BACKGROUND Reduced executive functions (EF) are commonly associated with developmental conditions (e.g., autism spectrum disorder, ASD; attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, ADHD), although EF seems to be typical in children with callous unemotional (CU) traits. Regulatory function (RF) is a proposed infant precursor that maps on onto factors driving later EF. Here, we first test whether RF is specifically and negatively associated with ASD and ADHD traits, but not CU traits. Second, we test whether RF can act as a protective factor, by moderating the association between infant markers and subsequent ASD and ADHD traits. METHODS Participants were 79 infants at high (N = 42) and low (N = 37) familial risk for ASD. Data come from the 14-month infant visit (Autism Observational Scale for Infants; AOSI; activity level and RF from the Infant Behavior Questionnaire; IBQ) and the 7-year visit (ASD traits: Social Responsiveness Scale, SRS; ADHD traits: Conners 3, CU traits: Inventory of Callous Unemotional Traits). RESULTS Infant RF was negatively associated with later traits of ASD (B = - 0.5, p = 0.01) and ADHD inattention (B = - 0.24, p = 0.02) but not hyperactivity (B = - 0.25, p = 0.10) or CU traits (B = 0.02, p = 0.86). RF moderated the association between infant AOSI score and ASD traits, with a significant effect in those with low RF (B = 0.10, p = 0.006), not high RF (B = 0.01, p = 0.78). Similarly, for ADHD, infant activity level was associated with later ADHD inattention in those with low (B = 0.17, p = 0.04) but not high RF (B = 0.07, p = 0.48). For ADHD hyperactivity symptoms, activity level was predictive at both high and low levels of RF. CONCLUSIONS Strong RF may allow children to compensate for other atypicalities, thus attenuating the association between infant markers and later disorder traits. Whilst infant RF was associated with both ASD and ADHD inattention traits, there was no association with ADHD hyperactivity or CU traits. This suggests that any protective effect may not be universal and emphasises the need for a better understanding of the underlying moderating mechanisms.

中文翻译：

---

婴儿的调节功能可作为自闭症谱系障碍和注意缺陷/多动障碍的后期特征的保护因素，但不能作为无情的非情绪性特征。

背景技术执行功能降低（EF）通常与发育状况（例如，自闭症谱系障碍，ASD，注意力缺陷/多动障碍，ADHD）有关，尽管EF似乎是典型的无情情绪（CU）特质的儿童。调节功能（RF）是拟议中的婴儿前体，其作用于驱动后来的EF的因素。在这里，我们首先测试RF是否与ASD和ADHD性状特异性相关且与否负相关，而不与CU性状相关。其次，我们通过调节婴儿标志物与随后的ASD和ADHD性状之间的关联来测试RF是否可以作为保护因子。方法研究对象为79名婴儿，其ASD家族风险高（N = 42）和低（N = 37）。数据来自14个月的婴儿就诊（婴儿自闭症观察量表； AOSI；婴儿行为问卷的活动水平和RF；IBQ）和7年访问（ASD特质：社会反应能力量表，SRS； ADHD特质：Conners 3，CU特质：无情的非情感特质清单）。结果婴儿RF与ASD的后期特征（B =-0.5，p = 0.01）和ADHD注意力不集中（B =-0.24，p = 0.02）呈负相关，而与多动症（B =-0.25，p = 0.10）或CU特征无关（B ＝ 0.02，p ＝ 0.86）。RF缓解了婴儿AOSI评分与ASD特质之间的关联，对RF低（B = 0.10，p = 0.006）而非RF高（B = 0.01，p = 0.78）的婴儿有显着影响。同样，对于多动症，在低RF（B = 0.17，p = 0.04）但RF不高（B = 0.07，p = 0.48）的婴儿中，婴儿活动水平与后来的ADHD注意力不集中有关。对于多动症多动症状，在高和低水平的射频下，活动水平都是可预测的。结论强RF可以使儿童弥补其他非典型性，从而减弱婴儿标志物与后来的障碍特征之间的关联。婴儿RF与ASD和ADHD注意力不集中的特征有关，而与ADHD多动或CU特征无关。这表明任何保护作用可能都不是普遍的，并强调需要更好地了解潜在的调节机制。