Poster #49 - Positive and Negative Parenting Behaviours and Child Emotional Reactivity: Longitudinal Associations with Youth’s Internalizing Problems

• In Event: Poster Session 04

Abstract

Internalizing problems (IP) are critical to consider in children given their link with psychopathology. Parenting and child temperament have been examined extensively (Eisenberg et al., 2005; Mills et al., 2011), however, it remains unclear which aspects of parenting behaviors and child temperament are central in the development of children’s IP. Although many studies have examined risk factors for IP among children (e.g., Bayer et al., 2011), few have focused on protective factors. Even fewer focus on the effects of positive, relative to the effects of harsh, parenting. A positive parenting style or parenting practices with one’s child can be characterized by having warm and intimate experiences, demonstrating understanding when the child is upset, and encouraging open discussion (Sanders, 2012). This study’s main objective was to examine whether decreases in IP are driven by the presence of protective factors in addition to the absence of risk factors. Positive parenting, harsh parenting, and child emotional reactivity were examined as predictors of IP across childhood.
Data came from integrating three Canadian samples (n=556; 51% boys, 49% girls) and included children assessed at 3 to 5 years (Time 1), 6 to 8 years (Time 2), and 10 to 12 years (Time 3). Mothers responded to questionnaires for themselves and their child on IP, emotional reactivity, and parenting. Multivariate linear regression models and linear growth curve models were tested.
Positive parenting at Time 2 interacted with harsh parenting to predict IP at Time 3 (β = -.09, p = .03). Simple slope analysis revealed that the association between positive parenting at Time 2 and IP at Time 3 (see Figure) was stronger when harsh parenting was high. Further, positive parenting at Time 1 interacted with emotional reactivity to predict IP at Time 2 (β = -.20, p = .005); the inverse association between positive parenting and IP was stronger when emotional reactivity was high. Similarly, positive parenting at Time 2 interacted with emotional reactivity to predict IP at Time 3 (β = .21, p < .001; however, the association between positive parenting and IP was stronger when child emotional reactivity was lower. Finally, trajectory analyses revealed that positive parenting predicted an increase in IP over time (β = 0.18, p = .009).
Our results provide evidence that combinations of positive parenting and harsh parenting, and positive parenting and child emotional reactivity, predict IP through childhood. The effects of positive parenting on IP differed depending on the child’s age and whether child emotional reactivity was higher or lower. Positive parenting buffering against increasing IP when there was more harsh parenting could suggest protective effects of positive parenting even in the presence of harsh parenting, and that positive and harsh parenting are not mutually exclusive. Rather, parents likely express positive and harsh parenting behaviours, and the interaction of these behaviours at particular stages of child development impact mental well-being. Identifying that changes in IP among children over time are dependent upon both positive and harsh parenting practices is a unique contribution to the developmental psychopathology literature.

Authors

• Sasha Gunpat, Concordia University
  Presenting Author

• Marie-Pier Pare-Ruel, Concordia University

• Lisa A Serbin, Concordia University

• Paul David Hastings, University of California - Davis

• Rosemary S. Mills, University of Manitoba

• Dale M Stack, Concordia University