Reports an error in "Dimensions of deprivation and threat, psychopathology, and potential mediators: A multi-year longitudinal analysis" by Adam Bryant Miller, Margaret A. Sheridan, Jamie L. Hanson, Katie A. McLaughlin, John E. Bates, Jennifer E. Lansford, Gregory S. Pettit and Kenneth A. Dodge (Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 2018[Feb], Vol 127[2], 160-170). In the article, the indirect effects in the Path Analysis Model section of the Results (i.e., in paragraph 3 of the Model 1 subsection and paragraphs 1-4 of the Alternative models subsection) are incorrectly reported as standardized βs and should have been represented by βs for unstandardized indirect effects. Nevertheless, the pattern of results remains unchanged, and the standardized indirect effects are significant. Additional minor corrections to standardized βs for direct paths are as follows: In paragraph 1 of the Alternative models subsection, "β = 0.40" should read "β = 0.50." In paragraph 4 of the Alternative models subsection, "β = 0.05," "β = 0.12," and "β = 0.002, p = .97" should read " β = 0.12," "β = 0.09," and "β = 0.3, p = .70," respectively. Finally, the corresponding author's e-mail address is incorrect and should read adam.miller@unc.edu. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2018-09964-003.) Prior research demonstrates a link between exposure to childhood adversity and psychopathology later in development. However, work on mechanisms linking adversity to psychopathology fails to account for specificity in these pathways across different types of adversity. Here, we test a conceptual model that distinguishes deprivation and threat as distinct forms of childhood adversity with different pathways to psychopathology. Deprivation involves an absence of inputs from the environment, such as cognitive and social stimulation, that influence psychopathology by altering cognitive development, such as verbal abilities. Threat includes experiences involving harm or threat of harm that increase risk for psychopathology through disruptions in social-emotional processing. We test the prediction that deprivation, but not threat, increases risk for psychopathology through altered verbal abilities. Data were drawn from the Child Development Project (N = 585), which followed children for over a decade. We analyze data from assessment points at age 5, 6, 14, and 17 years. Mothers completed interviews at age 5 and 6 on exposure to threat and deprivation experiences. Youth verbal abilities were assessed at age 14. At age 17, mothers reported on child psychopathology. A path analysis model tested longitudinal paths to internalizing and externalizing problems from experiences of deprivation and threat. Consistent with predictions, deprivation was associated with risk for externalizing problems via effects on verbal abilities at age 14. Threat was associated longitudinally with both internalizing and externalizing problems, but these effects were not mediated by verbal abilities. Results suggest that unique developmental mechanisms link different forms of adversity with psychopathology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

“剥夺和威胁的维度，精神病理学和潜在的介体：多年的纵向分析”：对Miller等人的修正。（2018）。

报告了亚当·布莱恩特·米勒（Adam Bryant Miller），玛格丽特·A·谢里丹（Margaret A.Sheridan），杰米·L·汉森（Jamie L.Hanson），凯蒂·A·麦克劳克林（Katie A.McLaughlin），约翰·E·贝茨（John E. E.Lansford，Gregory S.Pettit和Kenneth A.Dodge（《异常心理学杂志》，2018年2月，第127卷[2]，160-170）。在本文中，结果的“路径分析模型”部分（即模型1小节的第3段和“替代模型”小节的1-4段）中的间接影响被错误地报告为标准化βs，并应以βs用于非标准化的间接作用。但是，结果的模式保持不变，并且标准化的间接影响是显着的。对直接路径的标准化β的其他较小修正如下：在“替代模型”小节的第1段中，“β= 0.40”应读为“β= 0.50”。在“替代模型”小节的第4段中，“β= 0.05”，“β= 0.12”和“β= 0.002，p = 0.97”应读为“β= 0.12”，“β= 0.09”和“β= 0.3，p = .70”。最后，通讯作者的电子邮件地址不正确，应阅读adam.miller@unc.edu。（原始文章的以下摘要出现在记录2018-09964-003中。）先前的研究表明，儿童期逆境的暴露与后期发育中的心理病理学之间存在联系。然而，关于将逆境与心理病理学联系起来的机制的研究未能解释这些逆境在不同类型逆境中的特异性。在这里，我们测试了一种概念模型，该模型将剥夺和威胁区分为儿童逆境的不同形式，具有不同的病理病理学途径。剥夺涉及缺乏来自环境的输入，例如认知和社会刺激，这些输入通过改变认知发展（例如语言能力）而影响心理病理学。威胁包括涉及伤害或伤害威胁的经历，这些经历通过破坏社会情感过程而增加了心理病理风险。我们测试了以下预测：剥夺而非威胁会通过语言能力的改变而增加心理病理风险。数据来自儿童发展项目（N = 585），跟着孩子走了十多年。我们分析来自5、6、14和17岁年龄段评估点的数据。母亲在5岁和6岁时完成了关于面临威胁和剥夺经历的采访。在14岁时评估了青少年的言语能力。在17岁时，母亲报告了儿童的心理病理学。路径分析模型测试了从剥夺和威胁经验中内部化和外部化问题的纵向路径。与预测一致，剥夺与通过14岁时对言语能力的影响而使问题外在化的风险有关。威胁与对内在性和外在性问题的影响纵向相关，但这些影响并非由言语能力所介导。结果表明，独特的发育机制将逆境与心理病理学联系起来。