Emerging effortful control in toddlerhood: The role of infant orienting/regulation, maternal effortful control, and maternal time spent in caregiving activities

Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Infant Behavior and Development

Emerging effortful control in toddlerhood: The role of infantorienting/regulation, maternal effortful control, and maternal timespent in caregiving activities

David J. Bridgetta,∗, Maria A. Gartsteinb, Samuel P. Putnamc, Kate Oddi Lancea,Erin Iddinsb, Robin Waitsb, Jessica VanVleetb, Lindsay Leeb

a Northern Illinois University, United Statesb Washington State University, United Statesc Bowdoin College, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 10 June 2010Received in revised form18 November 2010Accepted 3 December 2010

Keywords:Effortful controlTemperamentRegulationMothersParent–child relationshipLatent growth modelingInfancyToddler

a b s t r a c t

Latent growth modeling (LGM) was used to examine the contribution of changes in infantorienting/regulation (O/R) to the emergence of toddler effortful control (EC), the contribu-tions of maternal EC to the development of infant O/R and the emergence of toddler EC,the influence of maternal time spent in caregiving activities on toddler EC and the slope ofinfant O/R, and the contribution of maternal EC to subsequent maternal time spent in care-giving activities. Mothers from 158 families completed a self-report measure of EC whentheir infants were 4 months of age, a measure of infant O/R when their infants were 4, 6,8, 10, and 12 months of age, and a measure of toddler EC when their children reached 18months of age. Information concerning maternal time spent in various interactive care-giving activities was collected when infants were 6 months old. Results indicated highermaternal EC predicted interindividual differences in the intercept (i.e., higher intercepts),but not slope, of infant O/R and that higher maternal EC, higher infant O/R intercept, andhigher infant O/R slope contributed to higher toddler EC. Furthermore, higher maternal ECpredicted greater maternal time spent in interactive caregiving activities with their infantsand greater maternal time in interactive caregiving with infants also contributed to highertoddler EC after controlling for maternal EC. These findings contribute to the understandingof the influence of maternal EC, directly and through caregiving, on toddler EC. Additionalimplications as they are related to early developing regulatory aspects of temperament arediscussed.

© 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Rothbart and Bates (2006), and Rothbart and Derryberry (1981, 2002) refer to temperament as reflecting biologicallybased, individual differences in self-regulation and reactivity in domains such as attention, affect, and activity that areinfluenced across time by experience, maturation, and heredity. Within the temperament framework, the construct ofeffortful control, the ability to anticipate, detect errors, and activate a subdominant response in place of a more automatic,dominant response (i.e., prepotent response inhibition) (Rothbart & Bates, 2006), reflects self-regulation and is believed tobe linked to the anterior attention system and executive attention (Rothbart, Sheese, & Posner, 2007; Ruff & Rothbart, 1996;Simonds, Kieras, Rueda, & Rothbart, 2007). Numerous studies have indicated the importance of effortful control (EC) formyriad developmental processes. For example, studies have linked low effortful control to difficulties with externalizing

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 815 753 0774.E-mail address: [email protected] (D.J. Bridgett).

0163-6383/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2010.12.008

190 D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199

problems (e.g., Eisenberg, Valiente, et al., 2009; Gartstein & Fagot, 2003; Olson, Sameroff, Kerr, Lopez, & Wellman, 2005), andhigh EC to more effective regulation of emotional and behavioral responses (e.g., Eisenberg, Hofer, & Vaughan, 2007; Rothbart& Sheese, 2007), the development of conscience (Kochanska & Knaack, 2003; Kochanska, Murray, & Coy, 1997; Kochanska,Murray, & Harlan, 2000), as well as social and academic competence (Blair & Razza, 2007; Eisenberg, Smith, Sadovsky,& Spinrad, 2004; Fabes et al., 1999; Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, Swanson, & Reiser, 2008). The relative scarcity of studiesexamining developmental precursors of EC is surprising given the extensive literature examining outcomes associatedwith childhood EC. For example, to date, relatively few studies have examined potentially important contributors to thedevelopment of EC, namely aspects of infant temperament, maternal EC, and maternal caregiving factors (e.g., sensitivity,warmth, quality and time spent in parent–infant interaction), despite prior work suggesting that these attributes may becritical for the emergence of EC in the toddler period and its further development throughout childhood (e.g., Eisenberg,Cumberland, & Spinrad, 1998; Hill-Soderlund & Braungart-Rieker, 2008; Lengua, Honorado, & Bush, 2007). The goal of thepresent investigation is to add to the emerging literature examining precursors to toddler EC.

1. Infant temperament contributions to early effortful control

Developmentally, EC begins to emerge towards the end of the first year of life (Derryberry & Rothbart, 1997), with ECand related constructs reliably measured by 18 months of age (Kochanska & Knaack, 2003; Putnam, Gartstein, & Rothbart,2006). Prior to the emergence of EC and associated executive attention skills, infants have more basic attention mechanismsat their disposal (e.g., orienting attention), aiding in the regulation of behavior and emotion. Infant regulatory capacityhas been linked with early attentional skills through factor analytic studies conducted with parent report questionnaires(Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003). In this research, the orienting/regulatory capacity factor of the Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R; Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003) consists of lower order scales including Duration of Orienting (i.e., sustainedattention towards objects, such as toys), Cuddliness (i.e., enjoyment derived from being held), Soothability (i.e., ability ofthe infant to calm and regulate emotion when assisted by the caregiver), and Low Intensity Pleasure (i.e., the ability ofthe infant to attend to and derive pleasure from stimuli that are generally of low intensity). Several of the fine-grainedcomponents of the IBQ-R orienting/regulation factor reflect underlying attentional skills, albeit not yet as effective withrespect to regulation of emotions and behavior as the later-emerging executive attention skills, providing the foundationfor EC. The orienting/regulation factor also represents important social aspects of infant regulation (i.e., Soothability andCuddliness), reflecting the reliance of young children on their parents for assistance with regulation. Consistent with infantorienting/regulation providing a foundation for the later emergence of effortful regulation, several studies (e.g., Gartstein,Slobodskaya, Putnam, & Kinsht, 2009; Putnam, Rothbart, & Gartstein, 2008) have linked higher infant orienting/regulationmeasured by the IBQ-R to higher EC as measured by the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ) in toddlerhood,suggesting some continuity between early orienting/regulation skills and later effortful control.

Other early emerging temperament attributes, particularly negative emotions, may also affect the development of effort-ful regulation in early childhood. For example, Rothbart, Ahadi, Hersey, and Fisher (2001) reported concurrent negativeassociations between negative affectivity and effortful control, and Putnam et al. (2008) found longitudinal links betweenlow infant negativity and high childhood effortful control. Other investigators have also noted negative associations betweennegative emotion and effortful regulation (e.g., Eisenberg, Fabes, Bernzweig, & Karbon, 1993; Kochanska, Coy, Tjebkes, &Husarek, 1998). Consistent with theoretical expectations (e.g., Rothbart & Derryberry, 1981, 2002), these findings suggestthat low effortful regulation may result in poorly modulated negative emotionality (i.e., higher levels of negative emotional-ity). However, within a developmental context, there is reason to believe that high levels of negative emotions may interferewith developing regulation (e.g., Bridgett et al., 2009; Kochanska et al., 1998). For example, Stifter and Spinrad (2002) notedthat excessive crying, a behavioral indicator of negative emotion, appeared to compromise early emotion regulation. Thesestudies suggest that it is important to consider negative emotionality in models examining factors affecting the developmentof effortful regulation.

2. Parent contributions to the emergence of young children’s effortful control

Although infants have some limited mechanisms (e.g., gaze aversion, physical self-soothing) which assist in the regulationof emotion and behavior prior to the emergence of EC, in the first years of life children also rely heavily on caregivers forassistance in such regulation. Eisenberg et al. (2005) noted that early parenting behavior is important for the developmentof child emotion-related regulation, including EC. Caregivers who are sensitive to infant and toddler signals and effective atreducing stress and negative emotional reactions tend to foster the development of regulatory skills over time (Crockenberg& Leerkes, 2004; Propper & Moore, 2006). For instance, Lengua et al. (2007) found that maternal appropriate limit setting andscaffolding during parent–toddler interaction tasks predicted subsequent effortful control, after controlling for prior toddlereffortful control. Spinrad et al. (2007) found that the effects of sensitive, warm maternal parenting on subsequent outcomes,such as social competence, were mediated by effortful control. That is, supportive parenting practices were predictive ofhigher levels of later child effortful control, and effortful control uniquely predicted outcome indices, with higher EC leadingto greater competence/adjustment. These studies provide important evidence that parenting makes a significant contributionto the development of child EC early in life. Nevertheless, studies have generally addressed parenting during the toddlerperiod and beyond, with an almost exclusive focus on parenting sensitivity and warmth.

D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199 191

In addition to sensitivity and warmth, another aspect of parenting, the amount of time parents spend in various activ-ities with their children (e.g., time spent in activities that reflect caregiving efforts) during infancy is likely an importantcontributor to the subsequent emergence of EC. An economic theory proposed by Coleman (1988), emphasizing the impor-tance of social capital for subsequent human capital, provides a useful framework for the importance of caregiver time withchildren. Within this framework, time spent with children by parents is critical for fostering parent–child relationships andfor the provision of cognitive stimulation (also see Huston & Aronson, 2005). Thus, time represents a marker of importantparent–child interaction dynamics that foster optimal cognitive and social–emotional development.

Consistent with the importance of time spent with young children for fostering aspects of development, Cox, Owen,Henderson, and Margand (1992) found that maternal report of time spent with their infant 3 months postpartum wasassociated with increased infant attachment security 12 months postpartum even after accounting for observed maternalbehavior (e.g., positive interactions and physical affection) and parenting attitudes. Similarly, Huston and Aronson (2005)found that maternal caregivers who spent more time in social interaction with their infant tended to provide higher qual-ity home environments and were more sensitive than mothers who spent less time with their young child. Nevertheless,contrary to their expectations, additional maternal time spent with infants did not convey benefits to early cognitive devel-opment. Although the few studies that have investigated the effects of caregiver time with infants have resulted in mixedfindings, maternal time spent in social interaction with young children does appear to be potentially important, consistentwith Coleman’s (1988) theoretical proposition. However, to our knowledge, the effects of maternal time with infants havenot yet been examined with respect to toddler regulation.

Although the parent–infant relationship is critical for children’s subsequent developmental outcomes, several other fac-tors have been implicated in the development of children’s early emotional and behavioral regulation abilities. For example,aspects of maternal personality, stress, and emotional functioning (e.g., depression) have been associated with children’stemperament as well as to parenting practices (e.g., Coyne, Low, Miller, Seifer, & Dickstein, 2007; Dix, Cheng, & Day, 2009;Kochanska, Clark, & Goldman, 1997; Pesonen et al., 2008). The contribution of maternal EC, however, has not been widelyexamined. Parental EC is important to consider because of possible genetic as well as environmental links to child EC. That is,along with exerting direct genetic influences on child EC (e.g., Mullineaux, Deater-Deckard, Petrill, Thompson, & DeThorne,2009), parent EC may account for links between aspects of parenting practices, parent–child interactions, and children’s EC.Consistent with the importance of considering the effects of parent characteristics on parenting, Eisenberg et al. (1998) offersa heuristic model wherein characteristics of children (e.g., temperament, including regulation-related constructs such as EC)and parent characteristics (e.g., EC) are associated with “emotion-related parenting practices” (p. 243), which in turn serveto modulate arousal within the child. Eisenberg et al.’s model suggests that parents with better EC will be able to engagein parenting practices (i.e., practices that are associated with superior quality, occur with greater frequency, and that arelonger in duration) that provide better support for the development of child EC.

Despite the proposed links between parental regulation-related attributes, parenting practices, and child regulation-related characteristics, few empirical evaluations of this model exist at this time. A small handful of studies relying onsamples of school-aged children were identified in the current review that provide evidence supporting the importance ofconnections between parental regulation, parenting practices, and child regulation. Cumberland-Li, Eisenberg, Champion,Gershoff, and Fabes (2003) found that better maternal regulation was associated with greater use of positive parenting prac-tices and that both mothers’ and fathers’ regulation was associated with sons’ smiling in the disappointing gift paradigm(an indicator of regulated emotion). Similarly, more recent work identified a positive association between parental effortfulcontrol and positive reactions to children’s emotions and a negative relationship between parental effortful control and neg-ative reactions to children’s emotions. Importantly, parental reactions to children’s emotions mediated links between parenteffortful control and children’s effortful control (Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, & Reiser, 2007). Likewise, a few studies utilizingyoung school aged and older children have noted that maternal impulsivity, inattention, and ADHD symptoms, indicators ofpoor maternal regulation/attention (Chen & Johnston, 2007; Mokrova, O’Brien, Calkins, & Keane, 2010), and lower workingmemory (Deater-Deckard, Sewell, Petrill, & Thompson, 2010) were associated with less child-related involvement, moreinconsistent discipline practices (Chen & Johnston, 2007), unsupportive reactions to negative affect expressed by children,increased home chaos (Mokrova et al., 2010), and greater reactive negativity towards children (Deater-Deckard et al., 2010).However, the effect of parent EC on parenting during infancy, and the influence of both parent EC and parenting practiceson the development of infant orienting/regulation, as well as the emergence of EC in the early toddler period, a time whenthe executive attention system is coming online (Rothbart, Ellis, Rueda, & Posner, 2003) and may be particularly sensitiveto environmental effects (e.g., parenting), have not yet been examined.

3. The current investigation

The purpose of the present study is to examine, using a latent growth modeling approach, (1) the contribution of changesin infant orienting/regulation from 4 to 12 months of age to the emergence of toddler EC at 18 months of age, (2) the con-tributions of maternal EC to the development of infant orienting/regulation and to 18 month toddler EC, (3) the influence ofmaternal time spent in caregiving activities when infants were 6 months of age to the slope of infant orienting/regulationand 18 month toddler EC, and (4) the contribution of maternal EC to subsequent maternal time spent in caregiving activities.Consistent with the findings reported by Putnam et al. (2008), we anticipated that higher initial orienting/regulation (i.e., ori-enting/regulation intercept) would predict better EC measured when children reached 18 months of age. Extending Putnam

192 D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199

et al.’s (2008) findings, we also anticipated that higher infant orienting/regulation slope would contribute by explainingunique variance in higher levels of toddler EC. Given the potential importance of maternal EC, we predicted that highermaternal EC would be associated with higher initial infant orienting/regulation, higher slopes of infant orienting/regulation,and higher toddler EC. We also predicted, based on prior conceptual/theoretical work (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 1998) and empir-ical findings (e.g., Cumberland-Li et al., 2003; Valiente et al., 2007) that higher levels of maternal EC would predict increasedtime spent in caregiving activities two months later. Likewise, consistent with the implications of Coleman’s (1988) workon social capital within the family, it was anticipated that more maternal time spent in interactive caregiving activitieswith infants when children were 6 months of age would predict higher slopes of infant orienting/regulation over the firstyear of life and higher toddler EC when children reached 18 months of age. In this regard, the present study departs fromexisting research that has primarily focused on the quality of maternal–child interactions (e.g., warmth and sensitivity) andinstead, the present investigation examines how much time mothers are spending in various interactive activities, such asplaying, holding, bathing, feeding, dressing, and reading to their infant, during a typical day. While it is likely that maternaltime spent in such activities is related to warmth and sensitivity (e.g., Huston & Aronson, 2005), time spent interacting withinfants is also likely to be an independent contributor to developing attention-based regulation, such as EC, given increasedopportunities to employ and build such skills through interactions with caregivers (Calkins, Smith, Gill, & Johnson, 1998;Fox & Calkins, 2003; Olson, Bates, & Bayles, 1990).

The primary goal of the current investigation was to examine the contributions of maternal EC to maternal caregiving,maternal EC and caregiving to infant regulation/orienting and toddler EC, and of developing infant regulation/orientingto toddler EC. On the basis of existing theory/research linking negativity and regulation we also included 4-month infantnegative emotionality as a predictor of developing infant regulation/orienting. Also related to early negative emotionality,we anticipated that higher infant negative emotionality at 4 months would be associated with lower EC at 18 months of age,which is consistent with findings obtained by previous investigations (Kochanska et al., 2000; Putnam et al., 2008; Rothbartet al., 2001).

4. Method

4.1. Participants

Birth announcements, located on hospital websites and in local newspapers, were used to recruit 158 primary caregiverswith 4-month-old infants from five states (Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Nevada) to participate in a short-termlongitudinal study of infant temperament development. Most primary caregivers self-identified as Caucasian (92.4%), mar-ried (92.9%), and reported coming from relatively diverse educational (mean years of education = 15.17; range = 10–25 years)and economic backgrounds (mean income-to-needs ratio = 3.03; range = .33–7.95; 26.7% fell below the poverty line definedas an income-to-needs ratio of less than 2.0). Only families with healthy, full-term infants were eligible to participate; fam-ilies who reported that their infants had experienced pre- or postnatal complications (e.g., developmental delay, prematurebirth, or birth complications) were not eligible to participate. Families who agreed to participate were compensated with$10 for each completed assessment.

4.2. Measures

4.2.1. Maternal effortful controlThe short-form of the Adult Temperament Questionnaire (ATQ; Evans & Rothbart, 2007; Rothbart, Ahadi, & Evans, 2000)

was used to obtain a measure of maternal EC. The EC factor (˛ = .78) consists of subscales measuring activation control, atten-tional control, and inhibitory control. In addition to adequate reliability (i.e., internal consistency), significant associationsbetween ATQ factors and Big 5 personality factors, supporting the validity of this measure, have been reported for this adulttemperament self-report instrument (Evans & Rothbart, 2007; Rothbart et al., 2000a).

4.2.2. Maternal caregivingFor the purposes of the current study, primary caregivers were asked to report approximately how many hours per

day, during a typical day, they spent interacting with their infants in common activities. Mothers were asked about thetime they spent playing with, reading to, feeding, bathing, changing/dressing, and holding their infant. These behaviorswere selected as they capture activities likely to be common across participants, because there is a high likelihood (e.g.,feeding, changing, holding, etc.) that these behaviors would occur on a daily basis, because these behaviors reflect activitiesthat are required to meet the basic needs of infants, and because these caregiving behaviors require interacting with infantsdirectly or promote infant socioemotional development (e.g., playing). Associations between different categories of maternalcaregiving were examined (Table 1) with nearly all categories significantly associated with one another. As such, a compositevariable representing the total time maternal caregivers spent in interactive caregiving activities with infants was createdby summing the time spent in each individual activity. Given the aims of this study and these findings, total time during atypical day that maternal caregivers spent interacting with their infants was used in the missing data analyses as well as thegrowth model.

D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199 193

Table 1Associations between categories of time spent in interactive childcare activities at total time maternal caregivers spent in caregiving activities at 6-monthevaluation and between categories of time spent in interactive childcare activities and variables included in latent growth model.

Activity Play Reading Feeding Bathing Dressing Holding Total timeMat. carea

Play – .53** .59** .43** .29** .57** .71**

Reading – – .81** .16* .09 .64** .39**

Feeding – – – .32** .24** .73** .56**

Bathing – – – – .27** .20** .37**

Dressing – – – – –– .26** .48**

Holding – – – – – – .80**

a Total time reflects the sum of time for each category of caregiving activity.* p < .10.

** p < .05.

The approach to measuring parenting in the current investigation is consistent with similar efforts in earlier studies.For example, Gaertner, Spinrad, Eisenberg, and Greving (2007) had parents complete diaries that included frequency andduration information regarding aspects of parental involvement on Likert-type scales. Similarly, Adi-Japha and Klein (2009)used phone contact with parents to determine duration of time (i.e., hours) children spent outside of their mothers careduring a given week and Huston and Aronson (2005) used a phone interview time diary method to examine parental timeuse in a 24-h period. These studies are similar to the approach in the present study insomuch as they focus on the durationof events related to caregiving, as well as other activities, and that such information was obtained, as was in the presentstudy, using a parent-report format.

4.2.3. Infant orienting/regulation and negative emotionsThe Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R; Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003), designed for infants between 3 and 12

months of age, was used to evaluate infant temperament. The IBQ-R represents a rationally derived, fine-grained assessmenttool, based on the definition of temperament proposed by Rothbart and Derryberry (1981), work with the Child BehaviorQuestionnaire (Rothbart et al., 2001), comparative studies, and other relevant developmental research. The 14 IBQ-R scalesare internally consistent, with Chronbach’s Alphas ranging from .60 to .90, and form three temperament factors referred toas positive affectivity/surgency, negative emotionality, and orienting/regulation. Of relevance to this study are the negativeemotionality and orienting/regulation factors. Negative emotionality is defined by distress to limitations, fear, sadness,and, loading negatively, falling reactivity. Orienting/regulation consists of duration of orienting, low-intensity pleasure,soothability, and cuddliness (Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003). Since its original development and introduction, the reliabilityand validity of the IBQ-R has been supported from diverse samples of participants, including samples from different cultures(Gartstein, Knyazev, & Slobodskaya, 2005; Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003; Klein, Putnam, & Linhares, 2009).

4.2.4. Toddler effortful controlToddler EC was assessed using the EC factor of the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ; Putnam et al., 2006).

The EC factor is comprised of the following ECBQ subscales: attention shifting, low-intensity pleasure, inhibitory control,cuddliness, and attention focusing. As reported by Putnam et al., 2006, the EC factor has good psychometric properties, withalphas ranging from .62 to .86 in 18-month old toddlers for the subscales comprising the EC factor as well as inter-raterreliability and longitudinal stability from 18 to 36 months for the overall factor.

4.3. Procedure

Maternal caregivers completed the ATQ when their infant was 4 months of age. When infants reached 6 months of age,caregivers completed the Caregiver Survey. The IBQ-R, including subscales comprising the orienting/regulation factor, wascompleted by mothers when their infants were 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months of age and the ECBQ, with subscales comprisingthe EC factor, was completed when the participating children reached 18 months of age. All questionnaires were mailedto participants, with return postage included, approximately 3–5 days prior to the targeted completion window. The rapidnature of development during the first two years of life created a particular need to ensure that measures were completed asclose in time as possible to the child reaching each respective assessment phase (i.e., 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months of age). Thus,caregivers were instructed to complete measures within a 2-week time frame of the designated assessment point (e.g., ±1week from the infants’ 4 month “birthday”).

4.4. Analytic strategy

We used latent growth modeling (LGM) to examine hypotheses in the current investigation (see Byrne & Crombie, 2003or Curran & Hussong, 2003 for details regarding the strengths and the utility of LGM). The model presented below wasestimated using EQS 6.1 (Bentler, 2004). Model fit was evaluated using robust indices of fit, including the Satorra–Bentlerchi-square (Satorra & Bentler, 2001), Akaike Information Criterion (AIC; Akaike, 1987), comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler,

194 D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199

Table 2Descriptive statistics for measures included in growth model.

Measure M SD

Maternal EC 4.66 .63Infant positive emotionality 4.15 .75Infant negative emotion 3.46 2.43Maternal time in infant care (hours per day) 10.53 3.784 month ORa 4.63 .556-month OR 4.57 .498-month OR 4.46 .5510-month OR 4.28 .5312-month OR 4.26 .51Toddler EC 4.00 .52

a Orienting/regulation.

1990), incremental fit index (IFI; Bollen, 1989), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Steiger & Lind,1980).

5. Results

5.1. Missing data and preliminary analyses

As is common in longitudinal studies, attrition occurred throughout the course of this investigation, with a rate of 57%by the 18-month assessment. Although high, this rate is consistent with those of other studies (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 1999).Of the initial 158 participants, the numbers assessed at 6, 8, 10, 12, and 18 months, respectively, were 123, 101, 97, 80,and 69. A total of 29 analyses (t-tests) were performed to examine differences between assessment completers and non-completers on all measures used up to a given assessment point. For example, assessment of completers and non-completersfor the 12-month evaluation were compared on measures collected at 4, 6, 8, and 10 months of age. Accounting for multiplecomparisons, none of the comparisons were significant. Given these findings, missing data was handled using maximumlikelihood estimators (MLE), which is considered one of the preferred methods of handling missing data (see Jelicic, Phelps,& Lerner, 2009 for a discussion of missing data and preferred approaches to handling missing data in longitudinal studies,including MLE, and Bentler, 2004 or Pettit, Keiley, Laird, Bates, & Dodge, 2007 for additional information regarding the useof MLE specifically).

Zero-order correlations supported a number of expected relationships. That is, as anticipated, maternal EC, 8-monthinfant orienting/regulation, and 18-month toddler EC were positively associated with overall maternal time spent in care-giving activities when infants were 6 months of age. Maternal EC was positively associated with infant orienting/regulationmeasured at 4, 8, and 10 months postpartum; however, although associations were in the anticipated direction, maternalEC was not significantly associated with infant orienting/regulation measured at 6 and 12 months postpartum. Maternal ECand infant orienting/regulation measured at 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months postpartum were positively associated with toddlerEC. With the exception of a negative association with 8-month orienting/regulation, infant negative emotionality, measured4 months postpartum, was not associated with measurements of infant orienting/regulation at other time points nor wasinfant negative emotionality associated with maternal EC, maternal time spent in caregiving activities, or toddler EC. Zero-order associations between measures of infant orienting/regulation obtained at 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months postpartum wereall positive and significantly associated with each other. Descriptive statistics for all variables included in the growth modelbelow are presented in Table 2; see Table 3 for associations between measures used in the current investigation.

Table 3Associations between measures included in the initial growth model.

Measure MaternalEC

Infant NE 4-monthORa

6-monthOR

8-monthOR

10-monthOR

12-monthOR

ToddlerEC

6-month mat.time in careactivities

Maternal EC – −.11 .29** .13 .22** .26** .18 .23* .16*

Infant NE – – −.04 .02 −.19* −.16 −.15 −.01 −.034-month OR – – – .63** .55** .56** .33** .32** .066-month OR – – – – .69** .70** .65** .36** .128-month OR – – – – – .78** .53** .39** .19*

10-month OR – – – – – – .65** .45** .0712-month OR – – – – – – – .39** .16Toddler EC – – – – – – – – .37**

Note: Sample sizes for pairs of measures vary across time.a Orienting/regulation.* p < .10.

** p < .05.

D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199 195

Fig. 1. Growth model of infant orienting/regulation (OR), maternal EC, and maternal time in caregiving predicting toddler EC.

5.2. Latent growth model

The latent growth model examining the prediction of toddler EC from the intercept and slope of infant orient-ing/regulation, infant negative emotions, maternal effortful control, and maternal time spent in caregiving fit the data well,S-B �2 (20) = 31.84, p < .05, AIC = −8.16, CFI = 1.00, IFI = 1.00, RMSEA = .06 (90% confidence interval = .01–.10). Consistent withthe hypotheses outlined above, higher maternal EC, z = 2.33, p < .05, and higher infant orienting/regulation intercept andslope, z = 7.23, p < .05 and z = 2.68, p < .05, respectively, predicted higher 18-month toddler EC. Furthermore, after accountingfor maternal EC, 4-month infant negative emotionality, and the intercept of infant orienting/regulation, the time maternalcaregivers spent in interactive caregiving activities with their 6-month-old infants was a significant predictor of 18-monthtoddler EC, z = 2.26, p < .05. However, infant negative emotionality was not a significant predictor of toddler EC as had beenanticipated, z = .40, p > .05. Nevertheless, collectively, the predictors included in the model under investigation accounted for49.2% of the variance of toddler EC.

Other findings were also largely consistent with expectations. Higher maternal EC was associated with greater maternaltime spent in interactive caregiving activities with infants 6 months postpartum, z = 1.81, p < .05. Higher maternal EC also pre-dicted higher intercept of infant orienting/regulation, z = 2.18, p < .05, but unexpectedly, did not account for inter-individualdifferences in the slope of infant orienting/regulation, z = .04, p > .10. Although not significant, a trend consistent with a prioriexpectations suggested that higher maternal EC was associated with lower infant negative emotionality, z = −1.43, p < .10.As was anticipated based on our prior finding (see Bridgett et al., 2009), higher infant negative emotionality at 4 months ofage was associated with lower slopes of infant orienting/regulation. Infant negative emotionality did not predict 6-monthmaternal time spent in interactive caregiving activities with their children, z = −.39, p > .10 and maternal time spent in inter-active caregiving activities with their children at 6 months of age did not account for inter-individual differences in the slopeof infant orienting/regulation, z = 1.18, p > .10. The LGM model with standardized parameter estimates is depicted in Fig. 1.

6. Discussion

A number of expected associations between predictors, measured during infancy, and toddler EC were identified in thepresent investigation. Both the slope and intercept of infant orienting/regulation were significant predictors of toddler EC,as were maternal EC and maternal time spent in interactive care with infants. Importantly, the effect of maternal time spentin interactive care with infants on toddler EC was obtained after accounting for the potential influence of maternal EC.Furthermore, maternal EC predicted the amount of time mothers spent in interactive caregiving activities. However, infantNE was not a significant predictor of toddler EC. In addition to findings addressing the primary aims of the current study,several other findings are noteworthy. Maternal EC was a significant predictor of the intercept of infant orienting/regulation,

196 D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199

but not the slope, and infant NE was a significant predictor of the slope of infant orienting/regulation, but not theintercept.

The current investigation makes a number of contributions by extending existing research addressing the role of mater-nal characteristics, parenting, and infant temperament in the emergence of children’s EC very early in life. Existing work(e.g., Putnam et al., 2008) has demonstrated that infant temperament characteristics, and orienting/regulation in particular,exhibit associations with toddler EC. The current study complemented these findings by examining changes in infant orient-ing/regulation across time, finding that higher slopes of this infant attribute contributed unique variance to the predictionof EC in toddlerhood. Furthermore, this result builds on existing work (e.g., Bridgett et al., 2009; Gartstein et al., 2010) thathas focused on change in infant temperament constructs and prediction of subsequent parenting (e.g., Bridgett et al., 2009)and early emerging anxiety (e.g., Gartstein et al., 2010), by demonstrating that change in early temperament constructs overtime also provides important, unique information regarding the development of later abilities reflecting effortful regulation.

Although the expected effects involving the role of developing infant orienting/regulation in the emergence of EC intoddlerhood were identified, the anticipated contribution of infant negative emotion was not observed, a finding that isinconsistent with prior research that has identified negative associations between negative emotions and EC (Eisenberg,Valiente, et al., 2009; Fabes et al., 1999; Lonigan & Vasey, 2009). At the same time, it should be noted that infant negativeemotionality was a significant predictor of lower slopes of infant orienting/regulation. Given that higher slopes of infantorienting/regulation were associated with higher EC when children reached 18 months of age, it appears that negativeemotionality in infancy has indirect effects on early toddler EC via developing orienting/regulation. This finding suggeststhat infancy and early childhood may represent a particularly sensitive developmental period with respect to attention andself-regulation skills, wherein early regulation is particularly vulnerable to disruption by negative emotional states.

In the current study, maternal time spent in interactive caregiving activities when infants were 6 months of age predictedtoddler EC after accounting for the effects of maternal EC. In turn, maternal EC predicted both toddler EC as well as maternaltime spent in interactive caregiving. This pattern of results is consistent with the Eisenberg et al. (1998) model that concep-tualizes caregiver EC as contributing to parenting practices, which in turn support early developing regulation abilities inchildren. In addition, the present findings are consistent with a small handful of prior studies using school-age samples thathave examined the influence of parent regulation or EC on parenting (e.g., Chen & Johnston, 2007; Deater-Deckard et al.,2010; Mokrova et al., 2010) and subsequent child regulation (Cumberland-Li et al., 2003; Valiente et al., 2007). Importantly,the current study extends these findings by examining links between maternal EC, parenting, and subsequent toddler EC, ata time when the ability to use internal, effortful mechanisms to regulate emotion and behavior are first beginning to emerge(i.e., toddlerhood), and also by demonstrating that caregiving during infancy is an essential contributor to the emergenceof EC 12 months later. Furthermore, it is also worth noting that parenting effects on child EC, similar to those noted in thecurrent investigation, have more typically been observed earlier in life (e.g., Cipriano & Stifter, 2010; Karreman, van Tuijl,van Aken, & Dekovic, 2008; Lengua et al., 2007), whereas studies investigating the effects of parenting on child EC in oldersamples have not consistently produced similar effects (e.g., Lengua, 2006). This led Lengua (2006) to conclude that theeffects of parenting on child EC may be more important for early EC as opposed to EC in older children. Although the cur-rent investigation only examined EC in young toddlers and not in older children, our findings are consistent with Lengua’sconclusion, in so far as parenting effects on emerging EC early in life were observed. In sum, the present study adds to thegrowing literature supporting the effects of parenting on developing child EC early in life.

Differences between the measure of parenting used in the current investigation and other studies are also noteworthy.Prior work has more typically used measures of maternal warmth/sensitivity to examine associations between parenting,parent characteristics, and child outcomes (e.g., Bernier, Carlson, & Whipple, 2010; Crockenberg & Leerkes, 2004; Propper& Moore, 2006; Spinrad et al., 2007). The present investigation departed from these studies by asking mothers to reporthow much time in a typical day they spent engaged in interactive caregiving activities with their infants. Based on thepresent findings indicating that maternal time spent in interactive infant care was predicted by maternal EC, and in turncontributed to toddler EC, it appears that the amount of time parents spend interacting with their children may be importantto consider in future research. While it should be acknowledged that quantity of time engaged in interactive activities withchildren is likely related to parental warmth/sensitivity (e.g., Huston & Aronson, 2005), which was not measured in thecurrent study, our findings suggest the possibility that more opportunities to interact with caregivers may result in greaterexposure to experiences that promote the emergence of EC in toddlerhood through the parent-infant relationship andongoing social exchanges. This possibility is consistent with Coleman’s (1988) assertion that increased parental time withchildren, a necessary prerequisite for parents to be able to provide emotional support and cognitive stimulation, is importantfor children’s developmental outcomes. Importantly, this study extends existing work examining the influence of time withcaregivers on outcomes in early childhood (e.g., Cox et al., 1992; Huston & Aronson, 2005) to include temperament broadly,and EC specifically. Nevertheless, given that prior investigations have not consistently observed effects between caregivertime spent with children and children’s outcomes, future studies should replicate and extend the findings in the currentinvestigation by evaluating the effects of caregiver interactive time with their young infants on subsequent EC as well as onother temperament attributes (e.g., positive and negative emotionality).

In addition to the implications noted above, there are several broader implications of the current findings. Prior researchhas found that EC is important for myriad of child outcomes. For example, high EC has been linked to increased socialcompetence (Eisenberg et al., 2004; Fabes et al., 1999), fewer behavioral difficulties (Eisenberg, Valiente, et al., 2009; Gartstein& Fagot, 2003; Olson et al., 2005), and greater academic competence (Valiente et al., 2008). Likewise, aspects of parenting,

D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199 197

such as parenting style and parental warmth, have been associated with the increased likelihood of positive child outcomes(e.g., Baumrind, 1991; Davidov & Grusec, 2006). Results of this study suggest that the beneficial effects of caregiving on avariety of child outcomes (e.g., social competence, fewer behavior problems) may be at least in part mediated via improvedEC in early childhood. This is consistent with studies that have identified parenting as enhancing child regulation and moreeffective child regulation being associated with better developmental outcomes (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 2005; Eisenberg, Chang,Ma, & Huang, 2009; Hofer, Eisenberg, & Reiser, 2010; Spinrad et al., 2007). Further refinement and identification of parentingpractices that support emerging EC in toddlerhood may also provide fruitful avenues for early intervention efforts aimedat children at risk for poor emotional and behavioral control. Additional studies will also need to establish a longitudinalframework to rigorously test the meditational role of early EC for the relationships between aspects of caregiving and avariety of important child outcomes.

6.1. Limitations

Although the current study makes several unique contributions to the literature examining the emergence of EC earlyin life, several limitations should be acknowledged. The current study used only maternal report to assess both maternaltime spent in interactive parenting activities with their infants and temperament, and reliance on parent-report has beenquestioned as an optimal approach to the measurement of temperament (e.g., Kagan, 2007). However, the advantagesof parent-report methodology should also be noted. For example, in longitudinal research, single source, parent-reportmeasures permit more detailed and more frequent assessment of constructs than might be possible in a laboratory orother observational settings. Among other benefits, increased assessment frequency allows for an examination of inter-individual differences across time, as in the present investigation. Similarly, parents may have unique information regardinginfrequent/rare behaviors and behaviors that although common, are not generally observed in the laboratory context (e.g.,those occurring around bedtime). In addition, the IBQ-R (Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003) and its predecessor, the IBQ (Rothbart,1981), have demonstrated significant associations with laboratory measures of temperament and infant behavior, includinglinks between Duration of Orienting, a subscale of the broader orienting/regulation factor, and sustained play with toys(Rothbart, Derryberry, & Hershey, 2000), supporting the validity of parent observations of infant temperament. Nevertheless,future studies should consider some combination of parent report methods and laboratory measurements (e.g., laboratorymeasurements of parent and child effortful control) to refine and extend findings obtained in the current investigation. Asecond limitation is that the current study focused on mothers and did not obtain data pertaining to fathers’ caregivingactivities or EC. Although primary caregivers generally spend more time with infants (e.g., Day & Lamb, 2004; Hofferth et al.,2007; Pleck & Masciadrelli, 2004), it is possible that paternal information (e.g., EC and time spent in interactive caregivingactivities with infants) would have explained additional unique variance in the context of predicting toddler EC. Incorporatingfather involvement would be a valuable addition to future work examining EC early in the toddler period.

It should also be noted that, although the current study adds to the growing literature examining the pathways throughwhich maternal EC may influence child EC, the contribution of parent EC to child EC may be in part determined throughgenetic pathways. While several studies have examined the heritability of EC and found substantial genetic contributions(e.g., Lemery-Chalfant, Doelger, & Goldsmith, 2008; Mullineaux et al., 2009), the current study did not use a geneticallyinformed design to examine associations between maternal and toddler EC. Thus, results of this study suggest that, in additionto the possibility of genetic influences, parenting represents a likely environmental pathway for the effects of parent EC onchild EC, consistent with the conceptual framework provided by Eisenberg et al. (1998). Future work that simultaneouslyconsiders genetic effects via the use of a genetically informed design and examines environmental contributors to EC, suchas parenting, will be important for identifying more precisely the contributions of parenting to child EC, above and beyondthe direct genetic contributions to EC in young children.

References

Adi-Japha, E., & Klein, P. S. (2009). Relations between parenting quality and cognitive performance of children experiencing varying amounts of childcare.Child Development, 80(3), 893–906. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01304.x

Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52(3), 317–332. doi:10.1007/BF02294359Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56–95.

doi:10.1177/0272431691111004Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238Bentler, P. M. (2004). EQS (Version 6.1). Multivariate Software, Inc.Bernier, A., Carlson, S. M., & Whipple, N. (2010). From external regulation to self-regulation: Early parenting precursors of young children’s executive

functioning. Child Development, 81(1), 326–339. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01397.xBlair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in

kindergarten. Child Development, 78(2), 647–663. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01019.xBollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303–316.

doi:10.1177/0049124189017003004Bridgett, D. J., Gartstein, M. A., Putnam, S. P., McKay, T., Iddins, E., Robertson, C., et al. (2009). Maternal and contextual influences and the effect of temperament

development during infancy on parenting in toddlerhood. Infant Behavior & Development, 32(1), 103–116. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2008.10.007Byrne, B. M., & Crombie, G. (2003). Modeling and testing change: An introduction to the latent growth curve model. Understanding Statistics, 2(3), 177–203.

doi:10.1207/S15328031US0203 02Calkins, S. D., Smith, C. L., Gill, K. L., & Johnson, M. C. (1998). Maternal interactive style across contexts: Relations to emotional, behavioural, and physiological

regulation during toddlerhood. Social Development, 7(3), 350–369. doi:10.1111/1467-9507.00072

198 D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199

Chen, M., & Johnston, C. (2007). Maternal inattention and impulsivity and parenting behaviors. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36(3),455–468.

Cipriano, E. A., & Stifter, C. A. (2010). Predicting preschool effortful control from toddler temperament and parenting behavior. Journal of Applied Develop-mental Psychology, 31(3), 221–230. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2010.02.004

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.Cox, M. J., Owen, M. T., Henderson, V. K., & Margand, N. A. (1992). Prediction of infant-father and infant-mother attachment. Developmental Psychology,

28(3), 474–483.Coyne, L. W., Low, C. M., Miller, A. L., Seifer, R., & Dickstein, S. (2007). Mothers’ empathic understanding of their toddlers: Associations with maternal

depression and sensitivity. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16(4), 483–497. doi:10.1007/s10826-006-9099-9Crockenberg, S. C., & Leerkes, E. M. (2004). Infant and maternal behaviors regulate infant reactivity to novelty at 6 months. Developmental Psychology, 40(6),

1123–1132. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1123Cumberland-Li, A., Eisenberg, N., Champion, C., Gershoff, E., & Fabes, R. A. (2003). The relation of parental emotionality and related dispositional traits to

parental expression of emotion and children’s social functioning. Motivation and Emotion, 27(1), 27–56. doi:10.1023/A:1023674308969Curran, P. J., & Hussong, A. M. (2003). The use of latent trajectory models in psychopathology research. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4), 526–544.

doi:10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.526Davidov, M., & Grusec, M. (2006). Untangling the links of parental responsiveness to distress and warmth to child outcomes. Child Development, 77(1.),

44–58. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00855.xDay, R. D., & Lamb, M. E. (Eds.). (2004). Conceptualizing and measuring father involvement: Pathways, problems and progress. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Deater-Deckard, K., Sewell, M. D., Petrill, S. A., & Thompson, L. A. (2010). Maternal working memory and reactive negativity in parenting. Psychological

Science, 21(1), 75–79.Derryberry, D., & Rothbart, M. K. (1997). Reactive and effortful processes in the organization of temperament. Development and Psychopathology, 9(4),

633–652. doi:10.1017/S0954579497001375Dix, T., Cheng, N., & Day, W. H. (2009). Connecting with parents: Mothers’ depressive symptoms and responsive behaviors in the regulation of social contact

by one- and young two-year-olds. Social Development, 18(1), 24–50. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00488.xEisenberg, N., Chang, L., Ma, Y., & Huang, X. (2009). Relations of parenting style to Chinese children’s effortful control, ego resilience, and maladjustment.

Development and Psychopatholoy, 21(2), 455–477. doi:10.1017/S095457940900025XEisenberg, N., Cumberland, A., & Spinrad, T. L. (1998). Parental socialization of emotion. Psychological Inquiry, 9(4), 241–273.

doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0904 1Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Bernzweig, J., & Karbon, M. (1993). The relations of emotionality and regulation to preschoolers’ social skills and sociometric

status. Child Development, 64(5), 1418–1438. doi:10.2307/1131543Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S. A., Guthrie, I. K., Murphy, B. C., & Reiser, M. (1999). Parental reactions to children’s negative emotions: Longitudinal

relations to quality of children’s social functioning. Child Development, 70(2), 513–534. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00037Eisenberg, N., Hofer, C., & Vaughan, J. (2007). Effortful control and its socioemotional consequences. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp.

287–306). New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press.Eisenberg, N., Smith, C. L., Sadovsky, A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2004). Effortful control: Relations with emotion regulation, adjustment, and socialization in

childhood. In R. F. Baumeister, & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (pp. 259–282). New York, NY, USA:Guilford Press.

Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., Spinrad, T. L., Cumberland, A., Liew, J., Reiser, M., et al. (2009). Longitudinal relations of children’s effortful control, impulsiv-ity, and negative emotionality to their externalizing, internalizing, and co-occurring behavior problems. Developmental Psychology, 45(4), 988–1008.doi:10.1037/a0016213

Eisenberg, N., Zhou, Q., Spinrad, T. L., Valiente, C., Fabes, R. A., & Liew, J. (2005). Relations among positive parenting, children’s effortful control, andexternalizing problems: A three-wave longitudinal study. Child Development, 76(5), 1055–1071. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00897.x

Evans, D. E., & Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Developing a model for adult temperament. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(4), 868–888.doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.11.002

Fabes, R. A., Eisenberg, N., Jones, S., Smith, M., Guthrie, I., Poulin, R., et al. (1999). Regulation, emotionality, and preschoolers’ socially competent peerinteractions. Child Development, 70(2), 432–442. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00031

Fox, N. A., & Calkins, S. D. (2003). The development of self-control of emotion: Intrinsic and extrinsic influences. Motivation and Emotion, 27(1), 7–26.doi:10.1023/A:1023622324898

Gaertner, B. M., Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., & Greving, K. A. (2007). Parental childrearing attitudes as correlates of father involvement during infancy.Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(4), 962–976. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00424.x

Gartstein, M. A., Bridgett, D. J., Rothbart, M. K., Robertson, C., Iddins, E., Ramsay, K., et al. (2010). A latent growth examination of fear development in infancy:Contributions of maternal depression and the risk for toddler anxiety. Developmental Psychology, 46(3), 651–668. doi:10.1037/a0018898

Gartstein, M. A., & Fagot, B. I. (2003). Parental depression, parenting and family adjustment, and child effortful control: Explaining externalizing behaviorsfor preschool children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24(2), 143–177. doi:10.1016/S0193-3973(03)00043-1

Gartstein, M. A, Knyazev, G. G., & Slobodskaya, H. R. (2005). Cross-cultural differences in the structure of infant temperament: United States of America(U.S.) and Russia. Infant Behavior & Development, 28(1), 54–61. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2004.09.003

Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2003). Studying infant temperament via the revised infant behavior questionnaire. Infant Behavior & Development, 26(1),64–86. doi:10.1016/S0163-6383(02)00169-8

Gartstein, M. A., Slobodskaya, H. R., Putnam, S. P., & Kinsht, I. A. (2009). A cross-cultural study of infant temperament: Predicting preschool effortful controlin the United States of America and Russia. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 6(3), 337–364. doi:10.1080/17405620701203846

Hill-Soderlund, A. L., & Braungart-Rieker, J. M. (2008). Early individual differences in temperamental reactivity and regulation: Implications for effortfulcontrol in early childhood. Infant Behavior & Development, 31(3), 386–397. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.12.007

Hofer, C., Eisenberg, N., & Reiser, M. (2010). The role of socialization, effortful control, and ego resiliency in French adolescents’ social functioning. Journalof Research in Adolescence, 20(3), 555–582. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00650.x

Hofferth, S. L., Cabrera, N., Carlson, M., Coley, R. L., Day, R., Schindler, H., et al. (2007). Resident father involvement and social fathering. In S. L. Hof-ferth, & L. M. Casper (Eds.), Handbook of measurement issues in family research (pp. 335–374). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesPublishers.

Huston, A. C., & Aronson, S. R. (2005). Mothers’ time with infant and time in employment as predictors of mother-child relationships and children’s earlydevelopment. Child Development, 76(2), 467–482.

Jelicic, H., Phelps, E., & Lerner, R. M. (2009). Use of missing data methods in longitudinal studies: The persistence of bad practices in developmentalpsychology. Developmental Psychology, 45(4), 1195–1199. doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9542-5

Kagan, J. (2007). A trio of concerns. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(4), 361–376. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00049.xKarreman, A., van Tuijl, C., van Aken, M. A. G., & Dekovic, M. (2008). Parenting, coparenting, and effortful control in preschoolers. Journal of Family Psychology,

22(1), 30–40. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.22.1.30Klein, C. K., Putnam, S. P., & Linhares, M. B. M. (2009). Assessment of temperament: Translation and adaptation of instruments to Portuguese (Brazil)

language. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 43, 552–557.Kochanska, G., Clark, L. A., & Goldman, M. S. (1997). Implications of mothers’ personality for their parenting and their young children’s development

outcomes. Journal of Personality, 65(2), 387–420. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00959.x

D.J. Bridgett et al. / Infant Behavior & Development 34 (2011) 189–199 199

Kochanska, G., Coy, K. C., Tjebkes, T. L., & Husarek, S. J. (1998). Individual differences in emotionality in infancy. Child Development, 69(2), 375–390.doi:10.2307/1132172

Kochanska, G., & Knaack, A. (2003). Effortful control as a personality characteristic of young children: Antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal ofPersonality, 71(6), 1087–1112. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.7106008

Kochanska, G., Murray, K., & Coy, K. C. (1997). Inhibitory control as a contributor to conscience in childhood: From toddler to early school age. ChildDevelopment, 68(2), 263–277. doi:10.2307/1131849

Kochanska, G., Murray, K. T., & Harlan, E. T. (2000). Effortful control in early childhood: Continuity and change, antecedents, and implications for socialdevelopment. Developmental Psychology, 36(2), 220–232. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.36.2.220

Lemery-Chalfant, K., Doelger, L., & Goldsmith, H. H. (2008). Genetic relations between effortful and attentional control and symptoms of psychopathologyin middle childhood. Infant and Child Development, 17(4), 365–385. doi:10.1002/icd.581

Lengua, L. J. (2006). Growth in temperament and parenting as predictors of adjustment during children’s transition to adolescence. Developmental Psychology,42(5), 819–832. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.819

Lengua, L. J., Honorado, E., & Bush, N. R. (2007). Contextual risk and parenting as predictors of effortful control and social competence in preschool children.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28(1), 40–55. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.10.001

Lonigan, C. J., & Vasey, M. W. (2009). Negative affectivity, effortful control, and attention to threat-relevant stimuli. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,37(3), 387–399. doi:10.1007/s10802-008-9284-y

Mokrova, I., O’Brien, M., Calkins, S., & Keane, S. (2010). Parental ADHD symptomology and ineffective parenting: The connecting link of home chaos.Parenting: Science and Practice, 10, 119–135.

Mullineaux, P. Y., Deater-Deckard, K., Petrill, S. A., Thompson, L. A., & DeThorne, L. S. (2009). Temperament in middle childhood: A behavioral geneticanalysis of fathers’ and mothers’ reports. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(5), 737–746. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.008

Olson, S. L., Bates, J. E., & Bayles, K. (1990). Early antecedents of childhood impulsivity: The role of parent-child interaction, cognitive competence, andtemperament. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18(3), 317–334. doi:10.1007/BF00916568

Olson, S. L., Sameroff, A. J., Kerr, D. C. R., Lopez, N. L., & Wellman, H. M. (2005). Developmental foundations of externalizing problems in young children:The role of effortful control. Development and Psychopathology, 17(1), 25–45. doi:10.1017/S0954579405050029

Pesonen, A.-K., Räikkönen, K., Heinonen, K., Komsi, N., Järvenpää, A.-L., & Strandberg, T. (2008). A transactional model of temperamental development:Evidence of a relationship between child temperament and maternal stress over five years. Social Development, 17(2), 326–340. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00427.x

Pettit, G. S., Keiley, M. K., Laird, R. D., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2007). Predicting the developmental course of mother reported monitoring acrosschildhood and adolescence from early proactive parenting, child temperament, and parents’ worries. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(2), 206–217.doi:10.1037/0893-3200.21.2.206

Pleck, J. H., & Masciadrelli, B. P. (2004). Paternal involvement by U.S. residential fathers: Levels, sources, and consequences. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role ofthe father in child development (4th ed., pp. 222–271). Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Propper, C., & Moore, G. A. (2006). The influence of parenting on infant emotionality: A multi-level psychobiological perspective. Developmental Review,26(4), 427–460. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2006.06.003

Putnam, S. P., Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Measurement of fine-grained aspects of toddler temperament: The Early Childhood BehaviorQuestionnaire. Infant Behavior & Development, 29(3), 386–401. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.01.004

Putnam, S. P., Rothbart, M. K., & Gartstein, M. A. (2008). Homotypic and heterotypic continuity of fine-grained temperament during infancy, toddlerhood,and early childhood. Infant and Child Development, 17(4), 387–405. doi:10.1002/icd.582

Rothbart. (1981). Measurement of temperament in infancy. Child Development, 52(2), 569–578. doi:10.2307/1129176Rothbart, Ahadi, S. A., Hersey, K. L., & Fisher, P. (2001). Investigations of temperament at three to seven years: The Children’s Behavior Questionnaire. Child

Development, 72(5), 1394–1408. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00355Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A., & Evans, D. E. (2000). Temperament and personality: Origins and outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1),

122-135. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.122Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (2006). Temperament. In N. Eisenberg, & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality

development (6th ed., pp. 99–166). New York: Wiley.Rothbart, M. K., & Derryberry, D. (1981). Development of individual differences in temperament. In M. E. Lamb, & A. L. Brown (Eds.), Advances in developmental

psychology (pp. 37–86). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Rothbart, M. K., & Derryberry, D. (2002). Temperament in children. In C. v. Hofsten, & L. Bäckman (Eds.), Psychology at the turn of the millennium, Vol. 2:

Social, developmental, and clinical perspectives (pp. 17–35). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.Rothbart, M. K., Derryberry, D., & Hershey, K. (2000). Stability of temperament in childhood: Laboratory infant assessment to parent report at seven years.

In V. J. Molfese, & D. L. Molfese (Eds.), Temperament and personality development across the life span (pp. 85–119). Mahwah, NJ US: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates Publishers.

Rothbart, M. K., Ellis, L. K., Rueda, M. R., & Posner, M. I. (2003). Developing mechanisms of temperamental effortful control. Journal of Personality, 71(6),1113–1143.

Rothbart, M. K., & Sheese, B. E. (2007). Temperament and emotion regulation. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 331–350). New York,NY, USA: Guilford Press.

Rothbart, M. K., Sheese, B. E., & Posner, M. I. (2007). Executive attention and effortful control: Linking temperament, brain networks, and genes. ChildDevelopment Perspectives, 1(1), 2–7.

Ruff, H. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (1996). Attention in early development: Themes and variations. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66(4), 507–514.

doi:10.1007/BF02296192Simonds, J., Kieras, J. E., Rueda, M. R., & Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Effortful control, executive attention, and emotional regulation in 7-10-year-old children.

Cognitive Development, 22(4), 474–488. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2007.08.009Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Gaertner, B., Popp, T., Smith, C. L., Kupfer, A., et al. (2007). Relations of maternal socialization and toddlers’ effortful control to

children’s adjustment and social competence. Developmental Psychology, 43(5), 1170–1186. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.5.1170Steiger, J. H., & Lind, A. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society,

Iowa City, IA.Stifter, C. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2002). The effect of excessive crying on the development of emotion regulation. Infancy, 3(2), 133–152.

doi:10.1207/S15327078IN0302 2Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., & Reiser, M. (2007). Pathways to problem behaviors: Chaotic homes, parent and child effortful control, and parenting.

Social Development, 16(2), 249–267. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00383.xValiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., Swanson, J., & Reiser, M. (2008). Prediction of children’s academic competence from their effortful control, relationships,

and classroom participation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 67–77. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.67