From sensitivity during early adolescence to externalizing problems at age 15 was non-significant. Paths from

From sensitivity during early adolescence to externalizing problems at age 15 was non-significant. Paths from externalizing PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21186933 problems in early childhood to sensitivity during middle childhood and from externalizing behavior in middle childhood to sensitivity during early adolescence were both significant. The path from sensitivity in middle childhood to productive activity in middle childhood was significant, as was the path from sensitivity in middle childhood to harshness in middle childhood. Parental harshness and externalizing problems–The path from parental harshness in early childhood to externalizing problems in middle childhood was significant. However, the path linking harshness in middle childhood and externalizing in early adolescence and the path from harshness in early adolescence to externalizing at age 15 did not reach statistical significance. The path from externalizing problems in middle childhood to harshness in early adolescence was also significant. Monitoring and externalizing problems–The path from externalizing problems in early adolescence to monitoring at age 15 was significant as was the path from monitoring to externalizing problems at age 15. Self-control–Maternal sensitivity during early adolescence was MedChemExpress Omtriptolide significantly related to self-control as was the path from productive activity in early adolescence to self-control. However, the path from parental harshness was not significant Alternative Model #1 Guided by attachment and self-determination theory (Grossman Waters, 2005; Moller Deci, 2010), indirect effects of maternal sensitivity in early childhood and middle childhood through adolescent self-control were added to the base model. Adding these two paths improved the fit of the model, 2 = 280.134 (61), RMSEA = .061, CFI = .952, TLI = .917, IFI = .939. It also resulted in significant indirect effects. The 2 difference test, comparingNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptJ Abnorm Child Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 November 26.Bradley and CorwynPagethe base model to alternative #1, was significant, 2 = 27.925 (2), p < .01. As Figure 2 shows, maternal sensitivity in early childhood and middle childhood were significantly related to self-control. The indirect effects for early childhood sensitivity and middle childhood sensitivity were also significant. Alternative Model #2 Adding the path from productive activity to monitoring at age 15 improved the fit of the model compared to Alternative #1, 2 = 271.603 (60), RMSEA = .061, CFI = .953, TLI = . 918, IFI = .954. The 2 difference test was significant, 2 = 8.531 (1), p < .01. Although the direct path from productive activity to parental monitoring (see Figure 2) was significant, the indirect effect for productive activity during early adolescence changed very little. Specifically, when the indirect effect for productive activity in early adolescence was calculated for Alternative #1 (i.e., monitoring not in the model), = -.012. The indirect effect was changed to = -.014 when the second indirect effect, through parental monitoring, was added to the model (see Table 3). Even though there was insufficient support in the literature to formulate a set of clear hypotheses pertaining to gender differences in the interplay of parenting and externalizing problems from early childhood to adolescence, it seemed useful to explore the possibility of gender differences as regards the final model (Alternative #2).

Leave a Reply