Negative Emotionality and Internalizing Behaviors in Preschool Children: Moderating Role of Inhibitory Control

Shyness and inhibitory control in preschool dyads: An actor–partner model of social behavior.

“…Inhibitory control is revered by parents and educators in North America. However, these results fit with the larger body of research suggesting that if a child is shy, inhibitory control may interfere with approach behaviors in a social context (Brooker et al, 2016;Hassan & Schmidt, 2023;Henderson, 2010;Lahat et al, 2014;Lamm et al, 2014;Rodrigues et al, 2022;Thorell et al, 2004;Troller-Renfree et al, 2019;White et al, 2011). Rather than considering inhibitory control a panacea, it may be more helpful for parents and educators to think about inhibitory control like any other individual differences factor that may be helpful in some contexts (e.g., when working on an assignment independently) or at a certain level (e.g., moderate levels of inhibitory control), and confer risk in other contexts (e.g., when combined with high levels of shyness in a social context) or at a different level (e.g., very low or very high levels of inhibitory control; .…”

“…For example, social fear was only positively associated with prospective anxious behaviors with peers at age 5 at relatively high levels of inhibitory control measured at age 2 (Brooker et al, 2016). Similarly, negative emotionality during the preschool period was only positively associated with prospective internalizing difficulties when children’s percentile on a cognitive index of inhibitory control was relatively high (Rodrigues et al, 2022). Together, this collection of studies provides support for the risk potentiation model of control when conceptualizing reactive temperament as behavioral inhibition, social fear, or negative emotionality, and controlled cognitive processes as either inhibitory control or a neural correlate of cognitive control.…”

“…Although the risk potentiation model was originally developed to explain the behavior of children who had an early developmental history of behavioral inhibition (Henderson et al, 2015; Henderson & Wilson, 2017), the studies which have provided support for the model have used samples of children selected for reactivity (Lahat et al, 2014; Lamm et al, 2014; Troller-Renfree et al, 2019; White et al, 2011), and unselected samples of children (Brooker et al, 2016; Hassan & Schmidt, 2023; Henderson, 2010; Poole et al, 2021; Rodrigues et al, 2022; Thorell et al, 2004). This suggests that the risk potentiation model of control can be used to make predictions about children’s behavior in a normative and nonnormative, reactive sample of children.…”

“…There are several important limitations worth highlighting in the extant literature evaluating the risk potentiation model of control. First, most previous work relies on parent or teacher report of psychosocial outcomes rather than structured observed behavior (Henderson, 2010; Poole et al, 2021; Rodrigues et al, 2022; Thorell et al, 2004; Troller-Renfree et al, 2019; White et al, 2011) or direct observation of social behavior with adults rather than peers as social partners (Hassan et al, 2020; Hassan & Schmidt, 2023). Direct observation of social behavior, particularly with peers, is important to consider because the risk potentiation model of control suggests that one consequence of high levels of shyness and inhibitory control is restricted and nonflexible social behavior (Henderson et al, 2015; Henderson & Wilson, 2017).…”

Measuring Behavior Problems in Children from Low-Income Families: A Rasch Analysis of the Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 1½–5

“…These assumptions are essential in a rigorous IRT analysis. Given the emerging interest among empirical studies in reporting behavior problems at these two subscale levels (e.g., Hammam, et al, 2020; Quiñones-Camacho, et al, 2021; Rodrigues et al, 2022; Steenhoff et al, 2021), a more comprehensive IRT study on the externalizing and internalizing subscale scores is needed, To our knowledge, this is the first study applying IRT analysis to examine the psychometric properties of the CBCL/1½ – 5 among preschool children, particularly those who are from low-income population.…”