Abstract
Background: Prosocial behaviours – acts that benefit others – are of crucial importance for many species including humans. However, adolescents with conduct problems (CP), unlike their typically developing (TD) peers, demonstrate markedly reduced engagement in prosocial behaviours. This pattern is particularly pronounced in adolescents with CP and high levels of callous‐unemotional traits (CP/HCU) who are at increased risk of developing psychopathy in adulthood. While a substantial amount of research has investigated the cognitive‐affective mechanisms thought to underlie antisocial behaviour, much less is known about the mechanisms that could explain reduced prosocial behaviours in adolescents with CP.
Methods: Here we examined the willingness to exert effort to benefit oneself (self) and another person (other, prosocial condition) in children with CP/HCU, CP and lower levels of CU traits (CP/LCU) and their TD peers. The task captured both prosocial choices, and actual effort exerted following prosocial choices, in adolescent boys aged 11–16 (27 CP/HCU; 34 CP/LCU; 33 TD). We used computational modelling to reveal the mechanistic processes involved when choosing prosocial acts.
Results: We found that both CP/HCU and CP/LCU groups were more averse to initiating effortful prosocial acts than TD adolescents – both at a cognitive and at a behavioural level. Strikingly, even if they chose to initiate a prosocial act, the CP/HCU group exerted less effort following this prosocial choice than other groups.
Conclusions: Our findings indicate that reduced exertion of effort to benefit others may be an important factor that differentiates adolescents with CP/HCU from their peers with CP/LCU. They offer new insights into what might drive low prosocial behaviour in adolescents with CP, including vulnerabilities that may particularly characterise those with high levels of CU traits.
Methods: Here we examined the willingness to exert effort to benefit oneself (self) and another person (other, prosocial condition) in children with CP/HCU, CP and lower levels of CU traits (CP/LCU) and their TD peers. The task captured both prosocial choices, and actual effort exerted following prosocial choices, in adolescent boys aged 11–16 (27 CP/HCU; 34 CP/LCU; 33 TD). We used computational modelling to reveal the mechanistic processes involved when choosing prosocial acts.
Results: We found that both CP/HCU and CP/LCU groups were more averse to initiating effortful prosocial acts than TD adolescents – both at a cognitive and at a behavioural level. Strikingly, even if they chose to initiate a prosocial act, the CP/HCU group exerted less effort following this prosocial choice than other groups.
Conclusions: Our findings indicate that reduced exertion of effort to benefit others may be an important factor that differentiates adolescents with CP/HCU from their peers with CP/LCU. They offer new insights into what might drive low prosocial behaviour in adolescents with CP, including vulnerabilities that may particularly characterise those with high levels of CU traits.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Journal | Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |
Early online date | 29 Jan 2024 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 29 Jan 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Acknowledgments:This work was supported by an Open Research Area (ORA) Grant [Grant Number 464-15-176] financed by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC ES/N018850/1) to EV. AG was supported by an MRC graduate fellowship (MR/N013867/1). This study has been approved by the UCL Research Ethics Committee (Project ID Number: 0622/001).
The authors are grateful to Marina Geer, Katerina Pesheva, Cosima Roughton, Akhil Joseph, Graham Collopy, Kelsey Cass and Anne Murta for their help with data collection and to Quentin Bernard for technical support. Finally, the authors are grateful to all participating schools, staff and pupils. The authors have declared that they have no competing or potential conflicts of interest.
Keywords
- prosocial behaviour
- Conduct problems
- callous‐unemotional traits
- affiliation