present study. Sixth, attrition of the sample owing to participants who did not return for follow-up assessments could have affected the present study’s findings. A nonresponse analysis indicated that individuals who did not return for follow-up were younger (p < .001) and were more likely to have had a diagnosis of alcohol dependence (p < .001), and that fewer non-responders were exposed to assaultive (p < .001) and non-assaultive (p < .001) trauma and had a diagnosis of cannabis dependence (p < .001); no differences regarding gender, race/ethnicity, impulsivity, sexual trauma exposure, or ERO values were observed. In light of the absence of attrition effects for the primary findings for sexual trauma exposure and ERO power, we believe that inferences made in this report are likely to be sound. Relatedly, decreased sample sizes available in follow-ups 4 and 5 might limit the statistical power of some complex models examined in this study, leading to the possibility of type I and II errors. Despite these limitations, this is the first study to our knowledge to examine associations of early trauma exposure, neurophysiologic developmental trajectories in adolescence and young adulthood, and risk for later psychopathology. This is particularly important because this is
