Adolescent Family Adversity and Mental Health Problems: The Role of Adaptive Self-regulation Capacities. The TRAILS Study

Abstract

Adolescent family adversity is a considerable adaptive challenge in an increasingly turbulent developmental period. Using data from a prospective population cohort of 2230 Dutch adolescents, we tested risk-buffering interactions between adolescent family adversity and self-regulation capacities on mental health. We used two adaptive self-regulation capacities that could allow adolescents to manage relatively well with family adversity: (1) parent-reported effortful control, and (2) an attentional flexibility (in this case, set-shifting) task. Adolescent family adversity was associated with internalizing problems and externalizing problems. The risk-buffering effects of effortful control were found for externalizing problems but not for internalizing problems. There were no risk-buffering effects of attentional flexibility on both types of mental health problems. Effortful control is likely to benefit adolescents' ability to channel their frustrations in adaptive ways in the presence of family adversity. Additionally, (attentional) set-shifting tasks might have a limited predictive value for risk-buffering research.

The interaction between temperament and the family environment in adolescent substance use and externalizing behaviors: Support for diathesis–stress or differential susceptibility?

“…Results for self-regulatory measures of temperament were consistent, although based on only a few studies. Two studies examined inhibitory control and did not find significant interactions (Olson et al, 2000;Rioux et al, 2016) and three studies examined effortful control, finding significant interactions (Bakker et al, 2011;Loukas & Roalson, 2006;Sentse et al, 2011). One additional cross-sectional study examined duration of orienting and attentional focus and found significant interactions (Windle, 1992).…”

“…Effect sizes were small when the interaction involved coercive parenting and mother-infant affectionate contact, but it was of medium magnitude when the interaction involved parental monitoring. Conversely, three studies examined effortful control and found significant interactions that supported the diathesis-stress model (Bakker et al, 2011;Loukas & Roalson, 2006;Sentse et al, 2011), all with small effect sizes and large sample sizes. These three studies used data exclusively in adolescence and two of them used data from the same sample (Bakker et al, 2011;Sentse et al, 2011).…”

“…Conversely, three studies examined effortful control and found significant interactions that supported the diathesis-stress model (Bakker et al, 2011;Loukas & Roalson, 2006;Sentse et al, 2011), all with small effect sizes and large sample sizes. These three studies used data exclusively in adolescence and two of them used data from the same sample (Bakker et al, 2011;Sentse et al, 2011). The last study examined duration of orienting and attentional focus and also found interactions with small effect sizes that supported the diathesis-stress model using a cross-sectional design (Windle, 1992).…”

“…Finally, a last longitudinal study conducted by Bakker, Ormel, Verhulst, and Oldehinkel (2011) used the same sample as Sentse et al (2011), following 2230 participants from 11 to 16 years. In that study, higher levels of family adversity between 11 and 16 years were associated with higher levels of externalizing behaviors at 16 years when effortful control at 11 years was low, but not when it was high.…”

Chevauchement entre les trajectoires de jeu et les trajectoires de consommation de psychotropes au début de l’adolescence : une étude longitudinale génétiquement informative

“…Variables de contrôle susceptibles de jouer un rôle modérateur. Le risque socio-familial est un facteur de risque distal composé d'une accumulation de désavantages socioéconomiques et démo-graphiques présents à long terme et qui entravent la stabilité de la vie familiale des individus (Bakker, Ormel, Verhulst, & Oldehinkel, 2011 ;Moore, Vandivere, & Redd, 2006). Ces désavan-tages réfèrent à des situations comme la pauvreté, la séparation/le divorce et un faible niveau d'éducation des parents dont on sait qu'ils sont des facteurs de risque dans le développement de problèmes extériorisés (Dodge, Greenberg, & Malone, 2008 ;Hoeve et al, 2007 ;Lengua, Bush, Long, Kovacs, & Trancik, 2008 ;Mack, Leiber, Featherstone, & Monserud, 2007 ;Neumann, Barker, Koot, & Maughan, 2010).…”