1
FACULTEIT DER MAATSCHAPPIJ- EN GEDRAGSWETENSCHAPPEN
Graduate School of Childhood Development and EducationMASTER
ORTHOPEDAGOGIEK
2016 -2017
Master Thesis
Name student: Kelly Schuller
Address: Dompvloedslaan 57, Overveen Telephone number: 06-57396609 Student number: 10162925
Email: kelly.schuller@student.uva.nl
Subject: The relationship between fear/avoidance of a child (7,5) and parental encouragement Allocation to study: OOP
2
The relationship between fear and avoidance of a child at age 7,5 and parental encouragement Table of contents Title Page 1. Introduction 3 2. Method 6 3. Results 8 4. Discussion 11 5. Literature 13 Abstract
The risk factors for child anxiety problems and avoidant behaviour such as parental modelling and genetic transmission are established multiple times. This thesis attempted to research the parental encouragement as a protective factor for child fear and avoidance in a stranger situation and robot task. The main findings of this study were the significant correlation between fear and avoidance during both tasks and the marginal positive relationship between parental encouragement and fear during the robot task.
3
1. Introduction
Anxiety disorders are highly prevalent in children and adults (Baxter, Scott, Vos &
Whiteford, 2012), and they run in families, creating a genetic transmission that influences the child’s fearful temperament and behavioural inhibition (Murray, Creswell & Cooper, 2009). Parental anxiety may influence child fear through different pathways, for example
transmission of anxiety through genetic vulnerability or modelling, all contributing to higher levels of distress and avoidance (Murray, et al., 2009). The relation between parental anxiety and child fear and avoidance, may be linked to the development of anxiety disorders in a child on long term (Fisak Jr & Grills-Taquechel, 2007). Parental verbal information also plays a significant role in child acquisition of fearful and avoidant behaviour but as well as approach behaviour (Field, Lawson & Banerjee, 2008).
Genetically based temperamental dispositions for anxiety, namely behavioural inhibition, seem to be a moderating factor of the link (Aktar, Majdandzic, de Vente, & Bögels, 2013; Murray, et al., 2009). Behavioural inhibition refers to the pattern of the
reactions of a child, defined by fearfulness, hesitation or caution when the child is confronted with unknown people or situations (Kagan, 1989). The moderating effect of behavioural inhibition influences the relationship between anxiety in parents and fear and avoidance in the child. When a child has genetically behavioural inhibition, it is more likely to behave in a more fearful and avoiding way. Behavioural inhibition is a temperamental disposition and it is significantly associated with child fear (Aktar, et al., 2013).
Other pathways from parental anxiety to child anxiety and avoidance are through life events and socialization. These contribute to the perception of threat of the parent, which overflows to the child. Furthermore, parental anxiety itself plays a role in parenting, including over involvement and reduced parental encouragement, which on the other hand also are influenced by child anxiety (Murray, et al., 2009). Anxious parents may discourage
brave/approach behaviour and encourage fearful and avoidant behaviour in their child during parent-child interactions (Fisak Jr & Grills-Taquechel, 2007). Reinforcement of this kind of behaviour was found to be associated with the development of panic- and anxiety-related symptoms, thus is related to later anxiety problems for the child (Watt & Stewart, 2000).
4
This finding is consistent with the study of Muris, Meesters, Merckelbach, and Hulsenbeck (2000) where they showed that anxiogenic modelling through observational learning led to more fear in the child.Modelling of parental fearful behaviour is found to be an important factor in the development of fear in a child (Rapee, 2001). Rapee (2001) showed that children are likely to follow the anxious behaviour of their parents and as a result, show fearful behaviour towards situations themselves. Fear is defined as a reaction to a specific threatening stimulus, resulting in escape or avoidance when cue proximity increases (Lang, Davis & Öhman, 2000). Adams Jr, Ambady, Macrae and Kleck (2006) showed as well that fear and avoidance are two closely related emotions, with fear being regarded as an avoidant emotion.
Avoidance is defined as behaviour away from negative stimuli, such as objects, events or possibilities (Elliot, 2006). According to the approach-avoidance motivation the definition has five components, with the most important being the positive or negative valence of the situation. Positive and negative are opposite sides of the emotion, for example beneficial versus harmful. The given meaning to the stimuli makes an individual either approach or avoid the stimuli (Elliot, 2006). External factors can also influence the decision to approach or avoid, for example parental encouragement.
The transmission of fear through parents, genetically and environmentally, has been established by several studies (Murray, et al., 2009; Muris, et al., 2000), but focussed mostly on the negative outcomes explaining anxiety disorders in children. This transmission can also be used in a more positive way, by using parental behaviour to decline child fear and
avoidance. Maternal encouragement has been found to negatively associate with child avoidance, meaning that whenever the mother showed more encouragement the child would show less avoidance (Murray, et al., 2008).
Parental encouragement is defined as encouraging the child’s positive engagement with an unfamiliar situation through smiles, looks or simple comments (Aktar, Majdandzic, de Vente & Bögels, 2014). It is shown that parental encouragement is important for several important areas of a child’s life, such as study outcomes and psychical activity like sports (Jeynes, 2007; Pugliese & Tinsley, 2007). Adding to this, the study of Field, et al. (2008)
5
found an association between the amount of positive information children received about an object and the extent of children’s approach to an object. In contrast, negative information led to fearful and avoidant behaviour in the child. The relation between parental encouragement and child fear and avoidance is the main research question of this study.
Based on the study of Möller, Majdandziç and Bögels (2015) and Murray, et al. (2008) we will also look into the gender differences of the parents. The first study found differences between mothers’ and fathers’ encouraging parenting behaviour and child fear. Paternal behaviour was negatively associated with child fear whereas maternal behaviour was
positively associated with child fear. The second study of Murray et al. (2008) found effects of a negative relationship with maternal encouragement. According to these results, the expectation is that there will be a difference in parental encouragement in gender.
Both study’s Aktar et al. (2013) and Aktar et al. (2014) used the same sample as this research will, but for the former articles the children were tested at younger ages, respectively 1 year old and 2,5 years old. They focused on social referencing and included a variety of tests, but for now we are only using relevant information for this research. When the children were 1 year old no significant effects of parental encouragement on behavioural inhibition of the children were found (Aktar, et al., 2013). Later at age 2,5 a significant relationship did exist but only with fathers and was positively associated with child fear and avoidance,
meaning the children showed more fear and avoidance when the father was more encouraging (Aktar, et al., 2014).
Scientifically speaking, there are some inconsistencies in study outcomes. Already in 1969 Emmerich’s study established the relationship between the child’s behaviour and the parental role and as described above the relationship was found many times more. In contradiction, a different recent study from Warneken and Tomasello (2013) executed with young children showed that presence and encouragement of their parents did not influence the behaviour of the child. This study suggested that the behaviour of the child was spontaneous or intrinsically motivated, not moderated by their parents (Warneken & Tomasello, 2013). These contradicting outcomes ask for more research.
6
The research questions are as follows. The first question is: What is the relationship between a child’s avoidance and parental encouragement at age 7,5 during the stranger situation and robot task? The second question is: What is the relationship between a child’s fear and parental encouragement at age 7,5 during the stranger situation and robot task? The third and last question is about parental differences: Are there differences in paternal or maternal encouragement in relation to a child’s fear and avoidance?
The current study aims to shed further light on the relationship between parental encouragement and child fear and avoidance. Considering the previous research of Murray, et al. (2009) and Aktar et al. (2014) we expect a significant association between parental
encouragement and child fear and avoidance. Further, parental differences are expected, suggested by the study of Möller, et al. (2015) and Murray et al. (2008).
2. Method Participants
Participants consisted of 122 families with their 7.5 year old child. The sample was recruited through advertisement at different places, such as magazines and flyers. The participants provided written informed consent.
Design and procedure
This research is part of a longitudinal study ‘the social development of children’, where parents and children participated in a social study (Aktar, et al., 2014). Different studies examined this sample for example Aktar, et al. (2013; 2014). The families have been participating in a longitudinal study at the family lab of the University of Amsterdam. The study started with a pregnancy assessment and continued when the children were 1 year, 2,5 years, 4,5 years and now for the last time, being 7,5 years old. The current study focuses on two tasks at 7.5 year-measurement from this study, the stranger situation and robot task. The children visited the lab twice, and completed both of these tasks once with their mother and once with their father. The order of the tasks was fixed for both visits. The coding protocol was adapted from Aktar, et al. (2014). Two pairs of trained master students completed the
7
parent and child coding. After a training period with a coding protocol consisting of 3- or 5-point scales, master students coded the videos, each coder either the mother or father visit. Before doing actual analyses the data was checked on reliability between the different coders. For parental encouragement the reliability was .83 for the stranger task and .73 for the robot task. For the variable fear, the stranger task had a reliability of .63 and the robot task .92. The reliability for the stranger task is lower than desirable, this may have occurred because of the age the children now have. They show fear more subtle that when they were younger. For avoidance the reliability was .97 for the stranger task and .93 for the robot task, both perfectly high.
Tasks
Stranger situation: In this task, the parent and child were seated by the test leader, leaving
one chair open for the stranger. In phase one, the stranger entered the room, sat down and engaged the parent in a short conversation about his/her personality. In phase two, the
stranger explained to the parent that she would like to ask the child some questions and asked the parent if they could ask the child to switch seats. Phase three would end when the parent and child were on each other chairs. In phase four, the stranger would ask the child some questions for a few minutes, and would end with phase five, saying that she is done and leaves the room. The stranger maintained a neutral but friendly attitude towards the child and the parent. Different strangers conducted the task during the mother and father visits.
Robot situation. A remote-control robot was placed in the middle of the room before the
parent and child walked in. Parents were instructed to remain neutral in phase one, to talk about the robot in phase two, and to actively encourage the child to approach the robot in phase three. Two different robots were counterbalanced between the mother and father visits. The looks of the robot were constructed in an abstract way so that there were unrecognisable and sometimes scaring subjects. Phase four consisted the test leader coming in and turning the robot off, explaining to the child that it was a machine who couldn’t do anything anymore after they’ve pressed the off-button.
8 Measures
A previously used coding scheme was adapted and used to code parent and child behaviour (see Aktar et al., 2013). Child avoidance was measured through observation in two parts of the study. The behaviour was scored on a 5-point scale, 1 being open and showing no
avoidance and 5 being the most avoiding as can be. Each task was divided into certain epochs, shorts periods of time. A score of 1 was given if the child met the stranger or robot openly without turning away or avoiding gaze. Scoring a 5 meant that the child was predominantly avoidant and was turning and moving away from the stranger or robot. These children were ignoring the stranger or robot most of the time, for example by crawling underneath its own seat or an object in the room. Child fear was measured the same way, expect scoring fearful behaviour on the 5-point scale.
Parental encouragement was scored on a 3-point scale for both tasks. A score of 1 meant that the parent didn’t seem to support the interaction with the stranger or the
exploration of the robot. Parents scored a 3 when they were supportive without intervening, showing positive signals and were eager to support approach to the robot.
3. Results Main Statistics
The dataset was checked for normality and all variables passed for normal, except for child fear during the stranger task. The amount of skewness for this variable was -3.133.
First, correlations were checked to see if there was an indication of significant
relations between parental encouragement and fear and avoidance. Correlations were checked for each task and parent, as well as both parents together. A notable significant result was the relationship between fear and avoidance. This significant correlation held during all three groups; mother, father and parents together, indicating that this association is strong. The correlation was the highest for fathers, respectively .60 during the stranger task and .63 during the robot task. Another considerable result was the marginal significant relationship between parental encouragement and child fear. This correlation was .16 showing a positive
9 Table 1: Correlations Matrix
Variables Parental
Encouragement
Child Fear Child Avoidance Mother SSR – DSR SSR – DSR SSR – DSR Parental Encouragement ---- -.069 / .103 .108 / .045 Child Fear ---- .545** / .553** Child Avoidance ---- Father SSR – DSR SSR – DSR SSR – DSR Parental Encouragement ---- .164 / .205 .092 / .102 Child Fear ---- .604** / .628** Child Avoidance ---- Mother + Father SSR – DSR SSR – DSR SSR – DSR Parental Encouragement ---- .055 / .161* .083 / .079 Child Fear ---- .570** / .590** Child Avoidance
SSR = Stranger Task, DSR = Robot Task *p < .10, ** p < .01
Secondly, multiple two-way repeated measures ANOVA were conducted to compare the results of parental encouragement on fear and avoidance, during the stranger and robot task. Repeated measures are referring to the two tasks and as well to the parents, because all children came twice with one of their parents each time. The independent variables were the parents, the dependent variables were child fear and avoidance and the covariate was parental encouragement. Parental encouragement in the two tasks for mother and father as covariates are causing the multiple outcomes in the table. Two RM-ANOVA’s were conducted because of the different dependent variables, fear and avoidance. No significant associations were found. This resulted in the following table of results.
10 Table 2: Two Way Repeated measures ANOVA
Variables df MS F P
Avoidance
Parent * Tasks * PE-SSR-M 1 .028 .468 .498
Parent * Tasks * PE-DSR-M 1 .002 .028 .868
Parent * Tasks * PE-SSR-F 1 .001 .019 .890
Parent * Tasks * PE-DSR-F 1 .002 .035 .853
Fear
Parent * Task * PE-SSR-M 1 .021 .887 .352
Parent * Task * PE-DSR-M 1 .018 .767 .386
Parent * Task * PE-SSR-F 1 .001 .052 .820
Parent * Task * PE-DSR-F 1 .038 1,564 .218
PE = Parental Encouragement M = Mother, F = Father
SSR = Stranger Task, DSR = Robot Task
Parental Encouragement and Fear
Looking at the correlations only one significant result was found at the level of p < .10. During the robot task with both parents taken into account, child fear was significantly related to parental encouragement with a correlation of .16. This is a positive association meaning that whenever there was more parental encouragement, the child showed more fear. The RM-ANOVA analysis didn’t show any significant results. Expect for the marginal correlation, no significant relationships were found between parental encouragement and fear.
Parental Encouragement and Avoidance
No significant relationship was found between parental encouragement and avoidance. The correlations didn’t indicate any strong association and this was the same for the RM-ANOVA analysis.
11 Gender Differences
No significant differences were found between maternal and paternal encouragement. The relationship between a child and his/her mother or father doesn’t seem too distinct. Both correlations and RM-ANOVA didn’t show any implications that parental encouragement is different for fathers and mothers.
4. Discussion
This thesis attempted to research the relationship between parental encouragement and child fear and avoidance in a stranger situation and robot task. Based on earlier evidence for this relationship by Murray et al. (2008) and Aktar, et al. (2014), relations were studied but only one significant relationship with parental encouragement was found. The main findings of this study were the significant relationship between fear and avoidance during both the stranger and robot task and the marginal significant relationship between parental encouragement and fear during the robot task.
The significant relationship between child fear and avoidance in both tasks indicate that these two variables occur simultaneously. Notable is that in former research of Aktar, et al. (2014) with the same sample, children at age 4,5, this association wasn’t found. This indicates that the expressions of fear and avoidance are developing during childhood.
Secondly, the positive relationship between parental encouragement and fear during the robot task shows that whenever the parent is more encouraging, the child is more fearful. This is in line with the research of Aktar, et al. (2014) where the same relationship was found, but only with fathers. During the robot task both the child and parent had more freedom to interact and move in comparison with the stranger task. This may have led to this significant result in this task.
Although there was a significant correlation between parental encouragement and child fear during the robot task, this relationship wasn’t found at the stranger task nor during the ANOVA analysis. Because of the relatively weak evidence and no significant results anywhere else all hypotheses are rejected.
12 Limitations
A few limitations should be taken into account with the results. At first, parental fear wasn’t included because of limited time but may have had an influence on parental encouragement and/or child fear, as the same in the study of Murray, et al. (2008). The second limitation is that both stranger and robot tasks were very structured situations for parent behaviour, which is beneficially for consistency, but might have caused parents to act in a less encouraging way than they would normally do. Adding to his, parents being asked, like in the robot task, to be encouraging may have led the children to be more fearful and influence the child in a negative way (Aktar, et al., 2014). These two limitations may have led to different results of parental encouragement.
Another important limitation is that this was the fourth measurement of the
longitudinal study, which is helpful to get unique and valuable results, but may have caused the children to learn and anticipate on the tests itself as well as the order. The last limitation is the generalisation of the findings. This was a small study taking out from a larger longitudinal research at the University of Amsterdam. The sample size consists of families with a
relatively high socioeconomic background, which may have caused for a non-representational result of the actual population. These limitations should be taken into consideration for future research.
Conclusions
A strong association between fear and avoidance was found, but this was not hypothesised. Based on the findings of this study all hypotheses should be rejected, which askes for a critical look at the theory. Keeping the research of Aktar, et al. (2014) in mind, where they as well found a positive relationship between parental encouragement and child fear, the
direction of the research might be wrong. It could be that parents react more encouraging when the child is fearful, explaining the higher levels of fear. Further research is necessary to gain more information about the relationship between parental encouragement and child fear and avoidance. Longitudinal is preferred to examine the long term effects of parental
13
5. Literature
Adams Jr, R.B., Ambady, N., Macrae, C.N. & Kleck, R.E. (2006). Emotional Expressions Forecast Approach-Avoidance Behaviour, Motivation and Emotion, 30, 177-186. doi: 10.1007/s11031-006-9020-2
Aktar, E., Majdandziç, M., de Vente, W. & Bögels, S.M. (2013). The interplay between expressed parental anxiety and infant behavioural inhibition predicts infant avoidance in a social referencing paradigm, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54, 144-156. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02601.x
Aktar, E., Majdandziç, M., de Vente, W. & Bögels, S.M. (2014). Parental social anxiety disorder prospectively predicts toddlers’ fear/avoidance in a social referencing paradigm, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55, 77-87. doi:
10.1111/jcpp.12121
Baxter, A.J., Scott, K.M., Vos, T. & Whiteford, H.A. (2012). Global prevalence of anxiety disorders: a systematic review and meta-regression, Psychological Medicine, 43, 897-910. doi: 10.1017/S003329171200147X
Claar, R.L., Simons, L.E. & Logan, D.E. (2008). Parental response to children’s pain: The moderating impact of children’s emotional distress on symptoms and disability, Pain,
138, 172-179. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2007.12.005
Elliot, A.J. (2006). The Hierarchical Model of Approach-Avoidance Motivation, Motivation
and Emotion, 30, 111-116. doi: 10.1007/s11031-006-9028-7
Emmerich, W. (1969). The Parental Role a Functional-Cognitive Approach, Monographs of
the Society for Research in Child Development, 34, 1-66. doi: 10.2307/1165793
Field, A.P., Lawson, J. & Banerjee, R. (2008). The Verbal Threat Information Pathway to Fear in Children: The Longitudinal Effects on Fear Cognitions and the Immediate Effects on Avoidance Behaviour, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 214-224. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.117.1.214
14
Fisak Jr, B. & Grills-Taquechel, A.E. (2007). Parental Modelling, Reinforcement, and Information Transfer: Risk Factors in the Development of Child Anxiety? Clinical
Child and Family Psychology, 10, 213-231. doi: 10.1007/s10567-007-0020-x
Jeynes, W. H. (2007). The Relationship between Parental Involvement and Urban Secondary School Student Academic Achievement, Urban Education, 42, 82-110. doi:
10.1177/0042085906293818
Kagan, J. (1989). Temperamental contributions to social behaviour. American Psychologist,
44, 668–674. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.4.668
Lang, P.J., Davis, M. & Öhman, A. (2000). Fear and anxiety: Animal models and human cognitive psychophysiology, Journal of Affective Disorders, 61, 137-159. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0327(00)00343-8
Möller, E.L., Majdandziç, M. & Bögels, S.M. (2015). Parental Anxiety, Parenting Behaviour, and Infant Anxiety: Differential Associations for Fathers and Mothers, Journal of
Child and Family Studies, 24, 2626-2637. doi: 10.1007/s10826-014-0065-7
Muris, P., Meesters, C., Merckelbach, H. & Hulsenbeck, P. (2000). Worry in children is related to perceived parental rearing and attachment. Behaviour Research and
Therapy, 38, 487-497. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00072-8
Murray, L., de Rosnay, M., Pearson, J. Bergeron, C., Schofield, E., Royal-Lawson, M. & Cooper, P.J. (2008). Intergenerational Transmission of Social Anxiety: The Role of Social Referencing Processes in Infancy, Child Development, 79, 1049-1064. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01175.x
Murray, L., Creswell, C. & Cooper, P.J. (2009). The development of anxiety disorders in childhood: an integrative review, Psychological Medicine, 39, 1413-1423. doi: 10.1017/S0033291709005157
Pugliese, J. & Tinsely, B. (2007). Parental socialization of child and adolescent physical activity: a meta-analysis, Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 331-343. doi: 10.1037 /0893-3200.21.3.331
15
Rapee, R.M. (2001). The development of generalized anxiety disorder. In M.W. Vasey & M.R. Dadds. (Eds.), The developmental psychopathology of anxiety (pp. 481-503). New York: Oxford University Press.
Warneken, F. & Tomasello, M. (2013). Parental Presence and Encouragement Do Not Influence Helping in Young Children, Infancy, 18, 345-368. doi: 10.1111/j.1532 -7078.2012.00120.x
Watt, M.C. & Stewart, S.H. (2000). Anxiety sensitivity mediates the relationships between childhood learning experiences and elevated hypochondriacal concerns in young adulthood, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 49, 107-118. doi: 10.1016/S0022 -3999(00)00097-0
