Şengül-İnal, G., Borgen, N. T., Dearing, E., & Zachrisson, H. D. (2024): The double jeopardy of low family income and negative emotionality: The family stress model revisited.

I: Development and Psychopathology. Open Access.

Logo tidsskrift

Authors

Gülbin Sengul InalNicolai Topstad Borgen, Eric Dearing & Henrik Daae Zachrisson.

Abstract

The family stress model has, for decades, guided empirical work linking poverty with increased risk of child social-emotional dysfunction. The present study extends this line of work by examining whether child negative emotionality moderates associations between family income, family stress (maternal distress, parental locus of control, and relationship dissatisfaction), and later externalizing and internalizing behavior problems.

In a longitudinal population-based sample (n ~ 80,000) of Norwegian children followed from birth through age five (The Norwegian Mother, Father, and Child Cohort Study; MoBa), we examined whether high (vs. moderate or low) negative emotionality families would display: (a) compounding stress (i.e., particularly strong associations between low family income and family stress), (b) diathesis-stress (i.e., particularly strong associations between family stress and behavior problems), or (c) double jeopardy (i.e., both compounding stress and diathesis-stress moderating effects).

Negative emotionality significantly moderated the association between family income and behavior problems in a manner most consistent with double jeopardy. As a result, compared with children with moderate/low negative emotionality, the family income-behavior problems association was two to three times larger for those with higher negative emotionality. These findings underscore the active role children may play in family processes that link low family income with behavior problems.

Publisert 2. juni 2024 16:18 - Sist endret 2. juni 2024 16:18