Parental depressive symptoms are associated with greater variability and inconsistency in parenting behavior as well as children's emotional and behavioral dysregulation. The present study explored whether such relations extended to dyadic processes, examining whether maternal and paternal depressive symptoms at child age 3½ interacted with concurrent higher dyadic behavioral variability (DBV) in mother-child free play to heighten children's emotional and behavioral dysregulation at age 4 (N ϭ 100). Child dysregulation was measured as mother-reported emotional lability-negativity and externalizing problems, and DBV was measured as the number of transitions among dyadic behavioral states using state space grids. Parent behaviors included parent directives, positive reinforcement, and disengagement, and child behaviors included child compliance, persistence, and noncompliance, among others. Analyses also accounted for the degree of positive (compared to negative) behavioral content. Moderation analyses showed that DBV predicted greater child dysregulation only when maternal or paternal depressive symptoms were higher. Further, DBV was detrimental only when dyadic positive interaction content was low. Findings suggest DBV combined with low positive content in parent-child interactions is a particular risk factor for children's regulatory development. Fostering positive, predictable interaction patterns may be an important target for family interventions with a depressed parent.

The field of prevention science aims to understand societal problems, identify effective interventions, and translate scientific evidence into policy and practice. There is growing interest among prevention scientists in transparency, openness, and reproducibility. Open science provides opportunities to align scientific practice with scientific ideals, accelerate scientific discovery, and broaden access to scientific knowledge. Open science also addresses key challenges to the credibility of prevention science, such as irreproducibility of results, selective non-reporting (publication bias, outcome reporting bias), and other detrimental research practices. The overarching goal of this paper is to provide an overview of open science practices for prevention science researchers, and to identify key stakeholders and resources to support implementation of these practices. We consider various aspects of applying open science practices in prevention science, such as identifying evidence-based interventions. In addition, we call for the adoption of prevention science practices in the open science movement, such as the use of program planning principles to develop, implement, and evaluate open science efforts. We also identify some challenges that need to be considered in the transition to a transparent, open, and reproducible prevention science. Throughout, we identify activities that will strengthen the reliability and efficiency of prevention science, facilitate access to its products and outputs, and promote collaborative and inclusive participation in research activities. We conclude with the notion that prevention scientists are well-positioned to engage with the open science movement, especially given their expertise in examining and addressing complex social and behavioral issues. By embracing transparency, openness, and reproducibility, prevention science can better achieve its mission to advance evidence-based solutions to promote well-being.