Search for: All records

The transition to adolescence is a critical period for mental health development. Socio-experiential environments play an important role in the emergence of depressive symptoms with some adolescents showing more sensitivity to social contexts than others. Drawing on recent developmental neuroscience advances, we examined whether hippocampal volume amplifies social context effects in the transition to adolescence. We analyzed 2-y longitudinal data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD^®) study in a diverse sample of 11,832 youth (mean age: 9.914 y; range: 8.917 to 11.083 y; 47.8% girls) from 21 sites across the United States. Socio-experiential environments (i.e., family conflict, primary caregiver’s depressive symptoms, parental warmth, peer victimization, and prosocial school environment), hippocampal volume, and a wide range of demographic characteristics were measured at baseline. Youth’s symptoms of major depressive disorder were assessed at both baseline and 2 y later. Multilevel mixed-effects linear regression analyses showed that negative social environments (i.e., family conflict, primary caregiver’s depressive symptoms, and peer victimization) and the absence of positive social environments (i.e., parental warmth and prosocial school environment) predicted greater increases in youth’s depressive symptoms over 2 y. Importantly, left hippocampal volume amplified social context effects such that youth with larger left hippocampal volume experienced greater increases in depressive symptoms in more negative and less positive social environments. Consistent with brain–environment interaction models of mental health, these findings underscore the importance of families, peers, and schools in the development of depression during the transition to adolescence and show how neural structure amplifies social context sensitivity. 

To repair a program does not mean to make it (absolutely) correct; it only means to make it more-correct than it was originally. This is not a mundane academic distinction: Given that programs typically have about a dozen faults per KLOC, it is important for program repair methods and tools to be designed in such a way that they map an incorrect program into a more-correct, albeit still potentially incorrect, program. Yet in the absence of a concept of relative correctness, many program repair methods and tools resort to approximations of absolute correctness; since these methods and tools are often validated against programs with a single fault, making them absolutely correct is indistinguishable from making them more-correct; this has contributed to conceal/ obscure the absence of (and the need for) relative correctness. In this paper we propose a theory of program repair based on a concept of relative correctness. We aspire to encourage researchers in program repair to explicitly specify what concept of relative correctness their method or tool is based upon; and to validate their method or tool by proving that it does enhance relative correctness, as defined.