Predictions

1. Motivational Focus and the Socialization of Self-Regulation Tracy A. Dennis New York University Child Study Center Abstract This study of 111 3- and 4-year-olds and their mothers examined whether parenting, child self-regulation, and child outcomes were linked in terms of underlying approach and avoidance motivation. Maternal and child behaviors were coded from videotaped observations of a free play and three emotionally challenging tasks. Parenting and child self-regulation were coded as promotion (approaching positive outcomes) or prevention (avoiding negative outcomes). Child outcomes, also hypothesized to reflect promotion and prevention, were observed compliance and persistence, and mother-reported social skills. Results revealed motivational symmetry among parenting and child factors. Child temperament moderated the linkage between parenting and child social skills. The utility of a motivational model of socialization, the role of context and temperament, and implications for understanding the development of adjustment and maladjustment are discussed. Introduction Self-regulation, the ability to adjust by initiating behavioral or emotional changes, is one of the most crucial tasks of development. For young children, self-regulation is linked to outcomes such as compliance with caregiver standards and persistence in the face of challenge (Denham, 1998). The progression towards autonomous self-regulation over the first several years of life is founded in part upon and socialization by caregivers (Eisenberg, Cumberland, & Spinrad, 1998). However, more needs to be understood about linkages between parenting and child self-regulation and associated outcomes. The present investigation attempted to integrate two bodies of research, socialization of self-regulation and approach and avoidance motivation, to address this issue (see also Higgins, 1997). Approach and Avoidance Motivation.Motivation provides intrinsic “drives” or guidance for behavior. Approach motivation is inferred from behavior concerning positive/ Sensitivity to and approaching positive outcomes = Promotion Sensitivity to and avoiding negative outcomes = Prevention desired events, and supports self-regulation aimed towards promoting such events. In contrast, avoidance motivation is inferred from behavior concerning negative/undesired events, and supports self-regulation aimed towards preventing such events. Both parenting and child factors can be characterized in terms of approach and avoidance motivation. Approach oriented parenting and child outcomes are termed promotion and avoidance oriented parenting and child outcomes are termed prevention. If promotion and prevention are even partially socialized, then associations among parenting and child factors might show motivational correspondences or symmetry. That is, promotion parenting, child temperamental approach, and child promotion self-regulation all share the same core sensitivity to positive/desired events. Likewise, prevention parenting, child temperamental avoidance, and child prevention self-regulation all share the same core sensitivity to negative/undesirable events. Such associations have been proposed, but have not beenadequately tested (Higgins & Silberman, 1998). Motivational Symmetry in Parent and Child Promotion Motivational Symmetry in Parent and Child Prevention Parents Children Parents Children Promotion Parenting: Bolstering and Nurturance Prevention Parenting: Correction and prudence Promotion Self-Regulation: Approach Prevention Self-Regulation: Avoid Promotion Focus Prevention Focus Costs & benefits: Compliance, internalizing problems (anxiety) Costs & benefits: Persistence, externalizing problems Goals: Competence and Achievement Goals: Safety, rules, duties • Predictions • We predicted that there would be approach and avoidance motivational symmetry between parenting and child factors. Specifically, we predicted that • Maternal promotion and prevention parenting will predict child promotion and prevention self-regulation. • Maternal promotion and prevention parenting will predict child promotion and prevention related outcomes. • Method • Participants. 111 3- and 4-year-olds (M age = 48 months, SD = 5.78) • Observational Procedures • Mothers • Free play (FP). Unstructured mother-child play • Waiting task (WT). Children were made to wait to open a present while their mothers completed paper work. • Children • FP & WT • Impossibly Perfect Circles (IPC) & Transparent Box Tasks (TB).Designed to induce frustration and allow for observation of self-regulatory strategies and persistence (Laboratory Temperamental Assessment Battery; LabTAB; Goldsmith & Rothbart, 1996). • Measures • Observed maternal promotion and prevention parenting(FP & WT) • Promotion – bolstering and nurturance • Prevention – correction, punitiveness, and prudence • Observed child promotion and prevention self-regulation(WT) • Promotion – problem solving, seeking information, optimism • Prevention – withdrawal, self-soothing, comfort seeking, pessimism • Child outcomes • Compliance – Observed during the WT, measured on a 4 point scale • Persistence – Observed during the IPC, TB tasks. Values were standardized and averaged across tasks. • Social skills - Maternal ratings of the frequency of target behaviors using a 0-2 scale (SSRS; Gresham & Elliot, 1990) • Maternal ratings of child temperamental approach and avoidance • Frequency of target behaviors rated on a 1 – 7 scale, then averaged to create a scale score (Child Behavior Questionnaire; CBQ; Rothbart et al.,1994 ) Descriptive Statistics M SD Promotion Parenting 93.54 28.49 Prevention Parenting 15.69 9.56 Promotion Self-Regulation 14.67 6.01 Prevention Self-Regulation 9.66 5.94 Compliance 3.00 0.99 Social skills (standardized score) 50.03 10.25 CBQ approach 5.22 0.68 CBQ avoidance 3.52 1.35 Note. There were no group differences based on child age or sex, and thus, means are not reported. Prediction 1. Maternal promotion and prevention parenting will predict child promotion and prevention self-regulation Parent Child Promotion parenting Promotion self-regulation Prevention parenting Prevention self-regulation Results Prediction 2. Maternal promotion and prevention parenting will predict child promotion and prevention related outcomes. Parent Child Promotion parenting Persistence Prevention parenting Compliance ? Social Skills Results • Summary of Results • There was motivational symmetry between parenting and child self-regulation. • Promotion and prevention parenting were linked to promotion and prevention related child strengths and vulnerabilities. • Child temperament moderated the association between prevention parenting and child social skills, such that children who were high versus low in temperamental avoidance showed higher social skills when their mothers used prevention parenting. Child Self-Regulation Parenting Child Temperament as Moderator Parenting Child Outcomes β = .24 R² = .11 ΔF = 6.22* Promotion β = .18 R² = .36 ΔF = 38.20*** Promotion + + β = -.25 Promotion _ β = -.55 Compliance _ Prevention Prevention + R² = .18 ΔF = 10.03** R² = .15 ΔF = 14.08*** + β = .34 β = -.51 Prevention Prevention Prevention Persistence R² = .05 ΔF = 4.49* β = .18 Prevention Social Skills High Avoidance Discussion The approach and avoidance motivation framework has yielded an embarrassment of riches in personality and social psychology research, but has been underutilized in the developmental psychology literature. The present study sought to address this neglect, and provided evidence for motivational symmetry among parenting, child self-regulation, and child strengths and weaknesses. That is, we posited and found support for the contention that the motivational properties of approach and avoidance at least in part organize the socialization of self-regulation. We also found evidence for the moderating effects of child temperament. Children with relatively high versus low temperamental avoidance showed higher social skills when their mothers used prevention parenting. Children who are temperamentally References Denham, S. A. (1998). Emotional development in young children. New York: Guilford. Eisenberg, N., et al. (1998). Parental socialization of emotion. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 241-273. Goldsmith, H.H., & Rothbart, M.K. (1996) The Laboratory Temperament Assessment Battery (LabTAB): Locomotor version 3.0. Technical Manual, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. Gresham, F.S., & Elliot, S.N. (1990). Social Skills Rating System Manual. Circle Pines, MN: AGS. Higgins, E.T. (1997). Beyond pain and pleasure. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300. Higgins, E.T. & Silberman, I. (1998). Development of regulatory focus: Promotion and prevention as ways of living. In J. Heckhausen & C.S. Dweck (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulation across the life span (pp. 78-113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kochanska, G. (1993). Toward a synthesis of parental socialization and child temperament in early development of conscience. Child Development, 64, 325-347. Rothbart, M.K., Ahadi, S., & Hershey, K.L. (1994). Temperament and social behavior in children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 40, 21-39. avoidant often show social withdrawal and shyness. Thus, this moderation effect might reflect goodness of fit between parent and child, such that prevention parenting ameliorated vulnerabilities associated with avoidance (see also Kochanska, 1993). It must be kept in mind that approach and avoidance continually transact, and it may be the balance between the two dimensions that best predicts behavior. Furthermore, because goals and associated motivation tend to dynamically change, methodological advances are required in order to better infer the motivational properties of a given behavior. • Despite these challenges, findings of this study suggest that the approach-avoidance distinction may prove to be a fruitful model of socialization and self-regulation. For example, approach and avoidance motivation might in part underlay socialization and goodness of fit between parent and child as well as individual differences in psychopathology and competence. Future research is needed to better articulate such motivational pathways in the socialization of self-regulation and linkages between self-regulation and child outcomes.