Shared, child-specific and reciprocal influences

in the development of psychopathology

Jenny Jenkins, Judy Dunn, Jon Rasbash, Tom O’Connor, Anna Simpson, Patricia Behnke

Child Development, 2005

Journal of Family

Psychology, 2005

Conundrum for environmental researchers

Behavioral genetic studies find that siblings are very different from one

another once genetic effects have been

controlled

Effective vs Observed environment

• BG studies tend to focus on the EFFECTIVE environment (Turkheimer and Waldron, 2001).

• My focus is the OBSERVED environment.

• Measurements of the environment: family-wide and child-specific

OutcomeVariable

Between FamilyComparisons

Family A Family B

1 2

FamilyLevel

Child Level

Majority of environmental studies of family influencesfamily and child-specific processes are confounded

Environmental studies using sibling design: unconfounds family andchild

Fa mil y A

Fa mil y B

Fa mil y Level

Chil d Level

Between famil y comparis ons

Within family com parisons

1 2 3

Themes• Do family-wide or child-specific aspects of

the environment predict change in child behavior?

• How similar are children’s experiences in families?

• Shared family factors that increase or decrease similarity of experience?

• What are children’s own contributions to the stressful environments that they experience?

Mutual influence of marital conflict and children’s behavior

problems: shared and non-shared family risks

Jenny Jenkins, Judy Dunn, Jon Rasbash, Tom O’Connor and Anna Simpson

Child Development, 24-39, 2005

Marital conflict as a shared risk for children

Features of previous studies

• Mainly correlational at single time point

• Advantage of longitudinal for ‘causal’ argument

• A few that have predicted change in child behavior

• Elements of marital conflict: about kids and not about kids

Marital conflict

Children’s problems

Indications of child effect

• Couples w/o kids Marital satisfaction

• Birth of baby associated with declines in MS

• Poor child temperament or health MS

Methods• ALSPAC: 14,000 birth cohort from Avon,

UK• Avon Brothers and Sisters Study: intensive

investigations of non-step, single parent and stepfamilies with two or more children in family

• Time 1. Mean age of youngest 4.8 years. Older sibs between 6-17 years.

• Follow-up 2 years later• Examined change in response variable

Sample

• 45 biological families (101 children), 44 stepfather (109 children) and 38 complex (86 children)

• 3 participating children=44 families

2 participating children=81 families

1 participating child=2

Measures

• Child externalizing based on teacher report: TRF

• Argument about children: Mo report: How often couple disagrees about different aspects of child behavior.

• Exposure to conflict: Mo report: how often child in room when parents argue.

• General partner conflict: Mo report: money, in-laws, sex

Measures at the family and child-specific levels

3

FamilyA

FamilyB

Family averageArgument about children

Child’sdeviation fromthe family mean

1 22

Does marital conflict affect change in child behavior?

Does marital conflict affect change in child behavior?

• Not child-specific measure

Does child behavior affect change in marital conflict?

Child externalizing predicts change in argument more strongly in stepfamilies

Marital conflict increases externalizingchild behavior

Children’s externalizing behavior increases Conflict between parents: esp in steps

Conclusion

Question 2

Is the effect of marital conflict on siblings shared or non-shared?

Family level variable (family average on argument about children) explains variance in response rather than child-specific variable

BUT

Siblings show greater dissimilarity at higher levels of argument about children

00.0020.0040.0060.008

0.010.0120.0140.0160.018

sibling dissimilarity

average MC one unit increase inMC

Environmental risk may serve to spread children out. Role of

individual differences?

Environmental stress

Readiness to anger

Languagevulnerability

Behavioral inhibition

Ext

Int

Low achievement

Question 3

How differential are siblings’ experiences of marital conflict? What explains such differential experience?

Shared family environments?

Exposure to parental conflict

Family Blue Family Yellow Family Pink

Families differ from one another on how much parental conflict children experience

Shared family environments?

Children within families differ from one another on how much parental conflict they experience

Exposure to parental conflict

Family Blue Family Yellow Family Pink

Sibling similarity on conflict experience

0.44

0.46

0.48

0.5

0.52

0.54

0.56

0.58

argument aboutchildren

exposure to conflict

Change in differential argument about siblings

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

ch

an

ge

in d

iffe

ren

tia

l a

rgu

me

nt

ab

ou

t s

iblin

gs

biological

stepfather

complex

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Diff

eren

tial s

iblin

g ex

posu

re to

con

flict

biological

stepfather

complex

Differential sibling exposure to conflict as a function of family status

Summary of findings

• Relationship between marital conflict and child behavior is reciprocal

• At high levels of marital conflict siblings show increasing dissimilarity

• Siblings’ experiences in families are differential.

• Such differential experience is partly a function of shared environmental factors

Sibling negativity: Dyad-specific and shared family effects

•Same themes

•Sibling dyad negativity vs child adjustment

•Whether change in sibling relationships is explained by shared family factors; whether shared family factors increase dyad dissimilarity; what explains dyad dissimilarity

Methods

• ABSS sample as previously described• Maternal interview of sibling negativity in

the dyad using Colorado Maternal Interview on sibling relationships.

• Maternal negativity towards child based on 4 scales. Average for dyad; average for family and differential between siblings in dyad calculated.

Does family average or dyad specific maternal negativity explain change in sibling

negativity?

Change in sibling dyad negativity as a function of single parent family

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2 parent family

single parentfamily

Within family variance

Maternal differential treatment explains 13% of within family variance on sibling

negativity – but only in single parent families

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

no predictors after MDT

2 parent family

single parentfamily

Within family variance

Limitations of the sibling and marital conflict studies

Measurement problems. Although in some of the studies the IV and DV are based on different informants, the family clustering information is based on single informant. Degree of family clustering that we see may be related to same person reporting on measures for different siblings

Conclusions• Shared family stresses predict more variance

in outcomes than child or dyad specific. Measurement problem or AMBIENT effect?

• Children’s experiences in families are both similar and different. Shared family risks are associated with more differential experience: step families, single parent homes. Stresses increase individual differences?

• Children’s own contributions to the stressful environments that they experience?