1932

Abstract

The personalized approach to psychopathology conceptualizes mental disorder as a complex system of contextualized dynamic processes that is nontrivially specific to each individual, and it seeks to develop formal idiographic statistical models to represent these individual processes. Although the personalized approach draws on long-standing influences in clinical psychology, there has been an explosion of research in recent years following the development of intensive longitudinal data capture and statistical techniques that facilitate modeling of the dynamic processes of each individual's pathology. Advances are also making idiographic analyses scalable and generalizable. We review emerging research using the personalized approach in descriptive psychopathology, precision assessment, and treatment selection and tailoring, and we identify future challenges and areas in need of additional research. The personalized approach to psychopathology holds promise to resolve thorny diagnostic issues, generate novel insights, and improve the timing and efficacy of interventions.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-102419-125032
2020-05-07
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/clinpsy/16/1/annurev-clinpsy-102419-125032.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-102419-125032&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Allport G. 1937. Personality: A Psychological Interpretation Oxford, UK: Holt
  2. APA (Am. Psychiatr. Assoc.) 1980. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Washington, DC: Am. Psychiatr. Publ, 3rd ed..
  3. Asaparouhov T, Hamaker EL, Muthén B 2018. Dynamic structural equation models. Struct. Equ. Model. 25:359–88
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bae S, Chung T, Ferreira D, Dey AK, Suffoletto B 2018. Mobile phone sensors and supervised machine learning to identify alcohol use events in young adults: implications for just-in-time adaptive interventions. Addict. Behav. 83:42–47
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Barlow DH, Farchione TJ, Fairholme CP, Ellard KK, Boisseau CL et al. 2011. Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders: Therapist Guide New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  6. Barlow DH, Nock M, Hersen M 2009. Single Case Experimental Designs: Strategies for Studying Behavior for Change Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 3rd ed..
  7. Barton EE, Meadan H, Fettig A 2019. Comparison of visual analysis, non-overlap methods, and effect sizes in the evaluation of parent implemented functional assessment based interventions. Res. Dev. Disabil. 85:31–41
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bastiaansen JA, Kunkels YK, Blaauw F, Boker SM, Ceulemans E et al. 2019. Time to get personal? The impact of researchers’ choices on the selection of treatment targets using the experience sampling methodology. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/c8vp7
    [Crossref]
  9. Beck AT, Rush AJ, Shaw BF, Emery G 1979. Cognitive Therapy of Depression New York: Guilford
  10. Beck E, Jackson JJ. 2019. Consistency and change in idiographic personality: a longitudinal ESM network study. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. In press. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000249
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  11. Beltz AM, Wright AGC, Sprague BN, Molenaar PCM 2016. Bridging the nomothetic and idiographic approaches to the analysis of clinical data. Assessment 23:447–58
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bentley KH, Kleiman EM, Elliott G, Huffman JC, Nock MK 2018. Real-time monitoring technology in single-case experimental design research: opportunities and challenges. Behav. Res. Ther. 117:87–96
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Blaauw FJ, Schenk HM, Jeronimus BF, van der Krieke L, de Jonge P et al. 2016. Let's get Physiqual—an intuitive and generic method to combine sensor technology with ecological momentary assessments. J. Biomed. Inf. 63:141–49
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Blaauw FJ, van der Krieke L, Bos E, Emerencia A, Jeronimus BF et al. 2014. HowNutsAreTheDutch: personalized feedback on a national scale. Proceedings of the AAAI 2014 Fall Symposium Series6–10 Menlo Park, CA: AAAI
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Blaauw FJ, van der Krieke L, Emerencia AC, Aiello A 2017. Personalized advice for enhancing well-being using automated impulse response analysis. arXiv:1706.09268 [cs]
  16. Booij SH, Bos EH, Bouwmans ME, Faassen MV, Kema IP et al. 2015. Cortisol and α-amylase secretion patterns between and within depressed and non-depressed individuals. PLOS ONE 10:e0131002
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Booij SH, Bos EH, de Jonge P, Oldehinkel AJ 2016. The temporal dynamics of cortisol and affective states in depressed and non-depressed individuals. Psychoneuroendocrinology 69:16–25
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Borsboom D, Cramer AO. 2013. Network analysis: an integrative approach to the structure of psychopathology. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 9:91–121
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Bos EH, de Jonge P 2014. “Critical slowing down in depression” is a great idea that still needs empirical proof. PNAS 111:e878
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Bos EH, Hoenders R, de Jonge P 2012. Wind direction and mental health: a time-series analysis of weather influences in a patient with anxiety disorder. BMJ Case Rep 2012:bcr2012006300
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Bos FM, Blaauw FJ, Snippe E, van der Krieke L, de Jonge P, Wichers M 2018. Exploring the emotional dynamics of subclinically depressed individuals with and without anhedonia: an experience sampling study. J. Affect. Disord. 228:186–93
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Bosley HG, Fisher AJ, Taylor CB 2018. Differential responses of positive affect, negative affect, and worry in CBT for generalized anxiety disorder: a person-specific analysis of symptom course during therapy. Psychother. Res. 28:630–42
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Boswell JF, Anderson LM, Barlow DH 2014. An idiographic analysis of change processes in the unified transdiagnostic treatment of depression. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 82:1060–71
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Boswell JF, Bugatti M. 2016. An exploratory analysis of the impact of specific interventions: Some clients reveal more than others. J. Couns. Psychol. 63:710–20
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Boswell JF, Schwartzman CM. 2018. An exploration of intervention augmentation in a single case. Behav. Modif. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445518796202
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  26. Boukhechba M, Cai L, Chow PI, Fua K, Gerber MS et al. 2018. Contextual analysis to understand compliance with smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment. Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare232–38 New York: ACM
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Bouwmans ME, Beltz AM, Bos EH, Oldehinkel AJ, de Jonge P, Molenaar PC 2018. The person-specific interplay of melatonin, affect, and fatigue in the context of sleep and depression. Personal. Individ. Differ. 123:163–70
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Bouwmans ME, Bos EH, Booij SH, Faassen MV, Oldehinkel AJ, de Jonge P 2015. Intra- and inter-individual variability of longitudinal daytime melatonin secretion patterns in depressed and non-depressed individuals. Chronobiol. Int. 32:441–46
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Brake CA, Sauer-Zavala S, Boswell JF, Gallagher MW, Farchione TJ, Barlow DH 2016. Mindfulness-based exposure strategies as a transdiagnostic mechanism of change: an exploratory alternating treatment design. Behav. Ther. 47:225–38
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Brandt PT, Williams JT. 2006. Multiple Time Series Models Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  31. Bringmann LF, Elmer T, Epskamp S, Krause R, Schoch D et al. 2019. What do centrality measures measure in psychological networks. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 128:892–903
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Bringmann LF, Eronen MI. 2018. Don't blame the model: reconsidering the network approach to psychopathology. Psychopathology 125:606–15
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Bringmann LF, Ferrer E, Hamaker EL, Borsboom D, Tuerlinckx F 2018. Modeling nonstationary emotion dynamics in dyads using a time-varying vector-autoregressive model. Multivar. Behav. Res. 53:293–314
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Bringmann LF, Pe ML, Vissers N, Ceulemans E, Borsboom D et al. 2016. Assessing temporal emotion dynamics using networks. Assessment 23:425–35
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Brose A, Voelkle MC, Lövdén M, Lindenberger U, Schmiedek F 2015. Differences in the between-person and within-person structures of affect are a matter of degree. Eur. J. Personal. 29:55–71
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Cattell RB, Cattell AKS, Rhymer RM 1947. P-technique demonstrated in determining psychophysiological source traits in a normal individual. Psychometrika 12:267–88
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Clarkin JF, Yeomans FE, Kernberg OF 2006. Psychotherapy for Borderline Personality: Focusing on Object Relations Washington, DC: Am. Psychiatr. Publ.
  38. Cohen ZD, DeRubeis RJ. 2018. Treatment selection in depression. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 14:209–36
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Collins FS, Varmus H. 2015. A new initiative on precision medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:793–95
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Conner TS, Tennen H, Fleeson W, Barrett LF 2009. Experience sampling methods: a modern idiographic approach to personality research. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 3:292–313
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Costa PT, McCrae RR. 2008. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). In The SAGE Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment 2 GJ Boyle, G Matthews, DH Saklofske 179–98 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  42. David SJ, Marshall AJ, Evanovich EK, Mumma GH 2018. Intraindividual dynamic network analysis: implications for clinical assessment. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 40:235–48
    [Google Scholar]
  43. de Roover K, Ceulemans E, Timmerman ME, Nezlek JB, Onghena P 2013. Modeling differences in the dimensionality of multiblock data by means of clusterwise simultaneous component analysis. Psychometrika 78:648–68
    [Google Scholar]
  44. de Vos SD, Wardenaar KJ, Bos EH, Wit EC, Bouwmans ME, de Jonge P 2017. An investigation of emotion dynamics in major depressive disorder patients and healthy persons using sparse longitudinal networks. PLOS ONE 12:e0178586
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Doryab A, Dey AK, Kao G, Low C 2019. Modeling biobehavioral rhythms with passive sensing in the wild: a case study to predict readmission risk after pancreatic surgery. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 3:8
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Dotterer HL, Beltz AM, Foster KT, Simms LJ, Wright AGC 2019. Personalized models of personality disorders: using a temporal network method to understand symptomatology and daily functioning in a clinical sample. Psychol. Med. In press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291719002563
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  47. Edershile EA, Woods WC, Sharpe BM, Crowe ML, Miller JD, Wright AGC 2019. A day in the life of Narcissus: measuring narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability in daily life. Psychol. Assess. 31:913–24
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Elliott R, Wagner J, Sales C, Rodgers B, Alves P, Café MJ 2016. Psychometrics of the personal questionnaire: a client-generated outcome measure. Psychol. Assess. 28:263–78
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Epskamp S, Borkulo CV, Veen DC, Servaas M, Isvoranu A et al. 2018. Personalized network modeling in psychopathology: the importance of contemporaneous and temporal connections. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 6:416–27
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Fernandez KC, Fisher AJ, Chi C 2017. Development and initial implementation of the dynamic assessment treatment algorithm (DATA). PLOS ONE 12:e0178806
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Fisher AJ. 2015. Toward a dynamic model of psychological assessment. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 83:825–36
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Fisher AJ, Bosley HG, Fernandez KC, Reeves JW, Diamond AE et al. 2019. Open trial of a personalized modular treatment for mood and anxiety. Behav. Res. Ther. 116:69–79
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Fisher AJ, Boswell JF. 2016. Enhancing the personalization of psychotherapy with dynamic assessment and modeling. Assessment 23:496–506
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Fisher AJ, Reeves JW, Lawyer G, Medaglia JD, Rubel JA 2017. Exploring the idiographic dynamics of mood and anxiety via network analysis. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 126:1044–56
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Fisher AJ, Soyster PD. 2019. Generating accurate personalized predictions of future behavior: a smoking exemplar. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/e24v6
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  56. Ganz JB, Ayres KM. 2018. Methodological standards in single-case experimental design: raising the bar. Res. Dev. Disabil. 79:3–9
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Gates KM, Fisher ZF, Bollen KA 2020. Latent variable GIMME using model implied instrumental variables (MIIVs). Psychol. Methods 25:22742
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Gates KM, Molenaar PCM. 2012. Group search algorithm recovers effective connectivity maps for individuals in homogeneous and heterogeneous samples. NeuroImage 63:310–19
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Groen RN, Snippe E, Bringmann LF, Simons CJP, Hartmann JA et al. 2019. Capturing the risk of persisting depressive symptoms: a dynamic network investigation of patients’ daily symptom experiences. Psychiatr. Res. 271:640–48
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Hamaker EL, Ceulemans E, Grasman RPPP, Tuerlinckx F 2015. Modeling affect dynamics: state of the art and future challenges. Emot. Rev. 7:316–22
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Hamaker EL, Schuurman NK, Zijlmans EAO 2017. Using a few snapshots to distinguish mountains from waves: weak factorial invariance in the context of trait-state research. Multivar. Behav. Res. 52:47–60
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Hamaker EL, Wichers M. 2017. No time like the present: discovering the hidden dynamics in intensive longitudinal data. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 26:10–15
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Hamilton JD, Kendall PC, Gosch E, Furr JM, Sood E 2008. Flexibility within fidelity. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychol. 47:987–93
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Hartogs BM, Ploeg KV, Bos EH, Bartels-Velthuis AA 2017. Heart rate variability biofeedback stress relief program for depression. Methods Inf. Med. 56:419–26
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Hayes SC, Hofmann SG, Stanton CE, Carpenter JK, Sanford BT et al. 2019. The role of the individual in the coming era of process-based therapy. Behav. Res. Ther. 117:40–53
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Hayes SC, Strosahl KD, Wilson KG 2012. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: The Process and Practice of Mindful Change New York: Guilford, 2nd ed..
  67. Haynes SN, Mumma GH, Pinson C 2009. Idiographic assessment: conceptual and psychometric foundations of individualized behavioral assessment. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 29:179–91
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Himmelstein PH, Woods WC, Wright AGC 2019. A comparison of signal- and event-contingent ambulatory assessment of interpersonal behavior and affect in social situations. Psychol. Assess. 31:952–60
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Hoenders HR, Bos EH, de Jong JTM, de Jonge P 2012. Temporal dynamics of symptom and treatment variables in a lifestyle-oriented approach to anxiety disorder: a single-subject time-series analysis. Psychother. Psychosom. 81:253–55
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Hofmann SG, Hayes SC. 2019a. The future of intervention science: process-based therapy. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 7:37–50
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Hofmann SG, Hayes SC. 2019b. Functional analysis is dead: Long live functional analysis. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 7:63–67
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Hopwood CJ, Thomas KM, Luo X, Bernard N, Lin Y, Levendosky AA 2016. Implementing dynamic assessments in psychotherapy. Assessment 23:507–17
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Hosenfeld B, Bos EH, Wardenaar KJ, Conradi HJ, van der Maas HLJ et al. 2015. Major depressive disorder as a nonlinear dynamic system: bimodality in the frequency distribution of depressive symptoms over time. BMC Psychiatry 15:222
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Hyman SE. 2010. The diagnosis of mental disorders: the problem of reification. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 6:155–79
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Insel TR. 2014. The NIMH Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project: precision medicine for psychiatry. Am. J. Psychiatry 171:395–97
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Jameson JL, Longo DL. 2015. Precision medicine—personalized, problematic, and promising. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:2229–34
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Jones S, Hurrell E. 2019. A single case experimental design: How do different psychological outcome measures capture the experience of a client undergoing CBT for chronic pain. Br. J. Pain 13:6–12
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Kaiser T, Laireiter A-R. 2018. Process-symptom-bridges in psychotherapy: an idiographic network approach. J. Pers.-Oriented Res. 4:49–62
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Kim J, Zhu W, Chang L, Bentler PM, Ernst T 2007. Unified structural equation modeling approach for the analysis of multisubject, multivariate functional MRI data. Hum. Brain Mapp. 28:85–93
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Kotov R, Krueger RF, Watson D, Achenbach TM, Althoff RR et al. 2017. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): a dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 126:454–77
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Kramer I, Simons CJ, Hartmann JA, Menne-Lothmann C, Viechtbauer W et al. 2014. A therapeutic application of the experience sampling method in the treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial. World Psychiatry 13:68–77
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Kroeze R, Veen DC, Servaas MN, Bastiaansen JA, Voshaar RC et al. 2017. Personalized feedback on symptom dynamics of psychopathology: a proof-of-principle study. J. Pers.-Oriented Res. 3:1–10
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Kuyken W, Padesky CA, Dudley R 2011. Collaborative Case Conceptualization: Working Effectively with Clients in Cognitive–Behavioral Therapy New York: Guilford
  84. Lane ST, Gates KM, Pike HK, Beltz AM, Wright AGC 2019. Uncovering general, shared, and unique temporal patterns in ambulatory assessment data. Psychol. Methods 24:54–69
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Lee CM, Cronce JM, Baldwin SA, Fairlie AM, Atkins DC et al. 2017. Psychometric analysis and validity of the daily alcohol-related consequences and evaluations measure for young adults. Psychol. Assess. 29:253–63
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Lewis KC, Ridenour JM. 2019. The integration of EMA and single-occasion multimethod assessment data for a complex psychiatric patient. Assessment In press. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118825313
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  87. Litten RZ, Ryan ML, Falk DE, Reilly M, Fertig JB, Koob GF 2015. Heterogeneity of alcohol use disorder: understanding mechanisms to advance personalized treatment. Alcohol. Clin. Exp. Res. 39:579–84
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Linehan M. 1993. Cognitive–Behavioral Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder New York: Guilford
  89. Low CA, Dey AK, Ferreira D, Kamarck T, Sun W et al. 2017. Estimation of symptom severity during chemotherapy from passively sensed data: exploratory study. J. Med. Internet Res. 19:e420
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Lutz W, Schwartz B, Hofmann SG, Fisher AJ, Husen K, Rubel JA 2018. Using network analysis for the prediction of treatment dropout in patients with mood and anxiety disorders: a methodological proof-of-concept study. Sci. Rep. 8:7819
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Mohr DC, Zhang M, Schueller SM 2017. Personal sensing: understanding mental health using ubiquitous sensors and machine learning. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 13:23–47
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Molenaar PCM. 1985. A dynamic factor model for the analysis of multivariate time series. Psychometrika 50:181–202
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Molenaar PCM. 2004. A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Meas. Interdiscip. Res. Perspect. 2:201–18
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Molenaar PCM, Campbell CG. 2009. The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 18:112–17
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Molenaar PCM, Lo L. 2012. Dynamic factor analysis and control of developmental processes. Handbook of Developmental Research Methods B Laursen, TD Little, NA Card 333–49 New York: Guilford
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Molenaar PCM, Nesselroade JR. 2012. Merging the idiographic filter with dynamic factor analysis to model process. Appl. Dev. Sci. 16:210–19
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Mumma GH. 2004. Validation of idiosyncratic cognitive schema in cognitive case formulations: an intraindividual idiographic approach. Psychol. Assess. 16:211–30
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Mumma GH, Fluck J. 2016. How valid is your case formulation? Empirically testing your cognitive behavioural case formulation for tailored treatment. Cogn. Behav. Ther. 9:e12
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Mumma GH, Marshall AJ, Mauer C 2018. Person-specific validation and testing of functional relations in cognitive–behavioural case formulation: guidelines and options. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 25:672–91
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Mumma GH, Mooney SR. 2007a. Comparing the validity of alternative cognitive case formulations: a latent variable, multivariate time series approach. Cogn. Ther. Res. 31:451–81
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Mumma GH, Mooney SR. 2007b. Incremental validity of cognitions in a clinical case formulation: an intraindividual test in a case example. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 29:17–28
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Nesselroade JR, Gerstorf D, Hardy SA, Ram N 2007. Idiographic filters for psychological constructs. Measurement 5:217–35
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Norcross JC, Wampold BE. 2011. What works for whom: tailoring psychotherapy to the person. J. Clin. Psychol. 67:127–32
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Odgers CL, Mulvey EP, Skeem JL, Gardner W, Lidz CW, Schubert C 2009. Capturing the ebb and flow of psychiatric symptoms with dynamical systems models. Am. J. Psychiatry 166:575–82
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Pe ML, Kircanski K, Thompson RJ, Bringmann LF, Tuerlinckx F et al. 2015. Emotion-network density in major depressive disorder. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 3:292–300
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Pew Res. Cent 2019. Mobile fact sheet Pew Res. Cent Washington, DC: https://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/
  107. Pettersson E, Boker SM, Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A 2013. Modeling daily variation in the affective circumplex: a dynamical systems approach. J. Res. Personal. 47:57–69
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Piccirillo ML, Rodebaugh TL. 2019. Foundations of idiographic methods in psychology and applications for psychotherapy. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 71:90–100
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Price RB, Lane S, Gates K, Kraynak TE, Horner MS et al. 2017. Parsing heterogeneity in the brain connectivity of depressed and healthy adults during positive mood. Biol. Psychiatry 81:347–57
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Pustejovsky JE. 2018. Procedural sensitivities of effect sizes for single-case designs with directly observed behavioral outcome measures. Psychol. Methods 24:217–35
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Reber R, Canning EA, Harackiewicz JM 2018. Personalized education to increase interest. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 27:449–54
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Ridenour TA. 2019. Precision strategies as a timely and unifying framework for ongoing prevention science advances. Prev. Sci. 20:110–14
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Ridenour TA, Pineo TZ, Molina MMM, Lich KH 2013. Toward rigorous idiographic research in prevention science: comparison between three analytic strategies for testing preventive intervention in very small samples. Prev. Sci. 14:267–78
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Robins E, Guze SB. 1970. Establishment of diagnostic validity in psychiatric illness: its application to schizophrenia. Am. J. Psychiatry 126:983–87
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Roche MJ, Pincus AL. 2016. Precision assessment: an individualized and temporally dynamic approach to understanding patients in their daily lives. The Wiley Handbook of Personality Assessment U Kumar 192–204 New York: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Roche MJ, Pincus AL, Rebar AL, Conroy DE, Ram N 2014. Enriching psychological assessment using a person-specific analysis of interpersonal processes in daily life. Assessment 21:515–28
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Rodgers J, Herrema R, Honey E, Freeston M 2018. Towards a treatment for intolerance of uncertainty for autistic adults: a single case experimental design study. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 48:2832–45
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Rosmalen JG, Wenting AM, Roest AM, de Jonge P, Bos EH 2012. Revealing causal heterogeneity using time series analysis of ambulatory assessments: application to the association between depression and physical activity after myocardial infarction. Psychosom. Med. 74:377–86
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Rubel JA, Fisher AJ, Husen K, Lutz W 2018. Translating person-specific network models into personalized treatments: development and demonstration of the dynamic assessment treatment algorithm for individual networks (DATA-IN). Psychother. Psychosom. 87:249–51
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Shapiro MB. 1961. A method of measuring psychological changes specific to the individual psychiatric patient. Br. J. Med. Psychol. 34:151–55
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Shiffman S, Stone AA, Hufford MR 2008. Ecological momentary assessment. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 4:1–32
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Skinner BF. 1966. Operant behavior. Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application WK Honig 12–32 New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Smith JD. 2012. Single-case experimental designs: a systematic review of published research and current standards. Psychol. Methods 17:510–50
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Smith JD, Eichler WC, Norman KR, Smith SR 2015. The effectiveness of collaborative/therapeutic assessment for psychotherapy consultation: a pragmatic replicated single-case study. J. Personal. Assess. 97:261–70
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Snippe E, Bos EH, Ploeg KM, Sanderman R, Fleer J, Schroevers MJ 2015. Time-series analysis of daily changes in mindfulness, repetitive thinking, and depressive symptoms during mindfulness-based treatment. Mindfulness 6:1053–62
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Stavrakakis N, Booij SH, Roest AM, de Jonge P, Oldehinkel AJ, Bos EH 2015. Temporal dynamics of physical activity and affect in depressed and nondepressed individuals. Health Psychol 34:1268–77
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Tomko R, Solhan M, Carpenter R, Brown W, Jahng S, Wood P, Trull TJ 2014. Measuring impulsivity in daily life: the momentary impulsivity scale. Psychol. Assess. 26:339–49
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Toonen RB, Wardenaar KJ, Booij SH, Bos EH, de Jonge P 2016a. Using local linear models to capture dynamic interactions between cortisol and negative affect. J. Pers.-Oriented Res. 2:142–54
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Toonen RB, Wardenaar KJ, van Ockenburg SL, Bos EH, de Jonge P 2016b. Using state space methods to reveal dynamical associations between cortisol and depression. Nonlinear Dyn. Psychol. Life Sci. 20:1–21
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Trull TJ, Ebner-Priemer U. 2013. Ambulatory assessment. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 9:151–76
    [Google Scholar]
  131. van de Leemput IA, Wichers M, Cramer AO, Borsboom D, Tuerlinckx F et al. 2014. Critical slowing down as early warning for the onset and termination of depression. PNAS 111:87–92
    [Google Scholar]
  132. van der Krieke L, Blaauw FJ, Emerencia AC, Schenk HM, Slaets JP et al. 2016. Temporal dynamics of health and well-being: a crowdsourcing approach to momentary assessments and automated generation of personalized feedback. Psychosom. Med. 79:213–23
    [Google Scholar]
  133. van der Krieke L, Emerencia AC, Bos EH, Rosmalen JG, Riese H et al. 2015. Ecological momentary assessments and automated time series analysis to promote tailored health care: a proof-of-principle study. JMIR Res. Protoc. 4:e100
    [Google Scholar]
  134. van der Schans J, Cao Q, Bos EH, Rours I, Hoekstra PJ et al. 2020. The temporal order of fluctuations in atopic disease symptoms and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 29:13744
    [Google Scholar]
  135. van Os J, Delespaul P, Wigman J, Myin-Germeys I, Wichers M 2013a. Beyond DSM and ICD: introducing “precision diagnosis” for psychiatry using momentary assessment technology. World Psychiatry 12:113–17
    [Google Scholar]
  136. van Os J, Delespaul P, Wigman J, Myin-Germeys I, Wichers M 2013b. Psychiatry beyond labels: introducing contextual precision diagnosis across stages of psychopathology. Psychol. Med. 43:1563–67
    [Google Scholar]
  137. van Roekel E, Vrijen C, Heininga VE, Masselink M, Bos EH, Oldehinkel AJ 2017. An exploratory randomized controlled trial of personalized lifestyle advice and tandem skydives as a means to reduce anhedonia. Behav. Ther. 48:76–96
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Voelkle MC, Brose A, Schmiedek F, Lindenberger U 2014. Toward a unified framework for the study of between-person and within-person structures: building a bridge between two research paradigms. Multivar. Behav. Res. 49:193–213
    [Google Scholar]
  139. Wang W, Harari GM, Wang R, Müller SR, Mirjafari S et al. 2018. Sensing behavioral change over time: using within-person variability features from mobile sensing to predict personality traits. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 2:141
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Wichers M. 2014. The dynamic nature of depression: a new micro-level perspective of mental disorder that meets current challenges. Psychol. Med. 44:134960
    [Google Scholar]
  141. Wichers M, Schreuder MJ, Goekoop R, Groen RN 2018. Can we predict the direction of sudden shifts in symptoms? Transdiagnostic implications from a complex systems perspective on psychopathology. Psychol. Med. 49:380–87
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Wigman JT, van Os J, Thiery E, Derom C, Collip D et al. 2013. Psychiatric diagnosis revisited: towards a system of staging and profiling combining nomothetic and idiographic parameters of momentary mental states. PLOS ONE 8:e59559
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Wood P, Brown D. 1994. The study of intraindividual differences by means of dynamic factor models: rationale, implementation, and interpretation. Psychol. Bull. 116:166–86
    [Google Scholar]
  144. Woods WC, Arizmendi C, Gates KM, Stepp SD, Pilkonis PA, Wright AGC 2020. Personalized models of psychopathology as contextualized dynamic processes: an example from individuals with borderline personality disorder. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 88:24054
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Wright AGC. 2011. Quantitative and qualitative distinctions in personality disorder. J. Personal. Assess. 93:370–79
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Wright AGC, Beltz AM, Gates KM, Molenaar PCM, Simms LJ 2015. Examining the dynamic structure of daily internalizing and externalizing behavior and multiple levels of analysis. Front. Psychol. 6:1914
    [Google Scholar]
  147. Wright AGC, Gates KM, Arizmendi C, Lane ST, Woods WC, Edershile EA 2019. Focusing personality assessment on the person: modeling general, shared, and person specific processes in personality and psychopathology. Psychol. Assess. 32:502–15
    [Google Scholar]
  148. Wright AGC, Hallquist MN, Stepp SD, Scott LN, Beeney JE et al. 2016. Modeling heterogeneity in momentary interpersonal and affective dynamic processes in borderline personality disorder. Assessment 23:484–95
    [Google Scholar]
  149. Wright AGC, Simms LJ. 2016. Stability and fluctuation of personality disorder features in daily life. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 125:641–56
    [Google Scholar]
  150. Wright AGC, Zimmermann J. 2019. Applied ambulatory assessment: integrating idiographic and nomothetic principles of measurement. Psychol. Assess. 31:146780
    [Google Scholar]
  151. Yang X, Ram N, Gest SD, Lydon-Staley DM, Conroy DE et al. 2018. Socioemotional dynamics of emotion regulation and depressive symptoms: a person-specific network approach. Innov. Aging 2:15–16
    [Google Scholar]
  152. Yarkoni T, Westfall J. 2017. Choosing prediction over explanation in psychology: lessons from machine learning. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12:1100–22
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-102419-125032
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-102419-125032
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error