1. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Extending the Spectrum Idea: Child Personality, Parenting and Psychopathology Karla Van Leeuwen, Ivan Mervielde, Barbara De Clercq, Filip De Fruyt Ghent University, Belgium

2. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Introduction Differences between normal and abnormal or clinical samples: qualitative or quantitative? The spectrum hypothesis: a disorder is not a discrete taxon, but rather represents the extreme endpoints of a continuously-distributed dimension or cluster of dimensions (Shiner & Caspi, 2003; Widiger & Clark, 2000) Emotionaly instableEmotionaly stable

3. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Structure, validity, and reliability Moderation and Mediation Differences in (a) the nature, and (b) the strength of the covariation among independent and dependent variables between referred and non-referred samples? Differences in (a) the nature, and (b) the strength of moderating and mediating relationships between referred and non-referred samples? Differences in psychometric properties of measures between referred and non-referred samples? Differences in means between referred and non-referred samples? Means Covariation Basic Research QuestionTarget Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Different levels for testing the spectrum hypothesis

4. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Method Mothers & children clinically referred sample: children in psychological or psychiatric treatment non-referred sample: randomly selected Follow-up: 2- to 3-year interval

5. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Subjects Non-referredClinically referred Time 1Time 2Time 1Time 2 Boys276218118 69 Girls320255 87 45 Total596473205114 Age M SD 7-15 10.9 1.9 10-18 13.9 1.8 5-14 9.9 1.9 7-16 11.99 1.9

6. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Measures Parenting: Ghent Parental Behavior Scale (GPBS; Van Leeuwen & Vermulst, 2004) positive parenting and negative control Child Personality: The Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children (HiPIC; Mervielde & De Fruyt, 1999) extraversion, benevolence, conscientiousness, emotional stability and imagination Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Verhulst, Van der Ende, & Koot, 1996) internalizing and externalizing problem behavior

7. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Analyses ANOVA: differences in means Hierarchical multiple regression analyses Step 1: control variables: gender & age Step 2: independent effects: group, 1 personality variable & 1 parenting variable Step 3: 2-way interactions: group x personality, group x parenting, personality x group Step 4: 3-way interaction: group x personality x parenting

8. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Results: level 1 Significant mean differences between the referred and non-referred group at T1 & T2: Problem behavior: referred children are rated higher on Internalizing and Externalizing behavior Personality: referred children are rated lower on agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, extraversion and imagination Parenting: mothers of referred children report higher negative control and lower positive parental behavior  supports the classical spectrum hypothesis

9. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Results: level 3 Group by Personality interactions Personality predicts child problem behavior at T1 & T2, showing some differences in the strength of the relationships for referred and non-referred groups, but not in the kind of relationship.  supports largely the extended version of the spectrum hypothesis

10. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Benevolence by Group predicting Externalizing behavior *** *** p <.001

11. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Emotional Stability by Group predicting Internalizing behavior *** *** p <.001

12. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Group by Parenting interactions Negative control: stronger relationships for the referred group at T1 & T2 Positive parenting: different patterns across groups and time  partly supports the extended version of the spectrum hypothesis

13. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Negative control by Group predicting Externalizing behavior *** *** p <.001

14. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Positive parenting by Group predicting Internalizing behavior **(*) *** p <.001; ** p <.01

15. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Results: level 4 Parenting x Personality interactions total group (referred + non-referred children) 4 interactions at T1 & T2 Benevolence x Negative control Benevolence x Positive parenting Conscientiousness x Negative control  Externalizing behavior Emotional stability x Positive parenting  Internalizing behavior

16. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Benevolence (BE) by Negative control predicting Externalizing behavior *** *** p <.001

17. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Group x personality x parenting interactions Time 1: Three out of twenty 3-way interactions are significant, but when a Bonferroni correction is applied, none of the interactions remain significant Time 2: no significant 3-way interactions  similar personality-parenting interactions are associated with problem behavior in both the referred and non-referred group

18. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Discussion The results largely corroborate the spectrum hypothesis implying that differences between the two types of samples can be conceived as quantitative rather than qualitative. By focussing only on the most appropriate categorical diagnosis, clinicians ignore important ‘conditions’ for psychopathology or the ‘broader perspective’. Both parenting and personality should be taken into account in the assessment and the selection of an appropriate treatment for children’s externalizing and internalizing behavior.

19. ISSPD_The Hague_2007 Reference Van Leeuwen, K. G., Mervielde, I., De Clercq, B. J., & De Fruyt, F. (2007). Extending the Spectrum Idea: Child Personality, Parenting and Psychopathology. European Journal of Personality, 21, 63-89.