Differential Susceptibility to Family Conflict: The Interaction Effect of Temperament × Parenting on Early Childhood De

1. Differential Susceptibility to Family Conflict: The Interaction Effect of Temperament × Parenting on Early Childhood Delinquent Symptoms Xiao Zhang Department of Psychology University of Jyväskylä

2. Background • Part of a longitudinal project of Chinese children during the transition to nursery care

3. Background • Part of a longitudinal project of Chinese children during the transition to nursery care • Transition to child care: ---inherently stressful for young children (unfamiliar adults, unknown peers, and new physical settings for extended periods of time in absence of their parents)

4. Background • Part of a longitudinal project of Chinese children during the transition to nursery care • Transition to child care: ---inherently stressful for young children (unfamiliar adults, unknown peers, and new physical settings for extended periods of time in absence of their parents) ---increased risk of psychopathology symptoms across cultures (Ahnert et al., 2004; Klein et al., 2010; Zhang & Sun, 2010)

5. Background • Part of a longitudinal project of Chinese children during the transition to nursery care • Transition to child care: ---inherently stressful for young children (unfamiliar adults, unknown peers, and new physical settings for extended periods of time in absence of their parents) ---increased risk of psychopathology symptoms across cultures (Ahnert et al., 2004; Klein et al., 2010; Zhang & Sun, 2010) • Initial intention: Family × School → Psychopathology (Temperament: covariate)

6. Background • Part of a longitudinal project of Chinese children during the transition to nursery care • Transition to child care: ---inherently stressful for young children (unfamiliar adults, unknown peers, and new physical settings for extended periods of time in absence of their parents) ---increased risk of psychopathology symptoms across cultures (Ahnert et al., 2004; Klein et al., 2010; Zhang & Sun, 2010) • Initial intention: Family × School → Psychopathology (Temperament: covariate) • Aim of this paper: Temperament × Family → Psychopathology

7. Literature Review

8. Family Conflict • Characterized by marital discord and more general anger, hostility, and criticism among family members.

9. Family Conflict • Characterized by marital discord and more general anger, hostility, and criticism among family members. • A marker of dysfunctional families (Cummings, 1994). ---associated with elevated risk for a wide range of psychopathology symptoms, including internalizing (e.g., withdrawal, depression, anxiety) and externalizing (e.g., aggression, delinquency) (see a review in Kelly, 2000)

10. Family Conflict • Not all children who experience conflictual and harsh home environments develop symptoms of psychopathology (Garmezy et al., 1984).

11. Family Conflict • Not all children who experience conflictual and harsh home environments develop symptoms of psychopathology (Garmezy et al., 1984). • A number of child characteristics have been suggested to moderate (either exacerbate or attenuate) the risk of stressful family environments

12. Family Conflict • Not all children who experience conflictual and harsh home environments develop symptoms of psychopathology (Garmezy et al., 1984). • A number of child characteristics have been suggested to moderate (either exacerbate or attenuate) the risk of stressful family environments ---behavioral or temperamental in character (e.g., difficult/easy temperament), physiological or endophenotypic in nature (e.g., physiological reactivity), and genetic in origin (e.g., 5-HTTLPR alleles) (Belsky & Pluess, 2009)

13. Temperament • Biologically based individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced over time by heredity, maturation, and experience (Rothbart & Bates, 1998).

14. Temperament • Biologically based individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced over time by heredity, maturation, and experience (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). • Difficult temperament: ---operationalized in many different ways (e.g., high activity, negative emotionality) ---repeatedly linked to the development of internalizing and externalizing symptoms during the preschool period (Fagan, 1990)

15. Temperament • Biologically based individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced over time by heredity, maturation, and experience (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). • Difficult temperament: ---operationalized in many different ways (e.g., high activity, negative emotionality) ---repeatedly linked to the development of internalizing and externalizing symptoms during the preschool period (Fagan, 1990) • Yet recent research suggests that the combination of difficult temperament with stressful family environments (or the Temperament × Environment interaction) often has the greatest impact on psychopathology symptoms (e.g., Ramos et al., 2005; Tchann et al., 1996; Whiteside-Mansell et al., 2009).

16. Temperament × Family Conflict

17. Temperament × Family Conflict • Theoretical models (Temperament × Environment) ---Diathesis-stress hypothesis (Monroe & Simons, 1991): ---Differential susceptibility hypothesis (Belsky & Pluess, 2009):

18. Temperament × Family Conflict • Theoretical models (Temperament × Environment) ---Diathesis-stress hypothesis (Monroe & Simons, 1991): children with difficult temperament are more vulnerable to stressful environments, showing more symptoms of psychopathology, than those with easy temperament ---Differential susceptibility hypothesis (Belsky & Pluess, 2009):

19. Temperament × Family Conflict • Theoretical models (Temperament × Environment) ---Diathesis-stress hypothesis (Monroe & Simons, 1991): children with difficult temperament are more vulnerable to stressful environments, showing more symptoms of psychopathology, than those with easy temperament ---Differential susceptibility hypothesis (Belsky & Pluess, 2009): difficult children who are most adversely affected by an environmental stressor are the very same ones who reap the most benefit from environmental support and enrichment, including the absence of adversity

20. Temperament × Family Conflict • Theoretical models (Temperament × Environment)

21. Temperament × Family Conflict • Both hypotheses have received empirical support.

22. Temperament × Family Conflict • Both hypotheses have received empirical support. ---Diathesis-stress hypothesis: In a cross-sectional study of 145 preschool children, children with difficult temperament (e.g., high activity, negative mood) in high-conflict families had the most internalizing and externalizing symptoms, whereas children with easy temperament had the fewest symptoms regardless of levels of family conflict (Tschann et al., 1996)

23. Temperament × Family Conflict • Both hypotheses have received empirical support. ---Diathesis-stress hypothesis: In a cross-sectional study of 145 preschool children, children with difficult temperament (e.g., high activity, negative mood) in high-conflict families had the most internalizing and externalizing symptoms, whereas children with easy temperament had the fewest symptoms regardless of levels of family conflict (Tschann et al., 1996) ---Differential susceptibility hypothesis: In a longitudinal study of 728 children from ages 1 to 8, children with difficult temperament (e.g., inadaptability, unpredictability) were more likely to develop externalizing symptoms as a result of high conflict in the family but also tended to show fewer symptoms in low-conflict families than those with easy temperament (Whiteside-Mansell et al., 2009)

24. Temperament × Family Conflict • No support for either hypothesis:

25. Temperament × Family Conflict • No support for either hypothesis: In a longitudinal study of 337 children from ages 5 to 17, no interaction of temperament and marital conflict was found in the prediction of internalizing or externalizing problems (Leve et al., 2005).

26. Temperament × Family Conflict • Possible Sources of the mixed results

27. Temperament × Family Conflict • Possible Sources of the mixed results ---reporter bias and shared method invariance: the same informant to measure both temperament and symptoms

28. Temperament × Family Conflict • Possible Sources of the mixed results ---reporter bias and shared method invariance: the same informant to measure both temperament and symptoms ---hard to compare the results across studies: difficult temperament was almost always conceptualized in general senses (instead of using specific dimensions) but operationalized in different ways (i.e., using different measures)

29. Temperament × Family Conflict • Possible Sources of the mixed results ---reporter bias and shared method invariance: the same informant to measure both temperament and symptoms ---hard to compare the results across studies: difficult temperament was almost always conceptualized in general senses (instead of using specific dimensions) but operationalized in different ways (i.e., using different measures) ---direction of causality: some studies assessed conflict, temperament, and symptoms concurrently

30. Temperament × Family Conflict • Thus, more studies are needed with (a) measurement of conflict, temperament, and behavior using different informants, (b) assessment of specific temperamental dimensions, and (c) controls for prior symptoms when examining the Temperament × Family Conflict interaction in the prediction of later symptoms.

31. Temperament × Family Conflict • Moreover, the extent to which findings derived from studies of Western children apply to Chinese children during a critical transitional period is not clear.

32. Temperament × Family Conflict • Moreover, the extent to which findings derived from studies of Western children apply to Chinese children during a critical transitional period is not clear. ---Chinese children’s symptoms of psychopathology are associated with both temperament (e.g., shyness-sensitivity: Chen et al., 1992, 2009a; behavioral inhibition: Chen et al., 2009b; effortful control, positive emotionality, & anger-irritability: Zhou et al., 2009) and family environments (Phillips et al., 1991). Yet we do not know whether family environments interact with temperament to influence symptoms among Chinese children.

33. Temperament × Family Conflict • Moreover, the extent to which findings derived from studies of Western children apply to Chinese children during a critical transitional period is not clear. ---Chinese children’s symptoms of psychopathology are associated with both temperament (e.g., shyness-sensitivity: Chen et al., 1992, 2009a; behavioral inhibition: Chen et al., 2009b; effortful control, positive emotionality, & anger-irritability: Zhou et al., 2009) and family environments (Phillips et al., 1991). Yet we do not know whether family environments interact with temperament to influence symptoms among Chinese children. ---Symptoms of psychopathology during the transition to child care are affected by both environmental factors such as parenting (Klein et al., 2010) and child temperament (e.g., approach/withdrawal, adaptability: Ahnert et al., 2004). However, we do not know whether symptoms during this transition can be predicted by the Temperament × Family Conflict interactions.

34. The Present Study • The present study extends previous work by examining the Temperament × Family Conflict interaction in the prediction of delinquent symptoms among Chinese children during a critical developmental period—the transition from home to child care.

35. The Present Study • The present study extends previous work by examining the Temperament × Family Conflict interaction in the prediction of delinquent symptoms among Chinese children during a critical developmental period—the transition from home to child care. • To this end, we followed up a group of children in Beijing during their one-year transition to nursery care.

36. The Present Study • Hypothesis: a significant Temperament × Family Conflict interaction

37. The Present Study • Hypothesis: a significant Temperament × Family Conflict interaction ---this interaction is expected to be accounted for by the differential susceptibility hypothesis. Specifically, children with difficult temperament were expected to be more susceptible to the negative consequences of high conflict in the family, showing more delinquent symptoms, and also more positively affected by low conflict, showing fewer symptoms, than children with easy temperament.

38. Method

39. Method • Participants ---At 3 months after nursery entry (Time 1 T1), 118 children (56 boys, 62 girls; M = 33.3 months old, SD = 3.1 months) participated with mothers, fathers, and head caregivers. ---At 9 months after T1 (Time 2 T2; i.e., the end of nursery care), 11 children had transferred to other nurseries and did not participate. Attrition analyses did not reveal significant differences in the child’s age, sex, delinquent symptoms, temperament, or family conflict at T1.

40. Method • Measures

41. Method • Measures ---Delinquent Symptoms at T1 and T2: via caregiver report using the delinquency subscale in Achenbach’s (1992) Child Behavior Checklist/2–3 (CBCL/2–3). Alpha coefficients were 0.75 and 0.79 for delinquent problems at T1 and T2, respectively. Higher scores indicate more symptoms.

42. Method • Measures ---Delinquent Symptoms at T1 and T2: via caregiver report using the delinquency subscale in Achenbach’s (1992) Child Behavior Checklist/2–3 (CBCL/2–3). The scale measures the extent to which children do not do what social rules require. Alpha coefficients were 0.75 and 0.79 for delinquent problems at T1 and T2, respectively. Higher scores indicate more symptoms. ---Family Conflict At T1: via father report using the conflict subscale in Moos and Moos’s (1986) Family Environment Scale (FES). The scale measures the amount of openly expressed anger and conflict among family members. The alpha coefficient was 0.67. Higher scores indicate a conflictual environment in the family.

43. Method • Measure ---Temperament at T1: via mother reports using the activity level, rhythmicity, and approach/withdrawal subscales in Thomas and Chess’s (1977) Child Temperament Questionnaire (CTQ). Approach/withdrawal reflects a child’s tendency to approach new people and situations. Activity level measures a child's general level of energy and movement. Rhythmicity reflects the degree of predictability of the timing of the child’s biological functions such as hunger, sleep-wake cycles, and elimination. Alpha coefficients were 0.69 for the rhythmicity scale, 0.67 for the approach-withdrawal scale, and 0.63 for the activity level scale. Lower scores in rhythmicity and approach/withdrawal and higher scores in activity level indicate “difficult” temperament.

44. Results • Hierarchical regression to predict T2 delinquent symptoms (covariates: T1 delinquent symptoms, maternal education, child’s age and sex)

45. Results B=.51, p < .01b B=–.40, p < .05b

46. Discussion • Consistent with the diathesis-stress hypothesis, the results showed that children with difficult temperament (i.e., high activity level) were more vulnerable to family conflict and showed more delinquent symptoms as compared to children with relatively easy temperament (i.e., low activity level).

47. Discussion • Consistent with the diathesis-stress hypothesis, the results showed that children with difficult temperament (i.e., high activity level) were more vulnerable to family conflict and showed more delinquent symptoms as compared to children with relatively easy temperament (i.e., low activity level). • Moreover, as an important additional finding, children with difficult temperament were also influenced more positively by low conflict in their family than children with easy temperament. Difficult children showed fewer delinquent symptoms when reared in less conflictual families.

48. Discussion • Consistent with the diathesis-stress hypothesis, the results showed that children with difficult temperament (i.e., high activity level) were more vulnerable to family conflict and showed more delinquent symptoms as compared to children with relatively easy temperament (i.e., low activity level). • Moreover, as an important additional finding, children with difficult temperament were also influenced more positively by low conflict in their family than children with easy temperament. Difficult children showed fewer delinquent symptoms when reared in less conflictual families. • In sum, these findings were consistent with the differential susceptibility hypothesis (Belsky & Pluess, 2009).

49. Discussion • Temperament × Family Conflict interactions accounted for 5% of the variance in delinquent symptoms. • This effect size is generally consistent with results reported in other studies investigating Temperament × Parenting interactions in the development of externalizing problems. Moreover, the interaction effects were independent of prior delinquent symptoms, maternal education, and the child’s age and sex.

50. Discussion • Strengths: ---different informants: significant interactions cannot be solely ascribed to shared method variances. ---a longitudinal design was adopted: inferences about direction of effects can be made. ---the Temperament × Environment interaction was first tested in a sample of Chinese children during the transition to nursery care.