I have attached the Final assignment since this assignment is building off of it this will be a big deal. I will let you pick the four domains that you are comfortable with and if you want I will help

Relationships among Negative Emotionality, Responsive Parenting and Early Socio-cognitive Development in Korean Children Kijoo Cha* Early Childhood Education, Gachon University, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do Korea The present study examined the interplay among negative emotionality, responsive parenting and socio-cognitive developmental outcomes (i.e., communication, personal-social and problem-solving outcomes) in about 1620 Korean children using three waves of longitudinal data spanning theﬁrst 2 years of their life. Results from the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) demonstrated that there were moderate to low degrees of stability in negative emotionality, responsive parenting and socio-cognitive developmental outcomes from infancy to toddlerhood. Evidence for reciprocity in the parent–child relationship was found; responsive parenting predicted higher levels of subsequent child communication (in infancy and toddlerhood), and infants’higher problem- solving ability predicted higher responsive parenting in toddlerhood. Overall, the cross-age associations among the variables were similar between boys and girls, but some different patterns were observed: when controlling for family contextual factors and the within-time correlations, negative emotionality at an earlier point signiﬁcantly predicted lower responsive parenting at a later point and vice versa only in girls during infancy, but neither in boys nor in toddlerhood.

Key words:negative emotionality; stability of temperament; reciprocity; responsive parenting; child gender The relationship between young children and their parents is highly likely to be bidirectional; that is, children’s temperament or development is likely to elicit *Correspondence to: Kijoo Cha, Gachon University, Early Childhood Education, Seongnamdae-ro 1342, Sujeong-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, Korea. E-mail:

[email protected] Infant and Child Development Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) Published online 10 June 2016 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/icd.1990 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1 of 29 certain behavioural patterns from their parents over time, which in turn may affect the children’s temperament or development (Barnett, Gustafsson, Deng, Mills-Koonce, & Cox, 2012; Bornstein, Hendricks, Haynes, & Painter, 2007). In the past few decades, human and animal research has shown that the early years of life, particularly infancy and toddlerhood, are crucial in the individual’s overall life outcomes because of high brain plasticity during these developmental periods and the impact of early mother–child interactions on emotional and cognitive development in adulthood (Cameron et al., 2005; Colantuoni et al., 2011; Kang et al., 2011; Naumova, Lee, Rychkov, Vlasova, & Grigorenko, 2013). Despite the signiﬁcance of infancy and toddlerhood in human developmental trajectories, relatively fewer studies have examined the comprehensive interplay among child temperament, parenting and early socio-cognitive development in infancy and toddlerhood. Furthermore, even fewer studies have examined the possible differences in the interplay of these variables in boys and girls, particularly with non-Western samples. To address these gaps in the literature, the present study examined the transactional associations among temperament, parenting behaviours and child developmental outcomes longitudinally, with data spanning theﬁrst 2 years of life among a nationally representative sample of Korean children and their mothers.

Negative Emotionality and Parenting Negative emotionality is deﬁned as a child’s temperamental tendency to react to stressors with high degrees of negative effect, such as negative mood, unsoothability and irritability. (Rothbart & Bates, 2006), often used interchangeably with the term‘difﬁcult temperament’in the literature. As suggested from the deﬁnition, negative emotionality is inversely related to emotional self-regulation (Bridgett et al., 2009; Lee, Zhou, Eisenberg, & Wang, 2012). Many prior studies that examined the continuity of negative emotionality during infancy, toddlerhood and early childhood revealed low to moderate degrees of stability (0.2–0.5) (Casalin, Luyten, Vliegen, & Meurs, 2012; Komsi et al., 2006; Putnam, Rothbart, & Gartstein, 2008), which suggests that negative emotionality is subject to considerable changes over time. One of the most-studied proximal factors found to be associated with negative emotionality is parenting practices.

Studies investigating the links between difﬁcult temperament and supportive parenting (embracing warmth, sensitivity, responsiveness and acceptance) have revealed mixedﬁndings, mostly based on simple concurrent associations, with a greater number of studies reporting negative associations and fewer studies reporting positive associations (for a review, see Belsky & Jaffee, 2006; Paulussen-Hoogeboom, Stams, Hermanns, & Peetsma, 2007). Despite the strong theoretical support for transactionality in parent–child relationships, relatively fewer studies have reported the contribution of children’s negative emotionality to parenting behaviours, especially ininfancyandtoddlerhood(e.g. Boivin et al., 2005; Bridgett et al., 2009; Forget-Dubois et al., 2007; Katainen, Räikkönen, & Keltikangas-Järvinen, 1997; Lipscomb et al., 2011). Additionally, empirical studies revealing reciprocity in parent–child relationships mostly come from studies with older children, preschool- or elementary school-aged children (e.g. Combs-Ronto, Olson, Lunkenheimer, & Sameroff, 2009; Larsson, Viding, Rijsdik, & Plomin, 2007; Lengua, 2006; Lengua & Kovacs, 2005). Thus, the present study addressed these gaps in the literature.

2of29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Early Socio-cognitive Development Negative emotionality characteristics are likely to have a negative impact on early social and cognitive outcomes. Children low in negative emotionality, that is, those who were temperamentally better regulated and less reactive tended to have more positive peer relations and were more likely to be nominated as friends by peers (e.g. Gleason, Gower, Hohmann, & Gleason, 2005). Similarly, preschoolers who scored lower on negative emotionality tended to score higher on measures of early literacy, counting and numeracy skills, even when controlling for parental education, child gender and vocabulary (Coplan, Barber, & Lagace-Seguin, 1999).

Regarding language development, higher degrees of negative emotionality were associated with lower levels of vocabulary among 21-month-old children (Salley & Dixon, 2007), and with lower levels of vocabulary and narrative ability among 2- to 4-year-old children (Noel, Peterson, & Jesso, 2008). As the possible underlying mechanism of the observed links between temperament and language development, researchers postulated that high reactivity places a relatively greater load on self-regulatory systems, thereby leaving less amount of cognitive resources for the child to attend to and process given information, which would ultimately result in a slower rate of language acquisition (Reiser-Danner, 2003; Rothbart & Bates, 2006). As an alternative but not mutually exclusive hypothesis, it has also been posited that negative emotionality can deteriorate the quality of interpersonal relationships and linguistic inputs, leading to lower levels of language ability (Reiser-Danner, 2003). The same rationale can be employed to explain negative associations between difﬁcult temperament and cognitive development. For example, Molfese et al. (2010) found that mothers having children with higher negative emotionality tended to display higher levels of stress, which in turn was associated with children’s lower cognitive development.

A number of relevant studies have reported signiﬁcant associations between parenting behaviours and the language and pro-social skills of children (Barnett et al., 2012; Bornstein et al., 2007; Deater-Deckard et al., 2001; Deiner & Kim, 2004; Landry, Smith, & Swank, 2006). Barnett et al. (2012) reported signiﬁcant longitudinal paths from sensitive parenting behaviours to later child social competence (pro-social behaviours) and language development (expressive and receptive vocabulary) across 12 months to 36 months of age. It is notable that the authors found evidence of the inﬂuence of child development on parenting behaviours as well: higher levels of child social competence (among girls) and receptive vocabulary (among boys) predicted higher levels of subsequent sensitive parenting, which reveals another aspect of the transactional relationship of parent–child interactions.

Culture and Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Early Development Mainstream social values underlie how parents socialize their children. Parents respond differently to children’s behaviours depending on social desirability or acceptability of their behaviours (Goodnow & Collins, 1990; Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Some studies suggest that Korean mothers’responses to children’s negative emotionality might vary from what has been found among Western mothers (Lee, Norr, & Oh, 2005; Park, Trommsdorff, & Lee, 2012), which might have originated from differences in socio-cultural norms regarding parenting (Goodnow & Collins, 1990; Markus & Kitayama, 1991).

Although Korean parenting has gone through substantial changes in the past few decades owing to industrialization and Westernization, Korea has been found Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development3of29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd to still maintain a traditional interdependent culture characterized by human-relatedness, which is well revealed by family interdependence (Markus & Kitayama, 1991), especially a strong psychological bond between mothers and their children (Park & Cheah, 2005). Korean mothers tend to regard their children as extensions of themselves, rather than separate beings, which may well make them feel a strong sense of responsibility for their children’s well-being and development (Park & Kim, 2006). For example, Korean mothers were found to respond with self-blame or guilt to their children’s negative developmental outcomes rather than with anger, as observed in Western mothers (Lee et al., 2005). Moreover, in a recent study regarding Korean mothers’reactive (responding to children’s direct cues) versus proactive (anticipating children’s needs) sensitive behaviours in parenting (Park et al., 2012), Korean mothers tended to prefer proactive sensitive behaviours to a greater extent than did German mothers from an individualistic culture, pointing out the child’s immaturity in dealing with emotional distress as the reasons for the preference (Ziehm, Trommsdorff, Heikamp, & Park, 2013).

In sum, considering that emotional distress is related to the manifestation of negative emotionality and low emotional regulation, Korean mothers’strong psychological bond with children, perception of children as immature in emotional regulation, and strong sense of responsibility for children’s development may lead them to be less disturbed by infants’and toddlers’negative emotionality, compared to Western mothers. Thus, these characteristics of Korean mothers might result in the absence of a path from negative emotionality to responsive parenting, which is different from what has been observed in Western mother–child relationships.

Regarding associations between parenting behaviours and child language or cognitive development, extant studies with samples from various countries tend to converge on theﬁnding that sensitive and responsive parenting behaviours positively affect child language or cognitive development (Walker et al., 2007), although parental beliefs about their roles in or approaches to child development vary across cultures (Bradley et al., 1989; Parmar, Harkness, & Super, 2004).

Gender and Negative Emotionality and Parenting Parents’response to their children, including children’s difﬁcult temperamental attributes, is inﬂuenced by their beliefs and expectations about gender-appropriate behaviours and characteristics (Brown, Craig, & Halberstadt, 2015). Prior studies investigating the differences in parents’socialization behaviours between boys and girls have been based on the assumption that differential parenting behaviours from early years might be the foundation for later-appearing gender-related variations in children’s behaviours (Fausto-Sterling, García-Coll, & Lamarre, 2012a, 2012b; Martin & Ruble, 2010). Among these studies, research concerning infancy and toddlerhood has focused on the aspects of maternal daily caretaking behaviours (e.g. touching, lifting, moving and supporting new activities) (e.g. Fausto-Sterling et al., 2015), communication/language interactions (e.g. Clearﬁeld & Nelson, 2006) or interactions during disciplining (e.g., Ahl, Fausto-Sterling, García-Coll, & Seifer, 2013), disclosing gender-related differences in maternal behaviours even as early as theﬁrst year of life. Ahl et al. (2013) found that, overall, mothers of infant boys tended to spend a longer time on disciplining and used disciplinary words more frequently as compared to mothers of girls.

However, interestingly, as compared to mothers of infant girls, mothers of infant 4of29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd boys were also inclined to utter more affectionate terms and employ milder discipline strategies with their male infants, who manifested a greater number of negative effects during discipline interactions than did female infants. Indeed, some studies have demonstrated that the child’s gender moderates the relationship between the child’s negative emotionality and parenting behaviours (Chaplin, Cole, & Zahn-Waxler, 2005; Garside & Klimes-Dougan, 2002; Gordon, 1983; Klein, 1984; Putnam, Sanson, & Rothbart, 2002). Speciﬁcally, parents, in keeping with traditional gender-stereotyped expectations, tended to approve the expressions of negative-dominant emotions (e.g. anger and contempt) to a greater extent among boys than among girls, while the opposite pattern was observed in terms of negative-submissive emotions (e.g. shyness and fear).

Even though there has been no empirical study directly addressing child-gender-related disparity in Korean parenting during the early years of life, some remotely related studies allow us to hypothesize how differently Korean mothers might respond to children’s negative emotionality as a function of the child’s gender. For instance, in a study examining the socialization beliefs of Korean mothers of preschoolers, Park and Cheah (2005) reported that mothers of boys were more likely to point out the child’s developmental readiness (e.g.

‘Because at this age, the child is capable of understanding sharing’) as reasons for the importance of controlling negative emotions, whereas mothers of girls were more likely to resort to moral reasons (e.g.‘The skill is important because it shows that the child is kind, thoughtful, and considerate’), suggesting the continuous presence of traditional gender-stereotyped expectations even among younger generations of Korean mothers. In this respect, Korean mothers’socialization behaviours correspond to the patterns found among Western parents discussed above. Probably, this tendency is likely stronger among Korean mothers, considering that Confucianism, characterized by patriarchy-based strict division of gender roles, dominated the political ideology and way of life in the Korean society since long (Finch & Kim, 2003). Thus, the reviewed studies among both Western and Korean samples lead to the hypothesis that Korean mothers’ responsive parenting behaviours are less likely to be affected by the negative emotionality of boys than of girls.

Taken altogether, the reviewed literature has revealed the following: (i) the reciprocal nature between temperamentalattributes and parenting behaviours with less evidence for infants and toddlers and (ii) overall positive and negative associations that sensitive and responsive parenting, and negative emotionality, respectively, have with the socio-cognitive development of children across cultures.

However, some important gaps remain in this research area. Relatively fewer studies have examined the cross-lagged reciprocal relationships among temperament, parenting and child development and simultaneously probing the possible discrepancies between boys and girls during infancy and toddlerhood. Furthermore, even fewer studies have been conducted on subjects from non-Western cultures. Thus, the present study aimed to expand the literature by addressing the following research questions with a nationally representativelongitudinal dataset of Korean children and mothers concerning theﬁrsttwoyearsoflife.

Research Questions (RQs) and Hypotheses 1 How stable are negative emotionality, responsive parenting behaviours and developmental outcomes (communication, personal-social and problem-solving outcomes) over time (RQ 1 in Figure 1)?

Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development5of29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd In general, the reviewed studies revealed low to moderate degrees of stability in negative emotionality, responsive parenting and socio-cognitive development during the early years. Thus, similar results were expected in this study.

2 Are there any transactional effects between the child’s negative emotionality and parenting behaviours over time (RQ 2 in Figure 1)?

Considering Korean mothers’strong psychological ties with and view on their children as beings that are immature in emotional regulation, the path from negative emotionality to subsequent responsive parenting was not expected (possible differences between boys and girls are discussed in RQ 5), while the positive impact of responsive parenting on subsequent negative emotionality was.

3 Are there any transactional effects between parenting behaviours and each developmental outcome over time (RQ 3 in Figure 1)?

Based on previous studies that reported the positive impact of children’s higher language and cognitive outcomes on later parenting as well as the impact of responsive parenting on child development, reciprocity was hypothesized in the associations between parenting and socio-cognitive development. No cross-national differences were expected in this respect since responsive parenting has been found to foster children’s development regardless of cultural background, as discussed earlier.

4Does the child’s negative emotionality predictsubsequent socio-cognitive developmental outcomes (communication, personal-social and problem- solving outcomes) (RQ 4 in Figure 1)?

A few previous studies examining the associations between negative emotionality and socio-cognitive development have shown that negative emotionality exerts negative effects on language, social and cognitive development. Thus, signiﬁcant Figure 1. A Conceptual Model.

6of29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd paths from negative emotionality to subsequent socio-cognitive development were hypothesized to appear.

5 Do the associations among the variables (RQs 1–4) differ as a function of the child’s gender? That is, does the child’s gender moderate the associations among the variables?

The aspect of negative emotionality examined in the present study bears on the intensity of expressing negative reactions in response to external stimuli, which can be considered as dominant rather than submissive emotions. Thus, it is possible that the sample mothers might have been less annoyed by their sons’ negative emotionality due to a traditional bias against gender-related characteristics, while being relatively more irritated by their daughters’negative emotionality. Therefore, a signiﬁcant path from negative emotionality to less subsequent responsive parenting was expected only among girls. In terms of other relationships such as‘negative emotionality and socio-cognitive development’and ‘responsive parenting and socio-cognitive development’, no gender-related differences were anticipated since these associations were assumed to concern common or natural physiological mechanisms underlying human adaptation and development.

In addressing these research questions, relevant variables (i.e., marital satisfaction, maternal distress and stressful life events) were controlled as covariates, based on previous studies that suggested that socio-demographic factors (family SES) and stressful family experiences (maternal depression and marital conﬂict) affected both temperament and parenting behaviours (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002; Pauli-Pott, Mertesacker, & Beckmann, 2004; Sturge-Apple, Davies, & Cummings, 2006).

METHODS Participants The sample of the present study came from the large-scale national Panel Study on Korean Children (PSKC) conducted by the Korea Institute of Child Care and Education (KICCE). The PSKC identiﬁed a nationally representative sample of approximately 2000 children and their families in Korea, since 2008, through yearly data collection. The present study used data from theﬁrst three measurement waves that spanned across the children’sﬁrst 2 years of life. The data set at theﬁrst wave (W 1, 2008), on child development and family socio-demographics, was collected through a standardized child assessment tool (the Korean Age and Stages Questionnaire (K-ASQ), infants’age: 4 and 5 months) and parent questionnaires (N= 2078, boys: 50.8%, girls: 49.2%). At the second measurement wave (W 2, 2009), with the attrition of 226 families and the recruitment of 52 families, a total of 1904 children (boys: 50.5%, girls: 49.5%) and mothers participated in the data collection (infants’age: 13 to 15 months). At the third measurement wave (W 3, 2010), the sample children (N= 1802) were about 25 to 27 months old (boys: 50.9%, girls: 49.1%). In the current analysis, only the children and mothers who took part in the data collection at all three time points were included (N= 1620).T-tests were conducted to check whether there were differences between the groups of participants who were included and excluded in the analysis across all three waves, in terms of the main variables [i.e. child’s negative emotionality, responsive parenting, child’s developmental outcomes Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development7of29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd and domestic factors (family SES, marital satisfaction, maternal distress and stressful life events)]. Signiﬁcant differences were found only sporadically across a few variables: child’s communication (higher in the participants included; t= 2.92,p<.01) and personal-social outcomes at W 1(higher in the participants included;t= 4.08,p<.01), responsive parenting at W 2(higher in the participants excluded;t= 2.02,p<.05) and maternal distress at W 3(higher in the participants excluded;t= 2.45,p<.05).

Throughout the three waves of data, the parents (99.6% of the sample) were married, and less than 1% of the sample families were from ethnic minority groups. Additionally, majority of the sample parents [about 70% in both mothers (M = 31.1 years) and fathers (M = 33.6 years)] had two or more years of college, compared to approximately 30% of parents having completed high school. Parents with less than high school education accounted for less than 1% of the total sample. The educational attainment of the sample parents was only somewhat higher than the average of the Korean population of similar age (two or more years of higher education: 64% in 25- to 34-year-old) (OECD, 2013).

Measures Negative emotionality Information on negative emotionality was collected through a parent questionnaire. The questions were taken from the emotionality scale of Buss and Plomin’s (1984) Emotionality, Activity and Sociability (EAS) -Temperament Survey for Children-Parental Ratings. Among the three scales, the emotionality items address infants’negative mood, irritability and intensity of negative reactions, that is, negative emotionality (e.g.‘my baby cries easily’;‘my baby tends to be somewhat emotional’;‘my baby often fusses and cries’;‘my baby gets upset easily’; and‘my baby reacts intensely when upset’). Theﬁve items were rated on a 5-point scale, from not typical of my child (1 point) to very typical of my child (5 points). The Korean version of the EAS showed good internal consistency (0.74 in the 2008 wave, 0.98 in the 2009 wave and 0.86 in the 2010 wave), as did the original EAS (internal consistency M = 0.83) among children aged 1 to 9 years (Buss & Plomin, 1984). The ratings for each item were totaled, and higher scores on emotionality indicated the infant’s higher level of negative emotionality.

Parenting behaviours Information on parenting behaviours was also collected through items taken from the Parental Style Questionnaire (PSQ; Bornstein, 1989). The social interaction scale of the PSQ, which was used in the present study, consists of two facets of positive parenting behaviours: parental warmth (e.g.‘I provide my child with positive affectionate displays of warmth and attention’;‘I spend time talking to or conversing with my child’) and responsiveness (e.g.‘I promptly and appropriately respond to my child’s expressed distress or discomfort’;‘I provide my child with quick and positive feedback to his/her bids for attention’;‘Iam aware of what my child wants and/or is feeling’). The items were rated on a 5-point scale from hardly at all (1 point) to all the time (5 points). These ratings were then totaled for analyses, with higher scores indicative of warmer and more responsive parenting (henceforth, responsive parenting). The social interaction scale in this study showed an alpha reliability of 0.70, 0.92, and 0.98 in the 2008, 2009, and 2010 waves, respectively. 8of29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Socio-cognitive developmental outcomes Child developmental outcomes were measured by the Korean Age and Stages Questionnaire (K-ASQ), which is the Korean version of the ASQ validated by Huh, Squires, Lee, and Lee (2006) in the Korean context. The ASQ is a tool to assess the developmental status of young children using six questions inﬁve developmental areas: communication, gross motor skills,ﬁne motor skills, problem-solving and personal-social skills. Among these areas, three regarding socio-cognitive development were included in the current analyses: communication, personal-social skills and problem-solving. The communication scale addresses children’searly expressive and receptive language development and orientation towards communi- cation (e.g.‘When your baby wants something, does he tell you by pointing to it?’;‘If you point to a picture of a ball (kitty, cup, hat etc.) and ask your child,‘What is this?’ ‘Does your child correctly name at least one picture?’). The personal-social scale addresses children’s self-help skills (autonomy, personal) and interactions with other people or objects (social) (e.g.‘When you dress your baby, does she push her arm through a sleeve once her arm is started in the hole of the sleeve?’;‘When playing with either a stuffed animal or a doll, does your child pretend to rock it, feed it, change its diapers, put it to bed and so forth?’;‘Does your baby act differently towards strangers than he does with you and other familiar people?’). The problem-solving scale assesses children’s cognitive functioning (e.g. memory, attention and information-processing) and adaptive goal-directed behaviours to solve problems (e.g.‘After watching you hide a small toy under a piece of paper or cloth, does your babyﬁnd it?’;‘If your child wants something she cannot reach, does sheﬁnd a chair or box to stand on to reach it (for example, to get a toy on a counter or to“help”you in the kitchen)?’). Questions are answered with‘Yes’(10 points), ‘Sometimes’(5 points) or‘Not yet’(0 points). Scores for each item were totaled within each developmental area, with a maximum of 60 points. A comparison of the parental responses to the K-ASQ with the results from other validated assessment tools proved the validity of the K-ASQ: the percentage agreement of the results between the K-ASQ and the Korean version of the Denver II was 97% for 27-month-old (Lee et al., 2011). The alpha reliability of the K-ASQ was 0.74, 0.73 and 0.70 in the 2008, 2009 and 2010 waves, respectively.

Maternal distress The degree of maternal depression was assessed by the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) (Kessler et al., 2002), a simple measure of psychological distress involving six questions on one’s emotional state (e.g. During the past 4 weeks, how much of the time did you feel: so sad that nothing could cheer you up?; nervous?; restless orﬁdgety?; hopeless?; that everything was an effort?; and worthless?). The alpha reliability of the K6 was 0.99, 0.99 and 0.97 in the 2008, 2009 and 2010 waves, respectively. The K6 was validated on the Korean population (Paik, 2010). Each of the six questions was rated on a 5-point Likert scale, from 1 (none of the time) to 5 (all of the time). The ratings of all six questions were totaled, yielding a minimum score of 6 and a maximum score of 30. Scores at the lower end of the scale indicate a low level of psychological distress, while higher scores indicate a high level of psychological distress.

Stressful life events Twenty-seven items regarding stress-causing family life events within the past one year were rated either‘0’or‘ 1’depending on whether the event was experienced (=1) or not (=0) (e.g.‘Took out a loan or reﬁnanced a loan to cover Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development9of29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd increased expenses’;‘A parent/spouse died’;‘Parent/spouse became seriously ill or injured’;‘A member lost or quit a job’;‘Spouse/parent was separated or divorced’). These items were taken from the Family Inventory of Life Events and Changes (FILE) (McCubbin, Patterson, & Wilson, 1982), the translated version of which was validated among Korean adults (Choi & Ok, 1997). Scores were totaled, higher scores indicating a higher frequency of stressful family experiences during the past one year and a higher degree of tension and negative emotions within the family commensurate with the stressful events. The reliability coefﬁcient of the FILE was 0.67, 0.62 and 0.64 in the 2008, 2009 and 2010 waves, respectively.

Marital satisfaction Mother’s overall marital satisfaction was assessed by the Revised-Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (RKMSS), which was adapted from the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMSS) to the Korean cultural context and validated (Chung, 2004). Four items were rated on a 5-point Likert Scale (1 = very dissatisﬁed to 5 = very satisﬁed) and totaled for the analyses (Min: 4 points, Max: 20 points) (alpha = 0.98, 0.94 and 0.96 in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively). Higher scores indicate higher levels of marital satisfaction in mothers.

Analysis Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test cross-lagged models consisting of autoregressive and cross-time transactional paths between emotionality, parenting and the respective domain of three development outcomes (i.e. communication, personal-social and problem-solving) across the three waves of data (see Figure 1). The model also included within-time correlations among negative emotionality, parenting and each developmental outcome; for readability and simplicity, these within-time correlations have not been presented in theﬁnal model (Figures 2–6). The model was estimated using the robust maximum likelihood estimator in the M PLUS 7.11 (Muthén & Muthén, 2013). Based on the zero-order within-time correlations (Tables 2–4), the effects of maternal distress, marital satisfaction and stressful life events on both negative emotionality and Figure 2. Cross-lagged models among negative emotionality, responsive parenting and communication outcomes.

10 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd parenting were controlled in the model to prevent spurious associations from appearing. Family SES (a composite of parental education and family income) and maternal age were deleted as confounders in theﬁnal model (Figures 2–4) because when their effects on the main variables were controlled, the modelﬁt indices [e.g. comparativeﬁt index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)] dropped as compared to when they were not, and they had no or very weak signiﬁcant correlations with the main constructs across the three waves.

To test the moderating effects of child gender in the associations among the main constructs, a multiple group SEM was conducted in the following steps (Bollen, 1989). First, the hypothesized paths among the variables were constrained to be equal in the models for boys and girls, respectively. Next, the difference in the Figure 3. Cross-lagged models among negative emotionality, responsive parenting and personal-social outcomes.

Figure 4. Cross-lagged models among negative emotionality, responsive parenting and problem-solving outcomes.

Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development11 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd chi-squared statistics between the unconstrained and constrained models was calculated. Then, this chi-squared difference statistic was compared to the chi-squared distribution to see whether the constrained and unconstrained models were signiﬁcantly different from each other.

RESULTS Descriptive Statistics The descriptive statistics of negative emotionality, parenting and developmental outcomes at three measurement points have been presented in Table 1. Negative emotionality for girls was slightly higher than that for boys across all three points, but signiﬁcant difference between the two groups was found only at W 3(t= 2.23, p<.05). Responsive parenting for girls was also slightly higher only at W 3than that for boys (t= 1.94,p<.05). Finally, all socio-cognitive outcomes of girls were Figure 5. Cross-lagged models among negative emotionality, responsive parenting and communication outcomes for boys (n= 828).

Figure 6. Cross-lagged models among negative emotionality, responsive parenting and communication outcomes for girls (n= 792).

12 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Table 1. Descriptive statistics on temperament, parenting, and social developmental outcomes Boys Girls Total Mean (SD) Min/max Mean (SD) Min/max Mean (SD) Negative emotionality NE at W 1 13.60 (2.97) (n= 811) 5/25 13.63 (3.11) (n= 779) 6/25 13.62 (3.04) (n= 1590) NE at W 2 13.41 (3.06) (n= 825) 5/25 13.61 (3.24) (n= 787) 5/25 13.51 (3.15) (n= 1612) NE at W 3 16.06 (2.05) (n= 811) 9/23 16.28 (2.00) (n= 770) 7/22 16.17 (2.03) (n= 1581) Responsive Parenting Parenting at W 1 24.20 (2.94) (n= 758) 14/30 23.24 (3.03) (n= 725) 6/30 24.22 (2.98) (n= 1483) Parenting at W 2 23.43 (2.89) (n= 824) 14/30 23.47 (2.98) (n= 789) 14/30 23.44 (2.93) (n= 1613) Parenting at W 3 22.87 (3.28) (n= 814) 6/30 23.17 (2.94) (n= 774) 12/30 23.02 (3.11) (n= 1588) Communication Communication at W 1 53.89 (8.83) (n= 828) 15/60 53.76 (8.72) (n= 792) 10/60 53.83 (8.78) (n= 1620) Communication at W 2 47.75 (11.57) (n= 828) 5/60 51.04 (10.29) (n= 792) 10/60 49.54 (11.09) (n= 1620) Communication at W 3 50.61 (12.42) (n= 828) 0/60 55.02 (9.09) (n= 792) 10/60 52.76 (11.14) (n= 1620) Personal-social Personal-social at W 1 55.03 (7.79) (n= 828) 10/60 54.44 (8.32) (n= 792) 15/60 54.74 (8.05) (n= 1620) Personal-social at W 2 51.53 (11.41) (n= 828) 5/60 53.24 (10.32) (n= 792) 5/60 52.37 (10.92) (n= 1620) Personal-social at W 3 54.11 (9.32) (n= 828) 0/60 55.767.83 (n= 792) 20/60 54.92 (8.68) (n= 1620) Problem-solving Problem-solving at W 1 56.17 (7.43) (n= 828) 0/60 56.00 (7.26) (n= 792) 20/60 56.08 (7.35) (n= 1620) Problem-solving at W 2 48.59 (12.67) (n= 828) 0/60 50.20 (11.23) (n= 792) 0/60 49.38 (12.01) (n= 1620) Problem-solving at W 3 53.19 (8.53) (n= 828) 0/60 55.00 (6.94) (n= 792) 20/60 54.07 (7.85) (n= 1620) W1,ﬁrst measurement wave (2008); W 2, second measurement wave (2009); W 3, third measurement wave (2010) Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development13 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd signiﬁcantly higher than those of boys at W 2and W 3(communication:t= 6.04, p<.001 at W 2;t= 8.12,p<.001 at W 3; personal-social outcome:t= 3.15,p<.001 at W 2;t= 3.84,p<.001 at W 3; problem-solving:t= 2.71,p<.01 at W 2;t= 4.67, p<.001 at W 3) while there was no signiﬁcant difference at the initial point (W 1) between the two groups.

Correlations among All Study Variables The within-time correlations among all study variables have been presented in Tables 2–4 and the cross-time correlations of the main constructs in Table 5. Nega- tive emotionality was concurrently associated with lower levels of responsive parenting at W 1(r= 0.117,p<.001) and W 2(r= 0.216,p<.001), but not at W 3 (Tables 2–4). Responsive parenting tended to be associated with slightly higher levels of developmental outcomes (communication, personal-social and problem-solving outcomes) concurrently and prospectively across all three waves, whereas negative emotionality was concurrently associated with lower levels of personal-social (r= 0.081,p<.001) and problem-solving (r= 0.058,p<.05) outcomes only at W 2. The within-time correlations between the three developmen- tal outcomes were moderately strong (r= 0.5,p<.001) at W 1and were slightly weaker at W 2and W 3(r= 0.3–0.4,p<.001) (Tables 2–4). The over-time correlations within the respective domain of socio-cognitive developmental outcomes across three measurement points were rather weak (r= 0.1–0.2,p<.001) (Table 5).

Correlations between the negative emotionality estimates of adjacent years tended to become weaker from W 1to W 3(Table 5). Finally, overall, the family contextual factors (i.e. maternal distress, stressful life events and marital satisfaction) were consistently associated with negative emotionality and responsive parenting throughout all the three measurement points (Tables 2–4).

Testing the Cross-lagged Model The structural models for each of the developmental outcomes and each gender (Figures 2–6)ﬁt the data well. The modelﬁt indices (see Figures 2–6) satisﬁed the criteria (CFI≥.95, RMSEA≤.06, and SRMR≤.08) recommended by Hu and Bentler (1999) for a relatively goodﬁt between the data and a hypothesized model.

Concurrent paths among negative emotionality, parenting and each developmen- tal outcome have not been presented in Figures 2–6 for readability. The rest of this section addresses the research questions presented earlier.

1 How stable are negative emotionality, responsive parenting behaviours and developmental outcomes over time?

All the autoregressive paths were statistically signiﬁcant and in positive directions, suggesting a cross-time stability in negative emotionality, responsive parenting behaviours and developmental outcomes, except autoregressive paths of socio-cognitive development between W 1and W 3(Figures 2–4). Socio-cognitive development tended to show only a very weak degree of consistency over time (0.13–0.25). Negative emotionality (0.20–0.44) and responsive parenting (0.39–0.46) showed low to moderate degrees of stability. Finally, the stability of negative emotionality and responsive parenting decreased over time from infancy to toddlerhood, while that of communication and problem-solving abilities increased. 14 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Table 2. Zero-order correlations among variables related to temperament, parenting, social developmental outcomes, socio-demographics and domestic experiences at Wave 1 No. 12345678910 1 Family SES–––––––––– 2 Child sex 1 0.037 (n= 1535)––––––––– 3 Maternal age0.178*** (n= 1498)0.043 (n= 1407)–––––––– 4 Maternal distress 0.078*** (n= 1396) 0.034 (n= 1475) 0.053* (n= 1471)––––––– 5 Stressful live events 0.133*** (n= 1405) 0.043 + (n= 1486)0.049* (n= 1492)0.264*** (n= 1475)–––––– 6 Marital satisfaction0.113*** (n= 1403) 0.010 (n= 1481) 0.071* (n= 1428) 0.382*** (n= 1472) 0.205*** (n= 1481)––––– 7 Negative emotionality 0.042 (n= 1508)0.004 (n= 1590) 0.118*** (n= 1520)0.215*** (n= 1450)0.049 + (n= 1459) 0.109*** (n= 1454)–––– 8 Parenting 0.057* (n= 1402)0.006 (n= 1483)0.014 (n= 1468) 0.268*** (n= 1472) 0.062* (n= 1483)0.206*** (n= 1478) 0.117*** (n= 1456)–– – 9 Communication 0.004 (n= 1535) 0.007 (n= 1620) 0.015 (n= 1580) 0.057* (n= 1475) 0.039 (n= 1486)0.036 (n= 1481) 0.017 (n= 1590)0.285** (n= 1483)–– 10 Personal-social 0.011 (n= 1535) 0.037 (n= 1620) 0.022 (n= 1580) 0.082** (n= 1475) 0.074* (n= 1486)0.025 (n= 1481)0.026 (n= 1590)0.100*** (n= 1483)0.488*** (n= 1620)– 11 Problem-solving 0.036 (n= 1535) 0.011 (n= 1620) 0.013 (n= 1580) 0.080* (n= 1475) 0.057* (n= 1486)0.034 (n= 1481)0.021 (n= 1590)0.100*** (n= 1483)0.441*** (n= 1620)0.526*** (n= 1620) 1Boys were coded as 1 and girls as 2.+p<.10.

*p<.05.

**p<.01.

***p<.001. Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development15 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Table 3. Zero-order correlations among variables related to temperament, parenting, social developmental outcomes, socio-demographics and domestic experiences at wave 2 No. 12345678910 1 Family SES–––––––––– 2 Child sex 1 0.037 (n= 1535)– 3 Maternal age 0.178*** (n= 1498)0.043 (n= 1407) 4 Maternal distress 0.141*** (n= 1524) 0.011 (n= 1609) 0.043 (n= 1614) 5 Stressful live events 0.189*** (n= 1535)0.026 (n= 1620)0.015 (n= 1570)0.308*** (n= 1609) 6 Marital satisfaction0.130*** (n= 1515)0.006 (n= 1598) 0.027 (n= 1519) 0.337*** (n= 1587) 0.218*** (n= 1598) 7 Negative emotionality 0.069** (n= 1527)0.030 (n= 1612) 0.077*** (n= 1573)0.247*** (n= 1606)0.112*** (n= 1612) 0.123*** ( n= 1590) 8 Parenting 0.117*** (n= 1528)0.007 (n= 1613)0.067 (n= 1564) 0.324*** (n= 1604) 0.071** (n= 1613)0.203*** (n= 1591) 0.216*** (n= 1607) 9 Communication 0.020 (n= 1535)0.149*** (n= 1620) 0.013 (n= 1544) 0.019 (n= 1609)0.017 (n= 1620)0.006 (n= 1598) 0.039 (n= 1612)0.088*** (n= 1613) 10 Personal-social 0.000 (n= 1535)0.078*** (n= 1620) 0.015 (n= 1544) 0.056* (n= 1609)0.028 (n= 1620)0.026 (n= 1598) 0.081** (n= 1612) 0.086*** (n= 1613)0.400*** (n= 1620) 11 Problem-solving 0.025 (n= 1535)0.067** (n= 1620)0.001 (n= 1544) 0.033 (n= 1609)0.021 (n= 1620)0.033 (n= 1598) 0.058* (n= 1612)0.070** (n= 1613)0.398*** (n= 1620)0.424*** (n= 1620) 1Boys were coded as 1 and girls as 2.+p<.10.

*p<.05.

**p<.01.

***p<.001. 16 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Table 4. Zero-order correlations among variables related to temperament, parenting, social developmental outcomes, socio-demographics and domestic experiences at wave 3 No. 12345678910 1 Family SES–––––––––– 2 Child sex 1 0.037 (n= 1535)– 3 Maternal age 0.178*** (n= 1498)0.043 (n= 1407) 4 Maternal distress 0.068** (n= 1503) 0.054* (n= 1586)0.033 (n= 1479) 5 Stressful live events 0.202*** (n= 1512) 0.023 (n= 1596)0.005 (n= 1488)0.303*** (n= 1586) 6 Marital satisfaction 0.102*** (n= 1498)0.038 (n= 1579)0.001 (n= 1501) 0.313*** (n= 1570) 0.191*** (n= 1579) 7 Negative emotionality 0.038 (n= 1498)0.056* (n= 1581) 0.026 (n= 1539)0.187*** (n= 1573)0.115*** (n= 1581) 0.024 (n= 1566) 8 Parenting 0.106*** (n= 1504) 0.055* (n= 1588) 0.000 (n= 1511) 0.318*** (n= 1579) 0.131*** (n= 1588)0.228*** (n= 1572) 0.006 (n= 1574) 9 Communication 0.091*** (n= 1535)0.198*** (n= 1620) 0.031 (n= 1591) 0.106*** (n= 1586) 0.038 (n= 1596)0.065* (n= 1579) 0.006 (n= 1581)0.176*** (n= 1588) 10 Personal-social 0.015 (n= 1535)0.095*** (n= 1620)0.001 (n= 1591) 0.030 (n= 1586) 0.033 (n= 1596)0.081** (n= 1579) 0.015 (n= 1581)0.071** (n= 1588) 0.281*** (n= 1620) 11 Problem-solving 0.048 + (n= 1535)0.116*** (n= 1620) 0.003 (n= 1591) 0.038 (n= 1586) 0.025 (n= 1596)0.045 + (n= 1579) 0.047 + (n= 1581)0.088*** (n= 1588)0.379*** (n= 1620)0.371*** (n= 1620) 1Boys were coded as 1 and girls as 2.+p<.10.

*p<.05.

**p<.01.

***p<.001. Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development17 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Table 5. Zero-order correlations among temperament, parenting, social developmental outcomes at waves 1, 2 and 3 No. 1 2 34567891011121314 1NE(W 1)– – – ––––––––––– 2NE(W 2) .466***– – ––––––––––– 3NE(W 3) .217*** .277***– ––––––––––– 4P(W 1) .117*** .156*** .028––––––––––– 5P(W 2) .099*** .216*** .052* .509***–––––––––– 6P(W 3) .089*** .166*** .006 .445*** .554***––––––––– 7 Com (W 1) .017 .020 .031 .085* .069** .058*–––––––– 8 Com (W 2) .006 .039 .014 .098** .088*** .086*** .162***––––––– 9 Com (W 3) .011 .023 .001 .127*** .114*** .176*** .078** .263***–––––– 10 PS (W 1) .026 .035 .007 .100*** .085** .063* .488*** .169*** .093***––––– 11 PS (W 2) .049 + .081** .001 .089** .086** .089*** .158*** .400*** .136*** .190***–––– 12 PS (W 3) .027 .038 .015 .046 + .044 + .071** .069** .241*** .281*** .061* .152***––– 13 PrS (W 1) .021 .019 .008 .100** .105*** .075** .441*** .154*** .076** .526*** .187*** .086***–– 14 PrS (W 2) .020 .058* .041 .053* .070** .061* .160*** .398*** .179*** .138*** .424*** .163*** .136***– 15 PrS (W 3) .019 .021 .047 + .085** .049* .088** .103*** .247*** .379*** .096*** .158*** .371*** .092*** .230*** NE, negative emotionality; P, parenting; Com, communication; PS, personal-social; PrS, problem-solving; W 1,ﬁrst measurement wave (2008); W 2, second measurement wave (2009); W 3, third measurement wave (2010).

+p<.10.

*p<.05.

**p<.01.

***p<.001. 18 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd 2 Are there any transactional effects between negative emotionality and responsive parenting behaviours over time?

When accounting for domestic experiences that were associated with both negative emotionality and parenting, and concurrent associations among negative emotionality, parenting and a developmental outcome at each measurement point, only responsive parenting at W 1longitudinally predicted lower levels of negative emotionality at W 2( .067,p<.01), but not vice versa, nor at different waves (Figures 2–4).

3 Are there any transactional effects between parenting behaviours and each developmental outcome over time?

Although no transactional cross-lagged paths were found between responsive parenting and developmental outcomes during the same period, the positive impact on each other was observed across different developmental periods (Figures 2–4). The positive impact of responsive parenting on subsequent development was found in infancy and toddlerhood (i.e. communication), when concurrent correlations at each measurement point were taken into account. The impact of the child’s development on responsive parenting was found in infancy:

children’s higher problem-solving predicted higher levels of subsequent responsive parenting. Not reaching signiﬁcance level (.05), children’s personal-social outcomes marginally predicted higher levels of subsequent responsive parenting in toddlerhood (0.039,p= .069).

4Does the child’s negative emotionality impact subsequent developmental outcomes?

When the concurrent covariance was controlled, the statistically signiﬁcant impact of negative emotionality on child development was not found: negative emotionality at W 1only marginally predicted lower levels of personal-social outcomes at W 2( 0.043,p= 0.079) (Figures 2–4).

5 Do these over-time relations among the variables (RQs 1–4) differ as a function of the child’s gender? That is, does the child’s gender moderate these associations among the variables?

The constrained model, in which all the paths are set to be equal between boys’ and girls’models, did not produce statistically signiﬁcant differences in modelﬁt in comparison with the unconstrained model across all developmental outcomes, thereby failing to reject the null hypothesis that the pattern of associations does not vary between boys and girls (communication:Δχ 2(127) = 115.09,p= 0.76; personal-social outcomes:Δχ 2(127) = 117.47,p= 0.71; and problem-solving:Δχ 2 (127) = 131.83,p= 0.37). Although signiﬁcant moderation effects of the child’s gender were not found in this study because the signiﬁcant paths in the models for boys and girls did not differ greatly from each other, a few signiﬁcantly different paths were observed between boys and girls. The most prominent difference was the cross-lagged reciprocity observed between responsive parenting and negative emotionality in infancy only among girls (Figures 5 and 6; the rest ofﬁnal models, for boys and girls separately, are available from the author on request). The coefﬁcient for a path from negative emotionality at W 1 to responsive parenting at W 2was .064– .065, (p<.05) and that for a path from responsive parenting at W 1to negative emotionality at W 2was .074– .078 (p<.05) depending on the developmental outcome included in the model (i.e.

communication, personal-social and problem-solving outcomes). Another gender Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development19 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd difference was that responsive parenting at W 2 predicted higher levels of communication ability at W 3only among boys (.091,p<.05): the signiﬁcant path between the two variables found in the entire sample disappeared in the girls-only model. DISCUSSION The present study attempted to address the gaps in the literature by capturing the differences in longitudinal interplay among negative emotionality, parenting and the respective domain of early socio-cognitive development (communication, personal-social skills and problem-solving abilities) between boys and girls during theﬁrst 2 years of life, with a non-clinical sample from a non-Western culture.

Overall, theﬁndings of this study demonstrated that negative emotionality, parenting behaviours, and children’s socio-cognitive development during the initial years are stable with low to moderate degrees of associations, which are partially transactional and different between boys and girls, while exhibiting a general cross-cultural similarity.

Stability of Negative Emotionality and Socio-cognitive Development As found in the current study, many of the previous studies that examined relative or structural stability of temperamental characteristics during infancy to early childhood by investigating cross-age correlations or structural coefﬁcients revealed low to moderate degrees of consistency (0.2–0.5) in negative emotionality (Bornstein et al., 2015; Casalin et al., 2012; Komsi et al., 2006; Putnam et al., 2008; Putnam et al., 2002). Focusing on over-time changes in the consistency of negative emotionality, extant studies have reported mixedﬁndings regarding developmen- tal trajectories during the early years of life. In line with the observed reduction in the consistency of negative emotionality from infancy to toddlerhood in the present study, Bornstein et al. (2015) uncovered that during theﬁrst year of life, stability of temperamental distress to limitations, related to reactivity measured in this study, became weaker over time. In contrast, Putnam et al. (2008) found that cross-age correlations of negative emotionality traits increased in magnitude between toddlerhood and early childhood than between infancy and toddlerhood.

However, unlike some of the prior studies that solely counted on the comparison of correlations without controlling for probable covariates, the present study examined cross-age relations by holding constant the concurrent family factors found to affect the consistency of negative emotionality, such as maternal distress, marital satisfaction and stressful life events, while also taking into account concurrent correlations among the variables. Thus, the present study’s estimates of relative stability, extracted from more rigorous analyses, reinforced the conclusion that negative emotionality tends to be only moderately stable during infancy and toddlerhood in a Korean sample.

Absolute temperamental stability, that is, over-time mean level changes in temperament, particularly in the dimensions related to negative emotionality, has also been found to vary depending on the developmental periods (Bridgett et al., 2009; Lipscomb et al., 2011; Partridge & Lerner, 2007). For example, Bridgett et al. (2009) and Lipscomb et al. (2011) have found a continuous increase in negative emotionality during infancy and early toddlerhood, while Partridge and Lerner (2007), based on more frequent and longer observation, have reported 20 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd an increase in negative emotions until toddlerhood and a decrease thereafter until early childhood.

Reduction in the relative or absolute stability of negative emotionality, especially the former, which was found to occur in toddlerhood in the present study, could be at least partially explained by the biological maturation of the self-regulatory system in toddlerhood (Posner, Rothbart, Sheese, & Voelker, 2012; Rothbart & Bates, 2006). For example, the development of the executive attention system, which controls inhibition and attention shifting,ﬁrst appears towards the end of theﬁrst year of life and continues to develop during childhood (Calkins, 2004; Posner et al., 2012). Attention control, such as avoidance of negative stimuli, is an important strategy for infants to modulate negative emotions aroused by external factors (Calkins, 2004). Thus, maturation of the physiological foundation for emotional self-regulation could explain the decrease in negative emotionality stability after infancy. However, the observed decrease in the stability of negative emotionality over time might have resulted from a measurement error or simply from the differences in the interval between W 1and W 2, and W 2and W 3 (W 1–W 2: about 8 months, W 2–W 3: about 12 months) (Bornstein et al., 2015; Parade, Dickstein, Schiller, Hayden, & Seifer, 2014). Indeed, greater stability is expected over brief periods, in comparison to longer time spans.

Socio-cognitive developmental outcomes showed only a very weak strength of consistency. However, the lack of longitudinal studies examining the stability of early socio-cognitive development during infancy and toddlerhood makes it difﬁcult to judge whether the low consistency in the developmental outcomes is mainly due to measurement error or indeed demonstrates that the characteristics of early socio-cognitive development are considerably malleable to environmental inﬂuence (Houck, 1999). Thus, the degree of stability in each of the developmental areas would gradually become evident with more future studies.

Reciprocity in the Mother–Child Relationship between Boys and Girls: Infancy vs. Toddlerhood The impact of negative emotionality on subsequent responsive parenting was not observed in the present study, which might be attributed to the characteristics of Korean mothers. Many studies using Western samples have shown that mothers having temperamentally difﬁcult children are inclined to display less responsive or more rejecting parenting over time (Larsson et al., 2007; Lengua, 2006; Lengua & Kovacs, 2005). However, given Korean mothers’tendency to respond with self-blame or guilt to their children’s negative developmental outcomes (Lee et al., 2005) and perception of children as immature in emotional self-regulation (Ziehm et al., 2013), Korean mothers might have been less bothered by infants’ and toddlers’negative emotionality, which led to no observed negative impact of negative emotionality on subsequent responsive parenting overall. Thus, future studies with successive panel data would be able to disclose variations in the relations between responsive parenting and negative emotionality across longer developmental periods, along with changes in mothers’expectations and parenting emphases towards their growing children (McNally, Eisenberg, & Harris, 1991; Roberts, Jeanne, & Block, 1984).

The absence of signiﬁcant paths from responsive parenting to subsequent negative emotionality during toddlerhood might have resulted from the relatively lower malleability of the brain during toddlerhood than during infancy (Colantuoni et al., 2011; Kang et al., 2011; Naumova et al., 2013), when taking into Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development21 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd account the concurrent associations between them. Considering that the formation of synaptic connections in the prefrontal cortex, involved in emotional regulation (Etkin, Egner, & Kalisch, 2011), is relatively more active in infancy than in other developmental periods, children’s negative emotionality in toddlerhood might have been less susceptible to mothers’parenting, as compared to that in infancy.

This possibility also aligns with theﬁnding that fewer signiﬁcant cross-time associations were found between responsive parenting and socio-cognitive developmental outcomes during toddlerhood than during infancy.

Although the transactionality between responsive parenting and negative emotionality was not found in the overall analysis (using the whole sample) across infancy and toddlerhood, it was observed among the girls in infancy. When accounting for covariates (i.e. maternal distress, marital satisfaction and stressful life events) and within-time correlations, each of the observed strengths of the cross-lagged paths between responsive parenting and negative emotionality was similar, being also comparable to the average effect size (R= .06,p<.05) revealed in the Paulussen-Hoogeboom et al. (2007) meta-analysis of relevant studies.

Additionally, these bidirectional relations between responsive parenting and negative emotionality aligned with prior studies showing reciprocity between parenting and negative emotionality in older children (Combs-Ronto et al., 2009; Larsson et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2012; Lengua, 2006; Lengua & Kovacs, 2005) and the signiﬁcant impact of the child’s difﬁcult temperament on parenting behaviours (e.g. Bridgett et al., 2009; Lipscomb et al., 2011).

As hypothesized, a signiﬁcant path from negative emotionality to responsive parenting was not found in boys. This result might have been partially derived from parents’tendency to approve boys’expressions of negative-dominant emotions (e.g. anger and contempt) to a greater extent than of girls, while the opposite pattern was observed with respect to negative-submissive emotions (e.g. shyness and fear), which was in line with traditional gender-stereotyped expectations (Chaplin et al., 2005; Garside & Klimes-Dougan, 2002; Gordon, 1983; Klein, 1984; Putnam et al., 2002). Regarding theﬁnding that the positive impact of responsive parenting on subsequent negative emotionality during infancy was found only among girls, possible developmental differences in gene expression between the male and female brain (Kang et al., 2011; Weickert et al., 2009), which are mostly pronounced during the prenatal and neonatal periods, might have contributed to engendering the result by giving rise to gender-related variations in susceptibility to environmental inﬂuences, in concert with parents’ gender-related socializing practices (Fausto-Sterling et al., 2012a, 2012b).

Next, regarding the associations between parenting and child development, responsive parenting overall predicted higher levels of communication in infancy and toddlerhood as had been expected. These results are compatible with the well-establishedﬁndings of the positive impact of warm and responsive parenting on children’s subsequent language and social development among Western samples (e.g. Barnett et al., 2012; Bornstein et al., 2007; Deater-Deckard et al., 2001; Deiner & Kim, 2004; Landry et al., 2006; Tamis-LeMonda, Bornstein, & Bauwell, 2001), suggesting that physiological responses towards a nurturing environment featured by warmth and responsiveness tap a universal biological mechanism conducive to human adaptation and development.

Turning to gender differences in the cross-lagged relations between responsive parenting and communication outcomes, it seems that boys are more sensitive to responsive parenting at least in terms of early language development, although their average scores on communication were consistently lower than those of girls:

between W 2and W 3, responsive parenting predicted higher levels of subsequent 22 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd communication ability only in boys, and not in girls. Theseﬁndings are inconsistent with the Barnett et al. (2012)ﬁnding that sensitive parenting at 12 months predicted receptive communication at 24 months among both boys and girls, with path coefﬁcients being greater among girls than among boys. Prior studies have shown that children’s language ability is positively associated with the amount of parental speech directed to them (Hart & Risely, 1995; Weizman & Snow, 2001), and parents tend to provide more verbal stimulations to or engage in conversation with daughters than with sons (Clearﬁeld & Nelson, 2006; Leaper, 2002; Leaper, Anderson, & Sanders, 1998). However, due to the absence of information regarding the amount and quality of linguistic input offered to the sample of boys and girls in the present study, along with chance of measurement error, thisﬁnding remains incomprehensible at this point. Thus, more research is needed to examine the interplay among sensitive parenting, linguistic input and the child’s language outcomes and the role of the child’s gender in the interplay during infancy and toddlerhood.

Finally, it should be noted that the unidirectional path from parenting to negative emotionality found in this study does not indicate that the socialization process in the early years is solely determined by parents, with no contribution from the children. Although the temperamental emotional negativity did not predict the changes in parenting behaviours longitudinally (in the analysis of the entire sample), children’s early problem-solving ability (and personal-social outcome marginally) predicted higher levels of subsequent responsive parenting.

The evidence showing children’s early socio-cognitive development contributes to higher responsive parenting corroborates reciprocity in parent–child relations, alongside a line of research unveiling bidirectional associations between the child’s temperament and parenting.

In sum, the present studyﬁndings are in accordance with those of previous studies on European–American samples in three aspects: (i) the observed moderate stabilities in negative emotionality (~.2–.4) and responsive parenting (~.3–.45); (ii) the positive impact of responsive parenting on children’s subsequent socio-cognitive development; and (iii) the impact of children’s development on subsequent parenting behaviours. In contrast, aﬁnding that deviated from the mainstreamﬁndings from Western samples was that children’s negative emotionality did not predict subsequent parenting in the overall sample.

Hypothetically, the observed dominance of unidirectional paths from responsive parenting to negative emotionality may be because mothers’responses to the child are inﬂuenced by cultural child-caring beliefs, while children’s physiological responses to favourable environmental inﬂuences (responsive parenting) during the initial years of life concern universal or cross-culturally similar aspects of human adaptive behaviours. Additionally, the reciprocity between responsive parenting and negative emotionality observed only among girls, only in infancy, suggests that different patterns in parent–child interactions might appear as mothers’expectations towards children’s behaviours change depending on the children’s age and gender (as partially observed in the current study).

Limitations Important limitations should be noted. First, the data used in the current analyses were gathered through parental report and, thus, were exposed to parents’ subjective evaluations and judgments. Additionally, since parents were a common source of both child temperament and their own parenting behaviours, these two Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development23 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd lines of information might not be potentially independent (Putnam et al., 2002).

However, some studies revealed a strong objective component in parental ratings (Bates & McFayden-Ketchum, 2000) and convergence between parental ratings and observational assessments (Kochanska, Murray, & Coy, 1997). Indeed, parents’report of children’s developmental outcomes used in the current study showed extremely high accordance (97%) with the objective assessment by examiners. Next, this study could not take into account mothers’levels of self-regulation in the relationship between the child’s negative emotionality and parenting behaviours despite the recent evidence that parental self-regulation can be a moderating factor in temperament-parenting associations (Bridgett, Burt, Edwards, & Deater-Deckard, 2015). Additionally, this study heavily focused on attributes such as irritability, reactivity and unsoothability among many other temperamental traits under the overarching construct of negative emotionality.

Considering cross-cultural studies revealing discrepancies in parental responses towards different negative emotionality traits, especially in terms of negative-submissive emotions (e.g. inhibition and shyness) (Chen et al., 1998; Chen, Yang, & Fu, 2012), further studies are needed to examine the associations among other negative emotionality characteristics, parenting and child development with samples from different cultures. Finally, in relation to the previous point, negative emotionality in the current study was a rather broad construct consisting of a few reactivity-related general traits, not measuring one speciﬁc dimension of difﬁcult temperament (e.g. fear, anger and frustration), which might have obscured the reciprocity in the associations between negative emotionality and responsive parenting.

CONCLUSION The main implication of theseﬁndings for parents, teachers and policy-makers is the importance of warm and responsive childcare during the initial years of life, especially during theﬁrst year. The observed positive impact of responsive parenting reinforces the signiﬁcance of persistent provision of warm and responsive child caring, no matter how difﬁcult children are, and the importance of establishing systematic channels to provide new parents and infant day care workers with relevant information and training. In particular, the observed greater impact of responsive parenting during infancy points to the need to provide pre-parent education for expectant parents to reduce unintentional harm that can occur due to parents’ignorance and inexperience during theﬁrst year.

Additionally, the negative associations between stress-generating family factors and responsive parenting found in this study support the need for social policies and interventions that include comprehensive social services and parent education (e.g. the Comprehensive Conditional Cash Transfer; Fiszbein & Schady, 2009), in order to directly tackle stress-generating factors in at-risk families and make home environment developmentally conducive and nurturing.

REFERENCES Ahl, R. E., Fausto-Sterling, A., García-Coll, C. & Seifer, R. (2013). Gender and discipline in 5-12-month-old infants: A longitudinal study.Infant Behavior and Development,36, 199–209.

Bidirectional associations among sensitive parenting, language development, and social competence.Infant and Child Development,21, 374–393.

Bates, J. E. & McFayden-Ketchum, S. (2000). Temperament and parent-child relations as interacting factors in children’s behavioral adjustment. In V. J. Molfese & D. Molfese (Eds.), Temperament and personality development across the lifespan (edn, pp.

141–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Belsky, J. & Jaffee, S. R. (2006). The multiple determinants of parenting. In D. Cicchetti & D.

J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology. Vol. 3. Risk, disorder, and adaptation (2nd edn, pp. 38–85). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Boivin, M., P’erusse, D., Dionne, G., Saysset, V., Zoccolillo, M., Tarabulsy, G.,…Tr e m b l a y, R . E .

(2005). The genetic-environmental etiology of parents’perceptions and self-assessed behaviors toward their 5-month-old infants in a large twin and singleton sample.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,46, 612–630.

Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equation with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

Bornstein, M. H. (1989). Between caretakers and their young: Two modes of interaction and their consequences for cognitive growth. In M. H. Bornstein & J. S. Bruner (Eds.), Interaction in human development: Behavioural and biological perspectives (edn, pp.

147–170). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc..

Bornstein, M. H., Hendricks, C., Haynes, O. M. & Painter, K. M. (2007). Maternal sensitivity and child responsiveness: associations with social context, maternal characteristics, and child characteristics in a multivariate analysis.Infancy,12(2), 189–223.

Bornstein, M. H., Putnick, D. L., Gartstein, M. A., Hahn, C., Auestad, N. & O’Connor, D. L.

(2015). Infant temperament: Stability by age, gender, birth order, term status, and socioeconomic status.Child Development,86(3), 844–863.

Bradley, R. H., Caldwell, B. M., Rock, S., Ramey, C. T., Barnard, K. E., Gray, C.,…Johnson, D. L. (1989). Home environment and cognitive development in theﬁrst 3 years of life: A collaborative study involving six sites and three ethnic groups in North America.

Developmental Psychology,25, 217–235.

Bradley, R. H. & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development.Annual Review of Psychology,53, 371–399.

Bridgett, D. J., Gartstein, M. A., Putnam, S. P., McKay, T., Iddins, E., Robertson, C.,… Rittmueller, A. (2009). Maternal and contextual inﬂuences and the effect of temperament development during infancy on parenting in toddlerhood.Infant Behavior & Development, 32(1), 103–116.

Bridgett, D. J., Burt, N. M., Edwards, E. S. & Deater-Deckard, K. (2015). Intergenerational transmission of self-regulation: A multidisciplinary review and integrative conceptual framework.Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 602–654.

Brown, G. L., Craig, A. B. & Halberstadt, A. G. (2015). Parent gender differences in emotion socialization behaviors vary by ethnicity and child gender.Parenting,15(3), 135–157.

Buss, A. H. & Plomin, R. (1984). Temperament: Early developing personality traits.

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Calkins, S. D. (2004). Temperament and emotional self-regulation: Multiple models of early development. In M. Beauregard (Ed.), Consciousness, emotional self-regulation, and the brain. NY: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Cameron, N. M., Champagne, F. A., Carine, P., Fish, E. W., Ozaki-Kuroda, K. & Meaney, M.

(2005). The programming of individual differences in defensive responses and reproductive strategies in a rat through variations in maternal care.Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews,29, 843–865.

Casalin, S., Luyten, P., Vliegen, N. & Meurs, P. (2012). The structure and stability of temperament from infancy to toddlerhood: A one-year prospective study.Infant Behavior and Development,35,94–108.

Chaplin, T. M., Cole, P. M. & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2005). Parental socialization of emotion expression: Gender differences and relations to child adjustment.Emotion,5,80–88.

Chen, X., Hastings, P. D., Rubin, K. H., Chen, H. C., Cen, G. Z. & Stewart, S. L. (1998).

Child-rearing attitudes and behavioral inhibition in Chinese and Canadian toddlers: A cross-cultural study.Developmental Psychology,34, 677–686. Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development25 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Chen, X., Yang, F. & Fu, R. (2012). Culture and temperament. In M. Zentner & R. L. Shiner (Eds.), Handbook of temperament (edn, pp. 462–478). New York: Guilford.

Choi, Y. & Ok, S. (1997).가족스트레스모델의경험적검증:청소년자녀가있는중년기부부 를중심으로.[Empirical veriﬁcation of a family stress model: Focusing on families with adolescents].Journal of Korean Family Therapy,5(1), 55–78.

Chung, H. (2004). Application and revision of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale for use of Korean couples.Psychological Reports,95, 1015–1022.

Clearﬁeld, M. W. & Nelson, N. M. (2006). Sex differences in mothers’speech and play behavior with 6-, 9-, and 14-month-old infants.Sex Roles,54, 127–137.

Colantuoni, C., Lipska, B. K., Ye, T., Hyde, T. M., Tao, R., Leek, J. T.,…Kleinman, J. E. (2011).

Temporal dynamics and genetic control of transcription in the human prefrontal cortex.

Nature,478, 519–524.

Combs-Ronto, L. A., Olson, S. L., Lunkenheimer, E. S. & Sameroff, A. J. (2009). Interactions between maternal parenting and children’s early disruptive behavior: Bidirectional associations across the transition from preschool to school entry.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,37, 1151–1163.

Coplan, R. J., Barber, A. M. & Lagace-Seguin, D. G. (1999). The role of child temperament as a predictor of early literacy and numeracy skills in preschoolers.Early Childhood Research Quarterly,14, 537–553.

Deater-Deckard, K., Pike, A., Petrill, S. A., Cutting, A. L., Hughes, C. & O’ Connor, T. G. (2001).

Nonshared environmental processes in social-emotional development: an observational study of identical twin differences in the preschool period.Developmental Science,4(2), F1–F6.

Deiner, M. L. & Kim, D. Y. (2004). Maternal and child predictors of preschool children’s social competence.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,25,3–24.

Etkin, A., Egner, T. & Kalisch, R. (2011). Emotional processing in anterior cingulate and medial prefrontal cortex.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,15(2), 85–93.

Fausto-Sterling, A., García-Coll, C. G. & Lamarre, M. (2012a). Sexing the baby: Pt. 1—What do we really know about sex differentiation in theﬁrst three years of life?Social Science & Medicine,74, 1684–1692.

Fausto-Sterling, A., García-Coll, C. G. & Lamarre, M. (2012b). Sexing the baby: Pt. 2 —Applying dynamic systems theory to the emergences of sex-related differences in infants and toddlers.Social Science & Medicine,74, 1693–1702.

Fausto-Sterling, A., Crews, D., Sung, J., García-Coll, C., & Seifer, R. (2015). Multimodal sex- related differences in infant and in infant-directed maternal behaviors during months three through twelve of development.Developmental Psychology,51(10), 1351–1366.

Finch, J. & Kim, S. K. (2003). Confucian patriarchy reexamined: Korean families and the IMF economic crisis.The Good Society,11(3), 43–49.

Fiszbein, A. & Schady, N. (2009). Conditional cash transfers: Reducing present and future poverty. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Forget-Dubois, N., Boivin, M., Dionne, G., Pierce, T., Tremblay, R. E. & P’erusse, D. (2007). A longitudinal twin study of the genetic and environmental etiology of maternal hostile-reactive behavior during infancy and toddlerhood.Infant Behavior and Development,30, 453–465.

Garside, R. B. & Klimes-Dougan, B. (2002). Socialization of discrete negative emotions:

Gender differences and links with psychological distress.Sex Roles,47,115–128.

Gleason, T. R., Gower, A. L., Hohmann, L. M. & Gleason, T. C. (2005). Temperament and friendship in preschool-aged children.International Journal of Behavioral Development,29 (4), 336–344.

Goodnow, J. J. & Collins, W. A. (1990). Development according to parents: The nature, sources, and consequences of parents’ideas. London, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gordon, B. N. (1983). Maternal perception of child temperament and observed mother–child interaction.Child Psychiatry and Human Development,13(3), 153–167.

Hart, B. & Risely, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Houck, G. (1999). The measurement of child characteristics from infancy to toddlerhood:

Temperament, developmental competence, self concept, and social competence.Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing,22, 101–127.

Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.Structural Equation Modeling,6,1–55.

Huh, K., Squires, J., Lee, S. & Lee, J. (2006). K-ASQ (한국형ages & stages questionnaires)부 모작성형유아모니터링체계. [K-ASQ (Korean version of ages & stages questionnaires) parent-assessed monitoring systems of child development]. Seoul: Seoul Community Rehabilitation Center.

Kang, H. J., Kawasawa, Y. I., Cheng, F., Zhu, Y., Xu, X., Li, M.,…Sestan, N. (2011).

Spatio-temporal transcriptome of the human brain.Nature,478, 483–489.

Katainen, S., Räikkönen, K. & Keltikangas-Järvinen, L. (1997). Childhood temperament and mother’s childrearing attitudes: Stability and interaction in a three-year follow-up study.

European Journal of Personality,11, 249–265.

Kessler, R. C., Andrews, G., Colpe, L. J., Hiripi, E., Mroczek, D. K., Normand, S. L.,… Zaslavsky, A. M. (2002). Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-speciﬁc psychological distress.Psychological Medicine,32, 959–976.

Klein, P. (1984). The relation of Israeli mothers toward infants in relation to infants’ perceived temperament.Child Development,55, 1212–1218.

Komsi, N., Räikkönen, K., Pesonen, A., Heinonen, K., Keskivaara, P., Järvenpää, A. & Strandberg, T. E. (2006). Continuity of temperament from infancy to middle childhood.

Infant Behavior & Development,29, 494–508.

Kochanska, G., Murray, K. & Coy, K. C. (1997). Inhibitory control as a contributor to conscience in childhood: From toddler to school age.Child Development,68, 263–277.

Landry, S. H., Smith, K. E. & Swank, P. R. (2006). Responsive parenting: Establishing early foundations for social, communication, and independent problem-solving skills.

Developmental Psychology,42, 627–642.

Larsson, H., Viding, E., Rijsdik, F. V. & Plomin, R. (2007). Relationships between parental negativity and childhood antisocial behavior over time: A bidirectional effects model in a longitudinal genetically informative design.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,36 , 633–645.

Leaper, C. (2002). Parenting girls and boys. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (edn, Vol1, pp. 189–2726). London: Erlbaum.

Leaper, C., Anderson, K. J. & Sanders, P. (1998). Moderators of gender effects on parents’ talk to their children: A meta-analysis.Developmental Psychology,34(1), 3–17.

Lee, J., Choi, E., Do, N., Song, S., Wang, Y. & Chung, Y. (2011).한국아동패널2011사업보고 서:연구보고2011-25. [2011 annual report of the Panel Study on Korean Children: No.

2011-25]. Seoul: The Korean Institute of Child Care and Education.

Lee, I., Norr, K. F. & Oh, K. (2005). Emotional adjustment and concerns of Korean mothers of premature infants.International Journal of Nursing Studies,42(1), 21–29.

Lee, E. H., Zhou, Q., Eisenberg, N. & Wang, Y. (2012). Bidirectional relations between temperament and parenting styles in Chinese children.International Journal of Behavioral Development,37,57–67.

Lengua, L. J. (2006). Growth in temperament and parenting as predictors of adjustment during children’s transition to adolescence.Developmental Psychology,42(5), 819–832.

Lengua, L. J. & Kovacs, E. A. (2005). Bidirectional associations between temperament and parenting, and the prediction of adjustment problems in middle childhood.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,26,21–38.

Lipscomb, S. T., Leve, L. D., Harold, G. T., Neiderhiser, J. M., Shaw, D. S., Ge, X. & Reiss, D.

(2011). Trajectories of parenting and child negative emotionality during infancy and toddlerhood: A longitudinal analysis.Child Development,82(5), 1661–1675.

Markus, H. R. & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.Psychological Review,98(2), 224–253.

Martin, C. L. & Ruble, D. N. (2010). Patterns of gender development.Annual Review of Psychology,61, 353–381.

McCubbin, H., Patterson, J. & Wilson, L. (1982). FILE: Family inventory of life events and changes. In D. Olson, H. I. McCubbin, H. Barnes, A. Larsen, M. Muxen & M. Wilson (Eds.), Family inventories (edn, pp. 69 –89). St. Paul, MN: Family Social Science, University of Minnesota.

McNally, S., Eisenberg, N. & Harris, J. D. (1991). Consistency and change in maternal child-rearing practices and values: A longitudinal study.Child Development,62(1), 190–198. Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development27 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Molfese, V. J., Rudasill, K. M., Beswick, J. L., Jacobi-Vessels, J. L., Ferguson, M. C. & White, J.

M. (2010). Infant temperament, maternal personality, and parenting stress as contributors to infant developmental outcomes.Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,56(1), 49–79.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2013). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables.

User’s guide (Version 7.11). Muthén and Muthén.

Naumova, O. Y., Lee, M., Rychkov, S. Y., Vlasova, N. V. & Grigorenko, E. L. (2013). Gene expression in the human brain: The current state of the study of speciﬁcity and spatiotemporal dynamics.Child Development,84,76–88.

Noel, M., Peterson, C. & Jesso, B. (2008). The relationship of parenting stress and child temperament to language development among economically disadvantaged preschoolers.Journal of Child Language,35, 823–843.

OECD (2013). Education at a Glance 2013: OECD Indicators. OECD: Publishing.

Paik, J. (2010).노인의객관적특성과주관적지각특성이심리적안녕감과우울감에미치는 영향. [Effects of objective and subjective characteristics on the psychological well-being and depression for elderly].Journal of Social Issues,20(2), 137–173.

Parade, S. H., Dickstein, S., Schiller, M., Hayden, L. & Seifer, R. (2014). Stability of child behavioral style in theﬁrst 30 months of life: Single time point and aggregated measures.

International Journal of Behavioral Development,39(2), 121–129.

Park, S. Y. & Cheah, C. S. L. (2005). Korean mothers’proactive socialization beliefs regarding preschoolers’social skills.International Journal of Behavioral Development,29,24–34.

Park, S. Y. & Kim, U. (2006). Family, parent–child relationship, and academic achievement in Korea: Indigenous, cultural, and psychological analysis. In U. Kim, K. Yang & K.

Hwang (Eds.), Indigenous and cultural psychology: Understanding people in context (edn, pp. 421– 443). New York, NY: Springer Science Business Media.

Park, S. Y., Trommsdorff, G. & Lee, E. G. (2012). Korean mothers’intuitive socialization of their children.International Journal of Human Ecology,13(1), 39–56.

Parmar, P., Harkness, S. & Super, C. M. (2004). Asian and Euro-American parents’ ethnotheories of play and learning: Effects on preschool children’s home routines and school behaviour.International Journal of Behavioral Development,28,97–104.

Partridge, T. & Lerner, L. V. (2007). A latent growth-cure approach to infant temperament.

Infant and Child Development,16, 255–265.

Pauli-Pott, U., Mertesacker, B. & Beckmann, D. (2004). Predicting the development of infant emotionality from maternal characteristics.Development and Psychopathology,16,19–42.

Paulussen-Hoogeboom, M. C., Stams, J. J. M. G., Hermanns, J. M. A. & Peetsma, T. T. D.

(2007). Child negative emotionality and parenting from infancy to preschool: A meta-analytic review.Developmental Psychology,43(2), 438–453.

Posner, M. I., Rothbart, M. K., Sheese, B. E. & Voelker, P. (2012). Control networks and neuromodulators of early development.Developmental Psychology,48, 827–835.

Putnam, S. P., Rothbart, M. K. & Gartstein, M. A. (2008). Homotypic and heterotypic continuity ofﬁne-grained temperament during infancy, toddlerhood, and early childhood.Infant and Child Development,17, 387–405.

Putnam, S. P., Sanson, A. V. & Rothbart, M. K. (2002). Child temperament and parenting. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (edn, Vol1, pp. 255–277). London:

Erlbaum.

Reiser-Danner, L. A. (2003). Individual differences in infant fearfulness and cognitive performance: A testing, performance, or competence effect?Genetic, Social, and General Psychological Monographs,129(1), 41–71.

Roberts, G. C., Jeanne, H. B. & Block, J. (1984). Continuity and change in parents’ child-rearing practices.Child Development,55(2), 586–597.

Rothbart, M. K. & Bates, J. E. (2006). Temperament. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner & N.

Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th edn, Vol3, pp. 99–166). New York: Wiley.

Salley, B. J. & Dixon, W. E. (2007). Temperamental and joint attentional predictors of language development.Merrill-Palmer Quarterly ,53, 131–154.

Sturge-Apple, M. L., Davies, P. T. & Cummings, M. E. (2006). Hostility and withdrawal in marital conﬂict: Effects on parental emotional unavailability and inconsistent discipline.

Journal of Family Psychology,20(2), 227–238. 28 of 29K. Cha Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Bornstein, M. H. & Bauwell, L. (2001). Maternal responsiveness and children’s achievement of language milestones.Child Development,72(3), 748–767.

Walker, S. P., Wachs, T. D., Gardner, J. M., Lozoff, B., Wasserman, G. A. & the International Child Development Steering Group (2007). Child development: risk factors for adverse outcomes in developing countries.Lancet,369, 145–157.

Weickert, C. S., Elashoff, M., Richards, A. B., Sinclair, D., Bahn, S., Paabo, S.,…Webster, M.

J. (2009). Transcriptome analysis of male-female differences in prefrontal cortical development.Molecular Psychiatry,14(6), 558–561.

Weizman, Z. O. & Snow, C. E. (2001). Lexical output as related to children’s vocabulary acquisition: Effects of sophisticated exposure and support for meaning.Developmental Psychology,37, 265–279.

Ziehm, J., Trommsdorff, G., Heikamp, T. & Park, S. Y. (2013). German and Korean mothers’ sensitivity and related parenting beliefs.Frontiers in Psychology,4, 561.

Negative Emotionality, Parenting and Socio-cognitive Development29 of 29 Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Inf. Child. Dev.26: e1990 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/icd Copyright ofInfant &Child Development isthe property ofJohn Wiley &Sons, Inc.andits content maynotbecopied oremailed tomultiple sitesorposted toalistserv without the copyright holder'sexpresswrittenpermission. However,usersmayprint, download, oremail articles forindividual use.