Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Panel
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic Area
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Personal Schedule
Sign In
In Event: 2-110 - Poster Session 07
In Poster Session: PS 07 Section - Social, Emotional, Personality
Developmental scientists have become increasingly interested in the relationship between cumulative demographic risk and developmental outcomes. Risk has been defined as “a process that serves to increase the chances of experiencing a negative outcome in one or several domains of functioning…” (Popp, Spinrad, & Smith, 2008). Cumulative risk models are often preferred over single risk models because individual risk factors such as poverty and single parenthood are so highly correlated. Although researchers have demonstrated strong associations between cumulative risk and a variety of child outcomes, to our knowledge only Popp et al. have investigated links with child temperament, with a specific focus on infancy. In the present study we investigate links between cumulative and single risk indices and child temperament in 4- to 6-year-olds. Unlike other studies, we also consider rural status as an possible risk indicator.
Data were collected in two types of setting: a university-affiliated child-care facility (N = 33, about 52% girls) and a group of rural, county-funded preschools and kindergartens (N = 21, about 62% girls). Mean age across the two samples was 4.57 years (SD = 1.11 years). A cumulative risk index was created by summing across eight risk indicators based on 1) income, 2) marital status, 3) ethnicity/race, 4) family size, 5) maternal education, 6) maternal age at birth, 7) maternal occupational status, and 8) rurality status. Risk factors were dichotomized (1 vs 0) based on whether the family met a specific risk criterion (Table 1). Temperament was measured via mother report using the Child Behavior Questionnaire, which produced three overarching temperament scores: surgency, negative affectivity, and effortful control.
In terms of cumulative risk scores, 16 (30%) of the mothers had zero risk indicators, 14 (26%) had one, 8 (15%) had two, 9 (17%) had three, 4 (8%) had four, and 2 (4%) had five. No cumulative risk score exceeded five. Mean cumulative risk was 1.64 (SD = 1.51). As shown in Table 2, greater cumulative risk was associated with higher scores on surgency and negative affectivity but not effortful control. The most strongly associated individual risk factors were household income and rurality status, which were also strongly related to one other [r(53) = .61, p = .000]. Regression analyses revealed that rurality accounted for unique variance over and above income in both surgency (R2 = .20, p = .000) and negative affect (R2 = .42, p = .000), but not vice versa.
These results support the contention that cumulative demographic risk is linked to at least two superdimensions of temperament in early school age, wherein a driving factor appears to be a child’s rurality status. Moreover, the valence of these associations is consistent with the notion that greater demographic risk may lead to negative temperament outcomes. Both negative affectivity and surgency (at least to the extent that surgency indexes activity level and impulsive behavior) are characteristics that many would regard as contributing to temperamental difficulty. This link is notable because many researchers regard temperamental difficulty as a risk indicator for negative developmental outcomes in its own right.
Wallace E. Dixon, Jr., East Tennessee State University
Presenting Author
Natasha B. Gouge, East Tennessee State University
Non-Presenting Author
Lauren Driggers-Jones, East Tennessee State University
Non-Presenting Author
Nicholas A. Fasanello, East Tennessee State University
Non-Presenting Author
Chelsea L. Robertson, East Tennessee State University
Non-Presenting Author