Measures of effortful regulation for young children

Spinrad, Tracy L.; Eisenberg, Nancy; Gaertner, Bridget M.

doi:10.1002/imhj.20156

Cited by 77 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 63 publications

(80 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Within the non-eating self-regulation measures, the relationships we found between executive functioning, effortful control, and delay of gratification were typical of what has been found in previous studies—i.e., low to moderate positive correlations between measures (Bull & Scerif, 2001; Lehto et al, 2003; Spinrad et al, 2007; Wiebe et al, 2008). Of the three measures of non-eating self-regulation used in this study, only the gift delay task did not show associations with the other measures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research shows that for the non-eating domain, within-domain correlations are usually small to moderate with correlations between measures of executive functioning generally ranging between r = 0.20 and r = 0.35 (Bull & Scerif, 2001; Lehto, Juujarvi, Kooistra, & Pulkkinen, 2003; Wiebe, Espy, & Charak, 2008). Executive functioning and effortful control show similar correlations with measures of emotion regulation (see Spinrad, Eisenberg, & Gaertner, 2007 for a review). Within the eating domain, mothers’ responses on the satiety responsiveness and food responsiveness subscales of the Children’s Eating Behavior Questionnaire (CEBQ) are negatively correlated with one another (e.g., Frankel et al, 2014; Sleddens et al, 2008; Wardle et al, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Executive functioning, emotion regulation, eating self-regulation, and weight status in low-income preschool children: How do they relate?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was to examine relationships between child eating self-regulation, child non-eating self-regulation, and child BMIz in a low-income sample of Hispanic families with preschoolers. The eating in the absence of hunger task as well as parent-report of child satiety responsiveness and food responsiveness were used to assess child eating self-regulation. Two laboratory tasks assessing executive functioning, a parent questionnaire assessing child effortful control (a temperament dimension related to executive functioning), and the delay of gratification and gift delay tasks assessing child emotion regulation were used to assess child non-eating self-regulation. Bivariate correlations were run among all variables in the study. Hierarchical linear regression analyses assessed: 1) child eating self-regulation associations with the demographic, executive functioning, effortful control, and emotion regulation measures; and 2) child BMI z-scores associations with executive functioning, effortful control, emotion regulation measures, and eating self-regulation measures. Within child eating self-regulation, only the two parent-report measures were related. Low to moderate positive correlations were found between measures of executive functioning, effortful control, and emotion regulation. Only three relationships were found between child eating self-regulation and other forms of child self-regulation: eating in the absence of hunger was positively associated with delay of gratification, and poor regulation on the gift delay task was associated positively with maternal reports of food responsiveness and negatively with parent-reports of satiety responsiveness. Regression analyses showed that child eating self-regulation was associated with child BMIz but other forms of child self-regulation were not. Implications for understanding the role of self-regulation in the development of child obesity are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Executive functioning, emotion regulation, eating self-regulation, and weight status in low-income preschool children: How do they relate?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, other investigations suggest that Snack Delay is developmentally appropriate for IC assessment in 3-4 year olds (Bassett et al, 2012; Wiebe et al, 2011). Although used in the current study at 2 and 3 years of age, Dinky Toys was originally designed for preschool age children (Kochanska et al, 1996) and has been found to be difficult for children aged 30 months (Spinrad et al, 2007). Therefore, it could be that Snack Delay may be approaching a ceiling effect in 3-year-olds while Dinky Toys is more appropriate for the 3-year-olds (vs. 2-year-olds).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of inhibitory control in early childhood: A twin study from 2–3 years.

Gagne

Saudino

2016

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parent and lab-based observer ratings were employed to examine genetic and environmental influences on continuity and change in inhibitory control (IC) in over 300 twin-pairs assessed longitudinally at 2 and 3 years of age. Genetic influences accounted for approximately 60% of the variance in parent-rated IC at both ages. Although many of the same genetic effects on parent-rated IC were stable across age, there were also novel genetic effects that emerged at age 3 (i.e., genetic factors contributed to both continuity and change in parent ratings of IC). Observed IC displayed a different developmental pattern. Genetic influences were moderate at age 2 (38%) and nonsignificant at age 3 (6%). Change in observed IC across early childhood was due to shared and nonshared environmental factors. Findings indicate that it is important to consider the measurement of IC when interpreting developmental and etiological findings.

show abstract

“…This ability can be operationally defined as the capacity to accomplish goal directed behavior in the face of salient, competing inputs and actions (Casey et al, 2005). A prominent component of self-control is the ability to suppress inappropriate behaviors in favor of appropriate ones, often termed impulse control (Casey et al, 1997; Rothbart et al, 2001; Spinrad et al, 2007), and can be measured by a number of self-report assessments and behavioral tasks (Mobbs et al, 2008; Somerville et al, 2011; Grose-Fifer et al, 2013). The classic go/no-go task measures the ability to maintain behavioral control in the face of interfering stimuli, by measuring an individual’s speed and accuracy when instructed to respond to a frequent target (go trial) and withhold response to a rare nontarget (no-go trial).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probing behavioral responses to food: Development of a food-specific go/no-go task

Teslovich

Freidl

Kostro

et al. 2014

Psychiatry Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to exert self-control in the face of appetitive, alluring cues is a critical component of healthy development. The development of behavioral measures that use disease-relevant stimuli can greatly improve our understanding of cue-specific impairments in self-control. To produce such a tool relevant to the study of eating and weight disorders, we modified the traditional go/no-go task to include food and non-food targets. To confirm that performance on this new task was consistent with other go/no-go tasks, it was given to147 healthy, normal weight volunteers between the ages of 5 and 30. High-resolution photos of food or toys were used as the target and nontarget stimuli. Consistent with expectations, overall improvements in accuracy were seen from childhood to adulthood. Participants responded more quickly and made more commission errors to food cues compared to nonfood cues (F(1,140) = 21.76, P<0.001), although no behavioral differences were seen between lowand high-calorie food cues for this non-obese, healthy developmental sample. This novel food-specific go/no-go task may be used to track the development of self-control in the context of food cues and to evaluate deviations or deficits in the development of this ability in individuals at risk for eating problem behaviors and disorders.

show abstract

Measures of effortful regulation for young children

Cited by 77 publications

References 63 publications

Executive functioning, emotion regulation, eating self-regulation, and weight status in low-income preschool children: How do they relate?

Executive functioning, emotion regulation, eating self-regulation, and weight status in low-income preschool children: How do they relate?

The development of inhibitory control in early childhood: A twin study from 2–3 years.

Probing behavioral responses to food: Development of a food-specific go/no-go task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About