Parenting, Peers and Psychosocial Adjustment: Are the Same-or Different-Children Affected by Each?

Peer Victimization and Callous-Unemotional Traits: The Impact of Parents and Teachers

Research on the link between peer victimization and callous-unemotional (CU) traits has primarily relied on cross-sectional designs and yielded equivocal findings. In light of the poor outcomes related to peer victimization and CU traits, it is important to determine whether this link is reciprocal in nature and to identify factors that may influence its strength. Accordingly, the current study investigated the bidirectional association between peer victimization and CU traits over a 6-month period, accounting for the moderating effects of parents (i.e., support and hostility) and teachers (i.e., support and conflict). Participants included 284 third- through fifth-grade students (ages 7-12; 51.8% boys; 51.1% Hispanic) and their homeroom teachers. Children provided ratings of peer victimization, parental hostility, and parent and teacher support. Teachers provided ratings of CU traits and student-teacher conflict. A series of cross-lagged panel models were estimated. Results revealed that, at higher levels of parental hostility, peer victimization predicted increases in CU traits over time; in contrast, peer victimization predicted decreases in CU traits at lower levels of parental hostility. Surprisingly, at higher levels of teacher conflict, peer victimization predicted decreases in CU traits over time. CU traits did not interact with parent or teacher variables to predict subsequent peer victimization. Moreover, parental hostility was positively associated with subsequent peer victimization, whereas teacher support predicted decreases in victimization over time. These findings build on previous research examining environmental influences on the expression of CU traits by highlighting peer victimization and parental hostility as potential risk factors.

Better, for worse, or both? Testing environmental sensitivity models with parenting at the level of individual families

According to environmental sensitivity models, children vary in responsivity to parenting. However, different models propose different patterns, with responsivity to primarily: (1) adverse parenting (adverse sensitive); or (2) supportive parenting (vantage sensitive); or (3) to both (differentially susceptible). This preregistered study tested whether these three responsivity patterns coexist. We used intensive longitudinal data of Dutch adolescents (N = 256, Mage = 14.8, 72% female) who bi-weekly reported on adverse and supportive parenting and their psychological functioning (tmean = 17.7, tmax = 26). Dynamic Structural Equation Models (DSEM) indeed revealed differential parenting effects. As hypothesized, we found that all three responsivity patterns coexisted in our sample: 5% were adverse sensitive, 3% vantage sensitive, and 26% differentially susceptible. No adolescent appeared unsusceptible, however. Instead, we labeled 28% as unperceptive, because they did not perceive any changes in parenting and scored lower on trait environmental sensitivity than others. Furthermore, unexpected patterns emerged, with 37% responding contrary to parenting theories (e.g., decreased psychological functioning after more parental support). Sensitivity analyses with concurrent effects and parent-reported parenting were performed. Overall, findings indicate that theorized responsivity-to-parenting patterns might coexist in the population, and that there are other, previously undetected patterns that go beyond environmental sensitivity models.

Support and Conflict Among Youth With Type 1 Diabetes: A Focus on Friends

OBJECTIVE

The goal of the study was to examine the relations of general and diabetes-specific friend support and conflict to psychological and diabetes health among youth with type 1 diabetes. We examined gender as a moderator of these relations, and friend responsiveness and information-sharing as potential mediators.

METHODS

Youth with type 1 diabetes (n = 167; M age 15.83 [SD = 0.78]; 50% female) were interviewed once in the Fall and once in the following Spring of the school year. Using multiple regression analysis, general friend support, general friend conflict, diabetes-specific support, and diabetes-specific conflict were investigated as simultaneous predictors of psychological and diabetes outcomes cross-sectionally and longitudinally over four months.

RESULTS

Cross-sectionally friend conflict, including both general and diabetes-specific, was more predictive of outcomes than friend support. In cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, gender was a significant moderator, such that several relations of general friend conflict to outcomes were significant for females but not nonfemales. Friend support revealed mixed relations to outcomes across cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Although we found links of friend relationship variables to mediators (perceived responsiveness; information sharing), we found little evidence of mediation.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings show stronger evidence that conflictual friend relationships than supportive friend relationships are linked to health. Findings suggest that problematic friend relationships may have a stronger impact on the health of females than nonfemales. These results underscore the need to better understand the conditions under which friend support is helpful versus harmful and the reasons underlying these links.

Environmental susceptibility for all: A data-driven approach suggests individual differences in domain-general and domain-specific patterns of environmental susceptibility

How we are influenced by our environment is a fundamental question in developmental science. Theories and empirical research have claimed that some individuals are susceptible to environmental influences and others are much less susceptible. The present study addressed four questions: (1) Is environmental susceptibility a continuous or categorical construct? (2) Is environmental susceptibility unidimensional (i.e., domain general) or multidimensional (i.e., domain specific)? (3) Are there genetic contributions to individual differences in environmental susceptibility? (4) What are the temperamental characteristics of different environmental susceptibility patterns? We used child- and mother-report data from a sample of 11-year-old twins (N = 1,507) and applied a novel data-driven approach to assess an environmental susceptibility space, based on simultaneous associations between multiple environmental exposures (18 measures relating to parenting, parent, peer, and twin relationships) and developmental outcomes (10 measures relating to empathy, prosocial behavior, aggression, and self-esteem). The results suggest that the environmental susceptibility space we assessed is better conceptualized as continuous and multidimensional. Different children showed susceptibility to different contexts and variation in domain-general versus domain-specific patterns. A comparison of distances between monozygotic and dizygotic twins within the space demonstrated genetic contributions. Finally, susceptibility patterns could not be differentiated based on a specific temperament trait, but rather related to temperament profiles.

Individual differences in sensitivity to positive home environment among children "at risk" for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A review

Although the evidence for the genetic basis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is strong, environmental factors, such as the quality of parenting or the home environment, may moderate such genetic liability. The plausible negative effect of a low-quality home environment and negative parenting on child outcomes is well-established; however, the positive effect of a high-quality environment and positive parenting remained largely uninvestigated. Due to the presence of genetic, temperamental, or physiological factors, children who were traditionally considered at-risk for ADHD may be more sensitive to aspects of their environment compared to children who are not at such risk. Therefore, they would be more affected by their environmental experience, either for good or bad. Under supportive environmental conditions, such at-risk individuals might actually outperform their non-vulnerable peers, suggesting that these individual factors might be considered susceptibility factors rather than risk factors. Little is known regarding the positive effect of the environment in the ADHD literature, but it has been demonstrated in cognitive functions that are closely associated with ADHD, such as executive functions (EF). We review this literature and examine the extant empirical support for sensitivity to aspects of the home environment and parenting in the case of ADHD and EF. Moreover, we review factors that could help identify the specific aspects of the home environment and parenting that these children might be more susceptible to. Such knowledge could be valuable when designing preventive interventions and identifying those children that are especially sensitive and could benefit from such interventions. Recommendations for future studies are discussed as well.