Etiological Contributions to the Covariation Between Children’s Perceptions of Inter-Parental Conflict and Child Behavioral Problems

Abstract

Prior work has suggested that inter-parental conflict likely plays an etiological role in child behavior problems. However, family-level measurement of inter-parental conflict in most traditional child twin studies has made it difficult to tease apart the specific causal mechanisms underlying this association. The Children’s Perception of Inter-parental Conflict scale (CPIC) provides a child-specific measurement tool for examining these questions, as its subscales tap multiple dimensions of conflict assessed from the child’s (rather than the parent’s) perspective. The current study examined (1) the degree of genetic and environmental influence on each of the CPIC subscales, and (2) etiological contributions to the covariation between the CPIC scales and parental reports of child behavioral problems. The CPIC was completed by 1,200 child twins (aged 6-11 years) from the Michigan State University Twin Registry (MSUTR). Parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) to assess child internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. Multivariate models were examined to evaluate the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors to both the CPIC scales and to their overlap with child behavioral outcomes. Modeling results indicated no significant moderation of sex or age. Significant environmental overlap emerged between the CPIC conflict properties scale and child internalizing and externalizing problems. By contrast, significant genetic correlations emerged between the CPIC self-blame scale and externalizing problems as well as between the CPIC threat scale and internalizing problems. Overall, findings suggest that the subscales of the CPIC are somewhat etiologically diverse and may provide a useful tool for future investigations of possible gene-environment interplay.

The mediating role of coping self‐efficacy beliefs on the relationship between parental conflict and child psychological adjustment

“…Lower levels of coping self‐efficacy for avoiding maladaptive cognitions and coping self‐efficacy for avoiding maladaptive behaviors were expected to be associated with higher levels of internalizing, externalizing, and anxiety. Given that Brummert Lennings and Bussey showed that the reliability and validity of the PCC‐SES was equally applicable across gender and grade, it was expected that, consistent with past studies, the relationship between the variables would remain the same regardless of gender and age (see Cummings et al, ; Nikolas, Klump, & Burt, ).…”

The quality of the interparental relationship does not moderate the etiology of child conduct problems

“…For the current study, we focused specifically on the Conflict Properties scale (n=11 items, α = .77), which assesses the frequency and intensity of inter-parental conflict as observed by the child (e.g., “My parents get really mad when they argue”). The other three scales on the CPIC (namely, Threat, Self-Blame, and Triangulation/Stability) were not examined because they assess the child’s emotional and/or cognitive appraisals of inter-parental conflict (e.g., “I am to blame when my parents argue”) rather than their observations (Nikolas et al ., 2010, Nikolas et al ., 2013). …”

The Michigan State University Twin Registry (MSUTR): An Update

“…In doing so, we make use of several measurement strategies: parent- and child-informant reports, videotaped parent–child, family, and spousal interactions, and the assessment of an independent sample of neighborhood informants from each twin family’s neighborhood. The TBED-C has already produced several published papers (Burt & Klump, 2012, in press-a; Burt et al, 2012; Humbad et al, 2011; Klahr et al, in press; Marceau et al, 2012; Nikolas et al, 2012, in press), with many more under review and in preparation.…”

“…Observational as well as survey methods comprise our assessments of parent–child, familial, and spousal relationships. This multi-method approach allows us to more rigorously define our phenotype (Burt, 2012; Burt & Klump, 2012), examine informant effects on heritability estimates (Marceau et al, 2012; Nikolas et al, in press), and obtain a more fine-tuned understanding of environmental risks and their contributions to psychiatric outcomes (Burt et al, 2012; Burt & Klump, in press-a, 2012; Nikolas et al, 2012). …”