The extensive measures to prevent spread of COVID-19 have had a major impact on families' daily lives. Changes in family routines and experiences of COVID-19-related stress might negatively impact the quality of parenting and the parent-adolescent relationship. However, using active coping strategies might be associated with limited negative or even positive changes in the parent-adolescent relationship. This longitudinal, multi-informant, and pre-registered study used data of 240 mostly Dutch parents (85% mothers; M age = 44.2 years old) and adolescents (50% girls; M age = 11.4 years) from diverse SES backgrounds. Using Latent Change Score models, we examined how parent-reported parenting (i.e., positive parenting and discipline practices) and adolescent-reported relationship quality (i.e., support and negative interaction) changed from pre-COVID-19 (Fall 2019) to the COVID-19 period (Spring 2020). Moreover, we investigated whether parents' and adolescents' level of COVID-19-related stress was associated with the change in relationships, and whether active coping moderated the association between stress and changes in relationships. Results showed average decreases in support, positive parenting, and negative interactions between parents and adolescents. COVID-19-related stress was not a direct predictor of relationship changes and there was little evidence of moderating effects. Only adolescents' use of active coping strategies moderated the effect of stress on positive parenting. For high active coping adolescents, the link between stress and change in positive parenting was negative, whereas for low active coping adolescents this link was positive. The findings suggest that parent-adolescent relationships during a pandemic need attention, especially for adolescents with high stress levels and using active coping strategies.

Although poor Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) is a risk factor for reading and/or spelling difficulties (RSD) as well as for mathematical difficulties (MD), many questions surround this relationship. The main objective of the present study was to obtain insight in the relationship between alphanumeric vs. non-alphanumeric RAN and reading/spelling and mathematics in groups of 7-to-10-year-old children with RSD, MD, both RSD + MD, and in typically developing (TD) children. Analyses of variance between the groups showed that the RSD and comorbid (RSD + MD) groups were impaired on both alphanumeric and non-alphanumeric RAN, whereas the MD group was impaired only on non-alphanumeric RAN. Furthermore, non-alphanumeric RAN correlated with all measures except spelling, whereas alphanumeric RAN correlated with the reading and spelling measures only. These findings point towards different/additional cognitive processes needed in non-alphanumeric RAN compared to alphanumeric RAN, which affects the relationship with literacy and math.

No abstract

Background and Objectives: Although anxiety consists of multiple components, including cognitive, affective, motivational, and physiological, and some findings suggest that there might be differences regarding their control antecedents and effects on performance, previous studies have largely neglected to examine these components separately and for reasons of convenience often assessed test anxiety as a unified construct using a single-item. Therefore, this study investigated the different test anxiety components with the goal to: (1) examine the relative impact of the anxiety components in the mediating mechanism that connects control and performanceas proposed by Pekrun's control-value theory, and (2) determine which specific anxiety component is underlying common single-item anxiety measures. Methods: The research questions were investigated using an intraindividual approach in a sample of N = 137 German 8th graders during a mathematics exam. Results: As expected, control was negatively related to all anxiety components, but associations varied in strength. Additionally, the components differed in their relative impact on performance, with the cognitive component being central for this outcome. Furthermore, common single-item measures seem to specifically assess the affective component, and thus not the component most relevant for test performance. Conclusion: Consequently, our study strongly recommends to distinguish between the anxiety components depending on the research question at hand.