The Association of Behavioural Adjustment to Temperament, Parenting and Family Characteristics among 5‐Year‐Old Children

Abstract

The objective of this study was to identify specific temperament, parenting, and family variables, and their interactions, which predict problem behaviours and social skills in children. The subjects were 74 5-6 year old children (34 boys, 40 girls). Results showed different combinations of variables predicted each behavioural outcome, and the child's 'goodness of fit' in the home was a strong predictor of externalising behaviour and social skills. An interaction between temperamental inflexibility and punitive parenting in the development of parent-rated externalising behaviour problems was found. This study highlights the value of using specific indices of temperament, parenting and family functioning and of pursuing interaction effects in the prediction of children's behavioural development.This study investigates the relations among temperament, parenting, family functioning and goodness of fit in predicting problem behaviour and social skills in young children. The importance of identifying influential factors in the development of these behaviours is apparent from their associations with other outcomes such as peer unpopularity (Ladd, Price, & Hart, 1990) and lower school achievement (Hinshaw, 1992), and by their persistence into adulthood (Robins, 1978). Past models of both normal and abnormal development have tended to emphasise the role of either intrinsic factors or environmental influences, whereas an interactional perspective, which views development as resulting from interactions between the child and his/her environment, is increasingly accepted as a more useful conceptualisation (see Lewis, 1990, for review). This interactional approach bears resemblance to the systems perspectives advocated by a number of researchers (e.g. Minuchin, 1974; Bateson, 1972).Within the developmental psychopathology literature, the domains of child temperament, parenting style and family functioning are among those which have been examined to identify risk factors associated with maladaptive behaviour (Masten & Garmezy, 1985).

Predicting Growth Curves of Early Childhood Externalizing Problems: Differential Susceptibility of Children with Difficult Temperament

“…In a study by Belsky et al (1998), negative parenting predicted externalizing problems most strongly in 3-year-old boys who were highly temperamentally negative as infants. Results reported by Paterson and Sanson (1999) indicated that in particular the combination of temperamental inflexibility and punitive parenting resulted in the development of externalizing behavior problems in 5-and 6-year-olds. A combination of high negative emotionality, low fearfulness, and high negative maternal control preceded stable high externalizing trajectories in disadvantaged boys followed from age 2 to 6 in the study by Gilliom and Shaw (2004).…”

Goodness-of-fit in center day care: relations of temperament, stability, and quality of care with the child’s adjustment

“…Several studies tested the goodness-of-fit hypothesis in the context of the family (Kochanska, 1995;Mangelsdorf, Gunnar, Kestenbaum, Lang, & Andreas, 1990;Patterson & Sanson, 1999; see for reviews: Bates, 1989;Rothbart & Bates, 1998), but only a few investigations into goodness-of-fit in other child care contexts have been conducted (Carey & McDevitt, 1995). Interactions between temperament and day care characteristics may be crucial in understanding differences in the child's well-being and problem behavior.…”

Differential susceptibility to discipline: The moderating effect of child temperament on the association between maternal discipline and early childhood externalizing problems.

“…Gilliom and Shaw (2004) combined their measurements of harsh control techniques and (the absence of) warmth into an overall measure of maternal negative control. Paterson and Sanson (1999) did measure induction and parental warmth in addition to the negative discipline variables of punishment and expectancy of obedience, but only the interaction between temperamental inflexibility and parental punishment accounted for additional variance beyond main effects.…”