Interparental Conflict & Children’s Internalizing Psychopathology: Examining the Role of Children’s Appraisals & Emotions Jennifer K. Hauser & John H. Grych Marquette University  Integration of the Cognitive-Contextual Framework & the Specific Emotions Model  Incorporation of Childhood Internalizing Literature into this Model GOALS OF THE CURRENT PROJECT This work was supported by Grant NIMH# MH INTRODUCTION Cognitive-Contextual Framework Cognitive-Contextual Framework (Grych & Fincham, 1990)  Children’s appraisals mediate the relationship between interparental conflict and child adjustment  Two-stage Appraisal Process  Initial Processing: awareness of stressor & affective reaction  Secondary Processing: more elaborate; attempt to understand why the conflict has occurred & how the child should respond Children’s Emotions Children’s Emotions (Stein & Levine, 1987; Stein & Trabasso, 1992)  Organize and guide actions  When children perceive that their goals are threatened, the nature of the emotional reaction depends on the child’s estimate of how likely it is that a goal can be restored or maintained if threatened.  Thus, a child experiences different emotions depending upon if:  They think the goal can be reinstated  They think it unlikely that that the goal can be reinstated  The outcome is uncertain Specific Emotions Model (Crockenberg & Forgays, 1996; Crockenberg & Langrock, 2001)  Highlights importance of children’s emotional reactions to interparental conflict for understanding how exposure to conflict influences children’s responses & adjustment.  The parental conflict functions as information that children can use to construct the meaning of the conflict.  Appraisals: (evaluating the status of personally significant goals) determine whether and which emotion the child will experience.  Emotions: guide the type of behavior the child will engage in. THE PRESENT STUDY Integration of the Cognitive-Contextual Framework & the Specific Emotions Model Integration of the Cognitive-Contextual Framework & the Specific Emotions Model This model seeks to evaluate both appraisals and emotions in the presence of interparental conflict This model seeks to evaluate both appraisals and emotions in the presence of interparental conflict It will also seek to incorporate the relationships between specific appraisals & emotions and the type of psychopathology to which they are related. It will also seek to incorporate the relationships between specific appraisals & emotions and the type of psychopathology to which they are related. Internalizing Psychopathology  Anxiety & depression differ with regard to diagnosis, course, and appropriate treatment.  Current measures of childhood anxiety & depression are highly correlated. Tripartite Model of Emotions (Clark & Watson, 1991)  Two-factor structure of Affect  Symptoms of anxiety & depression can be divided into 3 classes:  Those specific to anxiety  Those exclusive to depression  Those that are common to both disorders  Current self-report measures of anxiety & depression tend to tap into negative affect (NA) Positive & Negative Affect Scale for Children (PANAS-C; Laurent et al., 1999) New measure created to distinguish anxious from depressed individuals– adapted from the adult version of the PANAS. New measure created to distinguish anxious from depressed individuals– adapted from the adult version of the PANAS. Based on the Tripartite Model of Emotions Based on the Tripartite Model of Emotions Consists of Negative Affect (NA) items & Positive Affect (PA) items Consists of Negative Affect (NA) items & Positive Affect (PA) items Basic Premise: While both anxious & depressed children will score high on negative affect, depressed children will score significantly low on the positive affect items. Basic Premise: While both anxious & depressed children will score high on negative affect, depressed children will score significantly low on the positive affect items. MEASURES Level of Interparental Conflict Children’s Perceptions of Interparental Conflict Scale (CPIC; Grych, Seid, & Fincham, 1992) : Conflict Properties Scale Children’s Perceptions of Interparental Conflict Scale (CPIC; Grych, Seid, & Fincham, 1992) : Conflict Properties Scale Assesses frequency, intensity, & resolution of parental conflict Assesses frequency, intensity, & resolution of parental conflictAppraisals CPIC Threat Scale CPIC Threat Scale Assesses the level of threat felt by the child when their parents have an argument Assesses the level of threat felt by the child when their parents have an argument CPIC Blame Scale CPIC Blame Scale Assesses the degree to which the child has the tendency to blame themselves for the conflict Assesses the degree to which the child has the tendency to blame themselves for the conflict Emotions: Worry & Sadness Problem Solving Task (PST) Problem Solving Task (PST) Children are instructed to identify ‘how much’ they felt each emotion during the previous discussion. Children are instructed to identify ‘how much’ they felt each emotion during the previous discussion. Sad & Worried were among other emotions that children were asked to rate Sad & Worried were among other emotions that children were asked to rate Child Internalizing Psychopathology Positive and Negative Affect Scale for Children (PANAS-C): Used to distinguish anxious from depressed children Positive and Negative Affect Scale for Children (PANAS-C): Used to distinguish anxious from depressed children 12 Positive Affect Items (interested, excited, happy) 12 Positive Affect Items (interested, excited, happy) 15 Negative Affect Items (sad, ashamed, upset) 15 Negative Affect Items (sad, ashamed, upset) RESULTS: Correlations of Criterion & Dependent Variables Conflict Properties (CPIC: IPC) 1.54*.33* *.24* 2. Threat Scale (CPIC) 1.19*.37*.20*.27** Blame Scale (CPIC) 1.29**.12.37**.42** 4. Worry (PST) 1.54**.50**.25* 5. Sad (PST) 1.38**.25* 6. Anxiety (PANAS-C) 1.50** 7. Depression (PANAS-C) 1 Mean (SD)12.8 (6.6)10.4 (4.4)3.1 (3.2)13.2 (17.3)10.5 (16.1)13.9 (15.0)30.1 (11.6) Interparental Conflict Appraisals Child Adjustment IPC Threat Blame Worry Sad Anxiety Depression APPRAISALEMOTIONADJUSTMENT Note: * p<.05, ** p<.01 METHODS Participants N=137 fourth & fifth grade children Mean age= % Male, 47.8% Female Ethnic Background 57.4% Caucasian 25% African-American 6.6% Hispanic.7% Asian 8.1% Biracial 2.2% Other Hierarchical Regression Analyses Predictor Variables:Anxiety Step 1: β for Interparental Conflict.24* R 2.04 Step 2: β for Interparental Conflict.01 β for Threat.21* β for Blame.32** R 2.16 Step 3: β for Interparental Conflict.07 β for Threat.03 β for Blame.21* β for Worry.35** β for Sad.15 R 2.32 Predictor Variables: Depression Step 1: β for Interparental Conflict.27* R 2.06 Step 2: β for Interparental Conflict.12 β for Threat.03 β for Blame.39** R 2.18 Step 3: β for Interparental Conflict.13 β for Threat-.06 β for Blame.37** β for Worry.04 β for Sad.30* R 2.26 DISCUSSION Conflict Properties Threat Blame Worry Sad Anxiety Depression.18*.42**.21*.35*.37**.30* Appraisals Threat Mediator of relationship between Interparental Conflict & Anxiety As predicted, not significantly related to Sadness or Depression Blame Mediator of both Interparental Conflict - Depression relationship & Interparental Conflict - Anxiety relationship Emotions Worry appears to be specific to Anxiety, whereas Sadness seems to be specific to Depression. Sadness Contrary to predictions, Sadness was not a mediator of the association between Blame and Depression Worry Mediates relationship between Threat and Anxiety Also, partially mediates relationship between Blame and Anxiety Contributions of the Current Project Integration of the Cognitive-Contextual Framework & the Specific Emotions Model Increased Specificity Incorporation of Child Anxiety & Depression Literature into Interparental Conflict Domain Limitations & Directions for Future Research Cross-sectional data: Since cross-sectional data were used in this project, no conclusions about time-ordered sequencing can be made. Longitudinal data are needed to explore predictive relationships among these variables. Utilization of PANAS-C: (1) used alternate scoring, (2) does not assess comorbid anxiety & depression, and (3) does not assess physiological hyperarousal (thought to be a significant component of anxiety). Measurement of Emotion: Emotions demonstrated may be modulated versions of initial emotional responses (product of emotion regulation). Hence, it is difficult to assess a “pure emotion;” emotion regulation literature explores this issue conceptually & methodologically (Cole et al., 2004; Campos et al., 2004).