Predicting Children’s Problem Behaviors from Family Environment, Parenting, and Effortful Control

1. Predicting Children’s Problem Behaviors from Family Environment, Parenting, and Effortful Control Jodi Swanson, Carlos Valiente, Kathryn Lemery-Chalfant, and Mark Reiser School of Social and Family Dynamics, Arizona State University Abstract Guided by Belsky’s (1984) and Eisenberg et al.’s (1998) heuristic models, we tested a process model that examined relations between parents’ effortful control and family chaos to parental reactions to children’s negative emotions, to children’s effortful control, to children’s externalizing problems. As expected, parents’ effortful control promoted positive and inhibited negative reactions to children’s negative emotions; high family chaos inhibited positive parental reactions. High levels of positive and low levels of negative reactions predicted children’s effortful control, which in turn negatively related to externalizing problem behaviors. Results highlight a mediational process model to promote children’s effortful control and reduce their problem behaviors. • Discussion • A notable percentage of children endure difficulties related to symptoms of problem behaviors. Consequently, it is a goal of many researchers to explore probable causes of such problems. Toward better understanding direct or indirect paths to problem behaviors, in this study we fit one of the first mediational process model combining the family environment, parenting, parents’ and children’s effortful control, and externalizing problem behaviors. • Aspects of parents’ temperament and regulatory skills have been related to their children’s temperament and adjustment. In addition, the relation between parenting and problem behaviors likely involves one or more mediators. Extending a small but growing literature in this area, this study found that children’s effortful control significantly mediates this relation. In addition, this is the first study to find that parenting practices mediate the relation between parents’ effortful control and children’s effortful control, identifying a very plausible target for intervention research. • Future Research • This study represents a first step toward elucidating mechanisms that underlie factors in the process of influences on children’s externalizing problem behaviors, and more broadly, children’s social adjustment and functioning. Future research of factors (e.g., family chaos, poorly regulated caregivers) that may increase the likelihood of emerging problem behaviors would benefit from also examining more proximal influences in a process model, investigating variables longitudinally and using multiple methods of assessment. • Method • Participants were 7- to 12-year-old (87 boys, 101 girls; M age = 9.55 years) 3rd – 5th grade children from predominately Mexican-American (47%) working-class families. Parents and children completed packets of questionnaires and were compensated for their participation. • Measures • Family Environment • Parents’ EC • Parents reliably reported their EC from the attention shifting, activation control, and inhibitory control scales from the Adult Temperament Questionnaire (Derryberry & Rothbart, 1988). • Family Chaos • The Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale (Matheny, Wachs, Ludwig, & Phillips, 1995), a scale that assesses perceptions of at-home disorganization, was used to assess family household chaos. • Parenting • The Coping with Children’s Negative Emotions Scale (Fabes, Eisenberg, & Bernzweig, 1990) was used to assess parents’ positive and negative reactions to children’s negative emotions. The scale consists of six 12-item scales in which parents describe the likelihood of their responses to typical situations that evoke children’s negative emotions. A principal components analysis was computed to reduce variables in the model: problem-focused and expressive encouragement loaded as positive reactions; minimization, punitive, and distress loaded as negative reactions. • Children’s Effortful Control (EC) • Children and parents reliably rated children’s EC using the attention shifting, activation control, and inhibitory control scales from the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire (Rothbart, Ahadi, Hersey, & Fisher, 2001). • Children’s Externalizing Problem Behaviors • Children reported on their externalizing problem behaviors with Achenbach’s (1991) Youth Self-Report, and parents reported on children’s externalizing problem behaviors with the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach, 1991). Results As Table 1 shows, the pattern of correlations supported most of our predictions. Of particular note is that both parents’ EC and family chaos were related in the expected directions to parents’ positive and negative reactions, as well as children’s EC and the outcomes (children’s externalizing problem behaviors). Further, parents’ reactions related in the expected direction to children’s EC, which in turn related negatively, as expected, to externalizing behaviors. These correlations provided initial support to examine the process model hypothesized to predict children’s problem behaviors. Structural Equation Model of Mediation Figure 1 indicates that parents’ EC was positively related to their positive reactions and negatively related to negative reactions. Family chaos also negatively related to parents’ positive reactions. High positive and low negative reactions predicted children’s high EC, which was negatively related to externalizing problem behaviors. To test for mediation, we used a confidence interval method (MacKinnon et al., 2002). Results indicated that parents’ positive (and negative) reactions and children’s EC mediated the relations between parents’ EC and their externalizing problems. Positive reactions only and children’s EC mediated the relations between family chaos and externalizing problems. Table 1. Zero-order Correlations among Study Variables. • Introduction • A process-oriented model linking family environment to problem behaviors is needed. • Parental socialization of children’s emotion, effortful control (EC), and adjustment has been widely researched. Although the family environment and indices of parenting seem to influence children’s emotion regulation and adjustment, few process-oriented models exist that describe how and why these relations are linked. Previously, researchers have attempted to predict problem behaviors either from measures of the family environment, parenting, or children’s temperament. Data from these studies have been informative and this work has been productive, but findings are inconsistent and often presented in separate literatures. More recent work suggests that these constructs might be best examined in a process-oriented model. • We proposed that parents’ EC and chaos will predict parents’ reactions to children’s negative emotions, which will influence children’s EC and consequently their externalizing problem behaviors. • Belsky (1984) proposed that qualities of parents’ dispositions (e.g., temperament, personality) influence how they parent, which influences their children’s social functioning. Poorly regulated parents likely employ lower-quality parenting practices. Building upon Belsky’s model, Eisenberg et al. (1998) identified that parents specifically socialize their children’s emotions via their own reactions to children’s emotions, their own discussion and expression of emotion, and their selection or modification of the child’s situation. Family chaos has also been related to both parenting and children’s social functioning. We will examine if parenting practices and children’s EC mediate the relation between a chaotic family environment and children’s problem behaviors. Most research in this area does not examine how parenting may relate to children’s EC or social functioning, as well as how parents’ EC and family household chaos may influence parenting. Note. +p < .10;*p < .05; **p < .01. EC = effortful control; PR = Parent-reported; CR = Child-reported. Figure 1. Unstandardized estimates are listed above the standardized estimates, which are in parentheses. Solid lines represent significant paths and the dotted line represents a hypothesized but nonsignificant path *p < .05, **p < .01. References Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Integrative guide for the 1991 CBCL/4-18, YSR, and TRF profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry. Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: A process model. Child Development, 55, 83-96. Derryberry, D., & Rothbart, M. K. (1988). Arousal, affect, and attention as components of temperament. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 958-966. Eisenberg, N., Cumberland, A. J., & Spinrad, T. L. (1998). Parental socialization of emotion. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 241-273. Fabes, R. A., Eisenberg, N., & Bernzweig, J. (1990). The Coping with Children’s Negative Emotions Scale: Procedures and scoring. Available from authors. Arizona State University. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104. Matheny, A. P., Wachs, T. D., Ludwig, J. L., & Phillips, K. (1995). Bringing order out of chaos: Psychometric characteristics of the confusion, hubbub, and order scale. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 16, 429-444. Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A., Hersey, K. L., & Fisher, P. (2001). Investigations of temperament at three to seven years: The Children’s Behavior Questionnaire. Child Development, 72, 1394-1408. Parent Parent 1.00 (.83) 1.00 (.89) Parents’ Effortful Control Parents’ Positive Reactions R2=.14 .23* (.20) 1.00 (.70) -.45** (-.38) Parent .48** (.61) Children’s Effortful Control R2=.28 Children’s Externalizing Problems R2=.77 -.34** (-.88) -.04* (-.25) .43** (.80) Family Chaos Parents’ Negative Reactions R2=.18 -.87** (-.27) Child -.52** (-.68) .41** (.28) 1.00 (.88) .37 (.11) 1.00 (.86) 1.00 (.92) .39** (.41) Parent Parent Parent Child This work was partially funded by the Arizona State University Faculty Grant in Aid and a National Science Foundation CAREER award to Carlos Valiente.