Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-7dld4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-24T14:01:03.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Inhibitory control as a mediator of bidirectional effects between early oppositional behavior and maternal depression

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2014

Daniel Ewon Choe*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Daniel S. Shaw
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Lauretta M. Brennan
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Thomas J. Dishion
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Melvin N. Wilson
Affiliation:
University of Virginia
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Daniel Ewon Choe, Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, 210 South Bouquet Street, 4423 Sennott Square, Pittsburgh, PA 15260; E-mail: dec60@pitt.edu.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Maternal depression is an established risk factor for child conduct problems, but relatively few studies have tested whether children's behavioral problems exacerbate mothers' depression or whether other child behavioral characteristics (e.g., self-regulation) may mediate bidirectional effects between maternal depression and child disruptive behavior. This longitudinal study examined the parallel growth of maternal depressive symptoms and child oppositional behavior from ages 2 to 5; the magnitude and timing of their bidirectional effects; and whether child inhibitory control, a temperament-based self-regulatory mechanism, mediated effects between maternal depression and child oppositionality. A randomized control trial of 731 at-risk families assessed children annually from ages 2 to 5. Transactional models demonstrated positive and bidirectional associations between mothers' depressive symptoms and children's oppositional behavior from ages 2 to 3, with a less consistent pattern of reciprocal relations up to age 5. Mediation of indirect mother–child effects and child evocative effects depended on the rater of children's inhibitory control. Findings are discussed in regard to how child evocative effects and self-regulatory mechanisms may clarify the transmission of psychopathology within families.

Information

Type
Regular Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 
Figure 0

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations of major study variables

Figure 1

Figure 1. Standardized solution for autoregressive cross-lagged model of maternal depressive symptoms and mother-rated child oppositional behavior: χ2 (7, N = 677) = 4.08, p = .771; comparative fit index = 1.00, root mean square error of approximation = 0.00 (0.00, 0.03), standard root mean square residual = 0.01. Covariates are child gender, race, intervention group, geographic site, and maternal education level. Correlations not shown. R2s: maternal depressive symptoms age 3 = .23, maternal depressive symptoms age 4 = .36, maternal depressive symptoms age 5 = .42, mother-rated child oppositional behavior age 3 = .25, mother-rated child oppositional behavior age 4 = .48, and mother-rated child oppositional behavior age 5 = .47. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Standardized solution for autoregressive cross-lagged model of maternal depressive symptoms and alternative caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior: χ2 (8, N = 677) = 5.39, p = .715; comparative fit index = 1.00; root mean square error of approximation = 0.00 (0.00, 0.03); standard root mean square residual = 0.01. Covariates are child gender, race, intervention group, geographic site, and maternal education level. Correlations not shown. R2s: maternal depressive symptoms age 3 = .23, maternal depressive symptoms age 4 = .35, maternal depressive symptoms age 5 = .43, caregiver-rated caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 3 = .20, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 4 = .24, and caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 5 = .33. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Standardized solution for mediation model of maternal depressive symptoms, mother-rated child oppositional behavior, and alternative caregiver-rated inhibitory control (IC): χ2 (17, N = 677) = 13.38, p = .711; comparative fit index = 1.0, root mean square error of approximation = 0.00 (0.00, 0.03), standard root mean residual = 0.02. Significant mediation for dashed pathway, mother-rated child oppositional behavior age 2 → caregiver-rated IC age 3 → caregiver-rated IC age 4 → maternal depressive symptoms age 5 (b = 0.29, SE = 0.15, β = 0.01, p = .051). Covariates are child gender, race, intervention group, geographic site, and maternal education level. Correlations not shown. R2s: maternal depressive symptoms age 3 = .23, maternal depressive symptoms age 4 = .36, maternal depressive symptoms age 5 = .43, mother-rated child oppositional behavior age 3 = .25, mother-rated child oppositional behavior age 4 = .48, mother-rated child oppositional behavior age 5 = .47, caregiver-rated IC age 3 = .05, and caregiver-rated IC age 4 = .29. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Standardized solution for mediation model of maternal depressive symptoms and alternative caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior and inhibitory control (IC): χ2 (17, N = 677) = 20.10, p = .269; comparative fit index = 1.0, root mean square error of approximation = 0.02 (0.00, 0.04), standard root mean square residual = 0.02. Significant mediation for dashed pathway, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 2 → caregiver-rated IC age 3 → caregiver-rated IC age 4 → maternal depressive symptoms age 5 (b = 0.40, SE = 0.19, β = 0.01, p = .031). Covariates are child gender, race, intervention group, geographic site, and maternal education level. Correlations not shown. R2s: maternal depressive symptoms age 3 = .22, maternal depressive symptoms age 4 = .35, maternal depressive symptoms age 5 = .43, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 3 = .20, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 4 = .25, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 5 = .36, caregiver-rated IC age 3 = .09, and caregiver-rated IC age 4 = .30. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Standardized solution for mediation model of maternal depressive symptoms, alternative caregiver-rated oppositional behavior, and mother-rated inhibitory control (IC): χ2 (16, N = 677) = 11.38, p = .785; comparative fit index = 1.0, root mean square error of approximation = 0.00 (0.00, 0.02), standard root mean square residual = 0.01. Significant indirect effect for dashed pathway, maternal depressive symptoms age 2 → mother-reported IC age 3 → caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 4 (b = 0.001, SE = 0.000, β = 0.02, p = .046). Covariates are child gender, race, intervention group, geographic site, and maternal education level. Correlations not shown. R2s: maternal depressive symptoms age 3 = .23, maternal depressive symptoms age 4 = .35, maternal depressive symptoms age 5 = .43, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 3 = .19, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 4 = .24, caregiver-rated child oppositional behavior age 5 = .33, mother-rated IC age 3 = .09, and mother-rated IC age 4 = .33. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Supplementary material: File

Choe Supplementary Material

Tables S1-S5

Download Choe Supplementary Material(File)
File 23.3 KB