Supporting Information S1 - Young Offspring at Genetic Risk of Adult Psychoses: The Form of the Trajectory of IQ or Memory May Orient to the Right Dysfunction at the Right Time

This information suggests that the results presented in the main text did not depend on the chosen developmental age cut-offs. To allow the construction of a developmental trajectory, the offspring sample was divided into subsamples of different age. Since there is no empirical evidence on which to base the choice of age cut-offs, we chose cut-offs that correspond to developmental ages that may have a meaning in social, clinical and developmental psychopathology. Thus, in the text of our article, a four age-period was chosen, as follow: primary school years (age 7–12), young adolescence (13–16), late adolescence (17–19) and beginning of adulthood (20–22). When we re-examined the developmental patterns with three age periods (ages 7–14, 15–18, 19–22), the results remained congruent (Table S1). To further analyze the three period intervals, it can be noted that the Group variable was significant for all the cognitive functions tested. As in the “four period analysis”, there were no statistically significant Group x Age Periods interaction terms for the Global IQ and for the verbal memory tests. In contrast, for the two tests of visual memory, the interaction term showed a statistical trend (RCFTIR, p = .071; RCFTDR, p = .099; Table S1) with shapes of the trajectories similar to those of the four age periods i.e. a lagging period during childhood followed by a recuperation period from adolescence until adulthood (Figure S1), whereas Global IQ displayed again a stable deficit. (DOC)