Login / Signup

Better, for worse, or both? Testing environmental sensitivity models with parenting at the level of individual families.

Savannah BoeleAnne BülowAmaranta de HaanJaap J A DenissenLoes Keijsers
Published in: Development and psychopathology (2023)
According to environmental sensitivity models, children vary in responsivity to parenting. However, different models propose different patterns, with responsivity to primarily: (1) adverse parenting (adverse sensitive); or (2) supportive parenting (vantage sensitive); or (3) to both (differentially susceptible). This preregistered study tested whether these three responsivity patterns coexist. We used intensive longitudinal data of Dutch adolescents ( N = 256, M age = 14.8, 72% female) who bi-weekly reported on adverse and supportive parenting and their psychological functioning ( t mean = 17.7, t max = 26). Dynamic Structural Equation Models (DSEM) indeed revealed differential parenting effects. As hypothesized, we found that all three responsivity patterns coexisted in our sample: 5% were adverse sensitive, 3% vantage sensitive, and 26% differentially susceptible. No adolescent appeared unsusceptible, however. Instead, we labeled 28% as unperceptive, because they did not perceive any changes in parenting and scored lower on trait environmental sensitivity than others. Furthermore, unexpected patterns emerged, with 37% responding contrary to parenting theories (e.g., decreased psychological functioning after more parental support). Sensitivity analyses with concurrent effects and parent-reported parenting were performed. Overall, findings indicate that theorized responsivity-to-parenting patterns might coexist in the population, and that there are other, previously undetected patterns that go beyond environmental sensitivity models.
Keyphrases
  • young adults
  • emergency department
  • human health
  • squamous cell carcinoma
  • risk assessment
  • adverse drug
  • single cell
  • sleep quality