Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Panel
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic Area
Search Tips
Register for SRCD21
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
Measures of dyadic interaction between mothers and their children show that interactions between mothers and children often tell a larger story than measuring each individuals’ behaviors separately from the other (Aksan, Kochanska, & Ortmann, 2006). Assessing two individuals engaging in interaction and then conglomerating scores on those assessments to describe the dyad is not true dyadic assessment because exchanges between the parties are often not captured well. Thus, some researchers have used a system to capture dyadic behavior, called Mutually Responsive Orientation. Mutually Responsive Orientation (MRO) measures the quality of communication, cooperation, and emotional ambiance between the dyad (Aksan, Kochanska, & Ortmann, 2006).
Previous research has explored different factors that predict individual maternal behaviors; both parenting stress and emotion regulation have been examined as factors that relate to individual differences in observed maternal behavior. Mothers higher in parenting stress typically display less optimal parenting (e.g., higher sensitivity and less directiveness). Two measures of emotion regulation include suppression (not expressing emotion even when experienced, Gross, 1998) and reappraisal (ability to reassess emotional stimuli in positive ways, Gross, 2015). Typically, less suppression and more reappraisal has been related to more optimal parenting. However, how these factors relate to dyadic interaction has not been examined. We predict that parent stress and emotion regulation (ER) would relate differently to individual maternal behaviors and MRO because each assessment reflects different types of interaction.
Mothers (n = 116) of 4-5-year-old children completed the Parental Stress Index-Short Form (PSI) and the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire. Mothers and children were observed in a 6 minute free play where MRO (mutual cooperation, harmonious communication, and emotional ambiance) and maternal sensitivity and directiveness were coded.
Three regression analyses were conducted with MRO, maternal sensitivity, and maternal directiveness used as dependent variables respectively (see Table 1). After controlling for child age and sex, more suppression was associated with less MRO, whereas less parenting stress and reappraisal were both associated with more maternal directiveness. Neither parenting stress nor ER were associated with maternal sensitivity.
Parenting stress and maternal ER related differently to dyadic measures than to individual measures of maternal behavior, highlighting that these measures were tapping into different qualities of mother-child interaction depending on how the interaction was coded. The negative relation between suppression and MRO could indicate that, when mothers allow their experienced emotions to be expressed instead of suppressing them, greater understanding of emotion between the dyad may be reached, which allows for greater understanding of each other’s needs and dyadic emotional ambiance. The relations found between reappraisal, stress, and directiveness, which was coded as an individual maternal behavior, may imply that when mothers are trying to actively reframe stress in a more positive way, they end up giving more direction to children and controlling the interaction more. These findings indicate a need to further parse out why parenting stress and emotion regulation relate to maternal behavior and MRO differently. Future work considering the involvement of child behavior in understanding both maternal individual behavior and MRO is necessary.