Negative (But Not Positive) Parenting Interacts with Infant Negative Affect to Predict Infant Approach: Evidence of Diathesis‐Stress

Abstract

Temperament by parenting interactions may reflect that individuals with greater risk are more likely to experience negative outcomes in adverse contexts (diathesis-stress) or that these individuals are more susceptible to contextual influences in a 'for better or for worse' pattern (differential susceptibility). Although such interactions have been identified for a variety of child outcomes, prior research has not examined approach characteristics - excitement and approach toward pleasurable activities - in the first year of life. Therefore, the current study investigated whether 6-month maternal reported infant negative affect - a phenotypic marker of risk/susceptibility - interacted with 8-month observed parenting behaviors (positive parenting, negative parenting) to predict 12-month infant behavioral approach. Based a sample of mothers and their infants (=150), results indicated that negative parenting was inversely associated with subsequent approach for infants with high, but not low, levels of early negative affect. Similar results did not occur regarding positive parenting. These findings better fit a diathesis-stress model rather than a differential susceptibility model. Implications and limitations of these findings are discussed.

Differential Susceptibility or Diathesis-Stress: Testing the Moderating Role of Temperament and Cortisol Levels between Fathers’ Parenting and Children’s Aggressive Behavior

“…They also demonstrate fewer behavioral problems when brought up in a positive environment, a finding which fits the differential susceptibility model [11,[20][21][22][23]. Nevertheless, the results reported by other studies are more consistent with the diathesis-stress model [24,25]. The interaction between child temperament and family features assessed in late childhood and its association with adolescent internalizing and externalizing symptoms are also consistent with the diathesis-stress model [26].…”

Children with low effortful control benefit in high-quality home learning environment: Evidence from China.

“…Referring to the sample size of previous studies (e.g., Holzman et al, 2018; Kim & Kochanska, 2012; Rioux et al, 2016) and excluding single-parent families, we recruited 326 preschoolers and their parents from Beijing, China. Children were 63.36 months old on average ( SD = 9.87) at Time 1 (T1), and 48.77% were girls.…”

“…For example, children who were low on effortful control behaved more externalizing problems than children who were high on effortful control when they experienced parental separation (Sentse et al, 2011). Children with high negative affect exposed to negative parenting showed less anticipation, excitement, and approach toward pleasurable activities, but those exposed to positive parenting did not benefit significantly (Holzman et al, 2018). Unlike the diathesis–stress model, the differential susceptibility model proffers that individuals with more challenging temperamental traits are not only more vulnerable faced the adverse impact of a nonsupportive environment, but also more susceptible to the beneficial impacts of a supportive environment (Belsky & Pluess, 2013; Slagt et al, 2016).…”

“…In addition, the main distinction between these two theoretical models is that the differential susceptibility model assumed that children lower in effortful control would fare significantly better if they are provided with supportive environments. A vast number of empirical studies have found temperament to be a vulnerability or plasticity factor in models of family constructs, such as parental mental health or parenting practices (Holzman et al, 2018; Kim & Kochanska, 2012; Rioux et al, 2016). However, limited research has focused on other constructs of the home environment, such as the home learning environment.…”

“…or parenting practices (Holzman et al, 2018;Kim & Kochanska, 2012;Rioux et al, 2016). However, limited research has focused on other constructs of the home environment, such as the home learning environment.…”