Abstract
Here we evaluate whether infant difficult temperament (6 months) functions as a vulnerability or more general plasticity factor when investigating effects of early-childhood parenting (8-42 months) on both positive and negative early-adolescent socioemotional development (age 8-11 years). Using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC, N = 14,541) and a re-parameterized model-testing approach to distinguish alternative person × environment conceptual models, results indicated that temperament × parenting interacted in predicting externalizing (i.e., hyperactivity, conduct problems), but not other behavior (i.e., emotional symptoms, peer problems), in a (weak) differential susceptibility manner. While more and less supportive parenting predicted, respectively, fewer and more behavior problems, it did so more strongly for children who were more difficult as infants.
Highlights
Humans are a highly plastic species, with experiences and exposures, especially early in life, influencing individual differences in development (e.g., Bornstein, 1989)
In light of work indicating that negative emotionality or difficult temperament can function as a vulnerability or a more general plasticity factor, the recent meta-analysis of Slagt and associates (2016) of Temperament × Parenting interaction research proves informative
Upon analyzing studies in which parenting was operationalized positively or negatively, they discovered that when difficult temperament was measured in infancy, it operated as a general plasticity factor, moderating positive and negative parenting effects in, respectively, a “for-better-and-for-worse” manner (Belsky et al, 2007); yet when it was assessed after 12 months of age it functioned only as a diathesis, amplifying the adverse effects of negative parenting
Summary
Data for this study come from the ongoing ALSPAC. This cohort study was launched in the early 1990s in order to investigate modifiable influences on offspring’s health and development, among many other topics. Given the large sample size, we implemented a quasi-experimental design, by dividing children into three, equalsized, temperamental subgroups, reflecting high, moderate, and low difficulty, using the composite temperament construct described below. Because analysis of all 20 imputed data sets, including all cases (i.e., not just those in the highest- and lowestdifficulty groups), revealed a significant temperament-parenting correlation (r = −.11, p < .001), primary analyses testing the Temperament × Parenting interaction was carried out after statistically adjusting the composite parenting variable for the composite temperament variable; this yielded a residual variable that became the parenting construct of interest (see Table 3 for variable correlations after adjusting for parenting variables). The crossover point was fixed at the mean (i.e., 0) of the predictor variable (i.e., parenting) to achieve a better model fit. Further constraining the slope on
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
