Early childhood teachers’ self-report on their socialization of emotion predicts child social-emotional outcomes, moderated by socioeconomic risk

• In Event: Poster Session 11
  In Poster Session: PS 11 Topic - Social, Emotional, Personality

Abstract

Emotional competence is crucial for preschoolers’ social and school success. Teachers perform emotion socialization behaviors (e.g., contingently responding and teaching), but there is still scant research to corroborate their contributions. We expected teachers’ self-reported reactions to children’s emotions and attitudes about teaching emotions to contribute to children’s social-emotional behaviors across an academic year, with likely moderation by socioeconomic risk.
Participants included 77 teachers and 323 preschoolers attending early care settings where families experienced little economic difficulty, or economic risk (predominantly Head Start). Children’s social-emotional behaviors (emotionally positive/prosocial, emotionally negative/dysregulated, and emotionally regulated/productive) were observed in fall and spring using the Minnesota Preschool Affective Checklist (MPAC-R/S). For socialization of emotion, teachers’ self-reported reactions to children’s emotions and attitudes about teaching emotions were assessed with the Teachers’ Coping with Children’s Negative Emotions Scale (TCCNES) and Teacher Emotion Socialization Self-Test (TESST), respectively. These previously validated measures showed adequate reliability (internal consistency, interrater).
In multilevel modeling analyses, class membership accounted for significant amounts of MPAC-R/S variance (ICCs from .20 to .48, ps from <.10 to < .001). Separate models for each MPAC-R/S aggregate were created for each teacher measure, with socioeconomic risk, socialization of emotion scores, and their interactions as Level 2 predictors, controlling for age, gender, and premeasures at Level 1. Level 2 findings are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1.
Regarding main effects of socialization of emotion, teachers’ encouragement of emotion was positively related to children’s emotionally positive/prosocial behavior. Their minimizing and problem-focused reactions were positively related, whereas greater emotion-focused reactions were negatively related, to children’s emotionally negative/dysregulated behavior. Furthermore, greater emotionally negative/dysregulated behavior was also positively related to teachers’ reports of greater emotion coaching and laissez-faire teaching styles. Finally, greater emotionally regulated/productive behavior was positively related to teachers’ minimizing reactions; no effects of emotion socialization on emotionally regulated/productive behavior were significant. At-risk status also was associated with children’s greater emotionally positive/prosocial and emotionally negative/dysregulated behavior.
Child socioeconomic risk also moderated several findings (see Figure 1). For children living in socioeconomic risk, increases in emotionally positive/prosocial behavior were positively associated with teachers’ proclivity to use emotion-focused reactions and negatively related with greater emotion encouragement reactions and laissez-faire and emotion coaching teaching styles. Greater emotionally negative/dysregulated behavior was negatively associated with laissez-faire and emotion coaching teaching styles, but also greater usage of emotion-focused reactions and punitive teaching styles, for at-risk children. Last, the teachers’ tendency to minimize children’s emotions was associated with greater emotionally regulated/productive behavior, but only for at-risk children.
These results highlight teachers’ self-reported socialization of emotion associated with children’s end-of-year social-emotional behaviors. Further, important differences, both theoretical and practical, emerged distinguishing children living in socioeconomic risk and their less disadvantaged peers. These results warrant investigation to further flesh out the commonalities and differences between teachers and parents’ contributions, as well as cultural/contextual influences in early education environments, especially when considering how best to tailor professional development efforts to the early educators. Implications and mechanisms will be considered, and results will be viewed toward informing such professional development.

Authors

• David E Ferrier, University of Tennessee - Chattanooga
  Presenting Author

• Susanne Ayers Denham, George Mason University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Hideko Hamada Bassett, George Mason University
  Non-Presenting Author