Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Positive Parenting Differentiates Young Children’s Physiological Functioning

Sat, March 23, 12:45 to 2:15pm, Baltimore Convention Center, Floor: Level 3, Room 341

Integrative Statement

Background: Despite extant literature connecting both poverty and early life adversity to serious adverse health outcomes across the lifespan (Felitti et al., 1998; Evans & Kim, 2007), far less literature seeks to examine why some children are severely impacted while others thrive. Evidence from animal models and typically developing, well-resourced populations suggest that environmental supports, in particular maternal care, may be especially protective in early life (Hostinar, 2015).

Method: The current study explored this important question in a population of infants and toddlers (n=134, age M= 24.30, SD= 9.89 months, 41.8% female) and their families enrolled in Early Head Start. Families were primarily Latinx (72.4%), living at or near the poverty line (79.9%), with over half of the current sample endorsing at least moderate caregiver mental health symptoms and substantial caregiver history of childhood adversity. Parents reported on depressive symptoms (CES-D; Radloff, 1977), history of adversity (ACE; Felitti et al., 1999), child’s negative life events (LEC; Work, et al. 1990), and child’s negative affectivity (PDR; Chamberlain & Reid, 1987). Positive parenting behaviors were observed and coded during a modified “3-bag” parenting task (NICHD SECCYD, 1999). Salivary cortisol was collected to capture children’s physiological functioning. Five diurnal samples were collected across two days (10 total) and on a separate day, nine stress reactive samples were collected across a 90-minute home visit. Parent-child dyads first completed 2 of the 3 bag tasks (book reading and toys) and then children were presented with a series of novel challenges for up to 7 minutes.

Results: Analyses first addressed cortisol reactivity to the stress paradigm as a function of parenting in the immediately preceding minutes. An unconditional latent growth model estimated average growth parameters for the whole sample. Time of day, child’s age and sex and child distress were controlled. Positive parenting was associated with lower later linear slope (i.e., less reactivity to stress paradigm), β = -.27, p < .05. Positive parenting was also associated with lower reactivity for children living in families experiencing especially low income, b= -.06 CR = 3.15, p < .01. Furthermore, negative affectivity was associated with higher reactivity only when positive parenting was low, b= -.07, CR=3.26, p <.01. Further analyses revealed higher rates of caregiver history of adversity had a negative impact on children’s diurnal cortisol, specifically higher noon (b= .28, t(77)= 2.45) and bedtime values (b= .34, t(80)= 2.81, p <.01), resulting in a flattened diurnal profile. Positive parenting moderated this relation such that caregiver history of adversity was more strongly associated with higher noon and bedtime values at lower levels of positive parenting.

Discussion: These finding suggest an important role of parental buffering in the development of adaptive stress physiology -a key component of later psychological and physical health outcomes- as well as the potential to interrupt the transmission of adversity across generations. Moreover, these findings further implicate early caregiving as a promising target for intervention efforts and importantly, suggest that vulnerable children and families may benefit most.

Authors