resiliency

Children’s Negative Emotions and Ego-Resiliency: Longitudinal Relations With Social Competence

Zoe E. Taylor Purdue University

Nancy Eisenberg, Sarah K. VanSchyndel, Natalie D. Eggum-Wilkens, and Tracy L. Spinrad

Arizona State University

We examined the relations of negative emotions in toddlerhood to the development of ego-resiliency and social competence across early childhood. Specifically, we addressed whether fear and anger/frustration in 30-month-old children (N � 213) was associated with the development of ego-resiliency across 4 time points (42 to 84 months), and, in turn, whether ego-resiliency predicted social competence at 84 months. Child anger/frustration negatively predicted the intercept of ego-resiliency at 42 months (controlling for prior ego-resiliency at 18 months) as well as the slope. Fear did not significantly predict either the intercept or slope of ego-resiliency in the structural model, although it was positively correlated with anger/frustration and was negatively related to ego-resiliency in zero-order correlations. The slope of ego-resiliency was positively related to children’s social competence at 84 months; however, the intercept of ego-resiliency (set at 42 months) was not a significant predictor of later social competence. Further- more, the slope of ego-resiliency mediated the relations between anger/frustration and children’s later social competence. The results suggest that individual differences in anger/frustration might contribute to the development of ego-resiliency, which, in turn, is associated with children’s social competence.

Keywords: ego-resiliency, anger/frustration, fear, social competence, negative emotionality

How children cope with and adjust to new experiences and challenges has important implications for their social-emotional development. Ego-resiliency is a dispositional trait that reflects how individuals adapt to environmental stress, uncertainty, con- flict, and change (Block & Block, 1980). An ego-resilient individ- ual is skilled at adapting to changing circumstances, can shift behavior as needed, is resourceful and persistent, and uses problem-solving strategies flexibly. In contrast, a nonresilient in- dividual is disquieted by new and changing circumstances, tends to brood and worry, goes to pieces under stress, and has difficulty recouping after traumatic experiences (Block & Block, 1980, 2006). In early childhood, ego-resiliency is evident in how well children are able to express affect in a situationally appropriate manner or find comfort when needed, how well they equilibrate physiological responses, and whether they are organized, persis- tent, and flexible when encountering challenges and stressors (Arend, Gove, & Sroufe, 1979; Block & Block, 1980). Individual differences in ego-resiliency can be observed early in life (Block & Block, 1980) and appear to be fairly stable across early childhood (Taylor, Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Widaman, 2013). Furthermore, it is likely that improvement in ego-resiliency (in addition to higher

levels) relates to positive developmental outcomes in children, as these children are likely showing improvements in coping with stress, challenge, and novelty. However, trajectories of ego- resiliency have not been tested in prior research.

Ego-resiliency is modestly to moderately related to regulatory processes, particularly effortful control; however, researchers have found that ego-resiliency is a unique construct (see Block & Block, 2006; Eisenberg et al., 2003, 2004; Martel et al., 2007; Shields & Cicchetti, 1997; Taylor, Eisenberg, et al., 2013). Effortful control is a superordinate construct that includes temperamentally based regulatory processes such as attentional and inhibitory control and planning (Rothbart & Bates, 2006). Effortful control pertains to capacities that can be used for behavioral and emotional self- regulation. In contrast, ego-resiliency reflects individuals’ dy- namic and resourceful adaptability or characteristic coping style with stress and the ability to rebound (Block & Block, 2006). Ego-resiliency is expected to be influenced by temperamental and other personality characteristics (e.g., effortful control, emotional- ity), learning (e.g., of coping skills), and the nature of the stressors in a particular context. In other words, ego-resiliency is viewed as less constitutionally based than other regulatory constructs, such as effortful control, and more a measure of how well and flexibly individuals adapt to and deal with stressful interactions (Eisenberg et al., 2003, 2004). Indeed, recent empirical research has supported this distinction and the argument that effortful control provides the early building blocks toward children’s ego-resiliency (Taylor, Eisenberg, et al., 2013).

As might be expected, given that ego-resiliency allows for flexible, and thus often successful, adaptation in social contexts, it has been concurrently and longitudinally associated with a range of positive developmental outcomes across a variety of ages. For example, ego-resiliency has been associated with popularity and

This article was published Online First December 23, 2013. Zoe E. Taylor, Department of Human Development and Family Studies,

Purdue University; Nancy Eisenberg and Sarah K. VanSchyndel, Depart- ment of Psychology, Arizona State University; Natalie D. Eggum-Wilkens and Tracy L. Spinrad, T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics, Arizona State University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Zoe E. Taylor, Purdue University Department of Human Development 1202 State Street West Lafayette, IN 47906. E-mail: [email protected]

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

Emotion © 2013 American Psychological Association 2014, Vol. 14, No. 2, 397– 406 1528-3542/14/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0035079

397

social competence in childhood (Block & Block, 1980; Cumberland-Li, Eisenberg, & Reiser, 2004; Eisenberg et al., 1997; Spinrad et al., 2006; Van Aken, 1992) and adolescence (Eisenberg et al., 2003; Hofer, Eisenberg, & Reiser, 2010; Martel et al., 2007; Swanson, Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, & O’Brien, 2011). Children with higher levels of ego-resiliency also have lower externalizing (Chuang, Lamb, & Hwang, 2006; Hofer et al., 2010; Smeekens, Riksen-Walraven, & van Bakel, 2008) and internalizing symptoms (Eisenberg, Chang, Ma, & Huang, 2009; Eisenberg et al., 2004; Martel et al., 2007) than those who are less resilient. Ego- resiliency is also positively associated with cognitive functioning and attentiveness (Martel et al., 2007).

Despite these demonstrated associations with positive develop- ment and emotional adjustment, few researchers have examined antecedents to the development of ego-resiliency. Having a greater understanding of factors that contribute to the development of ego-resiliency would better inform intervention efforts to foster this construct in children. In a small body of work, researchers have demonstrated that warm and sensitive parenting (Block & Block, 1980; Stams, Juffer, Van Ijzendoorn, & Hoksbergen, 2001; Taylor, Sulik, et al., 2013), as well as children’s effortful control (Taylor, Eisenberg, et al., 2013), are associated with individual differences in ego-resiliency. However, although Block and Block (1980) hypothesized that temperamental characteristics likely con- tribute to the development of ego-resiliency, few researchers have examined the relations between ego-resiliency and children’s dis- positional negative emotionality. Blair and Ursache (2011) have argued that high levels of emotional arousal reduce the ability to flexibly control attention and impair executive functions (see also Dennis & Chen, 2007). Therefore, it is possible that children who are more emotionally reactive may have greater difficulty recov- ering from challenging, novel, or stressful circumstances com- pared with less reactive children, and thus have lower levels of ego-resiliency. In turn, such difficulties could contribute to deficits in social competence.

Negative Emotionality and Social Competence

Individual differences in negative emotionality, such as frustra- tion, fear, sadness, and anger, are generally considered to be aspects of early emerging temperament that have broad effects on socioemotional development (Rothbart & Bates, 2006). Anger/ frustration is considered a basic emotion that can vary in intensity from mild irritation to intense fury and rage (Deater-Deckard & Wang, 2012), and is most often observed in early childhood in relation to interruption of ongoing tasks or goal blocking (Putnam, Gartstein, & Rothbart, 2006). Outbursts of anger and frustration typically peak around 18 to 30 months of age, and then decline as children begin to gain more control over their impulses and emo- tional reactions (Calkins & Fox, 2002; Degnan, Calkins, Keane, & Hill-Soderlund, 2008). Fear is a negative emotion related to antic- ipated pain, distress, and/or threat, including startle reactions to novelty and social stimuli (Gartstein, Putnam, & Rothbart, 2012). There is evidence that fear trajectories also increase between the ages of 4 and 12 months of age and then decrease (Braungart- Rieker, Hill-Soderlund, & Karrass, 2010; Gartstein et al., 2010). However, there are significant individual differences in the rate of deceleration from 12 to 16 months (Braungart-Rieker et al., 2010).

Negative emotions frequently have been found to predict later externalizing and internalizing symptoms (e.g., Gartstein et al., 2012; Rothbart & Bates, 2006). In particular, anger/frustration has been consistently related to later externalizing problems (Eisen- berg et al., 2005, 2009; Nigg, 2006), whereas fearfulness has been linked most consistently to internalizing symptoms (e.g., Oldehin- kel, Hartman, De Winter, Veenstra, & Ormel, 2004) and social anxiety (Schwartz, Snidman, & Kagan, 1999). Although both fear and anger/frustration appear to relate detrimentally to children’s development, anger is related to the behavioral approach system, whereas fear is more often related to behavioral inhibition or active withdrawal (Carver & Harmon-Jones, 2009; Lewis, 2010). Thus, it is possible that they relate to different aspects of developmental functioning. For example, although most infants experience anger and frustration, children with higher levels of dispositional anger and frustration often have difficult peer and social relationships, likely due, in part, to inappropriate and impulsive behavior (Bush, Lengua, & Colder, 2010; Eisenberg et al., 1999; Jones, Eisenberg, Fabes, & MacKinnon, 2002; Maszk, Eisenberg, & Guthrie, 1999). In contrast, fearful children may be more likely to elicit prosocial behavior from others (Coplan & Bullock, 2012; Jenkins & Ball, 2000), although wary, inhibited children are often not liked by peers (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 2006) and can have low levels of social competence (Spinrad et al., 2004).

Relations between these negative emotions and social compe- tence could be because children who are prone to fearfulness or have a tendency to become angry or frustrated have greater diffi- culty recovering from challenging or stressful circumstances com- pared with less reactive children, which could contribute to deficits in social competence. Children prone to anger/frustration may be especially likely to display impulsive, externalizing behaviors when dysregulated by stress, whereas children prone to fear would be expected to exhibit inhibition and social withdrawal (e.g., Derryberry & Rothbart, 1997; Eisenberg et al., 2001). Researchers have found that children with higher levels of anger and fear have lower levels of self-regulation (e.g., Braungart-Rieker et al., 2010; Eisenberg, Fabes, Nyman, Bernzweig, & Pinuelas, 1994), although some highly reactive infants do recover quickly, and less reactive infants may not have very good regulation skills. Additionally, as low reported impulsivity (sometimes viewed as approximately indicative of behavioral inhibition) has been related to low resil- iency in young schoolchildren (Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Morris, 2002), one would expect fearfulness, which tends to be associated with behavioral inhibition (e.g., Aksan & Kochanska, 2004), to predict low ego-resiliency.

Negative Emotions and Ego-Resiliency

Only one article has directly examined the association between dispositional negative emotionality and ego-resiliency (Eisenberg et al., 2003), although ego-resilient children have been described as less fearful than nonresilient children (Asendorpf & van Aken, 1999; Robins, John, Caspi, Moffitt, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1996). Eisenberg et al. (2003) found that adults’ reports of school-aged children’s negative emotionality (a broad construct that reflected sadness, anxiety, distress, and anger) were negatively related to children’s ego-resiliency concurrently and across a 2-year span. Drawing from research that has examined constructs related to ego-resiliency (i.e., inhibition, neuroticism, and physiological re-

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

398 TAYLOR ET AL.

sponses to stress), we hypothesized that fearful as well as angry/ frustrated children have lower levels of ego-resiliency. For exam- ple, behaviorally inhibited children tend to be wary and reactive to novelty (Derryberry & Rothbart, 1997; Kagan & Fox, 2006), and withdrawn behavior has also been associated with lower levels of ego-resiliency (Eggum et al., 2009). Infants who become easily frustrated have also been found to have difficulties regulating emotions and are more distressed by novelty than infants who do not frustrate easily (Calkins, Dedmon, Gill, Lomax, & Johnson, 2002). Children who are prone to anger and frustration are addi- tionally more physiologically reactive to stressful events than children less prone to these negative emotions (Calkins et al., 2002; Spinrad et al., 2009; van Bakel & Riksen-Walraven, 2004). For example, Spinrad and colleagues (2009) found that 4-year-olds with higher temperamental anger exhibited larger increases in salivary alpha amylase, a saliva biomarker of sympathetic nervous system responding, after a social stressor task than those with lower levels of anger.

Finally, support for a relation between negative emotionality and ego-resiliency has also been documented in the developmental resilience literature (Lengua, 2002; Shiner & Masten, 2012). For example, Shiner and Masten found that 10-year-old children with higher levels of neuroticism (defined as children who worry, get upset easily when things go wrong, or are sad) had a harder time overcoming later adversity in emerging adulthood (age 20), sug- gesting that childhood temperament has a long-term impact on later levels of resiliency and competence.

In summary, the literature suggests that children with both fearful and frustrated/angry temperaments are likely to be lower in ego-resiliency than their less emotional counterparts, and that fearfulness and anger/frustration are also associated with the de- velopment of ego-resiliency. We added to this prior literature by examining fear and anger separately rather than looking at nega- tive emotionality overall.

Present Study

Given this prior work, the goals of the present study were to longitudinally examine relations among children’s negative emo- tions, ego-resiliency, and social competence. Specifically, we had three aims. First, we wanted to examine whether anger/frustration and fear predicted the development of ego-resiliency across early childhood, and, in turn, whether the developmental trajectory of ego-resiliency predicted children’s later social competence. De- spite a clear association between ego-resiliency and social com- petence, few researchers have examined these constructs across more than one or two time points, and, to our knowledge, none has used latent growth modeling. In doing so, we were able to test not only whether negative emotionality was associated levels of chil- dren’s ego-resiliency at 42 months but also whether it predicted rate of growth in ego-resiliency. We expected that children who became more ego-resilient over time would have higher levels of social competence; we were unclear if ego-resiliency at 42 months would predict social competence 3.5 years later because many changes occur during this period of development.

Second, we examined whether fear and anger/frustration were differentially related to the development of ego-resiliency. We expected both dispositional fear and dispositional anger to be negatively associated with children’s ego-resiliency because both

anger and fearfulness involve emotional arousal that might hinder children’s ability to manage and recoup from stress (Blair & Ursache, 2011). However, it was possible that frustration/anger and fear would undermine ego-resiliency in different ways, as prior studies have shown that dispositional levels of anger/frustra- tion relate to different aspects of children’s developmental com- petence and functioning than fear. Therefore, we examined anger/ frustration and fearfulness as separate predictors of children’s ego-resiliency.

Our final aim was to examine whether ego-resiliency mediated the relation between negative emotionality and social competence, as this had not been tested in prior research. Research has dem- onstrated links between anger/frustration and externalizing symp- toms (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 2005), as well as fearfulness and internalizing symptoms (e.g., Oldehinkel et al., 2004). We hypoth- esized that ego-resiliency may be a mediating mechanism between negative emotionality and developmental outcomes.

Specifically, we separately examined whether children’s dispo- sitional fear and anger/frustration at 30 months were associated with the development of ego-resiliency across four time points (42, 54, 72, and 84 months) and, in turn, social competence at 84 months. To our knowledge, no one has examined change in ego- resiliency as a predictor of social competence, although change is a better index of the development of ego-resiliency than assess- ment at only one prior time point. Additionally, we controlled for prior levels of ego-resiliency in order to more stringently test prediction of change over time in this construct from 42 to 84 months. We also examined whether the development of ego- resiliency mediated relations of dispositional negative emotional- ity to social competence. Moreover, by including both anger/ frustration and fear as independent constructs in the analyses, we were able to examine whether fear and anger had unique relations to children’s ego-resiliency and children’s social competence.

Method

Participants

Participants were families residing in a metropolitan area in the southwest United States who were part of a longitudinal study of social and emotional development (see Spinrad et al., 2007). Mothers completed questionnaires at 18, 24, 30, 42, 48, 54, 72, and 84 months of age (ns � 256, 225, 230, 210, 194, 192, 162, and 144, respectively) and accompanied their child (55% boys) to laboratory visits (or a home visit at 72 months), which lasted approximately 1.5 to 2 hr at 18, 30, 42, 54, and 72 months. During these sessions, mothers were recorded interacting with their child during a series of tasks. Nonparental caregivers who knew the child well (e.g., babysitter, grandparent, and preschool teachers at earlier ages, and teachers at later ages) also completed question- naires at 18, 30, 42, 54, 72, and 84 months (ns � 176, 153, 151, 145, 144, and 133, respectively).

To be included in the present study, participants had to have at least one report of ego-resiliency measured at either 42, 54, 72, or 84 months (N � 213). At 30 months, 89.4% of the children were Caucasian, and 11% of the sample was Hispanic. Average annual family income at 30 months was $45,000 to $60,000 (range � $15,000 to $100,000), and mothers had an average of 2 years of college education. We conducted attrition analyses using t tests

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

399NEGATIVE EMOTIONS, EGO-RESILIENCY, AND SOCIAL COMPETENCE

comparing values of the major variables and demographic vari- ables for children with no data at 84 months (n � 70) with those who had data at this time point. Those without data at 84 months had higher levels of fear (t � 2.44, df � 197, p � .05; mean difference � .28) and lower levels of ego-resiliency at 54 months (t � �2.33, df � 203, p � .05; mean difference � �.30). Families with missing data also had marginally significant lower levels of household income (t � �1.89, df � 198, p � .06; mean differ- ence � �.53) and mothers’ education (t � �1.92, df � 201, p � .06; mean difference � �.30). The results of Little’s missing completely at random test (Little, 1998) suggested that the data were missing at random, �2 � 135.22, df � 117, p � .12. Covariance coverage ranged from 65.3% to 95.3% at Time 1, to 52.6% to 72.3% at Time 3.

Measures

Ego-resiliency. At 18, 42, 54, 72, and 84 months, mothers rated children on an 11-item revised questionnaire version of Block and Block’s (1980) ego-resiliency Q-sort (1 � highly un- descriptive to 9 � highly descriptive). This shortened scale was constructed by Eisenberg et al. (2003) in order to measure a purer version of resiliency (than in the original measure) that did not overlap with other related constructs, such as negative emotional- ity. After an initial reduction of the Q-sort to 23 items based on a content analysis by three experts (Eisenberg et al., 1996), six faculty and five graduate students with relevant expertise rated the resiliency items as to how much they reflected pure (i.e., uncon- taminated by other constructs) resiliency from 1 (not at all de- scriptive of resiliency) to 9 (most descriptive of resiliency). Resil- iency was defined as flexible, adaptable behavior. Only the 11 items that obtained a mean score of 5.8 or above (absolute value) were retained (e.g., “Can bounce back or recover after a stressful or bad experience,” “Freezes up when things are stressful, or else keeps doing the same thing over and over again”). All correlations between the original scale and the 11-item scale were above .83 (mean r � .91). This shortened scale has been reliable in numerous studies with children ranging in age from toddlers to adolescents (e.g., Cumberland-Li et al., 2004; Eisenberg et al., 2004; Martel et al., 2007; Swanson et al., 2011; Taylor, Eisenberg, et al., 2013).

Items were coded so that a high score reflected higher levels of ego-resiliency (�s � .57, .71, .71, .75, .78). One item from the original 11-item scale was dropped at 18 months (“Can talk about unpleasant things that have happened to him/her”) because it was considered inappropriate for the age assessed. At 18 months, items were composited into three indicators (parcels) in order to measure ego-resiliency at a latent level, with the stipulation that each indicator included both negative and positive items, as recom- mended by Kishton and Widaman (1994). Reports at 42, 54, 72, and 84 months were used to construct the growth model, with the intercept set at 42 months.

Child anger/frustration. Children’s anger/frustration was measured at 30 months using three indicators. The first two indi- cators were mothers’ and nonparental caregivers’ reports of chil- dren’s anger/frustration using 12 items from the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ; Putnam et al., 2006; e.g., “While having trouble completing a task [e.g., building, drawing, dress- ing], how often did your child get easily irritated?” and “When s/he asked for something and you said ‘no,’ how often did your child

have a temper tantrum?”). Responses ranged from 1 � never to 7 � always (�s � .81 for mothers and .84 for nonparental caregivers). The third indicator was observer report of children’s anger/frustration using a modified Infant Behavior Record (IBR) (Bayley, 1993). Four research staff observed the child’s behavior across the entire laboratory visit, and assessed how angry or frustrated the child became when he or she could not complete a task correctly or was not allowed to get what he or she wanted. The scale ranged from 1 � no anger or frustration observed to 4 � intense anger/frustration. Interrater reliabilities were calculated for approximately 25% of the data and were .78 across the four observers. Mothers’ and nonparental caregivers’ reports were sig- nificantly correlated (r � .24, p � .01). Mothers’ and observers’ reports were modestly correlated (r � .12, p � .08), as were nonparental caregiver and observer reports (r � .16, p � .06).

Child fear. Children’s fearfulness was measured at 30 months using the 12-item subscale for fear from the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ; Putnam et al., 2006; e.g., “While at home, how often did your child seem afraid of the dark?” and “When visiting a new place, how often did your child not want to enter?”). Responses ranged from 1 � never to 7 � always (� � .75 for mothers, � � .79 for nonparental caregivers). Mothers’ and nonparental caregivers’ reports of fear were significantly corre- lated (r � .32, p � .01). The same items for parents and caregivers were paired, and then these pairs of items were randomly com- posited into three parcels in order to measure ego-resiliency at a latent level. Considerable research supports parceling of items to develop multiple indicators of latent constructs to avoid contami- nating influences of measurement error when estimating relations among latent variables (Coffman & MacCallum, 2005; Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, 2002). Although we had IBR observer reports for fear, these reports did not correlate with mothers’ and caregivers’ reports, and we chose not to use them in the latent variable.

Child social competence. Children’s social competence was reported by mothers and teachers at 84 months using three scales: the Prosocial Behavior Scale (PSB), the Social Competence and Behavioral Evaluation (SCBE), and the Children’s Global Assess- ment Score (CGAS). Mothers’ and teachers’ scores were averaged for all three scales.

The first indicator used the PSB, a four-item scale ranging from 1 � always true to 5 � never false (Ladd & Profilet, 1996). Items included “This child tries to cheer up peers when they are sad or upset about something” and “This child is kind to peers” (� � .92 for mothers, � � .94 for teachers). Mothers’ and teachers’ reports were significantly correlated (r � .18, p � .05).

The second indicator was a 10-item social competence subscale from the shortened version of the SCBE (LaFreniere & Dumas, 1996). Responses ranged from 1 � never to 6 � always. Items included “Takes other children and their point of view into ac- count” and “Helps with everyday tasks” (� � .83 for mothers, � � .94 for teachers). Mother and teacher reports were significantly correlated (r � .21, p � .05).

The third indicator used the CGAS, a subscale from the Child Symptoms Inventory (Gadow & Sprafkin, 2002). Mothers and teachers rated the child’s level of functioning (e.g. competent at home, at school, and with friends; likable, confident, involved in activities and interests) over the past 6 months on a scale of 1 to 100. To make this scale comparable with the other scales,

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

400 TAYLOR ET AL.

we divided each score by 20, so that the scale ranged from 1 to 5 (1 � extremely impaired to 5 � doing very well in all areas). The mean score for this scale was 4.43 (SD � .46) for mothers, 4.30 (SD � .57) for teachers, and 4.36 (SD � .44) for combined reports. Mothers’ and teachers’ reports were significantly cor- related (r � .42, p � .01).

Covariates. The following covariate variables were in- cluded in the analysis: annual household income (1 � less than $15,000 to 7 � over $100,000) and mothers’ education (1 � grade school to 7 � PhD or MD).

Analysis Strategy

We first examined correlations among the variables. Next, we evaluated an unconditional structural equation model to test the model with a latent growth curve for ego-resiliency using Mplus Version 6.1 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998 –2011). We then added our predictor and outcome variables. We used full infor- mation maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation, given the pres- ence of some missing data. FIML estimation involves the fitting of covariance structure models directly to the raw data from each participant rather than to covariances among manifest variables. This avoids deleting persons with missing data (i.e., such as in listwise deletion). FIML estimation has been found to be efficient and unbiased when data are missing completely at random or are missing at random, and appears to be less biased than other approaches (Arbuckle, 1996).

To evaluate the fit of a structural model, we used the standard chi-square index of statistical fit that is routinely provided under maximum likelihood estimation of parameters, as well as several indices of practical fit, including the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Browne & Cudeck, 1993), the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), the Tucker- Lewis index (TLI; Tucker & Lewis, 1973), and the comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler, 1990). The RMSEA is an absolute index of fit, with values below .05 indicating close fit to the data. For the SRMR, a value less than .08 is generally considered a good fit. The TLI and CFI should be greater than .90 and preferably greater than .95 (Hu & Bentler, 1998).

Results

Table 1 presents the zero-order correlations among the vari- ables, as well as variable means and standard deviations. Correla- tions were mainly as expected. For example, children’s negative emotions (fear and anger/frustration) at 30 months were signifi- cantly negatively correlated with children’s ego-resiliency across all four later time points. Social competence and ego-resiliency were significantly correlated at 84 months and marginally corre- lated at 72 months. Unexpectedly, early fear and anger/frustration were not significantly correlated with children’s later social com- petence, although both relations were negative.

We then tested an unconditional model with both linear and quadratic changes. However, the mean and variance for the quadratic model were not significant, suggesting this type of model was not supported. A linear model (without the qua- dratic) fit the data well, �2(5, N � 213) � 3.964, p � .05, CFI � 1.00; TLI � 1.01; RMSEA � .00; SRMR � .05; mean intercept � 6.93, p � .01. The variance of the intercept (b � .37, SE � .07, p � .01) was significant, suggesting that children have different levels of ego-resiliency at 42 months. However, the variance of the linear slope was not significant. We next tested our model for moderation by child sex. We met the criteria for strict invariance, �2 � � 29.69, df� � 20, p � .05. We were also able to constrain the beta pathways in the model, �2 � � 3.51, df� � 8, p � .05. Thus, it was evident that the model ran equally well for males and females, and the two groups were combined in further analyses.

We then added our predictor and outcome variables as shown in Figure 1, �2(129, N � 213) � 152.049, p � .05; CFI � .972; TLI � .966; RMSEA � .029; SRMR � .067. As expected, child fear and anger/frustration at 30 months were positively correlated with each other, and were both negatively correlated with chil- dren’s ego-resiliency at 18 months. The variance of the intercept was significant (b � .63, SE � .10, p � .01), and the variance in the slope became significant (b � .78, SE � .18, p � .01). By adding variables to the unconditional model, more information is gained and power is increased. Child frustration negatively pre- dicted both the intercept of ego-resiliency at 42 months and the

Table 1 Zero-Order Correlations Among the Major Constructs (Aggregated) and Control Variables (N � 213)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. ER 18 mo 1.00 2. Fear 30 mo �.13��� 1.00 3. Frust 30 mo �.06 .21�� 1.00 4. ER 42 mo .31�� �.20�� �.14� 1.00 5. ER 54 mo .37�� �.17� �.17� .52�� 1.00 6. ER 72 mo .36�� �.22�� �.18� .49�� .58�� 1.00 7. ER 84 mo .22�� �.32�� �.20� .55�� .58�� .64�� 1.00 8. Comp 84 mo �.01 �.12 �.11 .08 .09 .16��� .35�� 1.00 9. Income 30 mo .02 �.09 �.20�� .16� .07 .08 .13 .13 1.00

10. Mo. ed. 30 mo .11 .06 �.09 .11 .02 .15��� .01 .13 .60�� 1.00 11. Child sex �.02 �.12��� .03 .01 .06 �.03 �.12 �.15��� .07 .03 1.00 M 6.80 2.46 3.07 7.00 6.92 6.83 6.93 4.17 4.21 4.39 — SD (.72) (.76) (.65) (.88) (.89) (.91) (1.02) (.47) (1.85) (1.02) —

Note. ER � ego-resiliency; mo � months; Frust � frustration; Comp � social competence; Mo. ed. � mothers’ education; Child sex: 0 � female, 1 � male. � p � .05. �� p � .01. ��� p � .10.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

401NEGATIVE EMOTIONS, EGO-RESILIENCY, AND SOCIAL COMPETENCE

slope (controlling for prior ego-resiliency at 18 months). Fear did not significantly predict either the intercept or slope of ego- resiliency.1 The slope of ego-resiliency positively predicted chil- dren’s social competence at 84 months. However, the intercept of ego-resiliency did not predict later social competence. Anger/ frustration and fear did not directly predict social competence, and these paths were not included in the final model. Income and mother’s education were included as covariates and regressed on all variables.

We additionally tested indirect effects from anger/frustration to children’s social competence via the slope of ego-resiliency using RMediation because simulations show that bootstrap confidence intervals can result in undercoverage for smaller samples (Tofighi & MacKinnon, 2011). The confidence interval (CI) for the indirect effect of anger predicting social competence via the slope of ego-resiliency did not contain zero (95% CI [�.796, �.038]). Thus, there was evidence for mediation for this path.

Discussion

Using longitudinal data from age 30 to 84 months, we examined whether children’s negative emotionality (frustration/anger and fearfulness) in early childhood was associated with the develop-

ment of ego-resiliency across middle childhood, and, in turn, whether ego-resiliency predicted children’s social competence. Our results suggested that negative emotionality, especially frus- tration/anger, might hinder the development of children’s ego- resiliency. In particular, frustration/anger was negatively related to the intercept and slope of ego-resiliency from 42 to 84 months, even when controlling for 18-month ego-resiliency. This suggests that frustration/anger is associated not only with children’s levels of ego-resiliency at 42 months but also with its rate of change. In other words, children who were relatively higher on dispositional anger/frustration did not increase in ego-resiliency as much as those children with lower levels of anger/frustration. We also found evidence that ego-resiliency mediated the relation of chil- dren’s anger to their social competence. Mediation suggests that the any causal effects of children’s dispositional anger/frustration on their social competence are due, in part, to its effects on the development of ego-resiliency. This mediated effect might indicate

1 We also tested a model with only fear and not anger to assess whether fear was singularly associated with ego-resiliency. Fear predicted the intercept of ego-resiliency (b � �.21, SE � .10, p � .05) but not the slope (b � �.23, SE � .20, p � .27). The other findings were the same.

Figure 1. Results of the growth model, N � 213. Note: �2(117, N � 213) � 140.048, p � .05; CFI � .968; TLI � .958; RMSEA � .031; SRMR � .058. Standardized results are shown with standard errors in parentheses. All factor loadings are significant at p � .01. Controls for mothers’ education and household income were included on all latent variables and removed if nonsignificant. RA-RC � mother report of ego-resiliency in parcels; OB � observer report of anger/frustration; MO � mother report of anger/frustration; CA � nonparental caregiver report of anger/frustration; FA-FC � combined mother and nonparental caregiver report in parcels; SCBE � Social Competence Behavioral Scale, combined mother and teacher report; PSB � Prosocial Behavior Scale, combined mother and teacher report; CGAS � Children’s Global Assessment Scale, combined mother and teacher report. �� p � .01. � p � .05.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

402 TAYLOR ET AL.

that more emotionally reactive children have greater difficulty dealing with and recovering from stressful situations, and that this leads to lower levels of social competence. For example, young children high in anger are more likely to engage in externalizing behavior and tend to be impulsive (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 2004; Maszk et al., 1999); thus, they are more likely to enact behaviors that are associated with lower peer status and social incompetence (Rubin et al., 2006).

In the zero-order correlations, individual differences in chil- dren’s adult-reported frustration/anger and fearfulness at 30 months were consistently negatively related to ego-resiliency at 42 to 84 months of age. However, in the structural model that in- cluded both constructs, only frustration/anger uniquely and nega- tively predicted the initial level and the slope of ego-resiliency. Thus, anger at 30 months predicted a decline in ego-resiliency over the next 3.5 years, even when taking into account the level of ego-resiliency at 18 months. Nonetheless, fear was negatively associated with the intercept of ego-resiliency when used in a model without frustration/anger (see Footnote 1). Given this, it is likely that both frustration/anger and fearfulness provide some overlapping variance when predicting ego-resiliency. This over- lapping variance may be due to both leading to social behaviors that are relatively reactive (closely linked with emotion and per- formed without much voluntary control; see Eisenberg, Hofer, Spinrad, & Sulik, in press) rather than effortfully modulated, and, consequently, both result in relatively inflexible and often socially unskilled behavior.

It is reasonable to assume that early individual differences in negative emotionality might affect the development of ego- resiliency. As already noted, children prone to anger (or fearful- ness) are likely to become dysregulated from emotional over- arousal, which may prevent them from recouping easily (Blair & Ursache, 2011). In addition, the high level of arousal involved in anger (or fearfulness) might hinder children’s learning productive ways to manage stress and the associated arousal, with the conse- quence that they are relatively unlikely to develop the tools and flexibility needed to recoup easily from stress. Our findings are consistent with research that has found a positive association between anger/frustration and stress reactivity (e.g., Calkins et al., 2002; Spinrad et al., 2006; van Bakel & Riksen-Walraven, 2004).

The fact that children’s fearfulness was negatively correlated with ego-resiliency is also consistent with expectations, although, as previously noted, fearfulness did not uniquely predict ego- resiliency once the relation of frustration/anger to ego-resiliency was taken into account. Children who are fearful tend to withdraw from novel situations, and nonresilient children tend to be disqui- eted by new and changing situations. Moreover, fearfulness, like anger, could disrupt regulatory mechanisms and learning that contribute to the ability to adapt and rebound from stress. It is possible that frustration/anger and fear undermine ego-resiliency in different ways across different contexts, or that the overlap between the two emotion variables made anger/frustration the stronger predictor. These findings do suggest that future work should examine these constructs separately in order to disentangle and differentiate the effects of these two constructs on children’s social and emotional development.

Also important, we found that the slope of children’s ego- resiliency across four time points (42 to 84 months) predicted children’s social competence at 84 months. Unexpectedly, the

intercept of ego-resiliency did not predict social competence, al- though the zero-order correlations between 72-month ego- resiliency and social competence were near significant for the latter at 72 months and significant at 84 months. (A model with the intercept set at 84 months also did not predict social competence). The fact that the slope of ego-resiliency and not the 42-month intercept predicted social competence at 84 months is consistent with the argument that ego-resiliency is changing in different ways for different individuals across preschool and early school years, and that it is the direction of change, not early levels of ego- resiliency, that are relevant to social competence at 7 years of age. Children’s ego-resiliency may change too much from age 42 to 84 months for early resiliency to predict later social competence. The association of ego-resiliency to social competence is not surpris- ing: Prior research has found relations between ego-resiliency in early childhood and later social characteristics such as responsive- ness, sensitivity, and popularity with friends in middle childhood (Block & Block, 1980; Spinrad et al., 2006). Moreover, ego- resilience in middle childhood has been linked to higher social– cognitive development, such as friendship understanding in ado- lescence (Hart, Keller, Edelstein, & Hofmann, 1998). However, although these prior findings were longitudinal, the present study is the first to examine individual differences in trajectories for the development of ego-resiliency.

The slope of ego-resiliency significantly mediated the relation of early frustration/anger to later social competence. Thus, anger may affect social competence in the school years by undermining children’s ego-resiliency. Of course, correlational findings cannot prove causal relations; nonetheless, the findings suggest a possible pathway from early negative emotionality to later deficits in social competence.

Strengths of the study include the use of longitudinal data, growth curve modeling, and multiple reporters (e.g., mothers and nonparental caregivers in the early years and teachers in the school years) and methods (e.g., both questionnaire and observed data). Weaknesses include the use of only one reporter of ego-resiliency and the lack of early measures of social competence. In addition, the findings may not generalize to diverse populations, as our sample included few high-risk children and was primarily Cauca- sian (non-Hispanic). It is also likely that other variables that we did not examine (such as socialization) could affect emotion and ego-resiliency, as well as social competence. Nonetheless, our findings suggest that children with higher levels of anger and frustration in early childhood have slower growth in their devel- opment of ego-resiliency in later childhood. Additionally, our results suggest that improvements in ego-resiliency across the preschool and early school years (i.e., children who get better at coping with stress, novelty, and challenge) relate to individual differences in social competence.

References

Aksan, N., & Kochanska, G. (2004). Links between systems of inhibition from infancy to preschool years. Child Development, 75, 1477–1490. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00752.x

Arbuckle, J. L. (1996). Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 243–277). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

403NEGATIVE EMOTIONS, EGO-RESILIENCY, AND SOCIAL COMPETENCE

Arend, R., Gove, F. L., & Sroufe, L. A. (1979). Continuity of individual adaptation from infancy to kindergarten: A predictive study of ego- resiliency and curiosity in preschoolers. Child Development, 50, 950 – 959. doi:10.2307/1129319

Asendorpf, J. B., & van Aken, M. A. (1999). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality prototypes in childhood: Replicability, pre- dictive power, and the trait-type issue. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 815– 832. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.4.815

Bayley, N. (1993). Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Second Edition Manual. San Antonio, TX: PsychCorp.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psy- chological Bulletin, 107, 238 –246. doi:10.1037/0033–2909.107.2.238

Blair, C., & Ursache, A. (2011). A bidirectional model of executive functions and self-regulation. In K. D. Vohs & R. F. Baumeister (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (2nd ed., pp. 300 –320). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1980). The role of ego-control and ego-resiliency in the organization of behavior. In W. A. Collins (Ed.), Minnesota symposia on child psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 39 –101). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Block, J., & Block, J. H. (2006). Venturing a 30-year longitudinal study. American Psychologist, 61, 315–327. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.315

Braungart-Rieker, J., Hill-Soderlund, A., & Karrass, J. (2010). Fear and anger reactivity trajectories from 4 to 16 months: The roles of temper- ament, regulation, and maternal sensitivity. Developmental Psychology, 46, 791– 804. doi:10.1037/a0019673

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136 –162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Bush, N., Lengua, L., & Colder, C. (2010). Tests of temperament as a moderator of the relation between neighborhood and children’s socio- emotional adjustment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31, 351–361. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2010.06.004

Calkins, S. D., Dedmon, S. E., Gill, K. L., Lomax, L. E., & Johnson, L. M. (2002). Frustration in infancy: Implications for emotion regulation, physiological processes, and temperament. Infancy, 3, 175–197. doi: 10.1207/S15327078IN0302_4

Calkins, S. D., & Fox, N. A. (2002). Self-regulatory processes in early personality development: A multilevel approach to the study of child- hood social withdrawal and aggression. Development and Psychopathol- ogy, 14, 477– 498. doi:10.1017/S095457940200305X

Carver, C. S., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2009). Anger is an approach-related affect: Evidence and implications. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 183– 204. doi:10.1037/a0013965

Chuang, S. S., Lamb, M. E., & Hwang, C. P. (2006). Personality devel- opment from childhood to adolescence: A longitudinal study of ego- control and ego-resiliency in Sweden. International Journal of Behav- ioral Development, 30, 338 –343. doi:10.1177/0165025406072795

Coffman, D. L., & MacCallum, R. C. (2005). Using parcels to convert path analysis models into latent variable models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40(2), 235–259. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4002_4

Coplan, R. J., & Bullock, A. (2012). Temperament and peer relationships. In M. Zentner & R. L. Shiner (Eds.), Handbook of temperament (pp. 442– 461). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Cumberland-Li, A., Eisenberg, N., & Reiser, M. (2004). Relations of young children’s agreeableness and resiliency to effortful control and impulsivity. Social Development, 13, 193–212. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507 .2004.000263.x

Deater-Deckard, K., & Wang, Z. (2012). Anger and irritability. In M. Zentner & R. L. Shiner (Eds.), Handbook of temperament (pp. 124 – 144). New York: Guilford Press.

Degnan, K. A., Calkins, S. D., Keane, S. P., & Hill-Soderlund, A. (2008). Profiles of disruptive behavior across early childhood: Contributions of frustration reactivity, physiological regulation, and maternal behavior.

Child Development, 79, 1357–1376. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008 .01193.x

Dennis, T. A., & Chen, C. C. (2007). Neurophysiological mechanisms and the emotional modulation of attention: The interplay between treat sensitivity and attentional control. Biological Psychology, 76, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.05.001

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/S0954579497001375

Eggum, N. D., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Valiente, C., Edwards, A., Kupfer, A. S., & Reiser, M. (2009). Predictors of withdrawal: Possible precursors of avoidant personality disorder. Development and Psycho- pathology, 21, 815– 838. doi:10.1017/S0954579409000443

Eisenberg, N., Cumberland, A., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S. A., Reiser, M., Murphy, B. C., Losoya, S. H., & Guthrie, I. K. (2001). The relations of regulation and emotionality to children’s externalizing and internalizing problem behavior. Child Development, 72(4), 1112– 1134. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00337

Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Murphy, B. C., Shepard, S., Guthrie, I. K., Maszk, P., . . . Jones, S. (1999). Prediction of elementary school children’s socially appropriate and problem behavior from anger reac- tions at age 4 to 6. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20, 119 –142. doi:10.1016/S0193-3973(99)80007-0

Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Nyman, M., Bernzweig, J., & Pinuelas, A. (1994). The relations of emotionality and regulation to children’s anger- related reactions. Child Development, 65, 109 –128. doi:10.2307/ 1131369

Eisenberg, N., Guthrie, I. K., Fabes, R. A., Reiser, M., Murphy, B. C., Holgren, R., . . . Losoya, S. (1997). The relations of regulation and emotionality to resiliency and competent social functioning in elemen- tary school children. Child Development, 68, 295–311. doi:10.2307/ 1131851

Eisenberg, N., Hofer, C., Sulik, M., & Spinrad, T. L. (in press). Effortful control and its socioemotional consequences. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Hand- book of emotion regulation (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Eisenberg, N., Chang, L., Ma, Y., & Huang, X. (2009). Relations of parenting style to Chinese children’s effortful control, ego resilience, and maladjustment. Development and Psychopathology, 21(2), 455– 477. doi:10.1017/S095457940900025X

Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Guthrie, I. K., Murphy, B. C., Maszk, P., Holmgren, R., & Suh, K. (1996). The relations of regulation and emo- tionality to problem behavior in elementary school children. Develop- ment and Psychopathology, 8, 141–162. doi:10.1017/ S095457940000701X

Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Reiser, M., Cumberland, A., Shepard, S. A., . . . Thompson, M. (2004). The relations of effortful control and impulsivity to children’s resiliency and adjustment. Child Development, 75, 25– 46. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00652.x

Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Morris, A. S. (2002). Regulation, resil- iency, and quality of social functioning. Self and Identity, 1, 121–128. doi:10.1080/152988602317319294

Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., Fabes, R. A., Smith, C. L., Reiser, M., Shepard, S. A., . . . Cumberland, A. J. (2003). The relations of effortful control and ego control to children’s resiliency and social functioning. Developmental Psychology, 39, 761–776. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.4 .761

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

Gadow, K. D., & Sprafkin, J. (2002). Child Symptom Inventory– 4 screen- ing and norms manual. Stony Brook, NY: Checkmate Plus.

Gartstein, M. A., Bridgett, D. J., Rothbart, M. K., Robertson, C., Iddins, C., Ramsay, K., & Schlect, S. (2010). A latent growth examination of fear

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

404 TAYLOR ET AL.

development in infancy: Contributions of maternal depression and the risk for toddler anxiety. Developmental Psychology, 46, 651– 668. doi: 10.1037/a0018898

Gartstein, M. A., Putnam, S. P., & Rothbart, M. K. (2012). Etiology of preschool behavior problems: Contributions of temperament attributes in early childhood. Infant Mental Health Journal, 33, 197–211. doi: 10.1002/imhj.21312

Hart, D., Keller, M., Edelstein, W., & Hofmann, V. (1998). Childhood personality influences on social– cognitive development: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1278 –1289. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1278

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

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424 – 453. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424

Jenkins, J. M., & Ball, S. (2000). Distinguishing between negative emo- tions: Children’s understanding of the social-regulatory aspects of emo- tion. Cognition & Emotion, 14(2), 261–282. doi:10.1080/ 026999300378969

Jones, S., Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2002). Parents’ reactions to elementary school children’s negative emotions: Relations to social and emotional functioning at school. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 48, 133–159. doi:10.1353/mpq.2002.0007

Kagan, J., & Fox, N. A. (2006). Biology, culture, and temperamental biases. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.), & N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol.3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 167–225). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Kagan, J., & Fox, N. A. (2006). Biology, culture, and temperamental biases. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & L. M. Richard (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology. Vol. 3: Social, Emotional, and Personality Devel- opment (6th ed., pp. 167–225).

Kishton, J. M., & Widaman, K. F. (1994). Unidimensional versus domain representative parceling of questionnaire items. Educational and Psycho- logical Measurement, 54, 757–765. doi:10.1177/0013164494054003022

Ladd, G. W., & Profilet, S. M. (1996). The child behavior scale: A teacher-report measure of young children’s aggressive, withdrawn, and prosocial behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 32, 1008 –1024. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.32.6.1008

LaFreniere, P. J., & Dumas, J. E. (1996). Social competence and behavior evaluation in children aged three to six: The Short Form (SCBE-30). Psychological Assessment, 8, 369 –377. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.8.4.369

Lengua, L. J. (2002). The contribution of emotionality and self-regulation to the understanding of children’s response to multiple risk. Child Development, 73, 144 –161. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00397

Lewis, M. (2010). The development of anger. In M. Potegal G. Stemmler, & C. Spielberger (Eds.), International handbook of anger: Constituent and concomitant biological, psychological, and social processes (pp. 177–192). New York, NY: Springer.

Lewis, M., & Ramsay, D. (2005). Infant emotional and cortisol responses to goal blockage. Child Development, 76(2), 518 –530. doi:10.1111/j .1467-8624.2005.00860.x

Little, R. J. A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statis- tical Association, 83(404), 1198 –1202. doi:10.2307/2290157

Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural equation modeling, 9(2), 151–173. doi:10.1207/ S15328007SEM0902_1

Martel, M. M., Nigg, J. T., Wong, M. M., Fitzgerald, H. E., Jester, J. M., Puttler, L. I., . . . Zucker, R. A. (2007). Childhood and adolescent resiliency, regulation, and executive functioning in relation to adolescent

problems and competence in a high-risk sample. Development and Psychopathology, 19, 541–563. doi:10.1017/S0954579407070265

Maszk, P., Eisenberg, N., & Guthrie, I. K. (1999). Relations of children’s social status to their emotionality and regulation: A short-term longitu- dinal study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 468 – 492.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998 –2011). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

Nigg, J. T. (2006), Temperament and developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 395– 422. doi:10.1111/ j.1469-7610.2006.01612.x

Oldehinkel, A. J., Hartman, C. A., De Winter, A. F., Veenstra, R., & Ormel, J. (2004). Temperament profiles associated with internalizing and externalizing problems in preadolescence. Development and Psy- chopathology, 16, 421– 440. doi:10.1017/S0954579404044591

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

Robins, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy, 70, 157–171. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.157

Rothbart, M., & Bates, J. (2006). Temperament. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & L. M. Richard (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 99 –166). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & L. M. Richard (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology. Vol. 3: Social, Emotional, and Personality Development (6th ed., pp. 571– 645).

Schwartz, C. E., Snidman, N., & Kagan, J. (1999). Adolescent social anxiety as an outcome of inhibited temperament in childhood. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 38, 1008 – 1015. doi:10.1097/00004583-199908000-00017

Shields, A., & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Emotion regulation among school-age children: The development and validation of a new criterion Q-sort scale. Developmental Psychology, 33, 906 –916. doi:10.1037/0012-1649 .33.6.906

Shiner, R. L., & Masten, A. (2012). Childhood personality as a harbinger of competence and resilience in adulthood. Development and Psycho- pathology, 24, 507–528. doi:10.1017/S0954579412000120

Smeekens, S., Riksen-Walraven, J., & van Bakel, H. J. A. (2008). Profiles of competence and adaptation in preschoolers as related to the quality of parent-child interaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1490 – 1499. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.012

Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Cumberland, A., Fabes, R. A., Valiente, C., Shepard, S. A., . . . Guthrie, I. K. (2006). Relation of emotion-related regulation to children’s social competence: A longitudinal study. Emo- tion, 6, 498 –510. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.6.3.498

Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Gaertner, B., Popp, T., Smith, C. L., Kupfer, A., . . . Hofer, C. (2007). Relations of maternal socialization and toddlers’ effortful control to children’s adjustment and social compe- tence. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1170 –1186. doi:10.1037/0012- 1649.43.5.1170

Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Granger, D. A., Eggum, N. D., Sallquist, J., Haugen, R. G., . . . Hofer, C. (2009). Individual differences in preschool- ers’ salivary cortisol and alpha-amylase: Relations to temperament and maladjustment. Hormones and Behavior, 56, 133–139. doi:10.1016/j .yhbeh.2009.03.020

Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Harris, E., Hanish, L., Fabes, R. A., Ku- panoff, K., Ringwald, S., & Holmes, J. (2004). The relation of children’s everyday nonsocial peer play to their emotion, regulation, and social functioning. Developmental Psychology, 40(1), 67– 80. doi:10.1037/ 0012-1649.40.1.67

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

405NEGATIVE EMOTIONS, EGO-RESILIENCY, AND SOCIAL COMPETENCE

Stams, G. J. M., Juffer, F., Van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Hoksbergen, R. C. (2001). Attachment-based intervention in adoptive families in infancy and children’s development at age 7: Two follow-up studies. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 159 –180. doi:10.1348/ 026151001166010

Swanson, J., Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., & O’Brien, T. C. (2011). Predicting early adolescents’ academic achievement, social competence, and physical health from parenting, ego resilience, and engagement coping. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31, 548 –576. doi:10.1177/ 0272431610366249

Taylor, Z. E., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Widaman, K. F. (2013). Longitudinal relations of intrusive parenting and effortful control to ego-resiliency during early childhood. Child Development, 84, 1145– 1151. doi:10.1111/cdev.12054

Taylor, Z. E., Sulik, M. J., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Silva, K. M., Lemery-Chalfant, K., . . . Verrelli, B. C. (2013). Development of ego-resiliency during early childhood: An examination of polymor- phisms in the serotonin transporter gene and observed parenting. Social Development. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/sode.12041

Tofighi, D., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2011). RMediation: An R package for mediation analysis confidence intervals. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 692–700. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0076-x

Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10. doi:10.1007/ BF02291170

Van Aken, M. A. (1992). The development of general competence and domain-specific competencies. European Journal of Personality, 6, 267–282. doi:10.1002/per.2410060403

van Bakel, H. J., & Riksen-Walraven, M. (2004). Stress reactivity in 15-month-old infants: Links with infant temperament, cognitive compe- tence, and attachment security. Developmental Psychobiology, 44, 157– 167. doi:10.1002/dev.20001

Received April 23, 2013 Revision received August 19, 2013

Accepted September 17, 2013 �

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

406 TAYLOR ET AL.