Extending the Spectrum Idea: Child Personality, Parenting and Psychopathology

1. Extending the Spectrum Idea: Child Personality, Parenting and Psychopathology Karla Van Leeuwen, Ivan Mervielde, Barbara De Clercq, Filip De Fruyt Ghent University, Belgium ISSPD_The Hague_2007

2. Introduction • Differences between normal and abnormal or clinical samples: qualitative or quantitative? • The spectrum hypothesis: a disorder is not a discrete taxon, but rather represents the extreme endpoints of a continuously-distributed dimension or cluster of dimensions (Shiner & Caspi, 2003; Widiger & Clark, 2000) Emotionaly instable Emotionaly stable ISSPD_The Hague_2007

3. Different levels for testing the spectrum hypothesis Target Basic Research Question Level 1 Means Differences in means between referred and non-referred samples? Level 2 Structure, validity, and reliability Differences in psychometric properties of measures between referred and non-referred samples? Level 3 Covariation Differences in (a) the nature, and (b) the strength of the covariation among independent and dependent variables between referred and non-referred samples? Level 4 Moderation and Mediation Differences in (a) the nature, and (b) the strength of moderating and mediating relationships between referred and non-referred samples? ISSPD_The Hague_2007

4. Method • Mothers & children • clinically referred sample: children in psychological or psychiatric treatment • non-referred sample: randomly selected • Follow-up: 2- to 3-year interval ISSPD_The Hague_2007

5. Subjects ISSPD_The Hague_2007

6. Measures • Parenting: Ghent Parental Behavior Scale (GPBS; Van Leeuwen & Vermulst, 2004) • positive parenting and negative control • Child Personality:The Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children (HiPIC; Mervielde & De Fruyt, 1999) • extraversion, benevolence, conscientiousness, emotional stability and imagination • Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Verhulst, Van der Ende, & Koot, 1996) • internalizing and externalizing problem behavior ISSPD_The Hague_2007

7. Analyses • ANOVA: differences in means • Hierarchical multiple regression analyses • Step 1: control variables: gender & age • Step 2: independent effects: group, 1 personality variable & 1 parenting variable • Step 3: 2-way interactions: group x personality, group x parenting, personality x group • Step 4: 3-way interaction: group x personality x parenting ISSPD_The Hague_2007

8. Results: level 1 • Significant mean differences between the referred and non-referred group at T1 & T2: • Problem behavior: referred children are rated higher on Internalizing and Externalizing behavior • Personality: referred children are rated lower on agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, extraversion and imagination • Parenting: mothers of referred children report higher negative control and lower positive parental behavior  supports the classical spectrum hypothesis ISSPD_The Hague_2007

9. Results: level 3 • Group by Personality interactions • Personality predicts child problem behavior at T1 & T2, showing some differences in the strength of the relationships for referred and non-referred groups, but not in the kind of relationship.  supports largely the extended version of the spectrum hypothesis ISSPD_The Hague_2007

10. Benevolence by Group predicting Externalizing behavior *** *** *** p < .001 ISSPD_The Hague_2007

11. Emotional Stability by Group predicting Internalizing behavior *** *** *** p < .001 ISSPD_The Hague_2007

12. Group by Parenting interactions • Negative control: stronger relationships for the referred group at T1 & T2 • Positive parenting: different patterns across groups and time  partly supports the extended version of the spectrum hypothesis ISSPD_The Hague_2007

13. Negative control by Group predicting Externalizing behavior *** *** *** p < .001 ISSPD_The Hague_2007

14. Positive parenting by Group predicting Internalizing behavior **(*) *** p < .001; ** p < .01 ISSPD_The Hague_2007

15. Results: level 4 • Parenting x Personality interactions total group (referred + non-referred children) • 4 interactions at T1 & T2 • Benevolence x Negative control • Benevolence x Positive parenting • Conscientiousness x Negative control • Externalizing behavior • Emotional stability x Positive parenting • Internalizing behavior ISSPD_The Hague_2007

16. Benevolence (BE) by Negative control predicting Externalizing behavior *** *** *** p < .001 ISSPD_The Hague_2007

17. Group x personality x parenting interactions • Time 1: Three out of twenty 3-way interactions are significant, but when a Bonferroni correction is applied, none of the interactions remain significant • Time 2: no significant 3-way interactions  similar personality-parenting interactions are associated with problem behavior in both the referred and non-referred group ISSPD_The Hague_2007

18. Discussion • The results largely corroborate the spectrum hypothesis implying that differences between the two types of samples can be conceived as quantitative rather than qualitative. • By focussing only on the most appropriate categorical diagnosis, clinicians ignore important ‘conditions’ for psychopathology or the ‘broader perspective’. • Both parenting and personality should be taken into account in the assessment and the selection of an appropriate treatment for children’s externalizing and internalizing behavior. ISSPD_The Hague_2007

19. Reference • Van Leeuwen, K. G., Mervielde, I., De Clercq, B. J., & De Fruyt, F. (2007). Extending the Spectrum Idea: Child Personality, Parenting and Psychopathology. European Journal of Personality, 21, 63-89. ISSPD_The Hague_2007