Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-07T00:54:10.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Study of Positive and Negative Affect and Neurocognitive Functioning in Adolescents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2022

Rebeca Aritio-Solana
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Rioja (Spain)
Eduardo Fonseca-Pedrero
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Rioja (Spain)
Alicia Pérez-Albéniz
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Rioja (Spain)
Oliver Mason
Affiliation:
University of Surrey (UK)
Javier Ortuño-Sierra*
Affiliation:
Universidad de La Rioja (Spain)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Javier Ortuño. Universidad de La Rioja. Departamento de Ciencias de Educación. Calle Luis de Ulloa. 26002 Logroño (Spain). E-mail: javier.ortuno@unirioja.es
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The main purpose of the present work was to study neurocognitive performance of adolescents at risk for emotional difficulties. The sample included a total of 1,509 adolescents from stratified random cluster sampling. Derived from this sample, a group of high-risk (n = 92) and a comparison group (n = 92) were selected based on the short version of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) for comparison on the University of Pennsylvania computerized neuropsychological test battery for children (PENN). A Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was performed taking the scores on the PENN as dependent variables and the two groups derived from the scores of the PANAS (at risk vs. comparison) as a fixed factor. Adolescents at high risk of presenting affectivity problems showed statistically significant differences in several different neurocognitive domains, in accuracy, λ = .820, F (9, 160,000) = 3.913, p < .01, partial η² = .180; speed, λ = .502, F (5, 88,000) = 17.493, p < .01, partial η² = .498; and efficiency, λ = .485, F (4, 89,000) = 23.599, p <.01, partial η² = .515. The high risk group showed lower neurocognitive performance than the comparison group. In addition, a positive statistically significant correlation was found between all the neurocognitive competences (p < .05). Results found in this study reveal that neurocognitive impairments can be shown in adolescents at psychometric high risk for emotional problems before transition to more severe psychological problems.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2022

Mental health problems in children and adolescents range between 10 and 20% of the population (Dray et al., Reference Dray, Bowman, Campbell, Freund, Wolfenden, Hodder, McElwaine, Tremain, Bartlem, Bailey, Small, Palazzi, Oldmeadow and Wiggers2017; Gage & Patalay, Reference Gage and Patalay2021; Polanczyk et al., Reference Polanczyk, Salum, Sugaya, Caye and Rohde2015). In addition, emotional and behavioural problems have a worse long-term prognosis when the onset is prior to adulthood, for example during adolescence or childhood (Parés-Badell et al., Reference Parés-Badell, Barbaglia, Jerinic, Gustavsson, Salvador-Carulla and Alonso2014). In this sense, the prodromal characteristics (symptoms that precede the onset of the disorder) seem to start at an early age, specifically before the age of 25 (Fusar-Poli, Reference Fusar-Poli2019). In addition, problems in psychological adjustment have an impact at multiple levels (personal, family, school, health, economic, etc.) (Polanczyk et al., Reference Polanczyk, Salum, Sugaya, Caye and Rohde2015). Moreover, it should be emphasized that psychological problems and mental disorders are highlighted at this moment, as the new epidemic, also in the age group of 10 to 24 years (Gore et al., Reference Gore, Bloem, Patton, Ferguson, Joseph, Coffey, Sawyer and Mathers2011; Wykes et al., Reference Wykes, Haro, Belli, Obradors-Tarragó, Arango, Ayuso-Mateos, Bitter, Brunn, Chevreul, Demotes-Mainard, Elfeddali, Evans-Lacko, Fiorillo, Forsman, Hazo, Kuepper, Knappe, Leboyer, Lewis and Wittchen2015).

Likewise, different previous investigations affirm that the identification of emotional and behavioral problems during adolescence could mitigate, delay, and even prevent the appearance of a clinical disorder (Clark et al., Reference Clark, Coll-Seck, Banerjee, Peterson, Dalglish, Ameratunga, Balabanova, Bhan, Bhutta, Borrazzo, Claeson, Doherty, El-Jardali, George, Gichaga, Gram, Hipgrave, Kwamie, Meng and Costello2020; Copeland et al., Reference Copeland, Adair, Smetanin, Stiff, Briante, Colman, Fergusson, Horwood, Poulton, Jane Costello and Angold2013). As a result, public health systems are dedicating more resources to the prevention, detection, and intervention of psychological problems in adolescent populations (Arango et al., Reference Arango, Díaz-Caneja, McGorry, Rapoport, Sommer, Vorstman, McDaid, Marín, Serrano-Drozdowskyj, Freedman and Carpenter2018; Fonseca-Pedrero, Debbané et al., Reference Fonseca-Pedrero, Debbané, Rodríguez-Testal, Cohen, Docherty and Ortuño-Sierra2021).

Executive functioning encompasses the cognitive processes involved in planning, initiating, and maintaining goal-directed behavior, response inhibition, cognitive flexibility, working memory, problem solving, and emotional control (Peters, Reference Peters, Thomas, Mareschal and Dumontheil2020; Zelazo et al., Reference Zelazo, Blair and Willoughby2017). Thus, executive functions (EF) are related to positive outcomes such as social functioning (Blanco et al., Reference Blanco, Wall, He, Krueger, Olfson, Jin, Burstein and Merikangas2015; Fusar-Poli, Reference Fusar-Poli2019; Gore et al., Reference Gore, Bloem, Patton, Ferguson, Joseph, Coffey, Sawyer and Mathers2011) and academic skills (Distefano et al., Reference Distefano, Galinsky, McClelland, Zelazo and Carlson2018). On the other hand, specific neurocognitive changes during adolescence are related to an increase in vulnerability to certain mental health problems (Díez-Gómez et al., Reference Díez-Gómez, Pérezde Álbeniz, Ortuño-Sierra and Fonseca-Pedrero2020; Fonseca-Pedrero, Pérez-Álvarez et al., Reference Fonseca-Pedrero, Pérez-Álvarez, Al-Halabí, Inchausti, López-Navarro, Muñiz, Lucas-Molina, Pérez-Albéniz, Baños Rivera, Cano-Vindel, Gimeno-Peón, Prado-Abril, González-Menéndez, Valero, Priede, González-Blanch, Ruiz-Rodríguez, Moriana, Gómez, Navas and Montoya-Castilla2021; Fumero et al., Reference Fumero, Marrero, Pérez-Albéniz and Fonseca-Pedrero2021; Ortuño-Sierra et al., Reference Ortuño-Sierra, Bañuelos, Pérez de Albéniz, Lucas Molina and Fonseca-Pedrero2019). For instance, a relationship has been found between EF and anxiety disorders (Godovich et al., Reference Godovich, Senior, Degnan, Cummings, Shiffrin, Alvord and Rich2020; Mullin et al., Reference Mullin, Perks, Haraden, Snyder and Hankin2020; Ursache & Raver, Reference Ursache and Raver2014) and depression (Gotlib & Joormann, Reference Gotlib and Joormann2010; Thompson et al., Reference Thompson, Borenstein, Kircanski and Gotlib2020). Deficits in executive functioning have been related to depressive and anxiety disorders. According to Oliver et al. (Reference Oliver, Pile, Elm and Lau2019), the relationship between depressive disorder and EF in an adolescent population shows that there may be deficits in information processing, response inhibition, focus shift, selective attention, verbal working memory, and verbal fluency. In addition, alterations in EF can limit coping skills, increasing the risk of relapse and/or affecting compliance with treatment (Wagner et al., Reference Wagner, Doering, Helmreich, Lieb and Tadić2012).

Deficiencies in attention, working memory, and problem solving can have a negative impact on daily activities, especially in children and adolescents whose academic performance may depend on these skills (Aronen et al., Reference Aronen, Vuontela, Steenari, Salmi and Carlson2005; Best et al., Reference Best, Miller and Naglieri2011). Vilgis et al., (Reference Vilgis, Silk and Vance2015), after reviewing 33 studies on the possible relationship between executive functions and depressive disorders in children and adolescents, concluded that negative stimuli can affect performance in neuropsychological tasks.

Thus, both Positive Affect (PA) and Negative Affect (NA) have been shown to be relevant to cognitive performance in adolescents (Han et al., Reference Han, Helm, Iucha, Zahn-Waxler, Hastings and Klimes-Dougan2016; Sandín, Reference Sandín2003; Sandín et al., Reference Sandín, Chorot, Lostao, Joiner, Santed and Valiente1999). PA is defined as the experiencing of a positive mood, with feelings like joy, interest, enthusiasm, and alertness, whereas NA is related to emotional distress, and includes moods like fear, sadness, anger and guilt (Watson et al., Reference Watson, Clark and Tellegen1988). Recent studies have analyzed the relationship between PA, measured by the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson et al., Reference Watson, Clark and Tellegen1988), and working memory, finding a moderate positive correlation (Figueira et al., Reference Figueira, Pacheco, Lobo, Volchan, Pereira, de Oliveira and David2018). Similarly, previous studies suggested the association between working memory and PA (Carpenter et al., Reference Carpenter, Peters, Västfjäll and Isen2013; Yang et al., Reference Yang, Yang and Isen2013). However, the relationship between PA and short-term memory was weaker (Yang et al., Reference Yang, Yang and Isen2013). In addition, it seems that a high PA is related to higher levels of social cognition, and that an increase in NA decreases the performance in this area (Sanmartín, Inglés, Gonzálvez, et al., Reference Sanmartín, Inglés, Gonzálvez, Vicent, Ruiz-Esteban and García-Fernández2018; Sanmartín, Inglés, Vicent, et al., Reference Sanmartín, Inglés, Vicent, Gonzálvez, Díaz-Herrero and García-Fernández2018). Worth noting, none of the revised studies have established cause-effect relationships. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude that problems in affectivity may lead to neurocognitive difficulties and vice versa.

Therefore, and in view of existing previous research, there seems to be a lack of studies that analyze the relationship between different neurocognitive domains and the problems related to low PA and high NA in the adolescent population. The knowledge of different neurocognitive domains and their association with psychological problems can help to facilitate the detection and prevention of these alterations (Moore et al., Reference Moore, Gur, Thomas, Brown, Nock, Savitt, Keilp, Heeringa, Ursano and Stein2017). For this reason, the main objective of this study was to analyze the neurocognitive functioning of adolescents at risk for PA and NA, and to compare it with a comparison group of adolescents at low risk. Furthermore, we studied the correlation between the neurocognitive competences. Considering the previous literature, the working hypothesis was that adolescents at high risk might show more deficits in neurocognitive functioning when compared with those adolescents at low risk for PA and NA to the comparison group. In addition, we expected a positive correlation between all the neurocognitive competences.

Method

Participants

The study was carried out through stratified random sampling, by conglomerates, at the classroom level, in an approximate population of 15,000 students belonging to La Rioja. The different layer was created according to the type of educational center (public or concerted educational centers) and the educational stage (Compulsory Secondary Education, Baccalaureate and Vocational Training). The probability of removal from the classroom was determined based on the number of students enrolled in school. 34 educational centers and 98 classrooms participated. Students with a diagnosis of psychological disorder or with a diagnosis of intellectual disability were excluded from the study. This information was previously provided by the educational centers. The initial sample consisted of a total of N = 1,881 students.

Those participants with high scores on the Oviedo Infrequency Scale (Fonseca-Pedrero et al., Reference Fonseca-Pedrero, Paíno-Piñeiro, Lemos-Giráldez, Villazón-García and Muñiz2009) (more than three points) (n = 104), who were over 19 years old (n = 170) or who did not finish the test (n = 76) were eliminated. Thus, the final sample consisted of a total of 1,509 students, 739 boys (46.5%) and 849 girls (53.5%).

The mean age was 16.13 years (SD = 1.36), the age range oscillating between 14 and 19 years (14 years, n = 213; 15 years, n = 337; 16 years, n = 400; 17 years, n = 382; 18 years, n = 180 and 19 years, n = 76).

Instruments

Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Short version (PANAS-S) (Ebesutani et al., Reference Ebesutani, Okamura, Higa-McMillan and Chorpita2011). The PANAS is made up of two factors designed to measure Positive Affect and Negative Affect. The 10 items have a Likert-type format with responses ranging from 1 (very little or not at all), up to 5 (extremely or a lot). Five items evaluate PA through adjectives such as: Cheerful, lively, happy, energetic and proud; and another five the NA: Depressed, angry, fearful, scared and sad.

The PANAS assesses how people feel during the last weeks. This instrument has shown adequate psychometric quality in previous works with Spanish adolescents (Fonseca-Pedrero, Díez-Gómez, et al., Reference Fonseca-Pedrero, Díez-Gómez, de la Barrera, Sebastián-Enesco, Ortuño-Sierra, Montoya-Castilla, Lucas-Molina, Inchausti and Pérez-Albéniz2020).

The Oviedo Infrequency Scale (INF-OV) (Fonseca-Pedrero et al., Reference Fonseca-Pedrero, Paíno-Piñeiro, Lemos-Giráldez, Villazón-García and Muñiz2009). The INF OV is an instrument developed to detect those participants who have responded haphazardly. The INF OV is a self-report type measurement instrument composed of 12 items in Likert-type format of five categories depending on the degree of adherence (1 = completely disagree; 5 = completely agree).

Participants with more than three incorrect answers were eliminated from the sample. This scale has been used in previous studies and is valid to detect participants who present a random, pseudo-random and / or dishonest response pattern (Fonseca-Pedrero et al., Reference Fonseca-Pedrero, Paíno-Piñeiro, Lemos-Giráldez, Villazón-García and Muñiz2009).

The Family Affluence Scale–II (FAS–II) (Boyce et al., Reference Boyce, Torsheim, Currie and Zambon2006). Socioeconomic status was measured using a scale composed of 4 items with scoring ranges from 0 to 9 points. Previous international studies have demonstrated its adequate psychometric properties (Boyce et al., Reference Boyce, Torsheim, Currie and Zambon2006).

The Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (CNB) (Gur et al., Reference Gur, Richard, Hughett, Calkins, Macy, Bilker, Brensinger and Gur2010, Reference Gur, Richard, Calkins, Chiavacci, Hansen, Bilker, Loughead, Connolly, Qiu, Mentch, Abou-Sleiman, Hakonarson and Gur2012). The CNB is composed of test from different batteries. The PENN was administered using the system developed by the University of Pennsylvania. During one hour, the participants perform 14 tasks that include different domains: Executive functions (mental abstraction and flexibility, attention and working memory), episodic memory (words, faces and shapes), complex cognition (verbal and non-verbal reasoning and spatial processing, social cognition (identification of emotions, differentiation of expressed emotion and age differentiation), and sensorimotor speed

In the present study we used the following tasks (domain measured): Penn Conditional Exclusion Test (mental flexibility), the Penn Continuous Performance Test (attention), and Letter N-back (working memory) with the aim to assess executive functions; the Penn Word Memory Test (verbal memory), the Penn Face Memory Test (face memory), and the Visual Object Learning Test (spatial memory) in order to analyze memory; the Children’s version of the Penn Verbal Reasoning Test Language reasoning), Penn Matrix Reasoning Test (nonverbal reasoning), and the Penn Line Orientation Test (emotion identification) that intended to assess complex cognition; and finally, the Penn Emotion Identification Test (emotion identification), the Penn Emotion Differentiation Test (emotion differentiation), and the Penn Age Differentiation Test (age differentiation) were used to analyze social cognition domain. Different studies have shown adequate psychometric properties of the PEEN (Gur et al., Reference Gur, Richard, Calkins, Chiavacci, Hansen, Bilker, Loughead, Connolly, Qiu, Mentch, Abou-Sleiman, Hakonarson and Gur2012).

In addition to those tests developed to only measure speed, the other tests include measures of accuracy and speed. We simplified instructions and vocabulary for verbal stimuli from the adult CNB, in order to facilitate completion. The Motor Praxis task and Finger Tapping Test were evaluated in sensorimotor domainFootnote 1. Following previous works (Gur et al., Reference Gur, Richard, Calkins, Chiavacci, Hansen, Bilker, Loughead, Connolly, Qiu, Mentch, Abou-Sleiman, Hakonarson and Gur2012; Moore et al., Reference Moore, Reise, Gur, Hakonarson and Gur2015) the web based platform for the CNB was established with Perl CGI, HTML, a mySQL database and the Apache web server; tests were developed by means of Adobe Flash®. Scores ant tests are generated automatically with this platform.

We followed a back translation procedure in accordance with international guidelines for translation of psychological measures (Muñiz et al., Reference Muñiz, Elosua and Hambleton2013) with the aim of adapting the battery into Spanish. A panel of experts translated the American English original version of the CBN adolescent version into Spanish. Then, a bilingual researcher, familiar with American culture, translated this version into English. Finally, a third panel of researchers compared the two English versions (original and translated). All processes were supported by the Brain Behavior Laboratory, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, US.

Procedure

The research was approved by the Department of Education of the Government of La Rioja and the Ethical Committee of Clinical Research of La Rioja (CEICLAR). In order to standardize the test administration process in all educational centers, all researchers were given a protocol and guidelines that had to be implemented before, during, and after the tests were carried out. The administration was carried out collectively in groups of 10 to 30 participants. Classrooms of the school, which were equipped for this purpose with individual computer equipment, were used. Administration of the test was always carried out within school hours and the confidentiality of the responses was informed at all times, as well as the voluntary nature of participation. No rewards were given for collaboration in the study. Likewise, the informed consent of the parents or legal guardians was requested for the participation of adolescents under 18 years of age in the research. The study was presented as an investigation into emotional well-being and mental health.

Data Analyses

First, the initial sample of participants was analyzed. Those participants with high scores on the Oviedo Infrequency Scale (Fonseca-Pedrero et al., Reference Fonseca-Pedrero, Paíno-Piñeiro, Lemos-Giráldez, Villazón-García and Muñiz2009) (more than three points) (n = 104), who were over 19 years old (n = 170) or who did not finish the test (n = 76) were eliminated. Thus, the final sample consisted of a total of 1,509 students, 739 boys (46.5%) and 849 girls (53.5%).

Second, direct scores for precision and speed were calculated in each of the tests and later they were transformed into z scores, considering the means and standard deviations of the total sample. In order to facilitate interpretation and make it more consistent, a higher z score was intended to reflect better performance on the task (e.g., higher accuracy and shorter responses correspond to higher z-scores). Thus, the response time z scores were multiplied by –1, in such a way that a longer response time corresponded with a lower z score.

With the aim of comparing adolescents at risk and non-risk in affect, two different groups were created. For the group termed high psychometric risk, a score equal to or greater than 29 points in NA and equal to or less than 18 in PA was established as an inclusion criterion, according to the normative values of previous research (Crawford & Henry, Reference Crawford and Henry2004; Ortuño-Sierra et al., Reference Ortuño-Sierra, Santarén-Rosell, Pérez-Albéniz and Fonseca-Pedrero2015).

Z scores on the PENN greater than 3 and less than –3 were eliminated in order to reduce the influence of out-of-range values. Therefore, a final sample of n = 92 (26 males; mean age = 16.36 years) was obtained for the high psychometric risk group. A comparison group matched for gender and agewas selected from the remainder at random (n = 92; 26 males; mean age = 16.42 years).

Descriptive statistics were calculated for the precision, speed and efficiency measures of the five neurocognitive domains of the PENN according to the risk group and the comparison group for the PA and NA.

Second, a Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was performed taking the five neurocognitive domains (Executive Function, Memory, Complex Cognition, Social Cognition and Sensorimotor Cognition in the case of speed) as dependent variables and the two groups derived from the scores of the brief PANAS (at risk vs. comparison) as a fixed factor.

The variable of socioeconomic level (based on FAS II) was included as a possible covariate that could affect the result. The partial eta squared (partial η2) was used as an estimate of the effect size.

Finally, the Pearson’s correlations between the dependent variables were calculated with the aim to understand the relationship between all the neurocognitive competences. In order to facilitate understanding, we only included the correlation between the efficiency performance in Executive Function, Memory, Complex Cognition, Social Cognition (result of the accuracy minus the speed) and the Sensorimotor competence. We used SPSS 26.0 for data analysis (IBM, 2016).

Results

Descriptive Statistics for the Neurocognitive Domains

The descriptive statistics for all z scores in neurocognitive functions according to precision, speed and efficiency are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for the Total Sample and the Risk and Non-risk Groups

Accuracy Performance across Neurocognitive Domains

After controlling for the effect of socioeconomic status in the participants, the MANCOVA results with the precision scores of neurocognitive competencies as dependent variables and the two groups (comparison vs. high risk) as a fixed factor, showed statistically significant differences (λ = .820, F (9, 160,000) = 3.913, p = .001, partial η² = .180) (see Table 2). In particular, the ANOVAs reveal statistically signifficant differences by group in executive control, F (1, 92) = 13.820, p < .01, partial η² = .076; complex cognition, F (1, 92) = 6.505, p = .001, partial η² = .037; and social cognition, F (1, 92) = 22.015, p < .01, partial η² = .116; but not for episodic memory, F (1, 92) = 2.030, p = .156, partial η² = .012. In those that were significant, the effect size was low except for social cognition.

Table 2. Accuracy Neurocognitive Performance Scores for the Comparison and the High-Risk Group

Speed Performance across Neurocognitive Domains

The MANCOVA for speed scores showed statistically significant differences in neurocognitive processing speed as a function of group, λ = .502, F (5, 88,000) = 17.493, p < .01, partial η² = .498. Specifically (see Table 3) the ANOVAs indicated that the speed scores in the participants varied statistically significantly depending on the group only in the domain of complex cognition, F (1, 92) = 51.395, p < .01, partial η² = .032. No statistically significant differences were found in the rest of the domains: Social cognition, F (1, 92) = 3.064, p = .082, partial η² = .018; executive control, F (1, 92) = 0.121, p = .728, partial η² = .001; episodic memory, F (1, 92) = 1.287, p = .258, partial η² = .008; sensorimotor performance, F (1, 92) = 1.323, p = .252, partial η² = .008. Adolescents at risk show a significant decrease in neurocognitive processing performance (more time needed) in complex cognition neurocognitive competence compared to those at non-risk.

Table 3. Speed Neurocognitive Performance Scores for the Comparison and the High-Risk Group

Efficiency Performance across Neurocognitive Domains

Regarding efficiency (derived from accuracy scores minus speed scores) in the four competences, the MANCOVA scores showed statistically significant differences according to the high and comparison groups in affectivity problems, λ = .485, F (4, 89,000) = 23.599, p < .01, partial η² = .515. The results of the ANOVAs are shown in Table 4. As can be seen, there are statistically significant differences in complex cognition, F (1, 92) = 8.643, p < .01, partial η² = .049; and social cognition, F (1, 92) = 15.276, p < .01, partial η² = .083. Nonetheless, no signifficant differences were found in executive control, F (1, 92) = 2.769, p = .098, partial η² = .016); nor in episodic memory, F (1, 92) = 3.036, p = .083, partial η² = .039. Adolescents with high psychometric risk show a lower performance regarding efficiency in two of the four neurocognitive competences when compared to those without risk.

Table 4. Efficiency Neurocognitive Performance Scores for the Comparison Group and the High-Risk Group

Correlation between Neurocognitive Domains

Table 5 shows the Pearson’s correlations for all the neurocognitive competences. As it can seen, most of the correlations found were statistically significant.

Table 5. Pearson Correlations between all the Neurocognitive Competences in Efficiency and Sensorimotor

Note. ** p < .05.

Discussion

Mental health problems in the child and adolescent population have a strong impact on personal, social, health and economic levels (Fumero et al., Reference Fumero, Marrero, Pérez-Albéniz and Fonseca-Pedrero2021; Vaingankar et al., Reference Vaingankar, Chong, Abdin, Shafie, Chua, Shahwan, Verma and Subramaniam2021). However, to date, there are still, limitations in understanding the association between positive and negative affectivity problems and neurocognitive performance during adolescence. Therefore, the objective of this research was to evaluate the neurocognitive performance in adolescents with psychometric risk of presenting problems in affectivity. The present work is one of the first studies to analyze the association between emotional measures of PA and NA, measured by the brief PANAS, and neurocognitive functioning, measured by the PENN, in an adolescent population. The results found in this study, although they do not establish cause-effect relationships, confirm that adolescents at risk of presenting affective problems (high NA or low PA) have lower neurocognitive performance than adolescents at low risk.

Specifically the results reveal statistically significant differences in all neurocognitive domains (executive control, complex cognition, and social cognition), except for episodic memory. Previous studies reveal results similar to those found in this study, relating EF to anxiety disorders (Godovich et al., Reference Godovich, Senior, Degnan, Cummings, Shiffrin, Alvord and Rich2020; Mullin et al., Reference Mullin, Perks, Haraden, Snyder and Hankin2020; Ursache & Raver, Reference Ursache and Raver2014) and depression (Gotlib & Joormann, Reference Gotlib and Joormann2010; Thompson et al., Reference Thompson, Borenstein, Kircanski and Gotlib2020). Also, different problems in neurocognitive functioning have been related to emotional problems (Vilgis et al., Reference Vilgis, Silk and Vance2015). In particular, the study of Barch et al. (Reference Barch, Harms, Tillman, Hawkey and Luby2019), indicated that emotion regulation and episodic memory were linked to depression symtoms. The results in the present study are unclear about this, as adolescents at risk for emotional problems did not show impairments in episodic memory when compared to those at low risk. Previous studies have documented that adolescents and adults with depression had impairments in episodic memory. As this study focus on emotional symptoms instead of depression, it could be that episodic memory deficits are associated to depression disorder but not to previous steps of emotional difficulties, contrary to the other neurocognitive domains studied (Ahern & Semkovska, Reference Ahern and Semkovska2017; Semkovska et al., Reference Semkovska, Quinlivan, O’Grady, Johnson, Collins, O’Connor and Knittle2019).

If the speed of processing is considered, the results showed statistically significant differences between the adolescents of low and high risk only in the domain of complex cognition. At the present time, few studies have reported data on neurocognitive performance and its relationship to mental health problems. The results of the present work converge with Vilgis et al. (Reference Vilgis, Silk and Vance2015) who found that difficulties in attention, working memory, and problem solving were related with affective disorders. Moreover, recent studies have found similar results between affective disorders and neurocognitive performance (Chaarani et al., Reference Chaarani, Hahn, Allgaier, Adise, Owens, Juliano, Yuan, Loso, Ivanciu, Albaugh, Dumas, Mackey, Laurent, Ivanova, Hagler, Cornejo, Hatton, Agrawal, Aguinaldo and Garavan2021; Godovich et al., Reference Godovich, Senior, Degnan, Cummings, Shiffrin, Alvord and Rich2020; Thompson et al., Reference Thompson, Borenstein, Kircanski and Gotlib2020). Therefore, positive and negative affect may be key to understanding the relationship between emotional difficulties measures and neurocognitive markers (Ho et al., Reference Ho, Gifuni and Gotlib2021; Mullin et al., Reference Mullin, Perks, Haraden, Snyder and Hankin2020).

The results for efficiency reveal that adolescents at risk show poorer performance in this type of task across different neurocognitive domains. Thus, high-risk adolescents obtained lower scores in complex cognition and social cognition. The differences found in this study are consistent with the hypothesis that there is a lower capacity to establish self-regulation processes in child and adolescent populations with neurocognitive deficits (Schoemaker et al., Reference Schoemaker, Bunte, Espy, Deković and Matthys2014). In this sense, different studies show the relationship between emotional regulation difficulties and school dropout, substance use, suicidal ideation or bullying, among other problems (Vaingankar et al., Reference Vaingankar, Chong, Abdin, Shafie, Chua, Shahwan, Verma and Subramaniam2021; Walker et al., Reference Walker, McGee and Druss2015). The results found in this study are consistent with the idea that adolescents with neurocognitive deficits are at higher risk for emotion dysregulation, which may lead to mental health problems (Schoemaker et al., Reference Schoemaker, Bunte, Espy, Deković and Matthys2014). It is worth mentioning that as emotional problems are more prevalent in women, the high risk group comprised of more women than men, a result that precludes generalization of the results to males.

Also, correlations between the dependent variables (the neurocognitive competences), were all positive and statistically significant. This makes sense from a neuropsychological perspective, as it is difficult to complete a complex problem if it is not possible, for instance, to keep the goal in mind (executive function) (Moore et al., Reference Moore, Reise, Gur, Hakonarson and Gur2015). Also, different authors, suggest that similar neural systems are involve in neurocognitive performance (Apšvalka et al., Reference Apšvalka, Ferreira, Schmitz, Rowe and Anderson2022; Cocuzza et al., Reference Cocuzza, Ito, Schultz, Bassett and Cole2020), what is in line with the positive correlation found between all the domains. Overall, the results presented are consistent with the hypothesis that difficulties in PA and NA are associated with limitations in neurocognitive skills (Basten et al., Reference Basten, Althoff, Tiemeier, Jaddoe, Hofman, Hudziak, Verhulst and van der Ende2013). In this regard, these results show that mental health problems, specifically those related to affective aspects, are significantly related to neurocognitive functioning in the adolescent population (Blanken et al., Reference Blanken, White, Mous, Basten, Muetzel, Jaddoe, Wals, van der Ende, Verhulst and Tiemeier2017; Hobson et al., Reference Hobson, Scott and Rubia2011). The results of this work seem to support the idea that the study of cognitive endophenotypes can be useful in order to understand the relationship between emotional difficulties and negative outcomes during adolescence. This can contribute to improve prevention and early detection strategies in the field of mental health (Abrahams et al., Reference Abrahams, Pancorbo, Primi, Santos, Kyllonen, John and De Fruyt2019; Beck et al., Reference Beck, Himelstein, Bredemeier, Silverstein and Grant2018; Oliver et al., Reference Oliver, Pile, Elm and Lau2019). Endophenotypic measures of specific neurocognitive functions could help to better understand affective problems and improve prognosis, offering a useful and relevant starting point for researchers, healthcare professionals and education professionals.

The results of this work have some limitations that should be mentioned. First, the cross-sectional nature of the study prevents the establishment of cause and effect relationships. In this way, it is not possible to determine whether the neurocognitive problem precedes, is concomitant or consequent to the problems in positive and negative affect. In the future, it would be advisable to carry out longitudinal studies that will allow stablishing cause-effect correlations. Second, to detect individuals at high risk of suffering emotional problems, the brief PANAS was used as a representative indicator. Although this measurement tool has been proven as a useful and valid screening tool, the inclusion of other measurement tools such as interviews could help to more accurately detect participants at risk of suffering from mental health problems. Furthermore, an exhaustive detection of specific learning difficulties in the sample was not carried out. Finally, no information was collected on a previous history of mental health problems at the family level, an aspect that could be relevant in subsequent research. Despite these limitations, the results found in the study show a significant relationship between problems in positive and negative affect and neurocognitive difficulties during adolescence. This study provides information that contributes to a deeper understanding of the underlying etiology of mental health problems in such a relevant stage of development as adolescence. Future research could continue with the study of the phenotypic measurement of cognitive competences with specific health problems and combined with neuroimaging data, genetic patterns and clinical evaluations.

Footnotes

Funding Statement: This work was supported by the “Beca Leonardo a Investigadores y Creadores Culturales 2020 de la Fundación BBVA”.

Conflicts of Interest: None.

1 The following platform was used: https://penncnp.med.upenn.edu/webcnp.pl

References

Abrahams, L., Pancorbo, G., Primi, R., Santos, D., Kyllonen, P., John, O. P., & De Fruyt, F. (2019). Social-emotional skill assessment in children and adolescents: Advances and challenges in personality, clinical, and educational contexts. Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 460473. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000591CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahern, E., & Semkovska, M. (2017). Cognitive functioning in the first-episode of major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychology, 31(1), 5272. https://doi.org/10.1037/NEU0000319CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Apšvalka, D., Ferreira, C. S., Schmitz, T. W., Rowe, J. B., & Anderson, M. C. (2022). Dynamic targeting enables domain-general inhibitory control over action and thought by the prefrontal cortex. Nature Communications, 13(1), Article 274. https://doi.org/10.1038/S41467-021-27926-WCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arango, C., Díaz-Caneja, C. M., McGorry, P. D., Rapoport, J., Sommer, I. E., Vorstman, J. A., McDaid, D., Marín, O., Serrano-Drozdowskyj, E., Freedman, R., & Carpenter, W. (2018). Preventive strategies for mental health. The Lancet Psychiatry, 5(7), 591604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30057-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aronen, E. T., Vuontela, V., Steenari, M.-R., Salmi, J., & Carlson, S. (2005). Working memory, psychiatric symptoms, and academic performance at school. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 83(1), 3342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2004.06.010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barch, D. M., Harms, M. P., Tillman, R., Hawkey, E., & Luby, J. L. (2019). Early childhood depression, emotion regulation, episodic memory, and hippocampal development. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 128(1), 8195. http://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000392CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basten, M. M. G. J., Althoff, R. R., Tiemeier, H., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Hofman, A., Hudziak, J. J., Verhulst, F. C., & van der Ende, J. (2013). The dysregulation profile in young children: Empirically defined classes in the Generation R Study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 52(8), 841850.E2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2013.05.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, A. T., Himelstein, R., Bredemeier, K., Silverstein, S. M., & Grant, P. (2018). What accounts for poor functioning in people with schizophrenia: A re-evaluation of the contributions of neurocognitive v. attitudinal and motivational factors. Psychological Medicine, 48(16), 27762785. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718000442CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Best, J. R., Miller, P. H., & Naglieri, J. A. (2011). Relations between executive function and academic achievement from ages 5 to 17 in a large, representative national sample. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(4), 327336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanco, C., Wall, M. M., He, J.-P., Krueger, R. F., Olfson, M., Jin, C. J., Burstein, M., & Merikangas, K. R. (2015). The space of common psychiatric disorders in adolescents: Comorbidity structure and individual latent liabilities. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 54(1), 4552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2014.10.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanken, L. M. E., White, T., Mous, S. E., Basten, M., Muetzel, R. L., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Wals, M., van der Ende, J., Verhulst, F. C., & Tiemeier, H. (2017). Cognitive functioning in children with internalising, externalising and dysregulation problems: A population-based study. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 26(4), 445456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-016-0903-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyce, W., Torsheim, T., Currie, C., & Zambon, A. (2006). The Family Affluence Scale as a measure of national wealth: Validation of an adolescent self-report measure. Social Indicators Research, 78, 473487. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-1607-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, S. M., Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., & Isen, A. M. (2013). Positive feelings facilitate working memory and complex decision making among older adults. Cognition & Emotion, 27(1), 184192. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.698251CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaarani, B., Hahn, S., Allgaier, N., Adise, S., Owens, M. M., Juliano, A. C., Yuan, D. K., Loso, H., Ivanciu, A., Albaugh, M. D., Dumas, J., Mackey, S., Laurent, J., Ivanova, M., Hagler, D. J., Cornejo, M. D., Hatton, S., Agrawal, A., Aguinaldo, L., … Garavan, H. P. (2021). Baseline brain function in the preadolescents of the ABCD Study. Nature Neuroscience, 24(8), 11761186. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-021-00867-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, H., Coll-Seck, A. M., Banerjee, A., Peterson, S., Dalglish, S. L., Ameratunga, S., Balabanova, D., Bhan, M. K., Bhutta, Z. A., Borrazzo, J., Claeson, M., Doherty, T., El-Jardali, F., George, A. S., Gichaga, A., Gram, L., Hipgrave, D. B., Kwamie, A., Meng, Q., … Costello, A. (2020). A future for the world’s children? A WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission. The Lancet, 395(10224), 605658. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32540-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cocuzza, C. V., Ito, T., Schultz, D., Bassett, D. S., & Cole, M. W. (2020). Flexible coordinator and switcher hubs for adaptive task control. Journal of Neuroscience, 40(36), 69496968. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2559-19.2020CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Copeland, W. E., Adair, C. E., Smetanin, P., Stiff, D., Briante, C., Colman, I., Fergusson, D., Horwood, J., Poulton, R., Jane Costello, E., & Angold, A. (2013). Diagnostic transitions from childhood to adolescence to early adulthood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 54(7), 791799. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12062CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2004). The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43(3), 245265. https://doi.org/10.1348/0144665031752934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díez-Gómez, A., Pérezde Álbeniz, A., Ortuño-Sierra, J., & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2020). SENTIA: Escala para la evaluación de la conducta suicida en adolescentes [SENTIA: An adolescent Suicidal Behavior Assessment Scale]. Psicothema, 32(3), 382389. http://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2020.27Google Scholar
Distefano, R., Galinsky, E., McClelland, M. M., Zelazo, P. D., & Carlson, S. M. (2018). Autonomy-supportive parenting and associations with child and parent executive function. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 58, 7785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dray, J., Bowman, J., Campbell, E., Freund, M., Wolfenden, L., Hodder, R. K., McElwaine, K., Tremain, D., Bartlem, K., Bailey, J., Small, T., Palazzi, K., Oldmeadow, C., & Wiggers, J. (2017). Systematic review of universal resilience-focused interventions targeting child and adolescent mental health in the school setting. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 56(10), 813824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2017.07.780CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ebesutani, C., Okamura, K., Higa-McMillan, C., & Chorpita, B. F. (2011). A psychometric analysis of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule for Children-Parent Version in a school sample. Psychological Assessment, 23(2), 406416. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueira, J. S. B., Pacheco, L. B., Lobo, I., Volchan, E., Pereira, M. G., de Oliveira, L., & David, I. A. (2018). “Keep that in mind!” The role of Positive Affect in working memory for maintaining goal-relevant information. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1228. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2018.01228/BIBTEXCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Díez-Gómez, A., de la Barrera, U., Sebastián-Enesco, C., Ortuño-Sierra, J., Montoya-Castilla, I., Lucas-Molina, B., Inchausti, F., & Pérez-Albéniz, A. (2020). Conducta suicida en adolescentes: Un análisis de redes [Suicidal behavior in adolescents: A network analysis]. Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpsm.2020.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Debbané, M., Rodríguez-Testal, J. F., Cohen, A. S., Docherty, A. R., & Ortuño-Sierra, J. (2021). Schizotypy: The Way Ahead. Psicothema, 33(1), 1627. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2019.285Google ScholarPubMed
Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Paíno-Piñeiro, M., Lemos-Giráldez, S., Villazón-García, U., & Muñiz, J. (2009). Validation of the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire-Brief Form in adolescents. Schizophrenia Research, 111(1–3), 5360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2009.03.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Pérez-Álvarez, M., Al-Halabí, S., Inchausti, F., López-Navarro, E. R., Muñiz, J., Lucas-Molina, B., Pérez-Albéniz, A., Baños Rivera, R., Cano-Vindel, A., Gimeno-Peón, A., Prado-Abril, J., González-Menéndez, A., Valero, A. V., Priede, A., González-Blanch, C., Ruiz-Rodríguez, P., Moriana, J. A., Gómez, L. E., Navas, P., … Montoya-Castilla, I. (2021). Tratamientos Psicológicos Empíricamente Apoyados Para la Infancia y Adolescencia: Estado de la Cuestión. Psicothema, 33(3), 386398. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2021.56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fumero, A., Marrero, R. J., Pérez-Albéniz, A., & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2021). Adolescents’ bipolar experiences and suicide risk: Well-being and mental health difficulties as mediators. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), Article 3024. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063024CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fusar-Poli, P. (2019). Integrated mental health services for the developmental period (0 to 25 years): A critical review of the evidence. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, Article 355. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gage, S. H., & Patalay, P. (2021). Associations between adolescent mental health and health-related behaviors in 2005 and 2015: A population cross-cohort study. The Journal of Adolescent Health: Official Publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 69(4), 588596. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JADOHEALTH.2021.03.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godovich, S. A., Senior, C. J., Degnan, K. A., Cummings, C., Shiffrin, N. D., Alvord, M. K., & Rich, B. A. (2020). The role of executive functioning in treatment outcome for child anxiety. Evidence-Based Practice in Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 5(1), 5366. https://doi.org/10.1080/23794925.2020.1727794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gore, F. M., Bloem, P. J. N., Patton, G. C., Ferguson, J., Joseph, V., Coffey, C., Sawyer, S. M., & Mathers, C. D. (2011). Global burden of disease in young people aged 10–24 years: A systematic analysis. Lancet, 377, 20932102. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60512-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gotlib, I. H., & Joormann, J. (2010). Cognition and depression: Current status and future directions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 285312. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131305CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gur, R. C., Richard, J., Calkins, M. E., Chiavacci, R., Hansen, J. A., Bilker, W. B., Loughead, J., Connolly, J. J., Qiu, H., Mentch, F. D., Abou-Sleiman, P. M., Hakonarson, H., & Gur, R. E. (2012). Age group and sex differences in performance on a computerized neurocognitive battery in children age 8–21. Neuropsychology, 26(2), 251265. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0026712CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gur, R. C., Richard, J., Hughett, P., Calkins, M. E., Macy, L., Bilker, W. B., Brensinger, C., & Gur, R. E. (2010). A cognitive neuroscience-based computerized battery for efficient measurement of individual differences: Standardization and initial construct validation. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 187(2), 254262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2009.11.017CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Han, G., Helm, J., Iucha, C., Zahn-Waxler, C., Hastings, P. D., & Klimes-Dougan, B. (2016). Are executive functioning deficits concurrently and predictively associated with depressive and anxiety symptoms in adolescents? Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 45(1), 4458. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2015.1041592CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ho, T. C., Gifuni, A. J., & Gotlib, I. H. (2021). Psychobiological risk factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviors in adolescence: A consideration of the role of puberty. Molecular Psychiatry. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-021-01171-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobson, C. W., Scott, S., & Rubia, K. (2011). Investigation of cool and hot executive function in ODD/CD independently of ADHD. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(10), 10351043. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02454.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
IBM. (2016). IBM SPSS Advanced Statistics (Version 24.0) [Computer software]. IBM. https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/downloading-ibm-spss-statistics-24Google Scholar
Moore, T. M., Gur, R. C., Thomas, M. L., Brown, G. G., Nock, M. K., Savitt, A. P., Keilp, J. G., Heeringa, S., Ursano, R. J., & Stein, M. B. (2017). Development, administration, and structural validity of a brief, computerized neurocognitive battery. Assessment, 26(1), 125143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191116689820CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, T. M., Reise, S. P., Gur, R. E., Hakonarson, H., & Gur, R. C. (2015). Psychometric properties of the Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery. Neuropsychology, 29(2), 235246. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000093CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mullin, B. C., Perks, E. L., Haraden, D. A., Snyder, H. R., & Hankin, B. L. (2020). Subjective executive function weaknesses are linked to elevated internalizing symptoms among community adolescents. Assessment, 27(3), 560571. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118820133CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muñiz, J., Elosua, P., & Hambleton, R. K. (2013). Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: Segunda edición [International Test Commission Guidelines for test translation and adaptation: Second edition]. Psicothema, 25(2), 151157. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.24Google Scholar
Oliver, A., Pile, V., Elm, D., & Lau, J. Y. F. (2019). The cognitive neuropsychology of depression in adolescents. Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports, 6(4), 227235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40473-019-00187-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortuño-Sierra, J., Bañuelos, M., Pérez de Albéniz, A., Lucas Molina, B., & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2019). The study of Positive and Negative Affect in children and adolescents: New advances in a Spanish version of the PANAS. PLOS ONE, 14(8), Article e0221696. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortuño-Sierra, J., Santarén-Rosell, M., Pérez-Albéniz, A., & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2015). Dimensional structure of the Spanish version of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) in adolescents and young adults. Psychological Assessment, 27(3), e1e9. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parés-Badell, O., Barbaglia, G., Jerinic, P., Gustavsson, A., Salvador-Carulla, L., & Alonso, J. (2014). Cost of disorders of the brain in Spain. PLOS ONE, 9(8), Article e105471. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105471CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, S. (2020). The development of executive functions in childhood and adolescence and their relation to school performance. In Thomas, M. S. C., Mareschal, D., & Dumontheil, I. (Eds.), Educational Neuroscience (pp. 225243). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003016830-13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polanczyk, G. V., Salum, G. A., Sugaya, L. S., Caye, A., & Rohde, L. A. (2015). Annual research review: A meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence of mental disorders in children and adolescents. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(3), 345365. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12381CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sandín, B. (2003). Escalas PANAS de afecto positivo y negativo para niños y adolescentes (PANASN) [PANAS scales of positive and negative affect for children and adolescents (PANASN)]. Revista de Psicopatología y Psicología Clínica, 8(2), 173182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandín, B., Chorot, P., Lostao, L., Joiner, T. E., Santed, M. A., & Valiente, R. M. (1999). Escalas Panas de Afecto Positivo y Negativo: Validación factorial y convergencia transcultural [The PANAS Scales of Positive and Negative Affect: Factor analytic validation and cross-cultural convergence]. Psicothema, 11(1), 3751.Google Scholar
Sanmartín, R., Inglés, C. J., Gonzálvez, C., Vicent, M., Ruiz-Esteban, C., & García-Fernández, J. M. (2018). Impact of affective profiles on school refusal in a Spanish sample of primary education. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(4), 13491357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0962-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanmartín, R., Inglés, C. J., Vicent, M., Gonzálvez, C., Díaz-Herrero, Á., & García-Fernández, J. M. (2018). Positive and negative affect as predictors of social functioning in Spanish children. PLOS ONE, 13(8), Article e0201698. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201698CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schoemaker, K., Bunte, T., Espy, K. A., Deković, M., & Matthys, W. (2014). Executive functions in preschool children with ADHD and DBD: An 18-month longitudinal study. Developmental Neuropsychology, 39(4), 302315. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2014.911875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semkovska, M., Quinlivan, L., O’Grady, T., Johnson, R., Collins, A., O’Connor, J., & Knittle, H. (2019). Cognitive function following a major depressive episode: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 6(10), 851861. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30291-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. J., Borenstein, J. B., Kircanski, K., & Gotlib, I. H. (2020). Standards for socially-and achievement-oriented roles in major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 44(5), 10251033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10123-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ursache, A., & Raver, C. C. (2014). Trait and state anxiety: Relations to executive functioning in an at-risk sample. Cognition and Emotion, 28(5), 845855. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.855173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaingankar, J. A., Chong, S. A., Abdin, E., Shafie, S., Chua, B. Y., Shahwan, S., Verma, S., & Subramaniam, M. (2021). Early age of onset of mood, anxiety and alcohol use disorders is associated with sociodemographic characteristics and health outcomes in adults: Results from a cross-sectional national survey. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 56(10), 18351846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-021-02070-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vilgis, V., Silk, T. J., & Vance, A. (2015). Executive function and attention in children and adolescents with depressive disorders: A systematic review. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 24(4), 365384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-015-0675-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, S., Doering, B., Helmreich, I., Lieb, K., & Tadić, A. (2012). A meta-analysis of executive dysfunctions in unipolar major depressive disorder without psychotic symptoms and their changes during antidepressant treatment. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 125(4), 281292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2011.01762.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, E. R., McGee, R. E., & Druss, B. G. (2015). Mortality in mental disorders and global disease burden implications. JAMA Psychiatry, 72(4), 334341. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.2502CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 10631070. http://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wykes, T., Haro, J. M., Belli, S. R., Obradors-Tarragó, C., Arango, C., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Bitter, I., Brunn, M., Chevreul, K., Demotes-Mainard, J., Elfeddali, I., Evans-Lacko, S., Fiorillo, A., Forsman, A. K., Hazo, J.-B., Kuepper, R., Knappe, S., Leboyer, M., Lewis, S.., … Wittchen, H.-U. (2015). Mental health research priorities for Europe. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2, 10361042. http://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00332-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, H., Yang, S., & Isen, A. M. (2013). Positive affect improves working memory: Implications for controlled cognitive processing. Cognition & Emotion, 27(3), 474482. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.713325CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zelazo, P. D., Blair, B., & Willoughby, M. T. (2017). Executive function: Implications for education. (NCER 2017–2000). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED570880.pdfGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for the Total Sample and the Risk and Non-risk Groups

Figure 1

Table 2. Accuracy Neurocognitive Performance Scores for the Comparison and the High-Risk Group

Figure 2

Table 3. Speed Neurocognitive Performance Scores for the Comparison and the High-Risk Group

Figure 3

Table 4. Efficiency Neurocognitive Performance Scores for the Comparison Group and the High-Risk Group

Figure 4

Table 5. Pearson Correlations between all the Neurocognitive Competences in Efficiency and Sensorimotor