A 75-year-old man with history of tobacco use, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia presents to the emergency department with sudden onset difficulty speaking and inability to walk. His family states they found him in his bedroom on the floor after appearing his normal self at breakfast 1 hour prior. They deny seeing any abnormal movement at that time or since. His family reports that he drinks alcohol occasionally and is compliant with all his medications, though they are not sure what he takes. The patient is unable to provide any history for himself.

Academic achievement is critical for lifelong health and wealth, but Latinx students have lower rates of high school completion and matriculation into higher education. This chapter describes research on the educational experiences of Latinx students using data collected over the past 12 years with thousands of families to argue that the achievement gap is maintained by the myth of meritocracy and the (mis)allocation of resources. The findings compel the authors to understand the “underachievement” of Latinx students as a reflection of an inequitable education system. Thus, they call on educators and policy makers to invest in programs and policies that cultivate linguistic, familial, navigational, and resistant capital for the sake of education justice for Latinx (and other marginalized) students. By building capital within communities, Latinx families and their allies can transform the US education system to meet the needs and affirm the belonging of Latinx students.

Peers play a critical role in children and adolescents’ development and adjustment. This chapter reviews existing scholarship on peer-perpetrated ethnic and racial discrimination, as well as supportive ethnic and racial processes in peer groups. We first examine theoretical perspectives underlying peer ethnic and racial discrimination and its developmental implications. We then review empirical evidence that has linked various forms (e.g., general, victimization, teasing, exclusion, online) of peer discrimination to developmental outcomes. The chapter subsequently explores protective factors in peer groups (friendships, socialization) that can buffer the negative influence of discrimination, as well as existing programs and practices that seek to address peer ethnic and racial discrimination. Lastly, the chapter identifies several areas for future research to unpack further the complex ethnic and racial processes in peer groups.

Psychopathology is the scientific exploration of abnormal mental states and behavior. The phenomena under consideration are first-person (i.e., lived) experiences and third-person clinical descriptions, which can be studied and explained in two different ways. On the one hand, descriptive psychopathology aims to capture these phenomena without any preconceived notions of cause or mechanism (Häfner, 2015). On the other hand, theoretical psychopathology explores the etiology of abnormal mental states, applying methods ranging from the social sciences to neurobiology and genetics (Schultze-Lutter et al., 2018). Here I will focus on the descriptive and theoretical psychopathology of panic disorder given that Russo and van Eck use it as the paradigmatic psychiatric illness in their chapter, “Charting the Explanatory Potential of Network Models in Psychopathology.”

This chapter describes ways in which Curll interacted with the book trade at large, and illustrates his methods as they relate to the common publishing practices then in operation. It is easier to spot the manner in which he differed from his colleagues than areas in which he resembled them. Under one crucial aspect, he never joined the mainstream: he was not a member of the Stationers’ Company, a fact whose implications underlie some of his publishing choices and his possible apprentices. In other respects, he went along with normal practices in the trade. Among other topics, attention is given to the scale of his output over time, pricing policies, his limited use of trade sales, his retail operations, some of his marketing strategies, and his legal problems, as compared with other booksellers. One section discusses his activities in co-publishing and his partnerships (longer or shorter) with figures such as Egbert Sanger, John Pemberton, and William Mears.

In this chapter, I provide reflections on two decades of research on ethnic and racial discrimination and its consequences for children and adolescents. Building on foundational theoretical frameworks and methodological advances, the chapter highlights the extraordinary growth of the field since the early 1990s, when empirical attention to discrimination and youth was sparse and marginalized within developmental science. Drawing across the twenty-four chapters, the commentary identifies the now-incontrovertible evidence documenting the breadth, magnitude, and persistence of discrimination’s effects across developmental domains – from psychological well-being and identity to academic, physiological, and behavioral outcomes. I highlight five themes that I believe should guide the next phase of scholarship in the field: the need to situate interpersonal discrimination within broader systems of structural and historical racism; a more explicit focus on how power operates in young people’s lives; an intersectional lens that captures the realities of youths with multiple marginalized identities; long-overdue attention to White youths’ racial learning; and a shift toward strengths- and rights-based perspectives that highlight resistance, cultural assets, and possibilities for thriving. Together, these themes chart a path toward a more comprehensive, equity-driven developmental science.

Psychiatry has a core goal of understanding the mechanisms that produce, underlie, and maintain psychiatric disorders. But what is a mechanism? And how should the answer to that question be justified? In this chapter Craver defends a practice-first direction of fit, which involves building a notion of “mechanism” for psychiatry by charitably reconstructing what the term appears to mean from the functions it serves for psychiatrists and researchers. Taking this approach, many philosophical objections to mechanism (i.e., that it is at odds with a process metaphysics and that it is committed to reductionist obsession with detail) turn out to be predicated on misunderstandings. Some directions for a future mechanistic philosophy of psychiatry are sketched out.

Can we use neuroimaging to study the causes of psychiatric disorders? If so, how does neuroimaging compare to other methods in psychiatric research that allow for strong causal inferences? Neuroimaging study designs have evolved from cross-sectional, providing only correlational evidence, to longitudinal and interventional, which have strengthened the inferences we can draw from brain images. In this chapter, Heckers shows that researchers are using neuroimaging tools to pursue three very different goals. The techniques are similar, but they aim for different – at times conflicting – inferences. The three types of psychiatric neuroimaging studies pursue distinct aspects of causality, with different levels of explanation and applications for clinical practice. Much of current psychiatric neuroimaging does not study the causes of psychiatric disorders. However, the inclusion of neuroimaging methods in intervention trials has the promise to reveal causal relationships in psychiatric disorders.

Descriptive psychiatry has served our field well for more than half a century. The need to rely on phenomenology cannot be blamed for the structural errors built into the DSM system, such as choosing categories over dimensions, pseudo-precision to serve interrater reliability, and the arbitrary division of psychopathology into nearly three hundred distinct categories. Like all of medicine, psychiatric treatments exhibit unacceptable levels of variability in patient outcomes, consistent with cryptic mechanistic heterogeneity underlying indistinguishable clinical presentations. The result is an aspiration for precision medicine using biomarkers to select the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. Unlike most of medicine, however, psychiatric disorders lack clear natural anchors, like amyloid and tau in Alzheimer’s disease, that nominate mechanisms, biomarkers, and treatment targets. Hyman argues that it is now scientifically possible, albeit still very difficult, to begin identifying mechanisms and biomarkers, and that a concerted effort is warranted.