Background-Emotional regulation (ER) has been conceptualized as an ongoing process of the individual's emotion patterns in relation to moment-to-moment contextual demands. In contrast to traditional approaches of descriptively quantizing ER, we employed a dynamic approach to ER by examining key transitions in infants of clinically depressed and nondepressed mothers in the context of maternal still-face (SF).

Is it always or necessarily the case that common and important parenting practices are better insofar as they occur more often, or worse because they occur less often? Perhaps, less is more, or some is more. To address this question, we studied mothers’ microcoded contingent responsiveness to their infants (M = 5.4 months, SD = 0.2) in relation to independent global judgments of the same mothers’ parenting sensitivity. In a community sample of 335 European American dyads, videorecorded infant and maternal behaviors were timed microanalytically throughout an extended home observation; separately and independently, global maternal sensitivity was rated macroanalytically. Sequential analysis and spline regression showed that, as maternal contingent responsiveness increased, judged maternal sensitivity increased to significance on the contingency continuum, after which mothers who were even more contingent were judged less sensitive. Just significant levels of maternal responsiveness are deemed optimally sensitive. Implications of these findings for typical and atypical parenting, child development, and intervention science are discussed.

Regulatory focus theory (RFT; Higgins, 1997) predicts that individual differences in the strength of promotion (ideal) and prevention (ought) orientations emerge from patterns of parent/child interactions that emphasize making good things happen versus keeping bad things from happening. This article examines the development of individual differences in the strength of children's promotion and prevention goals and presents selected findings from three studies exploring the origins of regulatory focus. We found a three-factor structure for parenting behaviors that differentiated between the presence/absence of positive outcomes versus the presence/absence of negative outcomes in two different data sets and validated that factor structure by examining its associations with maternal temperament. In turn, the parenting factors predicted individual differences in children's orientations to ideal and ought guides, and those associations were moderated by individual differences in child temperament.

Self-discrepancy theory (SDT) postulates that self-regulatory systems corresponding to the ideal and ought self-domains emerge from the influences of temperament (e.g., sensitivity to stimuli for positive vs. negative outcomes) and socialization (e.g., parenting behaviors and interpersonal outcome contingencies). This article reports 2 studies testing the developmental postulates of SDT concurrently and retrospectively. Study 1 showed that self-regulation with reference to the ideal vs. the ought domain was differentially associated with recollections of parenting styles of warmth and rejection, respectively. In Study 2, these findings were replicated, and self-regulation with reference to the ideal vs. ought domain was discriminantly associated with questionnaire measures of positive vs. negative temperament. Findings support the developmental postulates of SDT, despite the limitations of retrospective studies.