Parenting and Self-Regulation: Keys To Understanding Children’s Emotionality Kimberly L. Day, Ph.D.

Importance of Self-Regulation Includes motivational, cognitive, affective, and behavioral components Two types of self-regulation Emotion regulation Private speech

Emotion Regulation Strategies and emotionality Distraction and self-comforting Conflicting findings Shift from external to internal regulation cuddlebugs.onslow.org

Private Speech More common in cognitively-taxing tasks Improved cognitive abilities Aid in task completion Encourage in classrooms

Negative Emotionality At risk for negative outcomes Externalizing behaviors Poorer social skills Lower peer status blog.southeastpsych.com

Theoretical Basis Bandura’s Social Learning Theory Modelling Reinforcement Observational learning Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory Developmental level Scaffolding Private speech Internalization

Overview Studies 1. Relation of private speech to emotion regulation and emotionality 2. Parenting related to children’s private speech 3. Self-regulation predicting parenting and children’s emotionality Future directions

STUDY 1 Private Speech and Emotion Regulation

Private speech – Speech directed to the self Typically investigated during cognitive tasks Language One of the most important cognitive components of emotion regulation Gives children the ability to describe their feelings Therefore, children’s private speech should be related to their emotion regulation

Research Questions 1. Does children’s private speech predict children’s negative emotionality above and beyond children’s emotion regulation strategies? Hypothesis 1: Children’s private speech would be a unique predictor of their negative emotionality above and beyond their regulation strategies. Hypothesis 2: Children who used more beneficial private speech were expected to display less anger and sadness. Hypothesis 3: Children who used more non-beneficial private speech and social speech were expected to display more anger and sadness.

Research Questions 2. Does children’s private speech moderate the association between children’s emotion regulation strategies and their negative emotionality? Hypothesis: Expected that children with more beneficial private speech and more emotion regulation strategies would have less negative emotion.

Sample 116 preschoolers 4.5 to 6 years old 62 boys, 54 girls Predominately white, middle-class

Locked Box Task

Measures DistractionSelf-Comforting

Measures AngerSadness

Measures Beneficial private speech Inaudible muttering (27%) Facilitative task-relevant (86%) “First I’m gonna start off with this one.” “This must be the key.” “Does that fit?” “I get to play with the toys after I find the key.”

Measures Non-beneficial private speech Vocalizations (98%) “Uhh,” “Bo do do,” Ohumph” Task-irrelevant (3%) “We need to get to the bowling alley” Negatively valenced task-relevant (48%) “I can’t do this,” “I’m never going to get this,” “I can’t get it”

Measures Social speech (95%) “Mommy, how do you work it, I don’t know.” “Mommy, can you help me put it in?” “Will somebody help me?”

RESULTS

Regression Analyses Predicting Anger from Regulation Strategies and Speech Anger βR2R2 ∆R2∆R2 1. Age Distraction-.38**.20.20** Self-Comforting Social speech * Vocalizations.30** Inaudible muttering-.04 Negatively valenced task-relevant.25* Facilitative task-relevant-.19* 4. Negatively valenced x Distraction.18*.35.03* F for model6.29** *p <.05, **p ≤.001

Relation of Distraction to Child Anger at Three Levels of Negatively Valenced Task-Relevant Private Speech *p <.01

Regression Analyses Predicting Sadness from Regulation Strategies and Speech Sadness βR2R2 ∆R2∆R2 1. Age.23*.04.04* 2. Distraction Self-Comforting Social speech.25*.19.14* Vocalizations.16 Inaudible muttering-.10 Negatively valenced task-relevant.29* Facilitative task-relevant Vocalizations x Self-Comforting-.22*.23.04* F for model 3.57** *p <.05, **p ≤.001

Relation of Distraction to Child Sadness at Three Levels of Vocalizations

Conclusions from Study 1 Private speech occurred during an emotion- eliciting task Private speech predicted negative emotions above and beyond emotion regulation strategies Implications for caregivers and educators: Cognitive tasks can be frustrating Private speech should be encouraged because it aids cognitive and emotional self-regulation Can re-direct children when they are using less beneficial private speech

STUDY 2 Parenting and Private Speech

Limited research on how parenting behaviors relate to children’s private speech Importance of parenting for children learning to self-regulate Need to incorporate positive and negative parenting behaviors

Research Question 1. How do maternal behaviors in toddlerhood predict children’s beneficial private speech in preschool? Hypothesis: Maternal supportive and directive behaviors would interact to predict children’s beneficial private speech.

Sample Longitudinal mother-child study Toddlerhood (T1) Visit 140 toddlers 30 to 36 months old 88 boys, 52 girls Preschool (T2) Visit 116 preschoolers 4.5 to 6 years old 62 boys, 54 girls

Measures: Toddlerhood Visit Free play sessions Supportive behavior Sensitivity Involvement Directiveness

Measures: Preschool Visit Locked box task Beneficial private speech Inaudible muttering Facilitative task-relevant

RESULTS

Regression Analysis Predicting Preschoolers’ Beneficial Private Speech from Maternal Behaviors in Toddlerhood T2 Beneficial Private Speech βR2R2 ∆R2∆R2 1.Age.19*.05.05* 2. T1 Maternal directiveness T1 Maternal suppportiveness T1 Maternal directiveness x supportiveness -.22*.10.04* F for model 3.21* *p <.05

Relation of Directiveness to Beneficial Private Speech at Three Levels of Support *p <.05

Conclusions from Study 2 Maternal behavior in toddlerhood predicted preschoolers’ later self-regulation Important to take both sensitive and directive parenting into consideration Implications for caregivers and educators: Being overly involved can inhibit children’s future regulatory skills Need to scaffold children’s regulatory abilities Balance of moderate supportive and directive behaviors may be best

STUDY 3 Putting It All Together

Parent Emotion Coaching Children’s Effortful Control Children’s Non-Beneficial Private Speech EC x PS Children’s Negative Emotionality + – + –

Effortful Control Purposeful ability to start, stop, and modulate attention and behavior Believed to play a central role in children’s regulation of their emotional expression

Emotion Coaching Includes cognitive and emotional components How parents think and talk about emotion Teach emotion knowledge Importance of negative emotions

Putting It All Together Parent Emotion Coaching Children’s Effortful Control Children’s Non-Beneficial Private Speech EC x PS Children’s Negative Emotionality + – + –

Sample 156 parent-child dyads 3 to 5 years of age 79 boys, 77 girls Primary caregiver Mother 91% (n = 142) Father 6% (n = 10) Other 3% (n = 4) Predominately white, middle class

Measures Parental emotion coaching during an emotion talk task Encouragement of negative emotions during an upset event Labeling Validating Causes and consequences

Measures Private speech Selective attention task

Measures Non-beneficial private speech during the selective attention task (59%) Vocalizations Task-irrelevant Negatively valenced task-relevant

Measures Parent-report on Child Behavior Questionnaire Emotion regulation Effortful control Negative emotionality Anger Sadness

RESULTS

.20** Parental Emotion Coaching Children’s Effortful Control Children’s Non-Beneficial Private Speech EC x PS Children’s Negative Emotionality Child Age.17* -.19*.04.24** -.39**.20**.00.15* Child Sex *p <.01, **p <.05. SRMR =.02, CFI = 1.00.

Relation of Effortful Control on Negative Emotionality at Three Levels of Non-Beneficial Private Speech

Conclusions from Study 3 Effortful control mediated the relation of parental emotion coaching to negative emotionality Significance of non-beneficial private speech Replicated finding that children’s private speech moderates the relations of emotion regulation to negative emotion Implications for caregivers and educators: Cognitive and emotional abilities work together Important to support children’s negative emotions Assist children using non-beneficial forms of private speech

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Paper #1 Extremely low birth weight (ELBW) Normal birth weight control sample Literature review Bullying and ELBW children

Paper #2 Characteristics of ELBW victims Functional limitations Anxiety and ADHD Motor skills Self-esteem School and peer connectedness

Paper #3 – Part 1 Protective factors: Family, friends, school relations Outcomes: Internalizing, externalizing Bullied vs. Not bullied Only with ELBW survivors:

Paper #3 – Part 2 Protective factors: Family, friends, school relations Outcomes: Internalizing, externalizing ELBW vs. NBW Only with victims of bullying (ELBW and NBW):

Paper #4 Experience of bullying Outcomes: Wealth, health, social status

QUESTIONS?