Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643 www.academicpress.

com

Does child temperament moderate the inuence of parenting on adjustment?q

Kathleen Cranley Gallagher
Department of Educational Psychology, University of WisconsinMadison, Education Sciences Building, 1025 West Johnson Street, Madison, WI 53706, USA Received 26 March 2001; received in revised form 3 January 2002

Abstract Parental socialization and child temperament are modestly associated with child adjustment outcomes. Main-eects models have yielded valuable information, but fail to explicate mechanisms via which child adjustment occurs. A conditional model of inuence is suggested, in which parenting eects on child adjustment are moderated by child temperament characteristics. Theoretical support for such a model is outlined, integrating bioecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998) and a corollary dierential susceptibility hypothesis (Belsky, 1997). Empirical work compatible with the moderated model is reviewed, and research that more fully integrates the theoretical model and allows direct testing of the propositions is presented. 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.
Keywords: Parenting; Temperament; Child adjustment; Moderator; Ecological systems theory; Dierential susceptibility

Research linking parenting and child temperament to adjustment has relied primarily upon main-eects models, in which socialization (parenting) or biological predisposition (temperament) directly predicts child adjustment
q An earlier version of this paper was presented as part of preliminary examination requirements for completion of studies in the Ph.D. program in Human Development. I am most grateful to Deborah Lowe Vandell, Leonard Abbeduto, and B. Bradford Brown for their generous comments and assistance. E-mail address: kcgallag@wisc.edu

0273-2297/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved. PII: S 0 2 7 3 - 2 2 9 7 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 5 0 3 - 8

624

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

outcomes. It has been suggested that research emphasizing the interaction eects of parenting and child temperament might more precisely consider the complexity of development and its processes (Hinde, 1989; Kochanska, 1997; Lerner, 1998; Magnusson & Stattin, 1998; Thomas, 1984). A conditional model, in which the relationship between a predictor and dependent variable is moderated by the presence of a third variable, may be used to examine parenting inuences on child adjustment as moderated by child temperament. In this review, I summarize the work linking parenting and temperament to adjustment in main-eects models. A theoretical framework and ancillary hypothesis are then examined. Bioecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998) proposes how specic qualities of parenting have their most conspicuous eects on adjustment in the presence of distinct child temperament characteristics over time. A dierential susceptibility hypothesis (Belsky, 1997) is proposed as a means for interpreting temperamental instability. A survey of the empirical literature investigating the interaction of parenting and child temperament will follow. I conclude by suggesting strategies for future study of parentingtemperament interaction, informed by bioecological systems theory.

Main-eects models Adjustment in childhood Adjustment in childhood refers to the characteristics of the childs social functioning within constraints of the environment (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). Positive adjustment is reected in general positive emotion, compliant and self-regulated behavior, and harmonious interpersonal interactions (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). Negative adjustment outcomes are reected in the converse: negative emotion, disruptive behavior and conicted social relationships. What manifests as adjustment in childhood varies with developmental period and with the environmental and social demands placed upon the child (Sanson & Rothbart, 1995). Parenting and child adjustment Parenting is thought to inuence adjustment via processes commonly known as socialization, . . .whereby children acquire the habits, values, goals, and knowledge that will enable them to function satisfactorily when they become adult members of society (Maccoby, 1980b, p. v). The research linking parenting and child adjustment has generated the study of two primary dimensions of parenting. Parental warmth incorporates behaviors that convey acceptance, positive aect, sensitivity and responsiveness

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

625

toward the child. Parental control consists of sucient and developmentally appropriate involvement, discipline and monitoring (Baumrind, 1979; Maccoby, 1980b), manifest in enforcing demands and rules, high expectations, and restriction of the childs behavior. Negative aspects of parental control have also been considered, including the eects of intrusiveness and harsh discipline (Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1984). While operational denitions of parental warmth and control vary across studies, general ndings associating parenting with child adjustment can be summarized as follows. High maternal warmth and nonintrusive responding are related to secure attachment in infancy (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). In early childhood, parental high warmth and responsiveness have been associated with superior child prosocial skills (Sroufe, 1985), fewer behavior problems, and better peer relations (Baumrind, 1979). In later childhood and adolescence, these same parenting characteristics predict fewer behavior problems and more harmonious peer relationships (Baumrind, 1991). Profoundly negative parenting, manifested in child abuse and neglect, is also related to maladjustment in childhood and adulthood (Egeland & Sroufe, 1981). Maltreatment aside, however, predictions of child adjustment outcomes from parenting behaviors have been modest (Chamberlain & Patterson, 1995; Collins, Maccoby, Steinberg, Hetherington, & Bornstein, 2000; Maccoby, 1980a; Vandell, 2000; Wachs, 1991). Additionally, links between parenting styles and child adjustment outcomes have sometimes been equivocal. For example, high parental power, arbitrarily administered, was associated with divergent child outcomes: obedient, passive behavior in some children and aggressive cruel behavior in others (Maccoby, 1980a). Modest relations and equivocal ndings have led to reection on what alternative inuences might be playing a role in the childs developing social competence (Rothbart & Bates, 1998; Sanson & Rothbart, 1995). Child temperament and adjustment Child temperament, dened as constitutionally based individual dierences in emotional, motor, and attentional reactivity and self-regulation (Rothbart & Bates, 1998), is modestly related to concurrent and later child adjustment. In a direct linkage model, temperamental extremes may reect either positive adjustment on one end of the continuum, or pathology on the other (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). For example, extreme fearfulness may manifest as anxiety disorder, while very low attention may manifest as attention decit disorder. In early studies of child temperament, Chess and Thomas (1989) dened clusters of temperament characteristics they hypothesized were most clinically salient for adjustment. Children with an easy temperament typically exhibited moderate to high positive emotion, moderate activity level, high

626

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

adaptability and high emotional regulation. Children with dicult temperament typically exhibited high negative emotion, low adaptability, high activity level, and low emotional regulation. Children with the dicult characteristics were found to challenge parents, caregivers, and teachers, more than children with easy or average temperament (Thomas, 1984). Contemporary research in the area of temperament postulates a model that considers three global dimensions: surgency, negative emotion, and regulation (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). Surgency involves activity level and the tendency to approach or withdraw from novel situations. Regulation includes systems of attention and behavioral inhibition, and negative emotion refers to sadness, distress to limitation and soothability. While similar to the original dimensions of Thomas and Chess, the contemporary structure is supported by biological, behavioral genetic and social science research (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). Regardless of the model employed, characteristics associated with dicult temperament are modestly related to later behavior problems (Bates, 1989; Chess & Thomas, 1989; Martin, 1989). High negative emotion in infancy is associated with later internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Inhibition, or fearful withdrawal, is associated with later social inhibition or shyness (Kagan, 1994), and internalizing problems (Bates, Maslin, & Frankel, 1985). Irritability and distress to limitations is associated with later aggressive behavior (Bates et al., 1985). However, modest relations among variables, inconsistent ndings, and limited theoretical support have rendered main-eects-models of parenting or temperament inuence obsolete. Evidence that parenting inuences children (Belsky, Fish, & Isabella, 1991) and that children aect parents (Bell, 1968), persuades us to consider an alternative model that reects this underlying bidirectionality and reciprocity. A conditional model, focusing on interactive eects of parenting and temperament, is one such model.

A conditional model There has been little theoretical delineation of the synergistic processes of parenting and temperament, though interactions are often assumed to reect the bi-directional and reciprocal interchanges between the organism and environment over time (Hershberger, 1994; Magnusson & Stattin, 1998; Thomas, 1984; Wachs & Plomin, 1991). Thomas and Chess hypothesized that temperament conveyed its inuence in interaction with the demands of the environment, including parenting. Positive adjustment was seen as a product of goodness-of-t between the childs temperament and the environment: Simply dened, goodness of t results when the childs capacities, motivations and temperament are adequate to master the demands, expectations and opportunities of the environment (Chess

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

627

& Thomas, 1989, p. 380). Unfortunately, theoretical and methodological limitations (see Plomin & Daniels, 1984) have forced goodness-of-t approaches to remain under-utilized. The hypothesis of organismic specicity (Wachs, 1991) suggests that individuals may respond dierently to the environment according to qualities of their own reactivity. In other words, the environment inuences dierent people dierently. Wachs outlined the need for a theoretically based study of organismenvironment interactions, including systems, longitudinal, and interaction components, in which the interaction component examines either dierential vulnerability, utilization of environmental opportunities, or differences in response patterns to the environment. However, joint eects of parenting and temperament are not simply instances of organismenvironment interaction. While temperament can be considered a characteristic of the person, or organism, parenting is more than a feature of the environment. Parenting is bi-directional and reciprocal by design; the child is an active participant in the parenting process. Children elicit parenting behavior, and respond in ways that shape parenting (Bell, 1968). Therefore, the interaction of parenting and child temperament is a synergism of process (parenting) and person (temperament), as outlined by bioecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). A conditional model aims to uncover and meaningfully interpret interactions, or the nonlinear association between two variables. In the proposed conditional model, interaction tests the prediction of child adjustment from parenting characteristics, moderated by child temperament characteristics. Baron and Kennys (1986) inuential work on moderator and mediator variables sets forth considerations for exploring the role of third or intervening variables. Where child temperament moderates the eects of parenting, a childs temperament characteristics increase or decrease the strength of the relationship between parenting (the independent variable) and child adjustment (the dependent variable). Specically, qualities of parenting may predict dierent outcomes for children with dierent temperament characteristics (Sanson & Rothbart, 1995). Bronfenbrenner and Morris (1998) elaborate on how conditional eects might be explored, posing hypotheses for child outcomes of dysfunction and competence. The bioecological systems model Expanding on the ecological systems model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Crouter, 1983), Bronfenbrenner and Morris (1998) advance a bioecological model, a theoretical basis for understanding how particular processes, in combination with child characteristics, might dierentially inuence development. This model is referred to as the ProcessPersonContextTime model (PPCT), and sets forth implications for how research might consider the interaction of parenting and temperament.

628

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

Parenting proximal processes The core of the bioecological model is proximal processes (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998), activities in which the child interacts with persons, objects or symbols on a regular basis, such as participating in mealtime, listening to storybooks, and visiting relatives. The inuence of proximal processes on developmental outcomes is expected to vary with characteristics of the Person (child or other), characteristics of the Context (the broader environment), and elements of Time (duration and historical setting). The quality of proximal processes is theorized to inuence child development outcomes more than any single measure of Person, Context, or Time alone, Proximal processes are posited as the primary engines of development (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998, p. 996). Competent and increasingly complex participation in these proximal processes is necessary for optimal developmental outcomes. Parenting is a proximal process in which parental inuence on child adjustment varies as a function of the childs characteristics, such as temperament. Responsive parenting may reduce the likelihood of social withdrawal in school in the case of an inhibited child, but not in the case of an uninhibited child. Harsh parenting may be associated with increased child aggression in general, but with even more aggression in the case of children who express more negative emotion. An example of parenting as a proximal process is found in the socialization of a young childs mealtime behaviors. The parents eorts involve encouraging manners, having the child be healthily nourished, and somehow avoiding catastrophic messes. The childs activity level, fearfulness regarding novelty (new food), and emotions regarding restrictions (e.g., high chair, bib) inuence the parents eorts. The process is the parent-led reciprocal interchange of the meal activity, constantly inuenced by the Person characteristics of the child. Temperament person characteristics Person characteristics that moderate the inuence of proximal processes include force and demand characteristics. Force characteristics are the childs active behavioral dispositions (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998, p. 1009). Force characteristics such as impulsiveness, angriness, and shyness can encourage or impede development in the context of proximal processes. Demand characteristics evoke or hinder social reactions and behaviors from others involved in proximal processes. According to Bronfenbrenner and Morris (1998), temperament can act as force or demand characteristics. The degree to which a temperament characteristic impedes or facilitates productive engagement in proximal processes indicates its positive or negative value for the childs development. Fearfulness, a force characteristic, may hinder a childs participation with the parent in playgroup activities, reducing the quality and time spent in parentchild proximal processes. Infants high in irritability or activity level, demand characteristics, may

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

629

evoke more negative emotional expression from parents in the case of the former, or more parental restriction in the latter case. The child contributes to the process through these Person characteristics, moderating the association of parenting and child outcomes. A conditional model of inuence Bronfenbrenner and Morris theorize that Proximal Processes and Person characteristics synergistically predict developmental outcomes. Proximal Processes become more elaborate over time. Parenting and child temperament interact such that the total eect is greater than the addition of their separate contributions (see Fig. 1). Distressful emotion, inhibitory fearfulness, and high activity level render a child less able to engage in increasingly complex proximal processes, and make negative adjustment outcomes more likely. Questions this model can begin to address are plentiful. Are there situations in which typically negative processes or negative temperament are associated with positive outcomes? Might it be adaptive for parents to be less sensitive to childrens need for autonomy in dangerous contexts, such as urban settings or political conict? Do certain temperament characteristics interact with aspects of parenting more than others? The bioecological theory of development is consistent with Wachs and Plomins (1991) requirements for a theoretical model of organismenvironment interaction. The systems components, outlined in detail in earlier works by Bronfenbrenner (i.e., microsystems, mesosystems), help to account for the complexity of the environmental inuences in a childs life (see Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Crouter, 1983). A longitudinal component, inherent in Bronfenbrenners concept of Time, considers developmental progress within and over periods of time. An interactive

Fig. 1. Expected child adjustment outcomes as predicted by the interaction of child temperament and parenting.

630

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

component is also included. Over 20 years ago, Bronfenbrenner (1979) stated, . . .the principal main eects are likely to be interactions (p. 38). An ancillary hypothesis An additional perspective for examining the associations among parenting, child temperament and child adjustment is a hypothesis of dierential susceptibility (Belsky, 1997, 2001), which incorporates evolutionary considerations into study of the ProcessPersonContext framework of ecological systems theory. According to the evolutionary perspective, variation among individuals behavioral characteristics occurs to enhance individual reproductive tness. Variation in individual characteristics increases the likelihood that the most adaptive characteristics advance into the next generation, with consistently maladaptive characteristics extinguishing over time. Since the future remains uncertain, and with it the human characteristics that may adapt best to future contexts, it makes sense, contends Belsky, that the ospring of individuals vary in the degree to which they exhibit certain characteristics. This is particularly valuable within families, in which parents best interest for promoting their genes into this uncertain future is having ospring who vary in their characteristics, or as Belsky (2001) depicts it, a reproductive hedging of bets (p. 7). Belsky (1997) suggests that what plausibly follows is variation among individuals in the characteristic of susceptibility to environmental inuence (p. 184). Just as there is variation among characteristics such as athletic ability, or body type, individuals traits may vary in their susceptibility to socialization inuences, including parenting. Thus, some ospring are expected to be aected by socialization experiencesin positive and/or negative ways, depending on the nature of their experienceswhereas others are expected to be aected to a far less degree, if at all. The dierential susceptibility hypothesis complements bioecological theory in its consideration of conditional eects (Belsky, 1997). Mounting evidence suggests that infants high in negative reactivity may be more susceptible to variations in parenting than their non-reactive peers (see Fig. 2), particularly in relation to outcomes of behavioral adjustment and regulation. As an example of how this might manifest, highly reactive, or negative, infants might be more susceptible to parents socialization pressures than their less reactive peers. Parents eorts to encourage or discourage this reactivity may be associated with child outcomes of social inhibition or social facility, respectively. Conversely, children who are less reactive and negative may be more prone to resist parental socialization, and may develop social competence with or without parental facilitation. Whether this susceptibility to inuences is specic to characteristics or global, within the organism, remains uninvestigated.

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

631

Fig. 2. Expected dierential susceptibility of negative temperament to the inuence of parenting on child adjustment outcomes.

Empirical work employing a conditional model There is a small body of literature exploring the interactive eects of parenting and child temperament as related to adjustment, possibly due to difculty in obtaining and interpreting signicant interaction terms (Sanson & Rothbart, 1995). The literature reviewed spans the developmental periods of childhood, with child adjustment manifested dierently at each developmental stage: attachment security in infancy, prosocial and antisocial skills in early childhood, and aggression and depression in middle and late childhood. Adjustment in infancy: Attachment security Findings linking attachment to later positive adjustment indicate that a secure attachment relationship between caregiver and child is a hallmark of positive adjustment in infancy (Rutter, 1997; Suess, Grossman, & Sroufe, 1992). In a short-term longitudinal study of 48 infants and their mothers, Crockenberg (1981) found that newborn irritability interacted with mothers social support, predicting attachment security in the Strange Situation at one year. Mothers who reported low levels of social support were more likely to have infants who were insecurely attached, but only when those infants were irritable as newborns. Crockenbergs instrumental study paved the way for how we might think about the complexity of parenting characteristics, child

632

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

temperament and adjustment in infancy. Particularly remarkable is the inuential nature of negative temperament on the association between parenting processes and child adjustment. Mangelsdorf, Gunnar, Kestenbaum, Lang, and Andreas (1990) explored similar issues in a multi-measure study of temperament, parenting and attachment security. The researchers observed 66 nine-month old infants and their mothers at home, assessing infant temperament and maternal personality. Attachment security in the Strange Situation was assessed when the infants were thirteen months old. Neither child temperament nor maternal behavior predicted later emotional expressiveness or attachment security. However, maternal constraint, a personality type reecting rigidity, traditionalism and low risk-taking (p. 824) interacted with temperament to predict attachment. Low maternal constraint predicted secure attachment for infants prone to distress; whereas maternal constraint, whether high or low, was unrelated to attachment security for infants not prone to distress. In both of these studies, features of parenting interacted with temperament, predicting child adjustment outcomes; however, parenting proximal processes did not interact with temperament. Robust measurement of parenting in infancy may be dicult, as the proximal processes of motherinfant interaction may be insuciently established (Kochanska, 1998). Irritable infants were more susceptible to parenting inuences than non-irritable infants, however, supporting the dierential susceptibility hypothesis. Adjustment in early childhood: Prosocial and antisocial behavior Research with preschoolers has more wholly documented parenting temperament interaction. For children 25 years old, opportunities for social interaction outside of the home increase in the contexts of playgroup, neighborhood, and preschool. Prosocial behavior is reected in positive behaviors that advance relationships, such as helpfulness, sharing, and empathy. Social inhibition reects the converse: failure to engage relationships with others, and in the extreme, social withdrawal (Rutter, 1997). Prosocial behavior Kochanskas model (1995, 1997) tests the joint inuences of parental socialization and child temperamental inhibition in relation to childrens moral development. Kochanska (1997) explored how parental socialization behaviors, such as responsiveness and discipline, interacted with child fearfulness to predict childrens conscience-related behaviors. With a sample of 90 toddlers and their mothers, child fearfulness was measured using parent report and a laboratory observation, including a risky events activity. Maternal responsiveness (sensitivity, acceptance, and cooperation) and

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

633

gentle discipline (reasoning and low-power guidance) were observed in a separate series of motherchild laboratory activities: a cooperative play kitchen scene, a toy clean-up and a prohibited toy situation. Child conscience was measured at 4- and 5-years old in the laboratory, where the child was challenged to not cheat in two rigged games, and enact moral dilemmas with dolls and props. Maternal gentle discipline predicted higher conscience scores only for children high in fearfulness. Maternal responsiveness was also related to higher conscience scores, but only for children rated low in fearfulness. Kochanska asserted that the pathways to internalization are dierent for children who dier on fearfulness, and that strong parental power interferes with the internalization of social morals. Thus, for fearful children, capitalization on their fearfulness, in the use of gentle, psychological discipline was sucient for positive moral development. For fearless children, characteristics of the motherchild relationship itself, such as maternal responsiveness, provided support needed for children to internalize morals. Stanhope (1999) also investigated interaction of child temperament and parent discipline in relation to prosocial behavior. With a sample of 56 preschoolers and their parents (49 mothers and 8 fathers), Stanhope measured parent report of child negative emotionality and parent-reported discipline. Child sharing behavior was observed for 20 min during free play in the nursery school setting. Low-power parental discipline was related to higher sharing in the nursery school, but only for children high in negative emotionality. Like Kochanska, Stanhope posited that low power parenting helped fearful children to develop prosocial behavior with peers. These two studies provide evidence that gentle or low power discipline is associated with both internalized (conscience) and externalized (sharing) prosocial behavior, for children who demonstrate high negative emotion or fearfulness. Parenting processes exerted inuence on childrens development in interaction with temperament characteristics of the Person (child). Additionally, temperament characteristics were dierentially susceptible to parental inuences, in that highly inhibited children were more likely to be aected by variation in parental discipline. Social inhibition Preschool children face increasing demands of social interaction. Social inhibition, or shyness, may put a child at risk for social withdrawal and poor peer relations (Rubin, Stewart, & Chen, 1995). Park, Belsky, Putnam, and Crnic (1997) observed the emotional expression of 125 rstborn males when the children were 10 months old. Infant positive temperament (laughter/ smiling and orientation) and negative temperament (fear and distress-tolimitations) were derived from a parent report and laboratory observation. Parenting processes were observed in the home, when the children were 15, 21, 27, and 33 months old; mothers and fathers were rated on positive aect,

634

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

negative aect, sensitivity, and intrusiveness. When the children were 3-years old, they participated in a series of activities in the laboratory, which were coded for social wariness: facial expression of fear or shyness, bodily tension, hesitation to respond or interact, and proximity-seeking with parent. Interaction of parenting processes and child temperament predicted child wariness in the lab. When mothers were intrusive, asserting their own objectives over those of the child, only highly negative infants were more wary at 3 years. Similarly, when fathers were highly intrusive, negative, less sensitive and less aectionate, negative infants were less wary at 3-years. These ndings contradicted the authors expectation that intrusive, aectively negative parenting would lead to negative adjustment outcomes. However, Kagan (1997) has suggested that parents intrusiveness might be necessary for fearful children, in order to encourage interaction with people. Early, Rimm-Kaufman, Cox, and Saluja (1999) reported contradictory ndings in their examination of interaction between maternal sensitivity and child wariness in relation to social adjustment in the rst week of kindergarten. Child behavioral inhibition was evaluated at 15 months in the Strange Situation with 235 children and their mothers. Maternal sensitivity was observed in three structured motherchild activities. When the children completed their rst week of kindergarten, teachers reported child levels of active engagement and withdrawal in the classroom. Maternal sensitivity interacted with wariness in prediction of kindergarten adjustment. Sensitive mothering was related to more active engagement with other children and less inactive (passive) withdrawal in kindergarten, but only for children who were highly fearful at 15 months. According to the investigators, mothering that was aectively warm and responsive to the infant provided a base of emotional support for the fearful child, which could be generalized to prosocial behavior with peers. The ndings in the two social inhibition studies dier dramatically. In one case (Park et al., 1997) less sensitive, negative parenting processes predicted less social inhibition for children who were more negative in infancy, while in the other (Early et al. (1999)) positive parenting processes predicted less social inhibition for children who were negative as infants. While the studies varied on several dimensions (i.e., age and gender of child), an explanation drawn from Bronfenbrenner and Morris (1998) suggests that proximal processes function dierently in relation to distinct outcomes. Dierences in the parenting predictors of social inhibition between the two samples may have been due to dierences in the outcome contexts. When parenting was less solicitous, fearful infants may have clung less to parents and demonstrated less fearfulness in social situations with parents present. When parented sensitively, children who were fearful as infants may have later been less inhibited in the presence of novel peers and situations. Alternatively, child adjustment outcomes may reect some aspect of the attachment working model. When parents were intrusive with fearful

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

635

infants, lack of inhibition in the lab with parents present may have indicated an avoidant attachment relationship. For inhibited children who were parented sensitively, less inhibition in a novel environment may have indicated a secure attachment relationship (Suess et al., 1992). Clearly, more research, including replication, is needed to sort through these discrepancies. Adjustment in the school years: Externalizing and internalizing pathology In middle childhood and adolescence the child spends substantial amounts of time in non-family environments, increasing expectations on the childs ability to interact socially. Maladjustment in this developmental period is made manifest by externalizing (e.g., aggression) and internalizing behaviors (e.g., withdrawal and depression) (Sanson & Rothbart, 1995). Parental socialization research often focuses on discipline, measured by parent involvement, monitoring consistency, and rigidity (Chamberlain & Patterson, 1995). Blackson, Tarter, and Mezzich (1996) explored the concurrent interaction of parental discipline and temperament in a sample of 152 pre-adolescent boys. The 1012-year old boys reported their own temperament and their parents discipline. Child dicult temperament was characterized by high activity, high fearful withdrawal, high negative emotion and low adaptability. Parental discipline incorporated consistency and severity, with high ratings of both indicating negative discipline. Mothers reported child internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Parental discipline and child temperament interacted, predicting both internalizing and externalizing behaviors. When parents used negative discipline, externalizing behavior was more prevalent in children with dicult temperament than in non-dicult children. The interaction of discipline and temperament also predicted internalizing problems, with negative parenting predicting depression only for dicult children. The authors posited that children with dicult temperament were more likely to elicit harsh parenting, such that dicult temperament served as a demand characteristic, eliciting negative parenting and perpetuating negative adjustment outcomes for the child. The data were also consistent with the hypothesis of dierential susceptibility, in that dicult children were more susceptible to the inuence of parental discipline than were their nondicult peers. In another concurrent study of pre-adolescent boys, Colder, Lockman, and Wells (1997) reported numerous interactions between parenting and child temperament. Sixty-four 4th and 5th grade boys and their parent completed questionnaires. Child activity level was rated by the parent and child fearfulness was rated by the parent and child. Parents reported their own involvement, monitoring and harsh discipline. Child aggression was reported by the childs teacher and child depression was reported by the child.

636

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

Parenting was related to child pathology in interaction with distinct characteristics of child temperament. Poor parental monitoring was related to child aggression for children high in activity level, but not for children with low and moderate activity level. Parental harsh discipline predicted child aggression in children moderate or high in fearfulness, but not in children low in fearfulness. Harsh discipline also predicted child depression, but only when children were highly fearful. Both high and low levels of parental involvement predicted child depression when children were moderately fearful, but not when children were low or high in fearfulness, suggesting that high involvement may be intrusive for children who are average in their temperamental fearfulness. While the ndings of both Blackson et al. (1996) and Colder et al. (1997) were complex, their specicity regarding temperament and parenting characteristics render a pattern consistent with bioecological theory. Parenting processes characterized as highly controlling and harsh predicted negative adjustment outcomes, but only for boys who exhibited temperament characteristics associated with risk. Additionally, temperamentally negative boys were more susceptible to parenting processes in relation to adjustment outcomes, supporting the dierential susceptibility hypothesis. In research drawing on data from two longitudinal samples, Bates, Pettit, Dodge, and Ridge (1998) explored the interaction of maternal parenting and child temperament in relation to externalizing problems. Bates and colleagues examined temperamental resistance to control, dened as child behavior that is typically impulsive and uncontrollable, ignoring or reacting angrily to outside guidance (Bates et al., 1998). Mothers of Sample I children (N 90) completed temperament questionnaires when the children were 13- and 24-months old, while mothers of Sample II children (N 156) completed retrospective versions of the same temperament measure when the children were 5-years old. Maternal restrictive control was observed in the home, when infants were 6-, 13-, and 24-months old with Sample I and at 5-years old with Sample II. High ratings of restrictive control described maternal attempts to manage dicult child behavior using restrictions, threats and correction. Mothers and teachers reported child externalizing behaviors several times between 7- and 11-years old. Maternal restrictive control interacted with temperament in prediction of later externalizing problems. Low maternal restrictive control predicted more externalizing behavior, but only for children high in resistance to control. High parental restrictive control predicted low externalizing for children high in resistance, but not for children low in resistance to control. In both cases, negative temperament was more amenable to socialization inuences of parenting than non-negative temperament. Mothering that was higher in power predicted better adjustment for children who were more resistant to control. Bates et al. (1998) posited that more controlling maternal care helped resistant children develop internal controls.

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

637

The ndings of Bates et al. (1998) converge with those of Park et al. (1997), providing support for the dierential susceptibility hypothesis. Children with negative temperament characteristics were more susceptible parental control in relation to adjustment outcomes. Parental control interacted with negative characteristics of child temperament to constrain the potential expression of negative behavior at later points of development. Unlike the ndings of Blackson et al. (1996) and Colder et al. (1997), higher parental control was related to more positive child outcomes. Bates et al. (1998) examined parental control as distinct from harshness, and examined change over time, dierences that may have accounted for the discrepancy.

Conclusions: A conditional model of parenting inuence Despite contentions to the contrary (see Harris, 1995), there is evidence that parenting bears considerable import for childrens adjustment (Collins et al., 2000; Vandell, 2000), and emerging research suggests that parental socialization plays a distinct role for children of dierent temperaments. One of the primary goals of this review was to identify an appropriate theoretical foundation for this emergent line of research. Several considerations provide guidance for ongoing research. Developmental considerations Positive parenting varies in relation to the childs developmental level, as well as in relation to the childs temperament. In early childhood, responsive, low-power mothering predicted positive adjustment only when children demonstrated more negative emotionality. Both intrusive and sensitive parenting were associated with less shyness in the preschool years, for children that were highly fearful as infants. While Kagan (1997) suggested that more socially demanding parental control decreases later shyness for fearful children, attachment theorists posit that all children, including fearful ones, demonstrate better social and peer skills as a result of a caregiverchild relationship based on sensitive and responsive parenting (Bretherton, Biringen, & Ridgeway, 1991; Sroufe, 1985). In middle childhood and adolescence, harsh parenting had deleterious effects for children who demonstrated negative temperament characteristics; however, high parental control that was not harsh had positive eects on adjustment when children were temperamentally negative. Higher parental control than previously posited may facilitate adjustment in school-age children who are fearful or resistant to control. Parenting proximal processes did not interact with child temperament in studies limited to infancy. Kochanska (1997) suggested that main eects of

638

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

parenting and temperament are more visible in earlier development, and that interactions are more common as development proceeds. This hypothesis is consistent with bioecological theory, in that processes and interactions are posited to grow more complex over time (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). More longitudinal data will be necessary to test this position. It is clear that the socialization needs of children change as development progresses; further research is needed to examine parenting and temperament interaction at dierent developmental periods. Methodological considerations Several methodological considerations could be incorporated into ongoing research, involving variable specicity, research design and analytical strategies. One strategy would be to test the dierent aspects of harsh parenting in interaction with qualities of temperament as related to adjustment. Parental high control may predict positive adjustment when children are highly resistant to control, but predict negative adjustment when children are highly fearful. Another strategy might examine dierent levels and types of parental monitoring in interaction with temperament. High parental monitoring may not be important for fearful children who are less likely to take risks. However, it could be expected to interact with high activity or low fearfulness to constrain dangerous risk-taking behavior. A ne-grained approach to the examination of interaction of temperament and parenting could provide insight beyond consideration of global constructs such as dicult temperament and negative parenting. The interaction of parenting and temperament could also be investigated using experiments. Dierent parenting techniques could be taught and emphasized to groups of parents, with groups randomly assigned, balanced in terms of child temperament characteristics, and including control groups. Other factors could include child gender, father and mother, and remote variables of parenting, such as social support and parent personality. Using pre- and post-measures of child adjustment, the researcher could tease out the processes via which children with particular temperament characteristics are parented most eectively. Intervention was a powerful factor in experimental work of van den Boom (1994). Low-SES mothers of highly negative infants participated in a skill-based program focusing on improving perception, interpretation, and responsiveness to their infants cues. When the children were 9-months old, the mothers of the intervention groups were more responsive, stimulating and attentive than the control mothers, and their children were more sociable and less negative than the controls. When the children were a year old, the intervention infant infants were more likely to be securely attached than the controls. Experimental research implementing intervention

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

639

strategies with both negative and non-negative infants could test both the bioecological framework and dierential susceptibility hypothesis. A moderator model tests hypotheses of conditional inuence; however, statistical interactions allow us to look at the eects only supercially (Rutter & Pickles, 1991), and to speculate regarding causal mechanisms. Baron and Kenny (1986) suggested using mediated moderation, a combined approach of investigation, to address this limitation. Using a path analytic framework, moderators of an association are identied, and causal paths are explored to identify variables inuencing the moderators eect on the predictor. Attachment security, dierential susceptibility, parental attitudes or experience, and developmental stage, are factors that may mediate the interaction of parenting and child temperament. As an example, a childs internal working model of self and parent could facilitate the interactive inuence of parenting and temperament on adjustment. A parent might exert control by encouraging a fearful child to approach playmates, respond politely to adults, and even defend play territory from aggressive children. If the child is securely attached to the parent, and has a working model that provides a sense of security and self-worth, the child may not exhibit poorer social adjustment, typically associated with fearfulness. A mediated moderator approach could enrich the study of parentingtemperament interaction. Theoretical considerations Under the umbrella of the ProcessPersonContextTime model, we can begin to evaluate the structure of the childs developmental milieu. Parenting, viewed as a process involving the child and parent reciprocally, combined with elements of Context, and observed over Time, may provide a richer understanding of the ecology of developmental processes (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). This review focused on the Process and Person aspects of the PPCT model; however, Context and Time should also be considered. Culture, economic status, family structure and neighborhood are all elements of Context that interact with parenting Processes, Person and Time to sculpt the course of a childs life. In some cultures (e.g., some Asian) child inhibition, or shyness, is not considered a negative temperament characteristic. For children raised in such cultural contexts, parenting processes may not inuence the course of inhibition. The child might demonstrate shyness in school, but would not necessarily exhibit negative adjustment. Research authentic to bioecological systems theory must consider appropriate elements of Context. Other elements of Context that may interact with processes of parenting and child temperament include political conditions, social policy, and societal attitudes. In extreme contexts (e.g., war, famine) dierent parenting and

640

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

temperament characteristics may be associated with child adjustment. More parental control may be necessary in dangerous environments. Negative temperament characteristics may not be amenable to change when they are adaptive, as in a famine (see DeVries, 1984). The interaction of parenting processes and child temperament need to be explored in extreme contexts. Time also needs to be considered in research that examines the interaction of parenting and temperament. Research should be longitudinal when possible (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998; Lerner, 1998; Wachs, 1991), in order to address changes over time in children and parents behavior. The historical milieu in which children develop should also be considered. The dierential susceptibility hypothesis (Belsky, 1997) is supported in the literature reviewed, as children with dierent temperament proles varied in their sensitivity to parental inuence. Children who were more negative in their aect and/or withdrew from stimuli were more vulnerable to the eects of parenting. Children higher in negative emotion, fearfulness or activity level were more susceptible to parental control and responsiveness than children who were less fearful, active or negative. Eects were evident in prosocial behavior and behavior problems, beyond the inuences of temperament and parenting alone. Belsky suggested that heritability estimates could help to test this hypothesis further. If high or low levels of some behavioral style were shown to be less heritable than traits at other levels, more environmental contribution to the high and low levels could be assumed, indicating greater amenability to inuences, such as parenting proximal processes. Ultimately, a model should advance understanding of developmental processes (Wachs, 1991). Exploring the interactive eects of Person (temperament) and Process (parenting) as related to child adjustment, and extending research to include elements of Context and Time, we pursue the ultimate goal: better understanding of the characteristics and circumstances of parenting that promote positive child adjustment for children of dierent temperaments. References
Ainsworth, M. D., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: Assessed in the strange situation and at home. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderatormediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 11731182. Bates, J. E. (1989). Applications of temperament concepts. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 321355). New York: Wiley. Bates, J. E., Maslin, C. A., & Frankel, K. A. (1985). Attachment security, motherchild interaction and temperament as predictors of behavior-problem ratings at age three years. In I. Bretherton & E. Waters (Eds.), Growing points of attachment theory and research (Vol. 50, pp. 167193). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

641

Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., Dodge, K. A., & Ridge, B. (1998). Interaction of temperamental resistance to control and restrictive parenting in the development of externalizing behavior. Developmental Psychology, 34, 982995. Baumrind, D. (1979). The development of instrumental competence through socialization. Paper presented at the Minnesota symposia on child psychology, Minneapolis, MN. Baumrind, D. (1991). Eective parenting during the early adolescent transition. In P. A. Cowan & E. M. Hetherington (Eds.), Family transitions (pp. 111163). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bell, R. Q. (1968). A reinterpretation of the direction of eects in studies of socialization. Psychological Review, 75, 8195. Belsky, J. (1997). Variation in susceptibility to environmental inuence: An evolutionary argument. Psychological Inquiry, 8(3), 230235. Belsky, J. (2001). Dierential susceptibility to rearing inuence: An evolutionary hypothesis and some evidence. Unpublished manuscript, Birkbeck College, University of London. Belsky, J., Fish, M., & Isabella, R. (1991). Continuity and discontinuity in infant negative and positive emotionality: Family antecedents and attachment consequences. Developmental Psychology, 27(3), 421431. Belsky, J., Hsieh, K., & Crnic, K. (1998). Mothering, fathering, and infant negativity as antecedents of boys externalizing problems and inhibition at age 3: Dierential susceptibility to rearing inuence? Development and Psychopathology, 10, 301319. Blackson, T. C., Tarter, R. E., & Mezzich, A. C. (1996). Interaction between childhood temperament and parental discipline practices on behavioral adjustment in preadolescent sons of substance abuse and normal fathers. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 22(3), 335348. Bretherton, I., Biringen, Z., & Ridgeway, D. (1991). The parental side of attachment. In K. Pillemer & K. McCartney (Eds.), Parentchild relations throughout life (pp. 124). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U., & Crouter, A. C. (1983). The evolution of environmental models in developmental research. InP. H. Mussen (Ed.), History, theory and methods (Vol. 1, (4th ed.., pp. 357414). New York: Wiley. Bronfenbrenner, U. & Morris, P. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), & R. M. Lerner (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 9931028). New York: Wiley. Chamberlain, P., & Patterson, G. R. (1995). Discipline and child compliance in parenting. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Applied and practical parenting (Vol. 4, pp. 205225). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Chess, S., & Thomas, A. (1989). Issues in the clinical application of temperament. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 377 403). New York: Wiley. Colder, C. R., Lockman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (1997). The moderating eects of childrens fear and activity level on relations between parenting practices and childhood symptomatology. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 25(3), 251263. Collins, W. A., Maccoby, E. E., Steinberg, L., Hetherington, E. M., & Bornstein, M. (2000). Contemporary research on parenting: The case for nature and nurture. American Psychologist, 55(2), 218232. Crockenberg, S. B. (1981). Infant irritability, mother responsiveness, and social support inuences on the security of infantmother attachment. Child Development, 52, 857865. DeVries, M. W. (1984). Temperament and infant mortality among the Masai of East Africa. American Journal of Psychiatry, 14(10), 11891194.

642

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

Early, D. M., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Cox, M. J., & Saluja, G. (1999, April). Predicting childrens wariness in the transition to kindergarten. Poster session presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM. Egeland, B., & Sroufe, L. A. (1981). Developmental sequelae of maltreatment in infancy. In R. Rizley & D. Cicchetti (Eds.), Developmental perspectives in child maltreatment (pp. 7792). San Francisco: Joey-Bass. Harris, J. R. (1995). Where is the childs environment? A group socialization theory of development. Psychological Review, 102(3), 458489. Hershberger, S. L. (1994). Genotypeenvironment interaction and correlation. In J. C. DeFries, R. Plomin, & D. W. Fulker (Eds.), Nature and nurture during middle childhood (pp. 281 294). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Hinde, R. A. (1989). Temperament as an intervening variable. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 2733). New York: Wiley. Kagan, J. (1994). Galens prophecy: Temperament in human nature. New York: Harper Collins. Kagan, J. (1997). Temperament and reactions to unfamiliarity. Child Development, 68(1), 139 143. Kochanska, G. (1995). Childrens temperament, mothers discipline, and security of attachment: Multiple pathways to emerging internalization. Child Development, 66, 597615. Kochanska, G. (1997). Multiple pathways to conscience for children with dierent temperaments: From toddlerhood to age 5. Developmental Psychology, 33(2), 228240. Kochanska, G. (1998). Motherchild relationship, child fearfulness, and emerging attachment: A short-term longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 34(3), 480490. Lerner, R. M. (1998). Theories of human development: Contemporary perspectives. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), & R. M. Lerner (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp. 124). New York: Wiley. Maccoby, E. M. (1980a). Child rearing practices and their eects. In J. Kagan (Ed.), Social development: Psychological growth and the parentchild relationship (pp. 367410). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Maccoby, E. M. (1980b). Social development: Psychological growth and the parentchild relationship. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Magnusson, D. & Stattin, H. (1998). Personcontext interaction theories. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), & R. M. Lerner (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 685759). New York: Wiley. Mangelsdorf, S., Gunnar, M., Kestenbaum, R., Lang, S., & Andreas, D. (1990). Infant proneness-to-distress temperament, maternal personality, and mother-infant attachment: Associations and goodness-of-t. Child Development, 61, 820831. Martin, R. P. (1989). Activity level, distractibility, and persistence: Critical characteristics in early schooling. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 451461). New York: Wiley. Park, S.-Y., Belsky, J., Putnam, S., & Crnic, K. (1997). Infant emotionality, parenting, and 3-year inhibition: Exploring stability and lawful discontinuity in a male sample. Developmental Psychology, 33(2), 218227. Patterson, G. R., Reid, J. B., & Dishion, T. J. (1984). Family interaction: A process model of deviancy training. Aggressive Behavior, 10, 253257. Plomin, R., & Daniels, D. (1984). The interaction between temperament and environment: Methodological considerations. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 30(2), 149162. Prior, M. R., Sanson, A. V., & Oberklaid, F. (1989). The Australian temperament project. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 537 554). New York: Wiley. Rothbart, M. K. (1989). Temperament and development. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 247287). New York: Wiley.

K.C. Gallagher / Developmental Review 22 (2002) 623643

643

Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (1998). Temperament. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Social, emotional and personality development (Vol. 3, 5th ed., pp. 105176). New York: Wiley. Rubin, K. H., Stewart, S. L., & Chen, X. (1995). Parents of aggressive and withdrawn children. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Children and parenting (Vol. 1, pp. 255284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rutter, M. (1997). Clinical implications of attachment concepts. In L. Atkinson & K. J. Zucker (Eds.), Attachment and psychopathology (pp. 1746). New York: Guilford. Rutter, M., & Pickles, A. (1991). Personenvironment interactions: Concepts, mechanisms, and implications for data analysis. In T. D. Wachs & R. Plomin (Eds.), Conceptualization and measurement of organismenvironment interactions (pp. 105141). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Sanson, A., & Rothbart, M. K. (1995). Child temperament and parenting. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Applied and practical parenting (Vol. 4, pp. 299321). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Sroufe, L. A. (1985). Attachment classication from the perspective of infantcaregiver relationships and infant temperament. Child Development, 56, 114. Stanhope, L. N. (1999, April). Preschoolers sharing as related to birth order, temperament, and parenting styles. Poster session presented at the biennial meeting of the Society of Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM. Suess, G. J., Grossman, K. E., & Sroufe, L. A. (1992). Eects of infant attachment to mother and father on quality of adaptation in preschool: From dyadic to individual organization of self. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 15, 4365. Thomas, A. (1984). Temperament research: Where we are, where we are going. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 30(2), 103109. Vandell, D. L. (2000). Parents, peer groups, and other socializing inuences. Developmental Psychology, 36(6), 699710. van den Boom, D. C. (1989). Neonatal irritability and the development of attachment. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 299 317). New York: Wiley. van den Boom, D. C. (1994). The inuence of temperament and mothering on attachment and explorations: An experimental manipulation of sensitive responsiveness among lower-class mothers and irritable infants. Child Development, 65, 14571477. Wachs, T. D. (1991). Synthesis: Promising research designs, measures and strategies. In T. D. Wachs & R. Plomin (Eds.), Conceptualization and measurement of organismenvironment interaction (pp. 162182). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Wachs, T. D., & Plomin, R. (1991). Overview of current models and research. In T. D. Wachs & R. Plomin (Eds.), Conceptualization and measurement of organismenvironment interaction (pp. 18). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.