Pathways to resilience: The parallel change in children’s emotional difficulties and family context during the COVID-19 lockdown in Italy.

Abstract

Objective:The study analyses which pathways to adjustment emerged at the family level during the COVID-19 containment period in Italy, during which children were locked down with their families for 56 days from March 11 to May 6. Using a longitudinal design, with data pre-and postevent, a bivariate latent change score model analyzed the covariance of the change in family well-being (FW) and in emotional difficulties (ED), testing if the longitudinal change in ED is a function of the starting level of FW, and vice-versa. Children's stress reactions to the pandemic and other related experiences were included as additional predictors. Method: A total of 166 middle school students (86 females) with a mean age of 11.14 (SD = .47) completed two online questionnaires, in January 2020 (T0) and in June 2020 (T1). Results: Results showed that children's ED decreased significantly, on average, during the lockdown period, and FW remained constant. ED and FW change scores had a significant and negative covariation (b = À .46; p = .01). When family well-being increased emotional difficulties decreased, and vice versa. FW at T0 predicted no change in FW, nor did T0 scores of ED predict any change in FW. Conclusions: The strong intercorrelated change between children's ED and FW during the lockdown does not seem influenced by preexisting levels of individual and family functioning. Findings supported the view that for some families, the COVID-19 lockdown was also an opportunity to experience deeper emotional connections, contributing to a decrease in ED. Clinical Impact StatementOn average, the emotional difficulties of young adolescents during the Italian COVID-19 lockdown decreased significantly. This finding suggests that the family relationships during the lockdown, on average, contributed to a possible growth in terms of emotional well-being. When the dynamic and parallel change between children and family system is considered, the preexisting levels of functioning (individual and systemic) are not relevant. The reciprocal adjustment is defined during the stressful event. Findings suggest that it is essential to activate supportive actions (i.e. parent training aimed to promote positive emotion socialization and warm relationships during stressful events) for all the families at the very early stage of the containment measures.

Empirical support for a model of risk and resilience in children and families during COVID-19: A systematic review & narrative synthesis

“…Changes to children’s family conditions during the pandemic may influence how they respond to stress during the pandemic. Although baseline family well-being did not significantly predict later internalizing problems in children, increases in family well-being from prepandemic to during COVID-19 were associated with decreases in child internalizing problems (Nocentini et al, 2022). Furthermore, increases in family conflict and decreases in the quality of emotional connections among family members (i.e., family cohesion) were predictive of heightened child internalizing problems during the pandemic, while baseline levels were not (Fosco et al, 2022).…”

“…Across several pathways, Fosco et al (2022) found more support for change in family dynamics (e.g., conflict, cohesion, and discipline) predicting child maladjustment rather than initial scores of the same measures. Similarly, another study demonstrated that baseline family well-being did not predict change in child emotional difficulties; rather, change in family well-being covaried with change in child emotional difficulties (Nocentini et al, 2022). Essler et al (2021) also provided support for change scores in parental strain predicting intraindividual change in child emotional well-being.…”

“…There was ample support linking caregiver and family (i.e., whole-family and parent-child) functioning with child internalizing behaviors, both from T pre to T COVID (e.g., Achterberg et al, 2021; Donker et al, 2021; Fosco et al, 2022; Frigerio et al, 2022; Lengua et al, 2022; Nocentini et al, 2022; Operto et al, 2022; Paschke et al, 2021; Shi & Wang, 2021; Wang et al, 2022; Wong et al, 2022) and at multiple time points during the pandemic (e.g., Browne et al, 2021; Corbett et al, 2021; Qu et al, 2021; Ren et al, 2021; Rizeq et al, 2021; Trucco et al, 2022; Wang, Henry, et al, 2021; Wang, Henry, et al, 2022; Wang, Toro, et al, 2021). In contrast, there was less and mixed support for the interrelations between caregiver/family functioning and child externalizing problems (e.g., Berry et al, 2021; Fosco et al, 2022; Frigerio et al, 2022; Gordon-Hacker et al, 2022; Lengua et al, 2022; Neubauer et al, 2021; Operto et al, 2022; Penner et al, 2021; Roche et al, 2022; Rosenthal et al, 2022; Shelleby et al, 2022; Trucco et al, 2022; Wang, Henry, et al, 2022).…”

“…Lastly, there is emerging evidence linking caregiver/family functioning with child positive adjustment (e.g., Donker et al, 2021; Essler et al, 2021; Jones et al, 2022; Neubauer et al, 2021; Shi & Wang, 2021; Wang et al, 2022; Wang, Henry, et al, 2021; Wang, Henry, et al, 2022; Wang, Toro, et al, 2021), though more research is needed to better explicate these relationships. Notably, there was support for bidirectional relationships within pathways, such as between (i) child internalizing behaviors and family dysfunction (e.g., Browne et al, 2021), parental stress (e.g., Paschke et al, 2021), and change in family well-being (e.g., Nocentini et al, 2022) and between (ii) child positive adjustment and caregiver functioning (e.g., maternal coping [Jones et al, 2022] and parental strain [Essler et al, 2021]). However, additional primary studies are needed to study the extent to which family members are reciprocally influencing one another, and/or whether effects are stronger in one direction than another.…”

“…In line with the COVID-19 FDM, there is robust evidence in support of a cascading process wherein pandemic-specific social disruptions impact child and caregiver/family functioning (Browne et al, 2021; Lengua et al, 2022; Rizeq et al, 2021; Wang, Henry, et al, 2021). Cascading processes were also evident within pathways including only caregiver/family and child constructs (e.g., heightened parent-child conflict predicting elevated adolescent depression; Achterberg et al, 2021; Corbett et al, 2021; Essler et al, 2021; Fosco et al, 2022; Frigerio et al, 2022; Gordon-Hacker et al, 2022; Hastings et al, 2021; Jones et al, 2022; Köhler-Dauner et al, 2021; Neubauer et al, 2021; Nocentini et al, 2022; Paschke et al, 2021; Penner et al, 2021; Qu et al, 2021; Ren et al, 2021; Shelleby et al, 2022; Shi & Wang, 2021; Trucco et al, 2022; Wang, Henry, et al, 2022; Wang et al, 2022; Wang, Toro, et al, 2021; Wong et al, 2022). These spillover effects within the family system align with other research published earlier during the pandemic (Masten, 2021).…”