Prosocial Behaviors in Adolescence Relations of Pubertal Timing, Emotional Reactivity, and Self-Regulation to Prosocial Behaviors in Adolescence Jennifer M. Wolff, Gustavo Carlo, & Lisa J. Crockett University of Nebraska-Lincoln Results Figure 1. Curvilinear Self-Regulation Predicting Prosocial Behavior at Home Concurrently for Girls. Introduction Correlational analyses: Among girls, emotional reactivity (T1) was negatively correlated with self-regulation (T1) and all measures of prosocial behavior (T1, T2). Self-regulation (T1) was positively correlated with all measures of prosocial behavior (T1,T2). Pubertal timing (T1) was unrelated to all other variables. Among boys, earlier pubertal timing (T1) was positively related to prosocial behavior in the home (T1,T2). Self-regulation was positively correlated with all measures of prosocial behavior (T1,T2). Bivariate ANOVAs revealed that, compared to boys, girls were significantly more pubertally mature, had higher scores on measures of self-regulation, prosocial behavior at home (T1, T2) and prosocial behavior with peers (T1). Regression analyses: Tables 1 and 2 show the final steps of the regression models for girls and boys, respectively. For girls, self-regulation (T1) was positively related to prosocial behavior at home (T1). There was also a curvilinear effect of self-regulation (T1), such that prosocial behavior (T1) increased at a faster rate at higher levels of self-regulation (Figure 1). Furthermore, emotional reactivity was negatively, and self-regulation was positively, related to prosocial behavior the home (T2). There was also an interaction between self-regulation and reactivity (T1), such that the negative effect of reactivity was stronger for those who were better regulated (Figure 2). Finally, reactivity (T1) was negatively, and self-regulation (T1) was positively, related to prosocial behavior with peers (T1). There was an interaction between self-regulation and reactivity (T1), such that the negative effect of reactivity on prosocial behavior was stronger for those with lower self-regulation (Figure 3). There was also a curvilinear effect of self-regulation (T1) such that prosocial behavior increased faster at higher levels of self-regulation (similar to Figure 1). For boys, there was a positive effect of pubertal timing (T1) and self-regulation on prosocial behavior at home (T1). There was a curvilinear effect of self-regulation (T1) such that prosocial behavior increased at a faster rate at higher levels of self-regulation (similar to Figure 1). Furthermore, emotional reactivity (T1) was negatively, and self-regulation (T1) was positively, related to prosocial behavior in the home (T2). Finally, there was a negative effect of reactivity (T1) and a positive effect of self-regulation (T1) and SES (T1) on prosocial behavior with peers (T1). There is much interest in biological and emotion-related bases of adolescent functioning. Of particular interest are the hypothesized links between aspects of emotional responding and prosocial behaviors (i.e., actions intended to benefit others). Strong negative emotionality is inversely associated with prosocial competence in several studies, whereas other studies show a positive association between mild negative emotions and prosocial behaviors (Eisenberg & Fabes, 1992). Additionally, there is evidence that prosocial behaviors reflect good self-regulation skills. One explanation of this set of findings is that negative emotional reactivity is negatively related to prosocial behaviors under conditions of low levels of self-regulation. Some scholars have suggested that increases in emotional reactivity might be due to puberty, which in turn, may influence adolescent prosocial behaviors (Fabes et al., 1999). However, the increase in emotional reactivity could result in well-regulated emotional reactivity or underregulated reactivity. Therefore, we examined the concurrent and longitudinal relations of pubertal status, negative emotional reactivity, and self-regulation to adolescents’ prosocial behaviors. Interaction effects of emotional reactivity and self-regulation and possible curvilinear effects of these two variables were additionally examined. Research Hypotheses 1) Pubertal timing will be related to prosocial behavior such that earlier pubertal timing will be associated with less prosocial behavior. 2) Self-regulation will be positively, and emotional reactivity will be negatively, related to prosocial behavior. 3) Self-regulation will buffer the negative effect of emotional reactivity on prosocial behavior. 4) Moderate levels of self-regulation and emotional reactivity should be associated with lower levels of internalizing behavior. Figure 2. Interaction Between Emotional Reactivity and Self-Regulation Predicting Prosocial Behavior at Home Longitudinally for Girls. Table 2. Standardized Regression Results for Boys Table 1. Standardized Regression Results for Girls Prosocial Behavior with Peers Prosocial Behavior in the Home Concurrent Longitudinal Variable Puberty -.02 .16* .10 Reactivity -.16* .04 -.17* Self-Regulation .34** .49** .24* Self-Regulation X reactivity -.03 .06 .01 Curvilinear Reactivity -.04 -.09 -.06 Curvilinear Self-Regulation -.01 .20* .11 R2 .24** .21** .16** Prosocial Behavior with Peers Prosocial Behavior in the Home Concurrent Longitudinal Variable Puberty -.06 -.02 .07 Reactivity -.21* -.01 -.11 Self-Regulation .27** .45** .29** Self-Regulation X Reactivity .21* .01 -.14 Curvilinear Reactivity .04 -.05 Curvilinear Self-Regulation .23* .17* .05 R2 .19** .14** Method Participants: The third and fourth waves of data of the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development were used. Participants (N=841) were in sixth grade at T1 (M age = 11.5, SD = .17) and tenth grade at T2 (M age = 15.5, SD = .15). Only white adolescents (51% girls) were included. Measures: Pubertal Timing. Clinician rated Tanner stages, standardized within grade and gender. Emotional Reactivity. 3 items ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always); e.g., “My child is calm and not easily aroused”; α=.75. Self-regulation. 24 items drawn from the Self-Control subscale of the Social Skills Rating System and the Disruptive Behaviors Disorder Scale, e.g., “My child often interrupts or intrudes on others”. Scale scores were standardized and averaged to create a composite, α=.86. Prosocial Behavior. Prosocial behavior in the home (6 items; α =.80) was based on the cooperation subscale from the SSRS, e.g., “My child volunteers to help family members with tasks.” Prosocial behavior with peers (6 items; α = .77), was a shortened version of the prosocial subscale of the Child Behavior Scale (Ladd & Profilet, 1996), “My child is kind toward peers.” Mother report was used for both scales. Data Analysis: The main study analyses were hierarchical multiple regressions conducted separately by gender. In the first step, socioeconomic status (income to needs ratio) was entered as a control variable along with pubertal timing and the main effects of emotional reactivity and self-regulation. The interaction between reactivity and self-regulation was entered on the second step and the curvilinear effects of reactivity and self-regulation were entered on the third step. The reactivity and self-regulation variables were centered prior to creating the interaction terms to reduce nonessential collinearity. For each significant interaction, simple slope analyses were conducted to determine the pattern of interaction. Figure 3. Interaction Between Emotional Reactivity and Self-Regulation Predicting Prosocial Behavior with Peers for Girls. * p<.05 **p<.001; only final step of regression shown Discussion Pubertal timing was related to related to boys’ prosocial behavior at home, suggesting that more physically mature boys are perceived by their mothers to be more helpful around the house. To our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating a link between pubertal timing and prosocial behavior. Perhaps mothers place more household demands on boys who are more physically mature. Self-regulation was a consistent predictor of prosocial behavior at both time points and for each gender. These findings underscore the importance of good behavioral, attentional, and emotional regulatory processes in exhibiting prosocial behavior with peers and in the home. As expected, increased emotional reactivity was associated with less prosocial behavior with peers and in the home longitudinally. There were two interactive effects for girls (for prosocial behavior at home, the interaction was significant only in the second step of the regression). For prosocial behavior at home longitudinally, the negative effect of reactivity was stronger for girls who were more regulated. For prosocial behavior with peers, the negative effect of reactivity on prosocial behavior was stronger for girls with lower self-regulation. These findings show support for the conceptualized interactive effects of self-regulation and emotional reactivity on prosocial behaviors. The curvilinear effects of self-regulation were contrary to the hypothesis in that prosocial behavior increased more rapidly at higher levels of self-regulation. These findings imply that there may be a threshold of self-regulation on prosocial behavior such that individuals who exhibit moderate or high levels of self-regulation show increased prosocial behavior and those who exhibit low levels of self-regulation are low in prosocial behavior. Acknowledgments This research was funded by grant # 1R03HD058107-01 to Dr. L. Crockett. The NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) through a cooperative agreement (U10) that calls for a scientific collaboration between NICHD staff and participating investigators. Thanks to Meredith Hope for project assistance.