Conflict Dynamics in Mother-Child and Sibling Dyads: The Interplay Between Observed Behavior and Emotional Expression and Links with Children’s Socioemotional Development
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In a series of two observational studies, the present dissertation examined the interplay between emotional expressions and behavior during conflict between children and their family members. Conflict discussions were observed at two developmental periods (preadolescence and adolescence) and in two types of relationships (mother-child and sibling), to assess how family members respond to their own and their partners’ emotional expressions. Within-family similarities in responses to negative emotions as well as links with youths’ socioemotional development were also examined. \nThe participants in the two present studies were drawn from an ongoing forty-year longitudinal study of families in Montréal, Québec. In Study 1, preadolescents (aged 9 to 13 years) were observed during conflict discussions with their mothers, and questionnaire measures of their temperament and socioemotional functioning were collected at one time point prior (aged 6 to 10 years) and one time point subsequent (aged 11 to 16 years) to the observational measurements. In Study 2, early adolescents (aged 12 to 15 years) were observed during conflict discussions with their siblings and with their mothers. In both studies, participants’ verbal conflict behaviors and emotional expressions were coded continuously. Time-window sequential analysis was used to identify how participants responded to their own and their interaction partners’ emotional expressions. In Study 1, across-dyad differences in responses to negative emotions were associated with youths’ socioemotional functioning over time, and in Study 2, within-family similarities in responses to negative emotions were examined. \nResults from both studies indicated that overall, family members escalated conflict more (i.e., disagreed and confronted) and made more assertive (i.e., analytic) remarks when they appeared angry (i.e., displayed frowning/upset affect), and were more conciliatory and avoidant when they appeared sad. Neutral affect predicted the most conflict de-escalating behavior (i.e., analytic and conciliatory remarks), while positive affect promoted both de-escalating behavior and avoidance. Links between individuals’ behavior and their interaction partners’ emotional expressions were generally similar, yet weaker than responses to their own emotions. Differences between mother- child versus sibling conflict patterns, as well as between mother-child conflict before and after the transition to adolescence, suggested that family conflict dynamics are influenced by relationship type as well as developmental timing. Results from Study 1 also indicated that mothers’ tendency to escalate conflict when angry was associated with difficult child characteristics in earlier childhood and socioemotional difficulties in adolescence. Further, maternal and child de-escalation following sadness predicted socioemotional adjustment in adolescence. Furthermore, Study 2 identified many within-family similarities in responses to negative emotions, yet relatively few similarities in how youth responded across the two conflict contexts (i.e., with their mothers and with their siblings). \nFindings are discussed in relation to goal-based theories of emotion, as well as dynamic systems, transactional, and family systems perspectives on child development. The present dissertation makes a substantive contribution to our understanding of family conflict dynamics across the transition to adolescence, by illustrating how constructive and destructive conflict is linked to several contextual variables, including emotion, child characteristics, and relationship type. In addition, they show how individual differences in the management of negative emotions are tied to youths’ socioemotional development and to family functioning. Taken together, the present findings have a number of clinical implications that can help inform interventions aimed at promoting adaptive family conflict communication and psychological well-being.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».