Effects of Maternal Depressive Symptoms on Within-Dyad Behavioral Dynamics

• In Event: Novel Methodological Approaches for Advancing Study of the Intergenerational Transmission of Depression

Abstract

Mothers and infants are influenced by and influence each other during interactions (Feldman, 2007; Tronick & Beeghly, 2011). Families also likely differ in both mother- and infant-driven processes that shape dyadic behavioral dynamics. However, existing research focuses mostly on between-dyad differences in global characteristics rather than on within-dyad processes that unfold over the course of the interaction (Cohn & Tronick, 1988; Crandell et al., 2003; Montirosso et al., 2010). Dynamic within-dyad processes may be compromised by longer-term stress exposure, including elevated prenatal and postpartum maternal depressive symptoms (Roubinov et al., 2021). Examining between-dyad differences in within-dyad interactive processes during stress recovery can help illuminate specific depression-related impairments in how mothers regulate their infant’s behavior and how infant behavior differentially elicits maternal care. We hypothesized that (1) on average, there would be within-dyad bidirectional relations between infant negative (protest and withdrawal) and positive behavior and maternal positive behavior. We also hypothesized that (2) among families where mothers experienced elevated depressive symptoms, infants would be less likely to elicit maternal positivity and maternal positivity would be less effective in arresting negative infant behavior and promoting positive infant behavior.
We evaluated these hypotheses in a sample of 75 mother-infant (53.2% female, 77.1% White) dyads who participated in the Still Face Paradigm (SFP; Tronick et al., 1978) when the child was 6 months old. The SFP is a procedure designed to elicit infant stress reactivity and recovery through brief, experimentally-manipulated maternal emotional unavailability. Trained researchers coded the presence or absence of infant protest, withdrawal, and positive social behavior, and maternal positive social behavior using the Infant and Caregiver Engagement Phases system (ICEP; Reck et al., 2009) during each 3-second epoch of the SFP. Mothers self-reported depressive symptoms three times during pregnancy (PHQ-9; Kroenke et al., 2001) and at 6 months postpartum (EPDS; Cox et al., 1987). Cumulative depressive symptoms across pregnancy were indexed by area under the curve with respect to ground (AUCg; Pruessner et al., 2003). Dynamic structural equation models (DSEM; Asparouhov et al., 2018) evaluated depression-related, between-dyad differences in within-dyad processes during stress recovery (Figure 1).
Contrary to Hypothesis 1, on average, there was no evidence of bidirectional within-dyad processes during the recovery phase of the SFP (Table 1). However, within-dyad processes differed based on concurrent maternal depressive (PPD) symptoms (but not prenatal symptoms), such that PPD symptoms negatively predicted changes in mothers’ positive social behavior in response to infant protest, Est = -0.047, 95% CI: [-0.092, -0.001], and positively predicted changes in infant protest in response to mothers’ positive social behavior, Est = 0.050, 95% CI: [0.001, 0.102]. Posthoc probing revealed non-null differences in mother-driven effects based on concurrent PPD: Maternal positive social behavior negatively predicted subsequent infant protest, only among dyads where mothers reported low PPD symptoms, Est = -0.317, 95% CI: [-0.546, -0.055].
Results underscore the importance of disaggregating between-dyad differences from moment-to-moment, within-dyad processes involved in dyadic stress recovery. Maternal PPD symptoms may hinder infant development specifically through reduced effectiveness of maternal positive behavior on reducing infant negativity.

Authors

• Jennifer Anne Somers, University of California - Los Angeles
  Presenting Author

• Margot Barclay, University of California - Los Angeles

• Gabrielle Rose Rinne, University of California - Los Angeles

• Mary Coussons-Read, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs

• Chris Dunkel Schetter, University of California - Los Angeles

• Steve Lee, University of California, Los Angeles