Abstract

Maternal emotion dysregulation is a debilitating issue that can greatly impact relationships with their children; children can develop problematic behaviors as a way to cope with their mother’s instability of emotions; a child’s gender may also impact their susceptibility to being affected by maternal emotion dysregulation. The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation and the Child Behavior Checklist were utilized to help measure the variables of child behavior and maternal emotion dysregulation; demographic information was used to study gender. It was hypothesized there would be a 1st main effect that children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation will have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) than children who do not have mothers dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation, a 2nd main effect that males will have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist than females, and an interaction effect of a child’s mother dealing with a clinical level of emotional dysregulation on CBCL problem item scores will be stronger for females than males. A total of 68 mother-child dyads (Age: M= 48, SD= 7.6 months, Gender of Children: Female (46%) and Male (54%)) participated in a random clinical trial, where mothers completed the DERS and CBCL. The results showed that there was a main effect that children with mothers who experience a clinical level of emotion dysregulation have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) than children who do not have mothers experiencing a clinical level of emotion dysregulation. However, there was no evidence of a 2nd main effect or interaction effect. The implications of this study are to help find more information regarding how maternal emotion dysregulation affects children and what types of influences can alter child behavior or cause the development of problem behaviors; along with providing data to improve therapy and treatment methods for mothers and children.

Maternal Emotion Dysregulation Impacts on Child Behavior: Through the Lens of Child Gender

Introduction

Parent-child interactions are a key part of how children learn to socialize and communicate with others. These interactions can help guide children in developing good or bad behaviors. Emotion regulation is essential to helping individuals form healthy relationships and perform everyday tasks in a stable emotional state. Emotion regulation is defined as, “an ability to recognize, control, and express the emotions of oneself and others and an in/external process of monitoring, assessing, and modifying emotional reactions according to individual goals (Hoeksma et al. 2004; Thompson 1994, cited in Suh & Kang, 2020). While emotion regulation has always been viewed as a valuable skill for children to develop, it has rarely been discussed as an important skill for parents to have. Research has been accumulating around the effects maternal emotion regulation could have on child development. Evidence has shown that emotion regulation skills in mothers are important to help them handle their children’s negative emotions while also showing behavior that is acceptable for their child to adapt to. Children look up to their parents and often develop experiencing their parent’s emotions and interactions first-hand. This means that children may develop and replicate their parent’s actions from experience, leading to possible behavioral issues. Maternal emotion dysregulation can set poor boundaries and examples for how children should behave, and some research has found this to be shown more prominently in situations with peers such as in classroom settings.

How a child is able to express and regulate their emotions through their behaviors, is essential to development. Children rely on good behavioral skills to form social skills, educational skills, health habits, and communication. Without these skills, outcomes such as the development of Oppositional Defiant Disorder, or Childhood-onset depression may be more likely. Without proper support, and the ability to learn healthy behavior from an adult, children may be compromised to many other long-term issues such as anger issues, or negative mental health.

Literature Review

The literature reviewed for this paper has researched the effects that maternal emotional regulation can have on the development of toddlers and adolescents. While each journal article touched on its own distinct measures, there was a commonality in the predicted effects maternal emotional regulation could have on child behavior and emotion regulation. Much of the past literature has identified maternal emotional regulation to be impactful for childhood development. This is especially true for behavior because many children learn from and are directly interacting with their parents’ behaviors and emotions. They may grow to have resemblances in their own emotion regulation patterns compared to their parents.

A research study around the program Tuning into Kids stressed the importance of parents having good emotional regulation skills, especially in the area of emotion socialization. The researchers recruited families at school districts located in lower to middle-class areas of Melbourne, Australia. The participants were parent-child dyads where the children were between the ages of three to four years old, and the parents were primarily mothers (207 mothers, 9 fathers). They randomly placed these dyads into either the regular family services and help they were already receiving, or the Tuning into Kids program, which focused on increasing the emotional connection between parents and children. The structured program involved emotional coaching that would help alter parenting beliefs and behaviors. Two keys measures used to help facilitate this study were the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004) and the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI; Eyberg & Pincus, 1999, cited in Havighurst et al., 2010). The results found that parents who went through the program displayed better emotion socialization skills, which in return improved emotion regulation skills. There was a significant improvement in emotional awareness and regulation compared to the control group; along with reported improved empathy, by the end of the study. This study supports the key idea that emotion regulation can have a large impact on parent-child interactions which can influence a child’s behavior. They display this by showing how increased emotion socialization can lead to better handling of emotions.

Emotional socialization becomes a key theme in a lot of the literature surrounding maternal emotion dysregulation because it is a foundation for healthy communication between children and mothers. Another piece of literature reviewed also focused on the effect’s emotion socialization can have on child behavior. Researchers in Turkey conducted a study around the effects emotional socialization could have on child problem behaviors. They recruited participants via local advertising and had the participating mothers fill out a set of questionnaires. Two key measures were the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach & Ruffle, 2000), and the Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire-1 (PRFQ-1; Luyten et al., 2009, cited in Arikan & Kumru, 2020) which were respectively used to measure child problem behaviors, and maternal mentalization. The study found that poor maternal emotion socialization, as an indicator of emotion regulation, did have a negative effect on child problem behaviors, in terms of children internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors. Researchers struggled with identifying which symptoms of emotion regulation, such as anxiety or anger, directly contributed to certain child problem behaviors. They found more generally that poor emotion regulation could root a variety of possible child problem behaviors, without an exact pattern to exist (Arikan & Kumru, 2020).

The last piece of literature did specifically look at gender in children as a possible influencing factor to how mothers regulate their emotions, deal with challenging child behavior, and handle their children’s emotions. Mother-child dyads were recruited and the participating mother completed a set of questionnaires regarding child behavior and maternal emotion regulation. The study found that emotion regulation was consistently higher for females compared to male children and that the mother’s reaction does seem to have an influence on child aggression. They found that mothers of sons displayed more punitive reactions compared to the mothers of daughters; this could explain why the females had better emotion regulation skills (Suh and Kang, 2020).

There were key similarities between the literature reviewed. Most focused-on mothers are the primary parent or caregiver. Along with this, measures with similar constructs were used across the studies reviewed. There was a strong focus on key mediators and symptoms of emotion regulation such as emotional socialization and aggression. This is in part because they have key roles in how individuals are able to cope with and regulate their emotions. The age range was also consistent throughout the studies because it is important to stress that while the studies found similar results, this does not make their research correct. The studies all discussed the possibilities of third variables such as environmental or peer factors that could also affect problem child behaviors, along with the possible inaccuracy of self-report forms filled out by mothers

The studies each focused on their own mediators, and ideas in terms of why emotion regulation plays a role in child behavior. Some find that children will model after this behavior, others find children will develop feeling fearful of it, leading to other behavioral issues. Lastly, many are unsure of how exactly children interpret daily parent-child interactions, especially as toddlers. This leads to a lot of possibilities surrounding why maternal emotion regulation seems to influence problem child behaviors. Each study looked at different defining qualities from socio-economic status to gender; these variables were thought to influence why parents have or change their interaction habits compared to other parents.

Purpose of the Current Study

Our study is going to be able to expand from previous studies in the area by looking at different interactions. Gender has not commonly been researched as an interacting factor in maternal emotional regulation and possible outcomes in child behavior. Much of the prior literature looks at gender in terms of the parents, where the difference between mother and fathers may be key to understanding other issues such as child abuse potentials. However, these articles do not directly look at how that abuse and gender difference can shape long-term child behavior. Along with this, many past studies only utilize aggression to help measure variables like emotional dysregulation, or problem behaviors in children. Our study expands from prior ones while still keeping the core research point of the effects of maternal emotional regulation abilities.

Much of the prior literature has focused either solely on child behavioral issues or parent-child interactions. This has left gaps in research surrounding the role gender plays in child behavioral problems. Along with this, there is not a lot of background literature regarding the effects and differences a mother’s emotion regulation has on behavioral problems for female children compared to male children. Gender has often to be viewed through the parental lens, where researchers are comparing mothers against fathers. While this is because of the possible gender differences in emotional regulation that could affect parenting skills between mothers and fathers, it has not commonly been viewed from the perspective of possible gender differences in emotional regulation for male and female children that could affect behavior. This is especially intriguing because the development of emotion regulation in children could not only be affected by parental emotional regulation (and the differences there within gender) but also their gender. Along with this, much of the prior literature focuses solely on aggression, and depression to fulfill measuring emotion regulation in mothers, while also commonly using aggression to measure child behavior.

Our study is able to expand on previous information by utilizing the new areas of research as described above. By utilizing different testing measures, there will be more information regarding child behavior on a spectrum outside of just aggression. By including gender, there will be the addition of new information regarding interactions it can have on emotion regulation. It will also provide new information regarding the effect’s child gender can have on how they interact and interpret maternal emotional regulation and negative emotions.

Variables and Hypothesis

A questionnaire along with a task was used to help create the categorical and continuous variables for gender, presence of a clinical amount of emotional dysregulation in the mother, and problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist. The presence of a clinical level of emotional dysregulation in mothers was measured using the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004). A higher score in total indicates a higher level of emotional dysregulation; scores at or above 96 indicated a clinical level of emotional dysregulation. The demographic information collected from the study was used to help assess the gender variable. Lastly, to help measure child behavior problems, problem item scores from the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach & Ruffle, 2000) will be utilized. Higher scores on the CBCL indicate the child may struggle with more emotional and behavioral problems.

I hypothesize there will be the main effect that children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation will have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) than children who do not have mothers dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation. Secondly, I hypothesize a main effect that males will have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist than females. Lastly, I hypothesize an interaction effect of a child’s mother dealing with a clinical level of emotional dysregulation on CBCL problem item scores will be stronger for females than males.

Methods

Participants

A total of 68 mothers (M= 48, SD= 7.6 months), and their 3 to 4-year-old children, were recruited to participate in an in-person study in a university campus office. The child participants’ gender breakdown was 46% females and 54% males. The racial background of the child participants was: 63.2% European American, 5.9% Latino or Hispanic, 1.5% African American, 29.4% multiple racial and ethnic backgrounds, including individuals who identified their children as Asian American, American Indian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander. Demographic information regarding the mother’s education level and marital status was also recorded. For completed education level the breakdown was, 6% mothers with some high school attainment, 4.5% completed high school, 35.8% with some college, 14.9% technical school or professional school, 26.9% college graduates, and 12% with postgraduate education. The distribution for marital status included 62% percent were married or had longtime partners, 25% were never married, and 13% were separated, divorced, or widowed and were single heads-of-household. The income of families was distributed into quartiles: (1) less than $17,000, (2) $17,000-$29,000, (3) $29,001-$50,000, and (4) $50,000 or more.

Mothers with elevated Borderline Personality Disorder symptoms were specifically recruited for this study, because of the positive connection between BPD and emotion dysregulation.  Along with this, mothers with low BPD symptoms and low SES were recruited to offset the high prevalence of mothers with low SES who have high BPD symptoms. Mothers were screened for BPD using the McLean Screening Instrument (Zanarini et al., 2003; range = 0-9) and 27% (n = 18) reported 0-1 symptoms, 24% (n = 16) reported 2-4 symptoms, and 49% (n = 33) reported 4 or more symptoms.

Materials

Self-report questionnaires were administered to the participating mothers; these surveys included the DERS and the CBCL, as previously mentioned. Children did complete their own separate task as a part of a larger study, however, that information was not used for the purpose of this paper. Gender was measured using demographic information collected by the researchers. The mother either reported their child as M (male) or F (female). They also collected child race/ethnic information, age information, education level of the mother, the marital status of the mother, and socio-economic status of the family.

The presence of a clinical level of emotion dysregulation in the mothers was measured using the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004), a 36-item measure that uses statements to assess difficulty in regulating emotion. Example items on the DERS include: “I have difficulty making sense out of my feelings”, “When I’m upset, my emotions feel overwhelming”, and “When I’m upset, I have difficulty controlling my behaviors”. Respondents use a 5-point Likert Scale, from 1 (almost never [0-10%]) to 5 (almost always [91-100%]), to gauge how much they experience or relate to the statements. Total scoring works by summing all of the scores for each item together. Questions 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 17, 20, 22, 24 and 34 are reverse-scored. Subscale scoring consists of these sections: nonacceptance of emotional responses (11, 12, 21, 23, 25, 292), difficulty engaging in goal-directed behavior (13, 18, 20R, 26, 333), impulse control difficulties (3, 14, 19, 24R, 27, 324), lack of emotional awareness (2R, 6R, 8R, 10R, 17R, 34R 5), limited access to emotion regulation strategies (15, 16, 22R, 28, 30, 31, 35, 366), and lack of emotional clarity (1R, 4, 5, 7R, 9). Higher scores indicate higher levels of emotion dysregulation, and a score of 70 is considered a nonclinical community average, while a score of 96 or above indicates a clinical level of emotion dysregulation (Gratz & Roemer, 2004). Reliability for the DERS was strong, Cronbach’s α= .94.

To measure child behavior, the continuous variable, item scores on the CCBL, is being utilized through the Child Behavior Checklist (CCBL; Achenbach & Ruffle, 2000). The CCBL is a 64-item measure that has caregivers mark down how much they identify or feel the items describe their children with the listed behaviors, characteristics, and moods. Example items on the CCBL are: “Easily frustrated” and “Punishment does not change his/her behavior”. The 3-point scale ranges have the choices of, 0 (not true), 1 (somewhat or sometimes true), or 2 (very true or often true). Each mother’s responses to CBCL items were summed to calculate the child’s total score for problem behaviors. There are also subscales apart of the CBCL that can be utilized and they include: Somatic Complaints, Anxious/Depressed, Aggressive Behavior, Delinquent Behavior, Withdrawn, Social Problems, Attention Problems, and Thought Problems. Higher scores reflect higher levels of problem behaviors. The reliability of the CBCL questionnaire was strong, Cronbach’s α = .81.

Procedure

This study was a randomized clinical trial. Researchers recruited mother-child dyads for participants by Craigslist’s posts, fliers at local mental health clinics, and via a developmental database that is maintained by the psychology department. Once recruited, the participating families were assessed in a university campus office. Both the mother’s informed consent and the child’s assent were secured before participation, with IRB approval. There was a 2.5-hour session, where children completed assessments in one room while mothers completed questionnaires in an adjacent room. The questionnaires consisted of the 36-item DERS and the 64-item CCBL. The children’s assessment was Locked Box Task, which was a task aimed at trying to create frustration in children to measure behaviors such as distress, problem-solving, play activity, and distraction. Next, mothers and children reunited for parent-child interactions. Lastly, mothers received training in home cortisol data collection. They were debriefed about the research they were participating in. Participating families received $50 for the laboratory visit.

Results

A 2×2 factorial ANOVA determined that there was a main effect for the presence of maternal emotion dysregulation, however, there was no main effect for gender.  There was a difference in mean score for children who have mothers experiencing a clinical level of emotion dysregulation (M = 53.8, SD = 23.1) and for children who do not have mothers experiencing a clinical level of emotion dysregulation (M = 34.4, SD = 20.2), F (1, 61) = 12.2652, p > .001.  There was no significant difference in mean score for female children (M = 42.6, SD = 24.2) and for male children (M = 41.8, SD = 22.7), F (1, 61) = 0.031, p > .86. There was not a significant interaction between gender and having a mother who experiences a clinical level of emotion dysregulation, F (1, 61) = 0.104, p < .74. CBCL scores were not higher for female children with mothers who experience a clinical level of emotion dysregulation, compared to male children with mothers who experience a clinical level of emotion dysregulation (See Table 1 for cell means; see Figure 1 and Figure 2 for estimated marginal means). The range for the DERS scores was 40 to 125 (M = 68.4, SD = 21.7). The range for the CBCL scores was 5 to 124 (M = 42.2, SD = 23.3).

Discussion

Summary

It was hypothesized that there would be a main effect in which children with mothers who were dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation would have a higher problem item score on the CBCL. Along with this, it was hypothesized a main effect would be present where males would have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist than females. An interaction effect was hypothesized that female children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation would score higher on the CBCL compared to male children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation.

The results of our analysis provided insightful information surrounding the effects present between our variables. There was a statistically significant effect between children with mothers who were dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation and higher problem item scores on the CBCL. However, there was no significant effect between children with mothers who were dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation and problem item score on the CBCL. Along with this, our interaction effect, female children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation would score higher on the CBCL compared to male children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation, was non-significant. This means while there was visible evidence on a trend for the first hypothesis, no concrete evidence backing trends or interactions could be seen for the other two.

Our analysis provided partial support for this study’s hypotheses. The core idea of maternal emotion dysregulation affecting CBCL scores was supported, however, the intersection of gender was not. There was no evidence to prove the hypothesized effects that gender would have for the main effect on CBCL scores nor the interaction effect between a child’s mother dealing with a clinical level of emotional dysregulation and CBCL scores. There were no associations between gender, and child problem behaviors through these findings. Over our results supported our first main effect hypothesis, however, our second main effect hypothesis and interaction effect hypothesis did not hold to be true with our results.

Our results both agreed and disagreed with the previous findings in the literature review performed. Our first hypothesis, regarding the main effect that children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation will have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) than children who do not have mothers dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation, did compare to previous findings. The previous literature that utilized the CBCL, all found the same trend here at the surface level. However, when broken down into sections of emotion regulation, there was less consensus. While our study did not break down emotion dysregulation into subscales, many studies chose to separate qualities such as anxiety, aggression, distraction, and fear from each other. With the other studies, there was more focus on the aspect of emotion socialization within emotion regulation compared to ours. So, these are factors that may have affected the comparison of findings.

In terms of gender, our results contrast with the previous literature findings. The main literature piece on gender found that girls tended to regulate their emotions better and that mothers seemed to be more punitive towards their sons, leaving a significant difference in child labor. However, this study also took into account teacher opinions to try and avoid some bias from maternal figures. This bias may be important to why we did not receive statistically-significant outcomes for our secondary main effect and interaction effect. However, other studies that only performed secondary analyses on gender, did not find significant differences, which would align more with the findings received.

Strengths

This study possessed strengths surrounding the methodology and constructs used. Both measures have been frequently used tests in this area of child behavior and emotion regulation research, along with holding validity to accurately measure the variables. Along with this, the study was a randomized clinical trial, providing a more varied sample. By recruiting subgroups like low BPD, low-income individuals, there were advance steps taken to counteract predicted majorities. This also added some protection against researcher bias or participant bias, as the methodology was explicitly handled in steps and there was a low chance of manipulating any of the variables being researched. The way the hypotheses and variables are operationalized allowed for clear, direct research relating to valid constructs. It also allowed for a two by two factorial ANOVA to be completed, taking this research past the level of correlational. The study overall had rigid guidelines and objectives that allowed for transparency and generalizability.

Limitations and Possible Mechanisms

One significant limitation of this study is the lack of generalizability to a variety of demographics. The study contained very specific details that unfortunately limit how applicable the results are. One example of this is the children’s ages only ranging between three to four years old. While an important period developmentally, it may not be the key age range to target when trying to analyze differences due to gender. Children between the ages of three to four years old may not have a solid concept of gender identity, meaning that they may not be influenced even by a parent who was influenced by child gender. Internalized or externalized feelings about gender may not be present at this age because they do not understand their parents are treating them differently due to their gender. Along with this, three to four years old is long before puberty where gender differences become prominent, meaning that hormones and other variables may not impact behavior yet in our participants.

Along with this, the focus on only mothers limits the generalizability to general caregivers. By focusing on mothers, there is a stress placed on the mother-child relationship which is not often equally weighed to a caregiver-child relationship or a father-child relationship. It will be hard to generalize whether or not a father’s emotion dysregulation will have a similar impact compared to mothers. There is a lack of understanding of the father-daughter dyad or the father-son dyad. This may have partially contributed to why our interaction effect and our second main effect hypothesis were determined to be non-statically significant. The lack of ability to generalize to a larger audience, and collect a broader amount of information negatively impacts the ability to get the most accurate results. If experiment variables like age range were modified, it may have contributed to a significant result for gender effects.

A significant methodological limitation is not being able to directly assess child behaviors, and being limited in the questions asked. Child behaviors are assessed through the responses of participating mothers, this limits the child’s role in explaining and logically working through their behavior. By asking mothers to assess the child’s behavior, it is more so providing information on how mothers view certain behaviors and classify them. Not every mother may view aggression or irrational behaviors in the same manner. There is a strong possibility of bias in the reporting mothers, for them to exaggerate their good qualities while understating their downsides, and vice-versa for their child. Along with this, questions were limited because children were only the ages of three to four years old. Questions related to anxiety, behavioral disorders, or more complex-relationships would be non-applicable in this study thus, there is a lack of information there.

Our first hypothesis proved to be significant. However, there are possibly associated third-variables that could better explain the relationship analyzed. A very prominently discussed possible confound or moderator is the environment. There are many environmental influences in everyday life that can impact child behavior. This could include education environments such as child-teacher interactions, peer acceptance/social rejection, and the quality of the education in general. Other possible explanations could also be socio-economic status, where it is linked to several factors including food insecurity, healthcare, and homelessness. When children are forced into these situations without a way to pull themselves out, such as trying to get a job, an intense amount of frustration and even trauma, may build.

Those third variables also could be reshaped and analyzed similarly to gender, where they act as nominal independent variables, to view key differences between the groups, such as students with A-grades versus students with D-grades. The possibility of mediation could also be what explains why we saw a significant association between mothers’ scores for the CBCL and mothers’ scores for the DERS. One possible reason why the presence of a clinical level of maternal emotion dysregulation has a main effect with a child behavior problem items is because when mothers have a clinical level of emotion dysregulation, there is less validation from them regarding the child’s negative emotions. This leads to poor reactions from the mother that upset the child, increase frustration, and may leave many children feeling like they have to bottle-up negative emotions. This in return, leads to poor behaviors developed as children become angry for never feeling valid. Therefore, one possible mediator that could explain the relationship between a clinical level of emotion dysregulation in mothers and a child’s problem behaviors could be the lack of validation from mothers about a child’s negative emotions.

The lack of significant results, specifically for our gender-involved hypotheses, limits their applicability because it was not shown that gender effects problem behaviors. A large amount of theory backing up the impacts of maternal emotion dysregulation is because researchers make automatic assumptions that all children attach better to their mothers and that their mothers are inherently the emotional ones in a set of parents. Along with this, the most theory surrounding mothers’ emotions shaping child outcomes, only usually look at mothers in heterosexual relationships, who naturally produced the children, and are not immigrants or immersed in the culture in where they are living at. This type of theory limits the breadth of information that could be collected about minority groups, that could later be applied wide-scale. Issues that minority groups face, can be solved with benefitting non-minority groups still. Our results also limit the ability for us to back-up inherent gender differences that are theorized to be evident since infancy. While it was predicted that gender would cause a difference, it could easily be social rejection which tends to separate itself by gender once adolescence begins. Social rejection is theorized to be a defining characteristic as to why some people become bullies or develop extreme behavioral reactions; it has been applied to mass shooting perpetrators commonly as a way to explain why social rejection on youth can harvest bad behavioral issues long-term.

Implications

While not every result of the analysis was significant, the findings can still have implications for both research, and daily life. New contributions have been made in the field of child behavior development, especially in preschoolers. Our results were able to show that gender differences, focusing on those that affect behavior and emotions, may not develop as quickly as assumed. Children may not have as strong of genetic differences that predispose them to react in certain manners, reinforcing that either long-term maternal emotion dysregulation may have a stronger effect, along with puberty reinforcing gender differences. While our results contradict our literature review on the effects of gender and child behavior, many of these studies utilized teachers or peers to rate child behavior instead of a parent figure who could be biased. Technically, our results do contradict previous findings that males score worse on the behavior measures and that girls seem to be more emotionally impacted by their mothers. However, our base-level idea did hold. It was hypothesized there would be a main effect that children with mothers who are dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation will have higher problem item scores on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) than children who do not have mothers dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation. This supported all of the previous findings, which indicated they also found higher behavior problem scores when the mother was experiencing higher emotion dysregulation. This has implications for future research because there is a new perspective on why gender may influence some groups compared to others. Parts of identity such as geographic location, culture, and family values may also influence the outcome gender has on emotion differences displayed in behaviors.

In daily life, our findings still have just as impactful implications. Behaviors and emotions are something that exists inside of everyone, whether children, adults, males, or females. Everyone is susceptible to bad behavior, and negative emotions. Understanding how to better regulate our emotions, and help children do too, is an important goal. It could help break down a lot of the child-parent interaction barriers that are experienced when there’s an emotional disconnect. By helping children develop more good behaviors than bad, there are long-term impacts such as a better chance at finishing high-school, less chance of delinquency, and fewer risk levels for abusing federally classified “hard substances”. This type of research could be applied at early learning centers, public education systems, juvenile detention centers, or even everyday situations where good behavior skills are necessary to excel.

Future Directions

The varied results of our study provide many directions to move towards this specific research question. Our first hypothesis, regarding the main effect in which children with mothers who were dealing with a clinical level of emotion dysregulation would have higher problem item scores on the CBCL, was accurate to the results. This opens up discussion for why this may be better explained outside of the parameters of emotion regulation. Emotion regulation encompasses so many different facets of daily behavior, moods, and personality, where it is so broad that treatments may need to be more specific. Other variables to look at when trying to explain changes in child behavior would be environmental factors or internal factors. For example, it was never specifically answered in emotional dysregulation plays the largest role in shaping a child’s behavior. By researching environment living situations for children, more inferences can be made about socioeconomic status, and type of area (rural vs. urban). Internal factors such as feeling invalidated may also greatly shape how children view themselves. This self-view or self-confidence could shape behavior depending on if the child had negative views of themselves, along with peer reactions.

While it would be incredibly difficult to have a true experimental reaction for a research question like this, especially due to the ethical implications of manipulating certain variables; this is even more prominent for minors. However, more study designs could be shaped to identify other demographic associations similar to gender for this association. Studies could be shaped to assess possible mediators such as validation, emotion-socialization, and social-rejection.

While our results surrounding the effects gender would have on child behavior, the research does not have to stop here. Older age groups such as high-school or college students could be utilized as a way to see if there is a difference surrounding the effects gender has, once puberty has occurred for the participants. This would be one key way to alter the methodology instead of changing the research focus. However, the other is possible by looking at other factors outside of gender that explain why we see develop differences between men and women’s emotion regulation in adulthood. One possible mechanism is different social stereotypes and expectations placed on males and females in puberty. Males and females are expected to develop different interests, have different conversations, and different ways of socializing with same-sex peers. Males are often expected to take on rugged, athletic, and sometimes violent interests as a way of showcasing their masculinity. This is not as prominent until children are old enough to be in these activities, which is why the difference may not show up in 3 and 4-year olds. This also means the differences aren’t rooted in gender but more so, gender-based social expectations.

References

Arikan, G., Kumru, A. Patterns of Associations Between Maternal Symptoms and Child Problem             Behaviors: The Mediating Role of Mentalization, Negative Intentionality, and       Unsupportive Emotion Socialization. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-020-01046-w

Achenbach, T., & Ruffle, T.M. (2000). The Child Behavior Checklist and related forms for assessing behavioral/emotional problems and competencies. Pediatrics in review, 21 8, 265-71.

Binion, G., & Zalewski, M. (2018). Maternal emotion dysregulation and the functional organization of preschoolers’ emotional expressions and regulatory behaviors. Emotion, 18(3), 386–399. https://doi-org.libproxy.uoregon.edu/10.1037/emo0000319

Gratz, K. L. & Roemer, L. (2004).  Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in   Emotion Regulation Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26, 41-54.

Havighurst, S.S., Wilson, K.R., Harley, A.E., Prior, M.R. and Kehoe, C. (2010), Tuning in to Kids: improving emotion socialization practices in parents of preschool children – findings from a community trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51: 1342 1350. DOI:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02303.x

Suh, B.L., Kang, M.J. Maternal Reactions to Preschoolers’ Negative Emotions and Aggression:   Gender Difference in Mediation of Emotion Regulation. J Child Fam Stud 29, 144–154     (2020). https://doi-org.libproxy.uoregon.edu/10.1007/s10826-019-01649-5

Zanarini, M. C., Vujanovic, A. A., Parachini, E. A., Boulanger, J. L., Frankenburg, F. R., & Hennen, J. (2003). A screening measure for BPD: The Mclean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD). Journal of Personality Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.17.6.568.25355