Cumulative Risk, Negative Emotionality, and Emotion Regulation as Predictors of Social Competence in Transition to School: A Mediated Moderation Model

Abstract

The goals of this study were to examine the additive and interactive effects of cumulative risk and child negative emotionality on children's social competence in the transition from preschool to school and to test whether these associations were mediated by child emotion regulation within a sample of 310 low-income, ethnically diverse boys. Multiple informants and methods were used to measure contextual risk factors and negative emotionality at the ages of 1.5 and two, emotion dysregulation at the age of 3.5, and social competence in the home at the age of five and in school at the age of six. Results indicated that the relation between cumulative risk and emotion dysregulation was amplified for children with higher levels of negative emotionality. In turn, emotion dysregulation predicted lower social competence across both the home and the school contexts. This study represents an early effort to develop an integrative model of social competence by considering joint contributions of contextual risk, negative emotionality, and emotion regulation.

Negative Affectivity Moderates Associations Between Cumulative Risk and At-Risk Toddlers’ Behavior Problems

“…In contrast, low negative affectivity appears to be a protective factor for children facing multiple risks. Similarly to Chang et al (2012), negative affect was supported as a moderator; however, the present study’s outcomes and age of the children differ from Chang et al’s focus on emotion regulation and social competence during the preschool period and across the transition to school. Thus, the present study extends the findings of Chang et al (2012) by supporting the interplay of contextual risk and temperament on behavior problems in younger children.…”

“…Also, it was not supported when examining questionnaire measures of temperament. Second, a study by Chang, Shelleby, Cheong, and Shaw (2012), which utilized a mediated moderation model, found in low-income families that male toddlers’ negative affectivity, measured via parent report, moderated the relationship between cumulative risk and poor emotion regulation during the preschool period. More specifically, the association between cumulative risk and poor emotion regulation was stronger among children with elevated levels of negative affectivity.…”

“…We also examined whether child temperament traits (effortful control, negative affectivity, and surgency) functioned as moderators of associations between cumulative contextual risk and toddlers’ externalizing, internalizing, and sleep problems. Given the findings of Chang and colleagues (2012) reviewed above, we hypothesized that higher negative affectivity would exacerbate associations between cumulative risk and behavior problems. Based on Lengua’s (2002) findings, we also investigated whether higher effortful control attenuated associations between cumulative risk and behavior problems.…”

Early Family Risk Factors and Home Learning Environment as Predictors of Children’s Early Numeracy Skills Through Preschool

“…However, with the implementation of this approach, specific relations between risk factors-alone or in combination-and child outcomes cannot be detected. Large longitudinal studies adopt this second approach when analyzing the influence of a cumulative risk index on different child outcomes, including the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten (ECLS-K; e.g., Rathbun et al, 2005;West et al, 2000), the Effective Provision of Preschool Education Project (EPPE; e.g., Hall et al, 2010;, the National Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project (e.g., Mistry et al, 2010), the National Institute of Child Health and Youth Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (NICHD Study; e.g., Dearing, McCartney, & Taylor, 2009), and others (e.g., Brown & Ackerman, 2011;Burchinal et al, 2000;Chang, Shelleby, Cheong, & Shaw, 2012;Miller et al, 2016;Sameroff, Seifer, Zax, & Barocas, 1987;Seifer et al, 1992). The primary result of this research is that multiple disadvantaged children had poorer outcomes than other non-or less disadvantaged children (for an overview, see Evans et al, 2013).…”

Stress of stoicism: Low emotionality and high control lead to increases in allostatic load

“…On the other hand, negative emotionality (NE), defined as the tendency to experience irritability, anger and distress, is considered a risk factor for a wide range of negative outcomes. A host of developmental studies have found that high levels of NE have detrimental consequences for adjustment (Chang, Shelleby, Cheong, & Shaw, 2012) and cognitive functioning (Raver, Blair, & Willoughby, 2013), especially in the context of risky environments. In examining both self-regulation and NE together, researchers have often argued that self-regulatory abilities can buffer the effects of NE by modulating the disruptive expression and experience of negative emotions (Dich, Doan, & Evans, 2014;Eisenberg & Fabes, 1992).…”