ChapterPDF Available

Oppositional defiant disorder


Abstract and Figures

This publication is intended for professionals training or practising in mental health and not for the general public. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Editor or IACAPAP. This publication seeks to describe the best treatments and practices based on the scientific evidence available at the time of writing as evaluated by the authors and may change as a result of new research. Readers need to apply this knowledge to patients in accordance with the guidelines and laws of their country of practice. Some medications may not be available in some countries and readers should consult the specific drug information since not all dosages and unwanted effects are mentioned. Organizations, publications and websites are cited or linked to illustrate issues or as a source of further information. This does not mean that authors, the Editor or IACAPAP endorse their content or recommendations, which should be critically assessed by the reader. Websites may also change or cease to exist.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Oppositional deant disorder D.2 1
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Katie Quy & Argyris Stringaris
is publication is intended for professionals training or practising in mental health and not for the general public. e opinions
expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Editor or IACAPAP. is publication seeks to
describe the best treatments and practices based on the scientic evidence available at the time of writing as evaluated by the authors
and may change as a result of new research. Readers need to apply this knowledge to patients in accordance with the guidelines and
laws of their country of practice. Some medications may not be available in some countries and readers should consult the specic drug
information since not all dosages and unwanted eects are mentioned. Organizations, publications and websites are cited or linked to
illustrate issues or as a source of further information. is does not mean that authors, the Editor or IACAPAP endorse their content or
recommendations, which should be critically assessed by the reader. Websites may also change or cease to exist.
©IACAPAP 2012. is is an open-access publication under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License. Use,
distribution and reproduction in any medium are allowed without prior permission provided the original work is properly cited and
the use is non-commercial. Send comments about this book or chapter to
Suggested citation: Quy K, Stringaris A. Oppositional deant disorder. In Rey JM (ed), IACAPAP e-Textbook of Child and Adolescent
Mental Health. Geneva: International Association for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Allied Professions 2012.
Katie Quy MSc
Institute of Education, Thomas
Coram Research Unit, London,
Conict of interest: none
Argyris Stringaris MD, PhD,
Senior Lecturer, King’s College
London, Institute of Psychiatry,
UK & Consultant Child and
Adolescent Psychiatrist, Mood
Disorder Clinic, Maudsley
Hospital, London , UK
Conict of interest: none
Acknowledgments: The authors
are grateful Professor Stephen
Scott for his helpful comments.
Dr Stringaris gratefully
acknowledges the support of
the Wellcome Trust.
2Oppositional deant disorder D.2
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Disruptive behaviour disorders are common and are associated with
substantial impairment for both children and their families, and with a
range of poorer adjustment outcomes in later development (Ford et al,
2003; Burke et al, 2005; Copeland et al, 2009; Kim-Cohen et al, 2003; Costello
et al, 2003). Disruptive behaviour problems are also associated with increased
cost to society: it is estimated that the costs arising for individuals with antisocial
behaviours in childhood are at least 10 times higher than in non-antisocial
individuals by the time they reach 28 years (Scott et al, 2001a).
e two main classication systems, the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV; APA, 1994, 2000) and the
International Classication of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10; WHO, 1993)
specify oppositional deant disorder (ODD) as a persistent pattern of deant,
disobedient and antagonistic behaviour toward adults. is disorder is dened by
the absence of the more serious acts of aggression or antisocial behaviour associated
with conduct disorder.
e DSM-IV criteria for ODD require four or more symptoms to be present
for at least six months. Symptoms must occur at a level greater than in individuals
of comparable age or developmental stage and must cause ‘signicant’ impairment.
A diagnosis of ODD must exclude conduct disorder. Key features of ODD
highlighted by ICD-10 guidelines include a persistent pattern of provocative,
hostile and non-compliant behaviour, characterised by low temper threshold.
ODD is a relatively common childhood disorder with an estimated
prevalence of 2% to 10% (Maughan et al, 2004; Costello et al, 2003). Prevalence
estimates may, however, vary depending on factors such as informant source (e.g.,
parent vs. child) type of report (e.g., concurrent vs. retrospective) and whether or not
children meeting criteria for conduct disorder are included. ODD is signicantly
more common in boys than girls. Symptoms are relatively stable between the ages
of ve and ten, but are thought to decline after that point. ODD is diagnosed
more rarely in older children, partly in order to avoid labelling normative discord
between children and their parents during adolescence. Table D.2.1 summarises
prevalence rates from a number of large studies.
Cross-cultural dierences in prevalence
Data drawn from World Health Organisation and World Mental Health
surveys indicate that estimates of the prevalence of ODD vary widely across
countries. For example, data from a large-scale international survey published by
Kessler et al (2007) demonstrated marked variation in the lifetime prevalence of
impulse control disorders (comprising intermittent explosive disorder, oppositional
deant disorder, conduct disorder, and attention-decit/ hyperactivity disorder).
Relationship between ODD and conduct disorder
e extent to which ODD and conduct disorder should be considered as
separate or as a single disorder is the subject of some debate. is is reected
in existing classication systems: in DSM-IV the diagnosis of conduct disorder
Is often angry and
Often argues with
Is often touchy or easily
annoyed by others
Often loses
Often deliberately
annoys or irritates
Often blames others for
his or her mistakes or
Often actively dees or
refuses to comply with
adult requests or rules
Is often spiteful and
Oppositional deant disorder D.2 3
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Table D.2.1 Estimates of the prevalence ODD
Age range Boys (%) Girls (%)
British Child and Adolescent Mental Health Survey (Meltzer et al,
2000; Ford et al, 2003)
5-10 years 4.8 2.1
11-15 years 2.8 1.3
The Great Smoky Mountains Study (Costello et al, 2003) – three-
month prevalence
9-16 years 3.1 2.1
The Bergen Child Study (Munkvold et al, 2009) 7-9 years 2.0 0.9
Figure D.2.1 Lifetime prevalence of impulse control disorders (Kessler et al, 2007)
can include all of the features of ODD and it is treated as a precursor to conduct
disorder. In ICD-10, ODD is thought to only be a milder form of conduct
disorder, so the two are considered as a unique category, as they sometimes are in
empirical research studies (Kim-Cohen et al, 2003). However, while ODD and
conduct disorder have been found to have high levels of comorbidity, the majority
of children diagnosed with ODD do not go on to develop conduct disorder (Rowe
et al, 2002), and the two disorders are distinguishable by a range of dierent
correlates (Dick et al, 2005; Nock et al, 2007).
Relationship between ODD and other disorders (co-morbidity and
heterotypic continuity)
ODD is characteristically comorbid, in that it occurs together with or
before a wide range of other disorders (Costello et al, 2003) including anxiety and
depressive disorders (girls), conduct disorder and substance use disorders. Children
with ADHD often go on to develop ODD. e wide range of associations between
ODD and other disorders is depicted in Figure D.2.2.
ODD has consistently been found to predict later depression (Copeland
et al, 2009; Burke et al, 2010; Burke et al, 2005) and anxiety (Maughan et al,
2004). Most strikingly, Copeland et al (2009) found that childhood oppositional
deant disorder predicted young adult depression; young adult depression and
4Oppositional deant disorder D.2
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
anxiety disorders were often preceded by adolescent ODD, but not CD. e
relationship between ODD and emotional problems is particularly puzzling
it has been suggested that it may be the aective aspects of ODD that predict
emotional disorders such as anxiety and depression (Burke et al, 2005; Stringaris
& Goodman, 2009b)
In an attempt to explain the heterogeneity of the associations between
childhood ODD and adult disorders, Stringaris and Goodman (2009a, 2009b)
proposed that the DSM-IV ODD criteria consist of three a priori specied
dimensions described as “irritability, “headstrong and “hurtful” behaviour.
Others (Rowe et al, 2010) have identied only two dimensions – irritability and
headstrong, while others have suggested slightly dierent partition of symptoms
(Burke et al, 2010). e ndings suggest that “irritable” mood is more strongly
predictive of later emotional disorder (Stringaris et al, 2009), while “headstrong”
and “hurtful” behaviours are more predictive of conduct problems. e clinical
utility of these distinctions has yet to be established (Rowe et al, 2010; Burke et al,
2010; Aebi et al, 2010).
While no single cause of ODD has been identied, a number of risk factors
and markers have been found to be associated with oppositional behaviour.
Genetic eects contribute signicantly to the development of ODD
symptoms with heritability estimates exceeding 50%, with genetic factors
accounting more than 70% of the variability in individual measures based on
parent reports (Eaves et al, 1997). While some have suggested that ODD shares
substantial genetic overlap with conduct disorder (Eaves et al, 2000), other studies
have indicated unique eects for each (Rowe et al, 2008, Dick et al, 2005). In
Figure D.2.2: The relationship between ODD and other disorders (modied from Burke et al,
ODD: oppositional deant disorder; CD: conduct disorder; ADHD: attention decit/hyperactivity disorder (common precursor to
Oppositional deant disorder D.2 5
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
addition, it seems that genetic eects underlie the association between ODD and
ADHD (Hewitt et al, 1997) as well as between ODD and depressive disorder
(Rowe et al, 2008). In a twin study of adolescents, self-reported irritability
symptoms of ODD shared genetic eects with depressive symptoms, whereas
“headstrong/hurtful” symptoms of ODD shared genetic risk with delinquent
symptoms (Stringaris et al, 2012).
Gene-environment interplay
e notion that the eects of exposure to an environmental factor (e.g.
childhood maltreatment) on a child’s behaviour is conditional upon that child’s
genetic make-up has face validity and biological plausibility (Rutter, 2006). In one
of the pioneering studies in the eld (Caspi et al, 2002), a functional polymorphism
in the promoter region of the gene that codes for the neurotransmitter-metabolizing
enzyme monoamine oxidase A (MAO-A) was found to moderate the eect of
child maltreatment on future conduct and antisocial problems, although several
later studies did not nd such an interaction. Maltreated children with a genotype
that leads to low levels of MAOA activity more often displayed conduct disorder
and antisocial behaviours at follow up, than children with a high-activity MAOA
genotype (Caspi et al, 2002). is will be discussed further in the chapter on
conduct disorder (Chapter D.3).
Age of onset
e age of onset of antisocial symptoms (Mott, 1993) seems to be a good
predictor of later outcome. Mott (1993) distinguishes between children whose
symptoms rst emerge in childhood and persist into adolescence (childhood
onset persistent) compared to those whose symptoms rst occurr in adolescence.
Individuals in the childhood onset persistent group have been found to have poorer
adult outcomes when compared with non-disordered and adolescent-onset peers
(Mott, 2003; Mott, 2006; Mott et al, 2002; Odgers et al, 2007; Farrington
et al, 2006). Age of onset as a predictor of later outcomes is discussed further in
Chapter D.3.
Temperamental factors in toddlerhood, such as irritability, impulsivity,
and intensity of reactions to negative stimuli, may contribute to the development
of a pattern of oppositional and deant behaviour. It is possible that ODD is
arrived at through dierent temperamental routes that could serve to explain its
comorbidity. Stringaris et al (2010) showed that the comorbidity between ODD
and internalizing disorders was more strongly associated with early temperamental
emotionality, whereas the comorbidity between ODD and ADDH was better
predicted by temperamental over activity.
Peer inuences
Children who display oppositional behaviour are more inclined to experience
disrupted or problematic peer relationships. Such children are commonly rejected
by non-deviant peers, and tend instead to associate with other children who
exhibit problem behaviour. It would appear likely that the relationship between
peer rejection and childhood ODD symptoms is a bi-directional one, as is nicely
illustrated in a series of studies about bullying (summarised in Arseneault et al,
6Oppositional deant disorder D.2
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Callous and unemotional traits
e concept of psychopathy has been extended to young people in recent
years (Frick et al, 1994) with a focus on callous and unemotional traits. While not
all children diagnosed with conduct disorder have callous and unemotional traits
(Frick et al, 2000), the presence of such traits appears to distinguish a subgroup of
children with more serious conduct problems. Callous and unemotional traits seem
to be highly heritable (Viding et al, 2005) and characterised by poor recognition
of emotion (particularly fear) in facial expression (Blair et al, 2006; Dadds et al,
2006). e importance of callous and unemotional traits is discussed further in
Chapter D.3.
e broader environment surrounding the child may also be a risk factor.
Disruptive behaviour has consistently been associated with social and economic
disadvantage and neighbourhood violence (Guerra et al, 1995; Rowe et al, 2002).
Family factors
e importance of the interplay between genes and family-level
environmental factors has become increasingly clear in the aetiology of children’s
disruptive behaviour problems (Mott, 2005). Evidence from adoption studies
(O'Connor et al, 1998; Ge et al, 1996) shows that children at high genetic risk
for antisocial behaviour were more likely to receive negative parenting from the
adoptive parents than were children with low genetic risk for antisocial behaviour.
Conversely, it is known from studies using a monozygotic twin design that family-
level eects contribute to childrens risk for externalising problems over and above
children genetic eects (Jaee et al, 2003; Caspi et al, 2004). In other words,
parental behaviour towards children can be a true environmental risk.
Models of family inuences
Patterson (1982) proposed a model about how parental behaviour may
exacerbate childrens negative behaviour and result in what he designated as
“coercive family processes”. His work has shown that parents of children with
disruptive behaviour problems are more likely to be inconsistent in how they apply
rules, and give commands that are either unclear or the result of their own current
emotional state rather than contingent upon the child’s behaviour. A typical
mutually coercive process would arise when a parent responds in an unduly harsh
way to a child’s mildly disruptive behaviour, upon which the child may further
escalate its oppositional behaviour. is in turn leads to yet harsher responses by
the parent with further escalation. e result is that the parent may in the end
give in, reinforcing the child’s negative behaviours. is paradoxical “reward” of a
child’s negative behaviour may both increase and maintain oppositional behaviours
and is the specic target of therapeutic interventions (see below).
Measurement instruments
It is feasible to assess oppositional problems in children as young as 5 years
of age (Kim-Cohen et al, 2005). A wide range of instruments is available to
measure ODD symptoms and to assist in the diagnostic process and monitoring.
Clinicians should always bear in mind that diagnosis is based on their judgment
Gerald R Patterson, founder
of the Oregon Social
Learning Centre, described
the so called “coercive family
processes” and their role
in the development and
maintenance of behaviour
Oppositional deant disorder D.2 7
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Table D.2.2 Assessment tools commonly used to identify ODD (symptoms or the disorder).
Type Name Availability
The Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI: Eyberg &
Ross, 1978; Eyberg & Robinson, 1983)
Can be purchased from PAR
The Child Behaviour Checklist (Achenbach &
Edelbrock, 1983)
Can be purchased from ASEBA
The Behaviour Assessment for Children (BASC-2:
Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004)
Can be purchased from Pearson
Conners Child Behaviour Checklist (Conners &
Barkley, 1985)
Can be purchased from MHS
Strengths and Difculties Questionnaire (SDQ:
Goodman, 1997)
Available free of charge from SDQ
website subject to conditions.
The Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment
(Angold & Costello, 2000)
Available free of charge fom Duke
University, subject to copyright
approval from the author.
The Development and Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA:
Goodman et al, 2000) combines questionnaires and
interviews (with both structured and semi structured
Available free of charge from the
DAWBA website, for non-commercial
The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC:
Shaffer et al, 1993; Schwab-Stone et al, 1993; Shaffer
et al, 2000; Shaffer et al, 2004)
Available by emailing disc@worldnet. (administration charge for
paper copies)
The Disruptive Behaviour Diagnostic Observation
Schedule (Wakschlag et al, 2008b, Wakschlag et al,
and integration of the information gathered by interviews, clinical examination,
scales and other means (summarised in Table D.2.2).
Useful principles for assessing children with ODD include: a) try to obtain
information from as many dierent sources (parent, child, teacher) as possible;
b) assess comorbid psychiatric problems, particularly ADHD; c) assess other
risk factors at family, school and neighbourhood level. Children with disruptive
behaviour problems often come from deprived backgrounds. It is important
to identify factors (such as bullying or peer deviance) that maintain or increase
oppositional behaviours. e same applies to performance at school: a child with
reading diculties or hyperactivity may be more likely to manifest oppositional
behaviours at school.
Dierential diagnosis
Oppositionality can be seen in many childhood conditions. It is important
for the clinician to recognise those cases where other disorders may have given
rise to it. For example, it is not uncommon for children who develop a specic
phobia or other anxiety disorders (such as OCD) to become oppositional and
uncooperative, particularly in situations in which they expect to be exposed to
the feared situation. Clinicians treating children with OCD whose rituals are
disrupted know this phenomenon all too well. In these cases, assigning a diagnosis
8Oppositional deant disorder D.2
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Jack is 7 years of age. His mother reported that he was “very difcult” and that he had “always” been like that. He would
lose his temper over seemingly trivial matters, such as losing at a video game he played with his best friend: “he gets red
in the face and starts hufng, shouts and cries”. Also he was often grumpy for no apparent reason. His mother described
that when he did not want to do something “he simply won’t”. He often refused to go to bed; “we have massive rows in the
evenings because of this”. Jack sometimes got so angry that he broke his own toys or threw them around.
Jack has had no contact with his father since the age of six months. His mother said that Jack’s father was an “angry and
aggressive man”, who often shouted and lost his temper.
His teacher said that Jack was argumentative and refused to do as he was asked in class and constantly annoyed the
other children by throwing bits of paper at them and taking their pencils or toys. The other children in the class didn’t like to
play with Jack and this made him angry. Recently, some of the older children had been mocking him and pushing him around
in the playground. He often came home looking sad and grumpy.
Jack’s mother said that she was “at the end of her tether” and that “You can’t reason with him, you can’t shout at him, it
just doesn’t help – no matter what I do it just doesn’t work”.
Jack and his mother were seen at their local child and adolescent mental health service. On the basis of his symptoms
and level of impairment, Jack was given a diagnosis of ODD and his mother was offered to take part in a parent management
Within only a few weeks of attending the course she found this very helpful in dealing with Jack’s behaviours. At the end
of the intervention, Jack no longer displayed signicant symptoms of ODD. His tantrums had become very rare and he was,
overall, much less deant. He and his mother were more able to enjoy activities and play together. Jack’s mother reports that
she now nds it easier to identify Jack’s good behaviours and praise them accordingly.
of oppositional deant disorder and failing to recognise and address the underlying
anxiety disorder is counterproductive. e same applies to children with ADHD
who often develop oppositionality. Indeed, oppositionality might be the main
reason for the referral of such children. It is crucial for the clinician to be able to
look for ADHD as a possible underlying issue of the disturbance, even when the
parents’ chief worry is their child’s oppositionality. is has important treatment
implications (see below). Similar situations can arise in children with autism, who
can become particularly oppositional in the face of change of routine or due to
sensory sensitivities. Here too, clinicians will want to recognise possible underlying
problems and ensure that these are adequately treated.
Some general principles apply to the treatment of oppositional problems
as with other psychiatric disorder. Comorbidities should be identied as they are
likely to require treatment in their own right. is is particularly true for ADHD
and to a large extent also for childhood depression and anxiety. Other treatable
or modiable risks (e.g., ongoing bullying or failure at school due to learning
diculties) should always be assessed and addressed as part of the treatment
package oered to the family.
A number of treatments are available to clinicians, depending on the needs of
the individual child and family. For example, behaviour occurring predominantly
in either the home or school context may be best managed using a treatment
designed to address context-specic issues. More pervasive problems may call for
more intensive individual work (Mott & Scott, 2008).
Parent management training
Parent management training-based on principles of social learning theory is
a key feature of treatment in ODD. Problematic parent-child interaction patterns
Oppositional deant disorder D.2 9
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
have been implicated in the development and maintenance of oppositional
behaviour and principles of social learning, particular in relation to operant
conditioning (the role of reinforcement / consequences in altering behaviour),
have been found to be useful in modifying behaviour in both parents and children
(Feldman & Kazdin, 1995). Parent management training teaches parents to
identify prosocial and problem behaviour and apply punishment and reinforcement
techniques designed to increase the frequency of desired behaviours and decrease
the frequency of undesired ones.
Examples of parenting programmes
Several programmes based on social learning theory have been found to be
eective in addressing early onset antisocial behaviour, namely:
e Incredible Years (Webster-Stratton, 1981)
One of the best validated is Webster-Strattons “Incredible Years”,
a behaviourally-based training programme designed for use with parents
(Webster-Stratton & Hammond, 1997; Webster-Stratton, 1982; Webster-
Stratton, 1981), teachers and children (Webster-Stratton & Hammond,
1997). Scott and colleagues (2001b) carried out a multi-centre controlled
trial of the group parenting version in a sample of 141 (intervention group,
n=90; waiting list control group, n=51) children aged 3 to 8 years who were
referred for antisocial behaviour to their local multidisciplinary child and
adolescent mental health service. ey used the videotape-based “Basic”
programme (Webster-Stratton & Hancock, 1998). is comprised 13-16
2-hour weekly sessions in which parents were shown video segments with
scenes showing right and wrong ways to manage children. e programme
covered play, praise and rewards, limit-setting, and handling misbehaviour.
After watching the videos, parents were encouraged to discuss their own
childrens behaviour and rehearsed dierent approaches to handling it. Parents
were also given weekly activities to try at home (homework) and progress was
supported by telephone contact. Programme costs were comparable with
the cost of individual treatment. Substantial and statistically signicant
decreases in antisocial behaviour compared with controls were found in
parents’ ratings of children’s conduct problems as well as hyperactivity;
parent reports of total number of problems per day; conduct problems and
total deviance as measured by the Strengths and Diculties Questionnaire
(Goodman, 1997); externalising and total problem scores as assessed by the
Child Behaviour Checklist (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1983); parent dened
problems (the three problems parents identied as the ones they most wanted
to see improved); and ICD 10 diagnosis of oppositional deant disorder.
Parent behaviour was also measured and signicant decreases were found in
observations of parents’ inappropriate commands. Two further programmes
have also been developed: the Advance” programme, designed to manage
parental relationships and the “Partners” programme, designed to support
childrens academic learning and build up parent-teacher relationships.
Integrating the three programmes has been found to achieve the most
substantial improvements in behaviour.
e Triple P—Positive Parenting Programme
Triple P is an evidence based parenting and family support programme
10Oppositional deant disorder D.2
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
designed to prevent and manage behaviour problems in preadolescent children
by enhancing parenting skills and improving parent-child relationships. e
programme comprises multiple levels: universal intervention designed to
provide information on parenting issues for interested parents; provision of
advice for specic problem behaviours; brief programmes to provide advice
and training parents dealing with minor behaviour problems; and more
intensive programmes comprising training in mood management strategies,
coping skills and partner support skills designed to address more persistent
and pervasive behaviour problems. Triple P has been validated in a number
of studies with a range of family types and cultural backgrounds (Graaf et al,
1998, Bor et al, 2002).
Alternative approaches
Strategies have also been put forward to treat behaviour problems in
families where such programmes have been unsuccessful. Scott and Dadds (2009)
suggest a number of alternative ways of approaching intervention which may
provide a framework to address factors which may limit the ecacy parent training
programmes. ey recommend taking account of attachment security and the
parent-child relationship in considering intervention strategies, in order to allow
for the impact which disrupted attachment may have on the meaning of expected
reinforcers or punishments. In addition, they emphasise the importance of wider
social contexts which may impact on the child, such as parent relationships,
siblings, extended families and neighbourhoods. Finally, they encourage clinicians
to consider beliefs held by parents about the child (or aspects of parenting) which
may be interfering with treatment.
School-based interventions
1. Teachers may also be provided with additional tools to promote
improvements in classroom behaviour. Social learning theory is also key
in this approach. Mott and Scott (2008) identify four primary domains
of functioning to be addressed:Promoting compliance and adherence to
classroom rules and acceptable behaviours
2. Supporting the development of problem solving skills
3. Preventing problem behaviour
4. Avoiding the escalation of oppositional behaviour
A group of parents graduate
from a parenting program
in South Africa. Source:
Goals in managing
ODD (from Fraser &
Wray, 2008)
For parents
Improve positive
parenting skills
Enhance skills in
problem solving,
conict resolution and
For the child
of effective
problem-solving and
anger management
For the family
Family counselling and
support to deal with
the stresses in their
relationships and the
home environment
In the classroom
Encourage the teacher
or school counsellor
to provide social skills
sessions to improve
peer relationship.
Oppositional deant disorder D.2 11
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Individual therapy – anger management
Existing evidence indicates that CBT-based anger management training
may be particularly helpful in treating anger (Beck & Fernandez, 1998; Lochman
et al, 2011). is training uses a coping skills approach involving stress inoculation
interventions comprising three elements: cognitive preparation‚ skill acquisition‚
and application training (Meichenbaum, 1996). In the rst phase, cognitive
preparation, the trainer works to establish a relationship with the patient. e
patient is coached to reconceptualise stressors as potentially modiable problems
which can be managed using coping strategies. In the second phase, skill
acquisition, the patient is taught specic coping strategies, such as emotional
self-regulation, acceptance, problem-solving, and attention diversion procedures;
systems which may be applied to particular problems experienced by the patient
and their family. In the nal phase, the patient is taught to apply these strategies
in practice. Stressors are gradually introduced (using for example role playing
techniques), until the patient can employ coping skills in real-life situations.
ere is no evidence that medication is eective for the treatment of ODD.
In children with ADHD, treatment with stimulants is known to improve conduct
and oppositional symptoms (NICE, 2008); however, there is not much evidence
to support use of stimulants to treat oppositional problems in children without
ADHD. A trial in children with ADHD (Blader et al, 2009) showed that sodium
valproate may be useful for those children whose aggression did not respond to
stimulants. However, these were hospitalized children and the results may not
apply to the children commonly seen in outpatient samples. A trial of Lithium
in children with severe irritability has shown no eects (Dickstein et al, 2009).
It is far from clear that the eects of risperidone on the dicult behaviours of
children with autism (McCracken et al, 2002) or developmental disability can be
extrapolated to typically developing children. Serotonin reuptake inhibitors are
sometimes used for the treatment of anger in adult populations but evidence for
its eectiveness in youth is lacking. e dramatic increase in diagnosis of bipolar
disorder, particularly in the US (Blader & Carlson, 2007; Moreno et al, 2007) over
the last 10-15 years has been associated with an increase in the prescription of anti-
psychotic drugs for children (Olfson et al, 2006). It has been argued that cases with
symptoms typical of ODD, such as irritability, have been misdiagnosed as suering
from bipolar disorder. ere is no good evidence to support such expansion of the
diagnostic boundaries of bipolar disorder (Leibenluft, 2011; Stringaris, 2011) and,
on current evidence, anti-manic drugs should not be given to children with ODD
alone (for a more detailed discussion of this issue see Chapter E.3). Judicious use of
sedating agents in emergency settings or dopamine antagonists (e.g., risperidone)
used short term for specic symptom control may be considered on a case-to-case
basis. Clinicians using such medications will want to have informed parents and
child fully about the reasons for their use (instead of alternatives) as well as of the
potential side eects. Clear treatment goals (i.e., reduction/change in particular
behaviours or rating scale-scores) should be agreed at the outset within the clinical
team and with the patients and carers. e eects (and unwanted eects) of the
treatment should be carefully and regularly reviewed.
There is no evidence that
medication is effective
for the treatment of ODD.
In children with ADHD,
treatment with stimulants is
known to improve conduct
and oppositional symptoms;
however, there is not
much evidence to support
use of stimulants to treat
oppositional problems in
children without ADHD.
12Oppositional deant disorder D.2
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Achenbach TM, Edelbrock C (1983). Manual for the Child
Behavior Checklist and Revised Child Behavior Prole,
Burlington, VT: Queen City Printers.
Aebi M, Müller UC, Asherson P et al (2010). Predictability
of oppositional deant disorder and symptom
dimensions in children and adolescents with ADHD
combined type. Psychological Medicine, 40:2089–2100.
Angold A, Costello E (2000). e Child and Adolescent
Psychiatric Assessment (CAPA). Journal of the
American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
American Psychiatric Association (1994). DSM-IV: e
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(Fourth Edition), Washington, DC: American
Psychiatric Association
American Psychiatric Association (2000). DSM-IV-TR: e
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(Fourth Edition) Text Revision, Washington, DC:
American Psychiatric Association.
Arseneault L, Bowes L, Shakoor S (2010). Bullying victimization
in youths and mental health problems: 'Much ado
about nothing'? Psychological Medicine, 40:717-729.
Beck R, Fernandez E (1998). Cognitive-behavioral therapy in
the treatment of anger: a meta-analysis. Cognitive
erapy and Research, 22:63-74.
Blader JC, Carlson GA (2007). Increased rates of bipolar
disorder diagnoses among U.S. child, adolescent, and
adult inpatients, 1996-2004. Biological Psychiatry,
Blader JC, Schooler NR, Jensen PS et al (2009). Adjunctive
divalproex versus placebo for children with ADHD
and aggression refractory to stimulant monotherapy.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 166:1392-1401.
Blair RJ, Peschardt KS, Budhani S et al (2006). e development
of psychopathy. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 47:262.
Bor W, Sanders MR, Markie-Dadds C (2002). e eects of
the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program on preschool
children with co-occurring disruptive behavior
and attentional/ hyperactive diculties. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 30:571-587.
Burke JD, Hipwell AE, Loeber R (2010). Dimensions of
oppositional deant disorder as predictors of
depression and conduct disorder in preadolescent girls.
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 49:484-492.
Burke JD, Loeber R, Lahey BB et al (2005). Developmental
transitions among aective and behavioral disorders
in adolescent boys. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 46:1200-1210.
Caspi A, McClay J, Mott TE et al (2002). Role of genotype in
the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science,
Caspi A, Mott TE, Morgan J et al (2004). Maternal expressed
emotion predicts children's antisocial behavior
problems: using monozygotic-twin dierences
to identify environmental eects on behavioral
development. Developmental Psychology, 40:149-161.
Conners CK, Barkley RA (1985). Rating scales and checklists
for child psychopharmacology. Psychopharmacology
Bulletin, 21:809-843.
Copeland WE, Shanahan L, Costello EJ et al (2009). Childhood
and adolescent psychiatric disorders as predictors of
young adult disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry,
Costello EJ, Mustillo S, Erkanli A et al (2003). Prevalence and
development of psychiatric disorders in childhood and
adolescence. Archives of General Psychiatry, 60:837-
Dadds MR, Perry Y, Hawes DJ et al (2006). Attention to the
eyes and fear-recognition decits in child psychopathy.
British Journal of Psychiatry, 189:280-281.
Dick DM, Viken RJ, Kaprio J et al (2005). Understanding the
covariation among childhood externalizing symptoms:
genetic and environmental inuences on conduct
disorder, attention decit hyperactivity disorder, and
oppositional deant disorder symptoms. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 33:219-229.
Dickstein DP, Towbin KE, van der Veen JW et al (2009).
Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of
lithium in youths with severe mood dysregulation.
Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology,
Eaves L, Rutter M, Silberg JL et al (2000). Genetic and
environmental causes of covariation in interview
assessments of disruptive behavior in child and
adolescent twins. Behavior Genetics, 30:321-334.
Eaves LJ, Silberg JL, Meyer JM et al (1997). Genetics and
developmental psychopathology: 2. the main eects
of genes and environment on behavioral problems
in the Virginia twin study of adolescent behavioral
development. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 38:965-980.
Eyberg SM, Robinson EA (1983). Conduct problem behavior:
Standardization of a behavioral rating scale with
adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,
Eyberg SM, Ross AW (1978). Assessment of child behavior
problems: e validation of a new inventory. Journal of
Clinical Child Psychology, 7:113-116.
Farrington DP, Coid JW, Harnett LM et al (2006). Criminal
Careers up to Age 50 and Life Success up to Age 48:
New Findings from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent
Development. Home Oce Research, Development
and Statistics Directorate.
Feldman J, Kazdin AE (1995). Parent management training
for oppositional and conduct problem children. e
Clinical Psychologist, 48:3-5.
Ford T, Goodman R, Meltzer H (2003). e British Child and
Adolescent Mental Health Survey 1999: the prevalence
of DSM-IV disorders. Journal of the American Academy
of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 42:1203-1211.
Oppositional deant disorder D.2 13
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Fraser A, Wray J (2008). Oppositional deant disorder.
Australian Family Physician, 34:402-405.
Frick PJ, Bodin SD, Barry CT (2000). Psychopathic traits
and conduct problems in community and clinic-
referred samples of children: Further development
of the Psychopathy Screening Device. Psychological
Assessment, 12:382-393.
Frick PJ, O'brien BS, Wootton JM et al (1994). Psychopathy
and conduct problems in children. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 103:700-707.
Ge X, Conger RD, Cadoret RJ et al (1996). e developmental
interface between nature and nurture: A mutual
inuence model of child antisocial behavior and
parent behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 32:574-
Goodman R (1997). e Strengths and Diculties
Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 38:581-586.
Goodman R, Ford T, Richards H et al (2000). e Development
and Well-Being Assessment: Description and initial
validation of an integrated assessment of child
and adolescent psychopathology. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 41:645-655.
Graaf ID, Speetjens P, Smit F et al (1998). Eectiveness of the
Triple P Positive Parenting Program on behavioral
problems in children: a meta-analysis. Behaviour
Modication, 32:714-735.
Guerra NG, Huesmann LR, Tolan PH et al (1995). Stressful
events and individual beliefs as correlates of economic
disadvantage and aggression among urban children.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62:518-
Hewitt JK, Eaves LJ, Silberg JL et al (1997). Genetics and
developmental psychopathology: 1. Phenotypic
assessment in the Virginia Twin Study of Adolescent
Behavioral Development. Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, 38:943-963.
Jaee SR, Mott TE, Caspi A et al (2003). Life with (and
without) father: e benets of living with two
biological parents depend on the father’s antisocial
behavior. Child Development, 74:109-126.
Kessler RC, Angermeyer M, Anthony JC et al (2007). Lifetime
prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of mental
disorders in the World Health Organization's World
Mental Health Survey Initiative. World Psychiatry,
Kim-Cohen J, Caspi A, Mott TE et al (2003). Prior
juvenile diagnoses in adults with mental disorder:
developmental follow-back of a prospective-
longitudinal cohort. Archives of General Psychiatry,
Kim-Cohen J, Mott TE, Taylor A et al (2005). Maternal
depression and children's antisocial behavior: nature
and nurture eects. Archives of General Psychiatry,
Leibenluft E (2011). Severe mood dysregulation, irritability,
and the diagnostic boundaries of bipolar disorder in
youths. American Journal of Psychiatry, 168:129-142.
Lochman JE, Powell NP, Boxmeyer CL et al (2011). Cognitive
behavioral therapy for externalizing disorders in
children and adolescents. Psychiatric Clinics of North
America, 20:305-318.
Maughan B, Rowe R, Messer J et al (2004). Conduct disorder
and oppositional deant disorder in a national
sample: developmental epidemiology. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 45:609-621.
McCracken JT, Mcgough J, Shah B et al (2002). Risperidone in
children with autism and serious behavioral problems.
New England Journal of Medicine, 347:314-321.
Meichenbaum D (1996). Stress inoculation training for coping
with stressors. e Clinical Psychologist, 49:4-7.
Meltzer H, Gatward R, Goodman R et al (2000). e Mental
Health Of Children And Adolescents in Great Britain.
Oce for National Statistics.
Mott TE (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-
persistent antisocial behavior: a developmental
taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100:674-701.
Mott TE (2003). Life-course-persistent and adolescence-
limited antisocial behavior: A 10-year research
review and a research agenda. In TMB LAHEY, A
CASPI (eds) Cause of Conduct Disorder and Juvenile
Delinquency, New York: Guilford Press, pp 49-75.
Mott TE (2005). e new look of behavioral genetics in
developmental psychopathology: Gene-environment
interplay in antisocial behaviors. Psychological Bulletin,
Mott TE (2006). Life-course persistent versus adolescence-
limited antisocial behavior: Research review. In D
CICCHETTI and DJ COHEN (eds.) Developmental
Psychopathology. New York: Wiley.
Mott TE, Caspi A, Harrington H et al (2002). Males on
the life-course persistent and adolescence-limited
antisocial pathways: Follow-up at age 26 years.
Development and Psychopathology, 14:179-207.
Mott TE, Scott S (2008). Conduct disorders. In M Rutter, D
Bishop, D Pine et al (eds) Rutter's Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp543-564.
Moreno C, Laje G, Blanco C et al (2007). National trends in the
outpatient diagnosis and treatment of bipolar disorder
in youth. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64:1032-1039.
Munkvold L, Lundervold A, Lie SA et al (2009). Should there be
separate parent and teacher-based categories of ODD?
Evidence from a general population. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 50:1264-1272.
NICE (2008). Attention Decit Hyperactivity Disorder:
Diagnosis and Management of ADHD in Children,
Young People, and Adults.
Nock MK, Kazdin AE, Hiripi E et al (2007). Lifetime
prevalence, correlates, and persistence of oppositional
deant disorder: Results from the National
Comorbidity Survey Replication. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 48:703-713.
O'Connor TG, Deater-Deckard K, Fulker DW et al (1998).
Genotype-environment correlations in late childhood
and early adolescence: Antisocial behavioral problems
and coercive parenting. Developmental Psychology,
Odgers CL, Caspi A, Broadbent JM et al (2007). Prediction of
dierential adult health burden by conduct problem
14Oppositional deant disorder D.2
IACAPAP Textbook of Child and Adolescent Mental Health
subtypes in males. Archives of General Psychiatry,
Olfson M, Blanco C, Liu L et al (2006). National trends in the
outpatient treatment of children and adolescents with
antipsychotic drugs. Archives of General Psychiatry,
Patterson GR (1982). Coercive Family Process: Eugene, OR:
Reynolds CR, Kamphaus RW (2004). BASC-2: Behavior
Assessment System for Children, Circle Pines,
Minnesota: American Guidance Service.
Rowe R, Costello EJ, Angold A et al (2010). Developmental
pathways in oppositional deant disorder and conduct
disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119:726-738.
Rowe R, Maughan B, Pickles A et al (2002). e relationship
between DSM–IV oppositional deant disorder and
conduct disorder: Findings from the Great Smoky
Mountains Study. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 43:365-373.
Rowe R, Rijsdijk FV, Maughan B et al (2008). Heterogeneity in
antisocial behaviours and comorbidity with depressed
mood: a behavioural genetic approach. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49:526-534.
Rutter M (2006). Genes and Behaviour, Nature-Nurture Interplay
Explained. Willey-Blackwell.
Schwab-Stone M, Fisher PW, Piacentini J et al (1993). e
Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children--Revised
version (DISC--R): II. Test-retest reliability. Journal of
the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
Scott S, Dadds MR (2009). Practitioner Review: When parent
training doesn’t work: theory-driven clinical strategies.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50:1441-
Scott S, Knapp M, Henderson J et al (2001a). Financial cost of
social exclusion: follow up study of antisocial children
into adulthood. British Medical Journal, 323:191.
Scott S, Spender Q, Doolan M et al (2001b). Multicentre
controlled trial of parenting groups for childhood
antisocial behaviour in clinical practice. British Medical
Journal, 323:194.
Shaer D, Fisher P, Lucas C (2004). e Diagnostic Interview
Schedule for Children (DISC): Comprehensive
handbook of psychological assessment, Vol. 2:
Personality assessment. In MJ Hilsenroth, DL Segal,
M Hersen (eds). Willey, pp256-270.
Shaer D, Fisher P, Lucas C et al (2000). NIMH Diagnostic
Interview Schedule for Children Version IV (NIMH
DISC-IV): Description, dierences from previous
versions, and reliability of some common diagnoses.
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 39:28-38.
Shaer D, Schwab-Stone M, Fisher P et al (1993). e
Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-Revised
Version (DISC-R): I. Preparation, eld testing,
interrater reliability, and acceptability. Journal of the
American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
Stringaris A (2011). Irritability in children and adolescents: a
challenge for DSM-5. European Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry (in press).
Stringaris A, Cohen P, Pine DS et al (2009). Adult outcomes of
youth irritability: a 20-year prospective community-
based study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 166:1048–
Stringaris A, Goodman R (2009a). Longitudinal outcome of
youth oppositionality: irritable, headstrong, and
hurtful behaviors have distinctive predictions. Journal
of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 48:404-412.
Stringaris A, Goodman R (2009b). ree dimensions of
oppositionality in youth. Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, 50:216-223.
Stringaris A, Maughan B, Goodman R (2010). What's in a
disruptive disorder? Temperamental antecedents of
oppositional deant disorder: ndings from the Avon
longitudinal study. Journal of the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 49:474-483.
Stringaris A, Zavos H, Leibenluft E et al (2012). Adolescent
irritability: phenotypic associations and genetic links
with depressed mood. American Journal of Psychiatry,
Viding E, Blair RJ, Mott TE et al (2005). Evidence for
substantial genetic risk for psychopathy in 7-year-olds.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46:592-597.
Wakschlag LS, Briggs-Gowan MJ, Hill C et al (2008a).
Observational assessment of preschool disruptive
behavior, part II: Validity of the Disruptive Behavior
Diagnostic Observation Schedule (DB-DOS). Journal
of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry, 47:632-641.
Wakschlag LS, Hill C, Carter AS et al (2008b). Observational
assessment of preschool disruptive behavior, part I:
Reliability of the Disruptive Behavior Diagnostic
Observation Schedule (DB-DOS). Journal of the
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
Webster-Stratton C (1981). Modication of mothers' behaviors
and attitudes through videotape modeling group
discussion program. Behavior erapy, 12:634-642.
Webster-Stratton C (1982). e long term eects of a videotape
modeling parent training program: Comparison of
immediate and 1-year follow-up results. Behavior
erapy, 13:702-714.
Webster-Stratton C, Hammond M (1997). Treating children
with early-onset conduct problems: a comparison of
child and parent training interventions. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65:93-109.
Webster-Stratton C, Hancock LT (1998). Training for
parents of young children with conduct problems:
content, methods, and therapeutic processes. In JM
Briesmeister, CE Schaefer (eds) Handbook of Parent
Training. New York: Wiley.
World Health Organisation (1993). e ICD-10 Classication of
Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Diagnostic Criteria
for Research, Geneva: World Health Organization.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Reports an error in the original article by X. Ge et al ( Developmental Psychology , 1996 [Jul], Vol 32[4], 574–589). On page 584, Figure 2, negative signs were mistakenly inserted in front of 2 coefficients. The correct coefficients are given. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1996-01781-002 .). Using an adoption design to collect data on biological and adoptive parents of children adopted at birth, this study explored a possible mechanism through which heritable characteristics of adopted children evoke adoptive parent responses and lead to reciprocal influences between adoptive parent and adopted child behavior. Participants were 25 male and 20 female adoptees, 12–18 years of age, having either a biological parent with substance abuse/dependency or antisocial personality or a biological parent with no such history. The study found that psychiatric disorders of biological parents were significantly related to children's antisocial/hostile behaviors and that biological parents' psychiatric disorders were associated with adoptive parents' behaviors. This genotype-environment association was largely mediated by adoptees' antisocial/hostile behaviors. Results also suggest that the adoptee's antisocial/hostile behavior and adoptive… (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
This study examined 3 factors that were hypothesized to increase risk for aggression among urban children: economic disadvantage, stressful events, and individual beliefs. Participants were 1,935 African American, Hispanic, and White elementary-school boys and girls assessed over a 2-year period. The relation between individual poverty and aggression was only significant for the White children, with significant interactions between individual and community poverty for the other 2 ethnic groups. With a linear structural model to predict aggression from the stress and beliefs variables, individual poverty predicted stress for African American children and predicted beliefs supporting aggression for Hispanic children. For all ethnic groups, both stress and beliefs contributed significantly to the synchronous prediction of aggression, and for the Hispanic children, the longitudinal predictions were also significant. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for preventive interventions in multiethnic, inner-city communities.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
Factor analysis of a measure of psychopathy was conducted in a sample of 95 clinic-referred children between the ages of 6 and 13 years. These analyses revealed 2 dimensions of behavior, one associated with impulsivity and conduct problems (I/CP) and one associated with the interpersonal and motivational aspects of psychopathy (callous/unemotional: CU). In a subset of this sample (n = 64), analyses indicated that scores on the I/CP factor were highly associated with traditional measures of conduct problems. In contrast, scores derived from the CU factor were only moderately associated with measures of conduct problems and exhibited a different pattern of associations on several criteria that have been associated with psychopathy (e.g., sensation seeking) or childhood antisocial behavior (e.g., low intelligence, poor school achievement, and anxiety). These analyses suggest that psychopathic personality features and conduct problems are independent, yet interacting, constructs in children, analogous to findings in the adult literature.