CH Nelson CA under review Early caregiving environment causally impacts reward response and neural structure, mediating risk for depression in adolescence
  2. [1]McLaughlin KA Sheridan MA Lambert HK 2014 Childhood Adversity and Neural Development: Deprivation and Threat as Distinct Dimensions of Early Experience Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 47 578 591 This paper provides a comprehensive review of the dimensional model of childhood adversity 25454359 PMC4308474
  3. [2]McLaughlin KA Sheridan MA Gold AL Lambert HK Heleniak C Duys A Shechner T Wojcieski Z Pine DS in press Maltreatment exposure, brain structure, and fear conditioning in children Neuropsychopharmacology This paper examines fear learning mechanisms in children exposed to threatening early environments PMC4908632 26677946
  4. [3]Evans GW Li D Whipple SS 2013 Cumulative risk and child development Psychological Bulletin 139 1342 1396 A comprehensive review of the prevailing cumulative risk approach; an approach distinct from the one we advance in this paper 23566018
  5. [4]McEwen BS 2012 Brain on stress: How the social environment gets under the skin Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 17180 17185 An excellent and accessible review of the allostatic load model PMC3477378 23045648

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McLaughlin, K. A., & Sheridan, M. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
McLaughlin, Katie A.
Venue
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Published
2016-08
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
239-245
ISSN
  • 0963-7214 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8721
OpenAlex
W2495635308
Cited by
906
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 153 · 2025: 128 · 2024: 130 · 2023: 122 · 2022: 106 · 2021: 101 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
42.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Directions in Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH103291, R01MH106482)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U54HD083091)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
Keywords
cumulative risk, adverse childhood experiences, environmental adversity, child development, learning mechanisms, developmental mechanisms, intervention strategies, abuse and neglect, poverty, developmental prevention

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