see attachments
Carlson_Wang_2007.pdf Cognitive Development 22 (2007) 489–510 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Inhibitory control and emotion regulation in preschool children Stephanie M. Carlson ∗, Tiffany S. Wang Department of Psychology, University of Washington, United States Abstract This research investigated the relation between individual differences in inhibitory control and emotion regulation. Preschool children (N = 53) ages 4–6 (M = 5; 0) were assessed on brief batteries of inhibitory control of prepotent responses and emotion regulation. Individual differences in inhibitory control were significantly correlated with children’s ability to regulate their emotions. This relation held up even after controlling for age and verbal ability, and persisted for both Emotion Understanding and “online” control of emotional expressions that were negative (Disappointing Gift) or positive (Secret Keeping). Parent report of children’s self-control and emotion regulation corroborated the behavioral results. These findings suggest that executive control of attention, action, and emotion are skills that develop in concert in the preschool period. However, there was also evidence of a quadratic relation in which emotion regulation was optimal at intermediate levels of inhibition, highlighting the interplay of both cognitive control and temperament in socio-emotional functioning. © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Inhibitory control; Executive function; Emotion regulation; Temperament; Preschool 1. Introduction The ability to control potentially interfering thought processes and actions develops rapidly in the preschool period. Children of age 3 years have difficulty on tasks that require inhibitory control of attention and motor responses, such as suppressing a dominant response in accordance with rules. By 5 years of age they are much more proficient at these tasks (for a summary see Carlson, 2005). At the same time, children improve in the ability to regulate the experience of emotions by monitoring their expressive behavior. Saarni (1984) found that young children made an attempt to inhibit negative expressions upon receiving an undesirable gift, but they had trouble neutralizing ∗ Corresponding author at: Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States. E-mail address:
[email protected] (S.M. Carlson). 0885-2014/$ – see front matter © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2007.08.002 490 S.M. Carlson, T.S. Wang / Cognitive Development 22 (2007) 489–510 their expressions. Older children were more likely to attempt to feign positive expressions of emotion, although there were individual differences in these skills at all ages. Explaining individ- ual differences in emotion regulation that appear early in childhood is an important undertaking because older children who have difficulty managing emotions (e.g., anger) are at risk for devel- oping behavioral disorders (Cole, Michel, & Teti, 1994; Dodge & Garber, 1991). Both the control of attention and action in relatively unemotional “cool” contexts and the control of emotional expressions in affectively charged “hot” contexts appear to have key requirements in common: prevention of an impulsive response and carrying out an opposite act. Furthermore, deficits in attention and emotion regulation tend to co-occur in certain atypical and at-risk populations, such as children with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (Barkley, 1997). Surprisingly, however, little research has examined the relation between children’s regulation of action and emotion. Zelazo and Müller (2002) described potentially separate and shared neuroanatominal pathways for executive function in cool and hot task paradigms, but the question remains as to whether inhibitory control of prepotent responses and online emotion regulation in a social context are overlapping or independent skills at the level of individual differences. The aim of the present study was to assess the relation between individual differences in the deliberate control over actions and emotional expressions in typically developing preschool children. 1.1. Executive function Executive function (EF), defined as the conscious control of thought and action needed for future-oriented and purposeful behavior (Welsh, Pennington, & Groisser, 1991; Zelazo, Carter, Reznick, & Frye, 1997), involves a diverse set of cognitive processes, including planning, work- ing memory, set-shifting, error detection and correction, and the inhibitory control of prepotent responses (e.g., Roberts, Robbins, & Weiskrantz, 1998; Stuss & Benson, 1986). EF is required for goal-directed behaviors to solve novel problems, particularly those calling for the inhibition of automatic or established thoughts and responses (e.g., Casey, Tottenham, & Fossella, 2002; Roberts & Pennington, 1996). Inhibitory control (IC), then, refers to the ability to inhibit or suppress salient thought processes or actions that are not relevant to the goal or task at hand (Rothbart & Posner, 1985). Note that flexible employment of inhibitory control in problem-solving situations may involve not only the suppression of a dominant (but incorrect) response, but also the activation of a subdominant (but adaptive) response, or alternation between initiating and inhibiting a prepotent response according to setting conditions. For example, in the Bear/Dragon task (a simplified version of Simons Says), children are told to perform all actions commanded by a “nice” bear puppet but to suppress all actions commanded by a “naughty” dragon puppet, in an alternating fashion. Young 3-year-olds have difficulty inhibiting their actions in this task despite understanding the rule, whereas older 3-year-olds and most 4-year-olds can do so selectively (Reed, Pien, & Rothbart, 1984). This example illustrates one of many similar EF tasks showing marked improvement between ages 3 and 6, when children become much better at resolving con- flict of attention and/or motor responses, waiting for a reward, and staying on-task in the face of tempting distractions (Carlson, 2005; Kochanska, Murray, & Harlan, 2000). Diverse problem-solving scenarios are likely to require flexible suppression and selection of information in working memory and ensuing responses. Indeed, inhibitory control is thought to contribute to individual differences and/or developmental changes in a wide array of cognitive abilities including attention, memory, reading comprehension, and theory of mind (e.g., Carlson, Mandell, & Williams, 2004; Dempster, 1992; Harnishfeger & Bjorklund, 1993; Posner & Rothbart, 2000). EF in general is strongly associated with prefrontal cortex (PFC), which has an extremely S.M. Carlson, T.S. Wang / Cognitive Development 22 (2007) 489–510 491 protracted maturational period (e.g., Bunge & Zelazo, 2006; Diamond, 2002; Giedd, Blumenthal, & Jeffries, 1999), however, age-related changes in EF are apparent early on in development and are most striking during the preschool period. 1.2. Emotion regulation Emotional development includes changes in emotion expression, understanding, and regu- lation. Of these, emotion regulation (ER) is particularly likely to be related to EF. It has been difficult to achieve consensus on a single definition of ER (see Bridges, Denham, & Ganiban, 2004; Cole, Martin, & Dennis, 2004; Eisenberg & Spinrad, 2004). Our behavioral research exam- ines children’s online modulation of their own emotion expression as the social situation calls for it (down-regulation of negative or excitatory states and potential up-regulation/activation of the opposite feeling state). Hence, we will use the definition provided by Saarni (1984) in which ER refers to regulating the experience of emotion by monitoring one’s expressive behavior. This conceptualization of ER relies on intrinsic regulatory processes as well as extrinsic factors, par- ticularly children’s growing awareness of cultural display rules as they move from early to later childhood. Display rules are social conventions that dictate where, when, and how emotion-related behaviors should be expressed (Ekman & Friesen, 1969). In Saarni’s (1984) classic disappointment paradigm, children were given an undesirable gift (e.g., a babyish toy) and then observed to see how much they tried to dissemble or hide their disappointment. Six-year-olds (especially boys) were openly negative in their expressions, older children showed transitional behavior in which arousal level was apparent (e.g., lip biting) but were less overtly negative, and it was not until 10–11 years of age that children were able to exhibit positive behavior (e.g., exaggerate a smile). However, other studies using this procedure have found developmental change and individual differences in ER among preschoolers (Cole, 1986; Garner & Power, 1996; Josephs, 1994; Liew, Eisenberg, & Reiser, 2004). Even toddlers begin to become aware of their own distress and take steps to alleviate negative feelings, such as distracting themselves from a forbidden toy by playing with a substitute object (Grolnick, Bridges, & Connell, 1996; Kopp, 1989). Infants, too, engage in rudimentary forms of ER including gaze aversion, sucking, and proximity seeking (Buss & Goldsmith, 1998; Rothbart, Ziaie, & O’Boyle, 1992) Thus, similar to EF, ER is an early emerging set of skills that takes a long time to develop but shows marked improvement in the preschool period. ER has been linked to several aspects of social functioning in preschoolers, including social competence, popularity with peers and teachers, adjustment, shyness/introversion, and sympathy. It is seen as a vital aspect of social competence and one that determines, in large measure, the crucial social task of preschool children: positive engagement and self-regulation during peer interaction (Denham et al., 2003). The increasing complexity and demands of the social world of a preschooler make it necessary for children to modify their emotional reactions, made possible by way of developmental increases in both the comprehension and control of emotionality (Denham et al., 2003; Lewis, Sullivan, & Vasen, 1987). Uncontrolled negative emotionality, in particular, is a serious detriment to children’s social interactions (e.g., Denham, Blair, Schmidt, & DeMulder, 2002; Underwood, Coie, & Herbsman, 1992). In examining individual differences in preschool and school-age children’s social compe- tence, Eisenberg and colleagues have identified an interaction between negative emotionality and effortful control, defined by Rothbart and Bates (1998) as the ability to voluntarily inhibit a dom- inant response to activate a subdominant response. Specifically, children rated by adults as high in negativity tended to have poorer social outcomes, but this effect was moderated by individual 492 S.M. Carlson, T.S. Wang / Cognitive Development 22 (2007) 489–510 differences in effortful control (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 1995; Eisenberg et al., 1996; Eisenberg et al., 1997; Liew et al., 2004; see also Denham et al., 2003). Children high in effortful control (as reported by parents and/or teachers) are less likely to express negative emotionality, presum- ably because they can better manage their attention, emotions, and behavioral responses. Hence, effortful control is thought to contribute to the modulation (e.g., maintaining, activating, inhibit- ing) of emotion-related activities in specific situations, but also to reflect individual/dispositional differences across situations (i.e., a key aspect of temperament) (Eisenberg & Spinrad, 2004). Eisenberg and Fabes (1992) proposed a tripartite model to account for this pattern of inter- actions between temperament and self-regulation. Undercontrolled children are considered low in emotion regulation,