The NIMH Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) Initiative and Its Implications for Research on Personality Disorder
- 298 Downloads
Purpose of Review
We discuss the implications of the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative for neuroscience research on personality disorder (PD). To organize our review, we construct a preliminary conceptual mapping of PD symptom criteria onto RDoC constructs. We then highlight recent neuroscience research, often built around concepts that correspond to RDoC elements, and discuss the findings in reference to the constructs we consider most pertinent to PD.
PD symptoms were strongly conceptually tied to RDoC constructs within the Social Processes domain, implicating brain systems involved in interpersonal rejection, facial emotion perception, and self-referential processes. Negative and Positive Valence Systems were conceptually associated with many PD symptoms, with particular relevance ascribed to the latter’s Reward Valuation construct, which could reflect a more widespread disruption of computational processes involved in estimating the probability and benefits of a future outcome. Within the Cognitive Systems domain, the Cognitive Control construct mainly related to PD symptoms associated with impulse control, suggesting a connection to neural circuits that underlie goal selection and behavioral control. Arousal and Regulatory Systems could only be conceptually mapped onto PD symptoms through the Arousal construct, with different symptoms reflecting either a higher or lower biological sensitivity to internal and external stimuli.
The RDoC framework has promise to advance neuroscience research on PD. The Social Processes domain is especially relevant to PD, although constructs falling within the other RDoC domains could also yield important insights into the neurobiology of PD and its connections with other forms of psychopathology. Identifying RDoC constructs (e.g., habit formation) that subserve more fundamental processes relevant to personality functioning warrants further investigation.
KeywordsResearch domain criteria Personality disorder Negative valence systems Positive valence systems Cognitive systems Social processes
We are grateful to Dr. Vina Goghari for her constructive feedback on the formulation of the contents of this article.
Jacob W. Koudys is supported by a Master’s Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Achala H. Rodrigo is supported by a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Dean Carcone is supported by a Doctoral Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Anthony C. Ruocco is a University of Toronto Scarborough Research Excellence Faculty Scholar and is supported by an Early Researcher Award (ER14-10-185) from the Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Research and Innovation.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Jacob W. Koudys, Jenna M. Traynor, Achala H. Rodrigo, and Dean Carcone each declare no potential conflicts of interest.
Anthony C. Ruocco has received consulting fees from System Analytic.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 2.Development of the RDoC Framework. [Available from: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research-priorities/rdoc/development-of-the-rdoc-framework.shtml.
- 3.•• The RDoC Matrix. [Available from: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research-priorities/rdoc/constructs/rdoc-matrix.shtml. This website outlines the RDoC domains, constructs, and units of analysis, and contains information on updates to the Matrix.
- 4.Update on Genes in the RDoC Matrix. [Available from: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research-priorities/rdoc/update-on-genes-in-the-rdoc-matrix.shtml.
- 5.• Carcone D, Ruocco AC. Six years of research on the National Institute of Mental Health’s research domain criteria (RDoC) initiative: a systematic review. Front Cell Neurosci. 2017;11(46). https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2017.00046. This systematic review summarizes research that has been carried out on the RDoC.
- 6.American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th edition. (DSM-5). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.Google Scholar
- 12.Beck AT, Freeman A, Davis DD. Cognitive therapy of personality disorders, second edition. New York: Guilford Press; 2004.Google Scholar
- 13.• Mancke F, Herpertz SC, Bertsch K. Correlates of aggression in personality disorders: an update. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2018;20:53. This review implicates RDoC constructs in its outlining of aggression in PD. Google Scholar
- 14.• Ruocco AC, Carcone D. A neurobiological model of borderline personality disorder: systematic and integrative review. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2016;24(5):311–29. This review comprehensively describes neurobiological markers of BPD and their potential application to the RDoC framework. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Hayward M, Moran P. Comorbidity of personality disorders and mental illnesses. Psychiatry. 2008;7:102–4.Google Scholar
- 19.Gibbon S, Duggan C, Stoffers J, Huband N, Vollm BA, Ferriter M, et al. Psychological interventions for antisocial personality disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;6:CD007668.Google Scholar
- 20.Barlow DH, Farchione TJ, Sauer-Zavala S, Murray Latin H, Ellard KK, Bullis JR, et al. In: Barlow DH, editor. Unified protocol for transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders, second edition. New York: Oxford University Press; 2018.Google Scholar
- 24.•• Nusslock R, Alloy LB. Reward processing and mood-related symptoms: an RDoC and atranslational neuroscience perspective. J Affect Disord. 2017;216:3–16. This review models possible pathways for the transdiagnostic expression of mood-related symptoms couched within Positive Valence Systems constructs. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.Bedwell JS, Spencer CC, Chan CC, Butler PD, Sehatpour P, Schmidt J. The P1 visual-evoked potential, red light, and transdiagnostic psychiatric symptoms. Brain Res. 1687;2018:144–54.Google Scholar
- 32.Cooper AJ, Duke E, Pickering AD, Smillie LD. Individual differences in reward prediction error: contrasting relations between feedback-related negativity and trait measures of reward sensitivity, impulsivity and extraversion. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00248.
- 41.Fowles DC, Dindo L. A dual-deficit model of psychopathy. Handbook of Psychopathy; 2006. p. 14–34.Google Scholar
- 43.Fernandez KC, Jazaieri H, Gross JJ. Emotion regulation: a transdiagnostic perspective on a new RDoC domain. Cogn Ther Res. 2016;40(3):426–40.Google Scholar
- 48.Koudys JW, Gulamani T, Ruocco AC. Borderline personality disorder: refinements in phenotypic and cognitive profiling. Curr Behav Neurosci Rep. 2018;5(1):102–12.Google Scholar
- 50.•• Strauss GP, Cohen AS. A transdiagnostic review of negative symptom phenomenology and etiology. Schizophr Bull. 2017;43(4):712–29. This review reconceptualizes the relationships among RDoC constructs to assert novel etiological pathways for negative symptom expression. PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 53.Ogilvie JM, Stewart AL, Chan RCK, Shum DHK. Neuropsychological measures of executive function and antisocial behavior: a meta-analysis. Criminology. 2011;49(4):1063–107.Google Scholar
- 58.• Verona E, Bresin K. Aggression proneness: transdiagnostic processes involving negative valence and cognitive systems. Int J Psychophysiol. 2015;98(2 Pt 2):321–9. This study proposes a model for aggression proneness based on relationships among Negative Valence Systems and Cognitive Systems constructs. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 69.Brown RC, Plener PL, Groen G, Neff D, Bonenberger M, Abler B. Differential neural processing of social exclusion and inclusion in adolescents with non-suicidal self-injury and young adults with borderline personality disorder. Front Psychiatry. 2017;8:267.Google Scholar
- 70.Romaniuk L, Pope M, Nicol K, Steele D, Hall J. Neural correlates of fears of abandonment and rejection in borderline personality disorder. Wellcome Open Res. 2016;1.Google Scholar
- 76.Ekman P, Friesen WV. Pictures of facial affect. San Francisco: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1976.Google Scholar
- 77.Minzenberg MJ, Fan J, New AS, Tang CY, Siever LJ. Fronto-limbic dysfunction in response to facial emotion in borderline personality disorder: an event-related fMRI study. Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging. 2007;155(3):231–43.Google Scholar
- 79.Cullen KR, LaRiviere LL, Vizueta N, Thomas KM, Hunt RH, Miller MJ, et al. Brain activation in response to overt and covert fear and happy faces in women with borderline personality disorder. Brain Imaging Behav. 2016;10(2):319–31.Google Scholar
- 80.Scherpiet S, Herwig U, Opialla S, Scheerer H, Habermeyer V, Jäncke L, et al. Reduced neural differentiation between self-referential cognitive and emotional processes in women with borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging. 2015;233(3):314–23.Google Scholar
- 81.• Beeney JE, Hallquist MN, Ellison WD, Levy KN. Self–other disturbance in borderline personality disorder: neural, self-report, and performance-based evidence. Personal Disord Theory Res Treat. 2016;7(1):28 This study adopted a multimodal approach to examining multiple social processes constructs in BPD. Google Scholar
- 85.Berzins LG, Trestman RL. The development and implementation of dialectical behaviour therapy in forensic settings. Int J Forensic Mental Health. 2012;3(1):93–103.Google Scholar
- 86.Linehan MM. Cognitive-behavioural treatment of borderline personality disorder. New York: Guilford Press; 1993.Google Scholar
- 87.Fleischer M, Schafer M, Coogan A, Hassler F, Thome J. Sleep disturbances and circadian CLOCK genes in borderline personality disorder. J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2012;119:1105–10.Google Scholar
- 89.Bromundt V, Wirz-Justice A, Kyburz S, Opwis K, Dammann G, Cajochen C. Circadian sleep-wake cycles, well-being, and light therapy in borderline personality disorder. J Personal Disord. 2013;27:680–96.Google Scholar