Derek de Beurs1,2, Claudi Bockting3, Ad Kerkhof2, Floortje Scheepers4, Rory O'Connor5, Brenda Penninx6, Ingrid van de Leemput7. 1. Trimbos Institute (Netherlands Institute of Mental Health), Utrecht, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Centers (location AMC), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Departement of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 5. Suicidal Behaviour Research Laboratory, Glasgow University, Glasgow, UK. 6. Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Aquatic Ecology and Water Quality Management, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Suicidal behavior is the result of complex interactions between many different factors that change over time. A network perspective may improve our understanding of these complex dynamics. Within the network perspective, psychopathology is considered to be a consequence of symptoms that directly interact with one another in a network structure. To view suicidal behavior as the result of such a complex system is a good starting point to facilitate moving away from traditional linear thinking. OBJECTIVE: To review the existing paradigms and theories and their application to suicidal behavior. METHODS: In the first part of this paper, we introduce the relevant concepts within network analysis such as network density and centrality. Where possible, we refer to studies that have applied these concepts within the field of suicide prevention. In the second part, we move one step further, by understanding the network perspective as an initial step toward complex system theory. The latter is a branch of science that models interacting variables in order to understand the dynamics of complex systems, such as tipping points and hysteresis. RESULTS: Few studies have applied network analysis to study suicidal behavior. The studies that do highlight the complexity of suicidality. Complexity science offers potential useful concepts such as alternative stable states and resilience to study psychopathology and suicidal behavior, as demonstrated within the field of depression. To date, one innovative study has applied concepts from complexity science to better understand suicidal behavior. Complexity science and its application to human behavior are in its infancy, and it requires more collaboration between complexity scientists and behavioral scientists. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and scientists are increasingly conceptualizing suicidal behavior as the result of the complex interaction between many different biological, social, and psychological risk and protective factors. Novel statistical techniques such as network analysis can help the field to better understand this complexity. The application of concepts from complexity science to the field of psychopathology and suicide research offers exciting and promising possibilities for our understanding and prevention of suicide.
BACKGROUND: Suicidal behavior is the result of complex interactions between many different factors that change over time. A network perspective may improve our understanding of these complex dynamics. Within the network perspective, psychopathology is considered to be a consequence of symptoms that directly interact with one another in a network structure. To view suicidal behavior as the result of such a complex system is a good starting point to facilitate moving away from traditional linear thinking. OBJECTIVE: To review the existing paradigms and theories and their application to suicidal behavior. METHODS: In the first part of this paper, we introduce the relevant concepts within network analysis such as network density and centrality. Where possible, we refer to studies that have applied these concepts within the field of suicide prevention. In the second part, we move one step further, by understanding the network perspective as an initial step toward complex system theory. The latter is a branch of science that models interacting variables in order to understand the dynamics of complex systems, such as tipping points and hysteresis. RESULTS: Few studies have applied network analysis to study suicidal behavior. The studies that do highlight the complexity of suicidality. Complexity science offers potential useful concepts such as alternative stable states and resilience to study psychopathology and suicidal behavior, as demonstrated within the field of depression. To date, one innovative study has applied concepts from complexity science to better understand suicidal behavior. Complexity science and its application to human behavior are in its infancy, and it requires more collaboration between complexity scientists and behavioral scientists. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and scientists are increasingly conceptualizing suicidal behavior as the result of the complex interaction between many different biological, social, and psychological risk and protective factors. Novel statistical techniques such as network analysis can help the field to better understand this complexity. The application of concepts from complexity science to the field of psychopathology and suicide research offers exciting and promising possibilities for our understanding and prevention of suicide.
Authors: Marten Scheffer; Jordi Bascompte; William A Brock; Victor Brovkin; Stephen R Carpenter; Vasilis Dakos; Hermann Held; Egbert H van Nes; Max Rietkerk; George Sugihara Journal: Nature Date: 2009-09-03 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: D De Beurs; E I Fried; K Wetherall; S Cleare; D B O' Connor; E Ferguson; R E O'Carroll; R C O' Connor Journal: Behav Res Ther Date: 2019-06-16
Authors: Denny Borsboom; Eiko I Fried; Sacha Epskamp; Lourens J Waldorp; Claudia D van Borkulo; Han L J van der Maas; Angélique O J Cramer Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2017-10
Authors: Angélique O J Cramer; Claudia D van Borkulo; Erik J Giltay; Han L J van der Maas; Kenneth S Kendler; Marten Scheffer; Denny Borsboom Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-12-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ingrid A van de Leemput; Marieke Wichers; Angélique O J Cramer; Denny Borsboom; Francis Tuerlinckx; Peter Kuppens; Egbert H van Nes; Wolfgang Viechtbauer; Erik J Giltay; Steven H Aggen; Catherine Derom; Nele Jacobs; Kenneth S Kendler; Han L J van der Maas; Michael C Neale; Frenk Peeters; Evert Thiery; Peter Zachar; Marten Scheffer Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-12-09 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Eduardo Fonseca-Pedrero; Susana Al-Halabí; Alicia Pérez-Albéniz; Martin Debbané Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-04 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Yann David Kippe; Maia Adam; Anna Finck; James Kenneth Moran; Meryam Schouler-Ocak; Felix Bermpohl; Stefan Gutwinski; Thomas Goldschmidt Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2022-09-07 Impact factor: 5.760
Authors: Derek de Beurs; Claudi Bockting; Ad Kerkhof; Floortje Scheepers; Rory O'Connor; Brenda Penninx; Ingrid van de Leemput Journal: Suicide Life Threat Behav Date: 2021-02