Multiple

Determinants

of

Externalizing

Behavior

in

A

Longitudinal

Model

In

a

community

sample

of

children

assessments

of

parent-child

interaction

parent-child

attachment

and

various

parental

child

and

contextual

characteristics

at

and

months

and

at

age

were

used

to

predict

externalizing

behavior

at

age

as

rated

by

parents

and

teachers

Hierarchical

multiple

regression

analysis

and

path

analysis

yielded

a

significant

longitudinal

model

for

the

prediction

of

age

externalizing

behavior

with

independent

contributions

from

the

following

predictors

child

sex

partner

support

reported

by

the

caregiver

disorganized

infant-parent

attachment

at

months

child

anger

proneness

at

months

and

one

of

the

two

parent-child

interaction

factors

observed

at

months

namely

negative

parent-child

interactions

The

other

i.e.

a

lack

of

effective

guidance

predicted

externalizing

problems

only

in

highly

anger-prone

children

Furthermore

mediated

pathways

of

influence

were

found

for

the

parent-child

interaction

at

months

-LRB-

via

disorganized

attachment

-RRB-

and

parental

ego-resiliency

-LRB-

via

negative

parent-child

interaction

at

months

-RRB-

Externalizing

behavior

problems

including

aggressive

destructive

and

delinquent

behavior

represent

the

most

common

type

of

mental

health

problems

in

children

Longitudinal

studies

have

shown

that

the

stability

of

externalizing

problems

is

relatively

high

from

preschool

age

into

adolescence

-LRB-

Moffit

Caspi

Dickson

Silva

Stanton

Smith

Calkins

Keane

Anastopoulos

Shelton

-RRB-

Moreover

early

externalizing

problems

are

predictive

of

other

forms

of

psychopathology

and

often

interfere

with

the

child

's

personal

social

and

academic

development

-LRB-

Campbell

Moffitt

-RRB-

Although

developmental

psychopathologists

now

generally

assume

such

problems

to

have

their

roots

in

children

's

early

developmental

histories

early

identification

of

children

at

serious

risk

of

developing

such

pathology

is

hampered

by

a

lack

of

insight

into

the

determinants

leading

to

later

maladaptive

outcomes

-LRB-

Tremblay

-RRB-

Although

various

theoretical

models

of

the

development

of

externalizing

problems

in

the

very

first

years

of

life

-LRB-

Campbell

Shaw

Gilliom

Moffitt

Greenberg

Sameroff

Chandler

-RRB-

differ

in

the

emphasis

they

place

on

the

role

of

certain

etiological

factors

they

agree

in

the

assumption

that

multiple

factors

from

various

domains

additively

and

interactively

contribute

to

the

emergence

and

maintenance

of

externalizing

problems

Taken

together

four

domains

of

factors

have

been

proposed

to

contribute

to

their

development

-LRB-

a

-RRB-

parent-child

interaction

and

parent-child

attachment

-LRB-

b

-RRB-

child

characteristics

-LRB-

e.g.

temperament

and

cognitive

abilities

-RRB-

-LRB-

c

-RRB-

parental

characteristics

-LRB-

e.g.

personality

-RRB-

and

-LRB-

d

-RRB-

contextual

characteristics

-LRB-

e.g.

socioeconomic

status

partner

support

and

stressful

life

events

-RRB-

To

date

very

few

studies

all

focusing

on

high-risk

samples

have

longitudinally

examined

the

joint

contribution

of

the

various

key

factors

to

the

onset

of

externalizing

problems

in

the

very

first

years

of

life

-LRB-

Aguilar

Sroufe

Egeland

Carlson

Erickson

Sroufe

Egeland

Lyons-Ruth

Alpern

Repacholi

Shaw

Owens

Vondra

Keenan

Winslow

-RRB-

Ours

is

the

first

study

to

assess

predictors

hypothesized

to

be

the

most

important

from

all

of

the

aforementioned

domains

both

in

infancy

-LRB-

i.e.

at

age

months

-RRB-

and

in

toddlerhood

-LRB-

i.e.

at

age

months

-RRB-

to

predict

the

emergence

of

later

externalizing

behavior

problems

-LRB-

i.e.

at

age

years

-RRB-

in

a

non

high-risk

community

sample

All

of

the

abovementioned

earlier

studies

of

the

multiple

determinants

of

externalizing

behavior

used

samples

characterized

by

one

or

more

risk

factors

The

sample

studied

by

Shaw

et

al.

-LRB-

-RRB-

included

only

low-SES

families

Aguilar

et

al.

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

Erickson

et

al.

-LRB-

-RRB-

studied

low-SES

samples

as

well

but

these

were

also

characterized

by

high

degrees

of

life

stress

and

a

large

proportion

of

single-parent

families

And

the

low-SES

sample

studied

by

Lyons-Ruth

et

al.

-LRB-

-RRB-

was

characterized

by

such

additional

risk

factors

as

a

relatively

high

incidence

of

a

history

of

maternal

psychiatric

hospitalization

single

parenthood

and

child

maltreatment

It

remains

to

be

seen

whether

similar

results

will

also

be

found

in

studies

with

community

samples

That

is

mainly

because

earlier

research

has

shown

that

the

predictive

power

of

risk

factors

may

increase

in

the

presence

of

other

risk

factors

-LRB-

Farrington

-RRB-

Consequently

it

is

possible

that

factors

that

predict

externalizing

problems

in

samples

with

one

or

more

risk

factors

fail

to

do

so

in

samples

with

lower

levels

of

risk

such

as

the

present

sample

In

light

of

this

studying

the

early

predictors

of

externalizing

problems

in

a

community

sample

constitutes

an

important

extension

of

the

existing

research

evidence

collected

in

high-risk

samples

The

criteria

on

which

we

based

our

selection

of

the

various

predictors

and

our

hypotheses

regarding

their

joint

contribution

to

the

development

of

externalizing

problems

led

by

various

interrelated

theoretical

models

are

described

per

domain

in

the

following

paragraphs

Parent-child

interaction

and

parent-child

attachment

From

a

transactional

perspective

-LRB-

Sameroff

Chandler

-RRB-

externalizing

problems

are

assumed

to

emerge

and

to

stabilize

or

change

in

children

's

continuous

interactions

with

their

immediate

environment

particularly

in

the

interactions

with

their

primary

caregivers

Repeated

observations

of

parental

and

child

behaviors

during

parent-child

interactions

are

thus

indispensable

to

gain

more

insight

into

the

early

development

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

Multiple

dimensions

of

parental

behavior

in

parent-child

interaction

have

been

found

to

be

associated

with

behavior

problems

in

children

at

various

ages

A

lack

of

positive

parenting

behaviors

such

as

the

expression

of

sensitivity

warmth

involvement

acceptance

and

positive

guidance

was

reported

to

be

related

to

externalizing

problems

in

preschoolers

-LRB-

Brophy

Dunn

Côté

Vaillancourt

LeBlanc

Nagin

Tremblay

Gardner

Pettit

Bates

Dodge

-RRB-

In

addition

high

levels

of

negative

parental

control

such

as

harsh

discipline

intrusiveness

negativity

and

hostility

also

proved

associated

with

externalizing

problems

-LRB-

Belsky

Woodworth

Crnic

Rubin

Burgess

Dwyer

Hastings

Campbell

Pierce

Moore

Marakovitz

-RRB-

Based

on

the

above

evidence

we

expected

both

a

lack

of

positive

parenting

behaviors

and

negative

parent-child

interactions

to

predict

externalizing

behavior

problems

at

age

Another

frequently

mentioned

risk

factor

and

closely

related

to

the

quality

of

parent-child

interaction

is

the

quality

of

attachment

between

infant

and

caregiver

By

the

end

of

the

infant

's

first

year

four

main

patterns

of

infant-parent

attachment

one

secure

and

three

insecure

can

be

distinguished

that

have

been

found

to

reflect

the

history

of

the

caregiver

's

responses

to

the

child

's

attachment

behaviors

-LRB-

Ainsworth

Blehar

Waters

Wall

Main

Solomon

-RRB-

Ainsworth

and

colleagues

-LRB-

-RRB-

originally

proposed

three

organized

patterns

of

attachment

Presumably

as

a

result

of

a

history

of

caregiver

sensitive

responsiveness

to

their

signals

and

needs

securely

attached

-LRB-

B

-RRB-

infants

use

the

caregiver

as

a

secure

base

from

which

to

explore

the

environment

Avoidant

-LRB-

A

-RRB-

infants

are

characterized

by

a

tendency

to

minimize

their

attachment

behaviors

while

under

stress

in

the

presence

of

the

caregiver

probably

resulting

from

earlier

experiences

with

a

caregiver

who

tended

to

reject

or

ignore

the

child

's

expression

of

attachment

behaviors

Infants

with

a

resistant

attachment

-LRB-

C

-RRB-

featuring

both

clinging

and

angry

behaviors

towards

the

caregiver

when

under

stress

are

presumed

to

maximize

the

expression

of

attachment

behavior

as

an

adaptation

to

their

caregiver

's

inconsistent

responsiveness

Main

and

Solomon

-LRB-

-RRB-

later

added

a

fourth

disorganized

-LRB-

D

-RRB-

pattern

typified

by

seemingly

contradictory

attachment

behaviors

that

is

thought

to

reflect

the

breakdown

or

absence

of

a

strategy

for

the

infant

to

use

the

caregiver

as

a

secure

base

in

times

of

stress

-LRB-

Main

Solomon

-RRB-

Disorganized

attachment

is

thought

to

ensue

from

extremely

unpredictable

or

frightening

behavior

on

the

part

of

a

maltreating

and/or

traumatized

parent

-LRB-

cf.

Lyons-Ruth

Jacobvitz

-RRB-

With

regard

to

the

predictive

value

of

attachment

security

versus

insecurity

for

the

later

occurrence

of

externalizing

problems

the

empirical

evidence

is

rather

inconsistent

Although

attachment

insecurity

was

found

to

be

associated

with

externalizing

problems

in

high-risk

samples

as

well

as

in

community

samples

in

studies

that

did

not

include

the

disorganized

attachment

classification

-LRB-

Erickson

et

al.

Fagot

Kavanagh

Munson

McMahon

Spieker

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

other

studies

did

not

report

such

a

relationship

-LRB-

Bates

Maslin

Frankel

Goldberg

Corter

Lojkasek

Minde

-RRB-

However

in

contrast

to

the

other

insecure

attachment

categories

disorganized

attachment

has

consistently

been

found

to

be

related

to

the

later

development

of

externalizing

problems

-LRB-

for

reviews

see

Lyons-Ruth

and

Jacobvitz

and

Van

IJzendoorn

Schuengel

and

Bakermans-Kranenburg

also

see

Lyons-Ruth

et

al.

Vondra

Shaw

Swearingen

Cohen

Owens

-RRB-

In

view

of

the

above

we

expected

infant

attachment

insecurity

and

particularly

attachment

disorganization

to

be

related

to

elevated

levels

of

externalizing

behavior

at

age

Considering

that

attachment

patterns

have

been

found

to

reflect

the

history

of

parent-child

interactions

we

expected

the

association

between

the

early

parent-child

interaction

and

later

externalizing

problems

to

be

at

least

partially

mediated

by

the

quality

of

the

infant-parent

attachment

Child

characteristics

Several

child

characteristics

can

prompt

the

development

of

externalizing

behavior

both

directly

and

indirectly

by

affecting

the

quality

of

parent-child

interactions

A

considerable

body

of

research

has

shown

associations

between

externalizing

problems

and

child

temperamental

characteristics

with

a

crucial

role

for

negative

emotionality

denoting

negative

mood

irritability

and

high-intensity

reactions

like

anger

-LRB-

for

a

review

see

Sanson

Hemphill

Smart

-RRB-

In

contrast

temperamental

inhibition

and

fear/shyness

may

act

as

a

protective

factor

as

these

characteristics

have

been

demonstrated

to

be

negatively

associated

with

later

externalizing

problems

-LRB-

Lacourse

Nagin

Vitaro

Côté

Arsenault

Tremblay

Sanson

Oberklaid

Prior

Amos

Smart

Schwartz

Snidman

Kagan

-RRB-

Nevertheless

the

relationship

between

child

temperament

and

externalizing

behavior

is

not

always

clear

or

direct

Etiological

models

of

externalizing

behavior

increasingly

propose

that

children

with

temperamental

difficulties

are

more

vulnerable

to

negative

rearing

influences

than

children

without

such

difficulties

-LRB-

Belsky

Moffitt

-RRB-

Several

recent

studies

have

substantiated

this

latter

assumption

-LRB-

Bates

Pettit

Dodge

Ridge

Belsky

Hsieh

Crnic

Hemphill

Sanson

Lacourse

et

al.

Leve

Kim

Pears

-RRB-

In

line

with

these

findings

we

anticipated

high

levels

of

child

negativity

and

low

levels

of

fearfulness

in

infancy

and

toddlerhood

particularly

in

interaction

with

parenting

to

predict

the

development

of

externalizing

problems

Another

contributory

child

characteristic

is

low

cognitive

or

linguistic

ability

-LRB-

Burt

Hay

Pawlby

Harold

Sharp

Dekker

Koot

Van

der

Ende

Verhulst

Moffitt

-RRB-

Therefore

we

hypothesized

that

child

cognitive

ability

at

months

would

be

negatively

related

to

the

occurrence

of

externalizing

problems

at

age

years

Boys

and

girls

have

been

found

equally

likely

to

exhibit

externalizing

behavior

problems

up

until

the

age

of

about

four

years

By

school

entry

however

boys

tend

to

exhibit

up

to

times

the

rate

of

externalizing

problems

for

girls

-LRB-

Côté

et

al

Mesman

Bongers

Koot

Rubin

et

al.

-RRB-

Accordingly

at

age

we

expected

the

boys

in

our

sample

to

score

higher

on

externalizing

behavior

than

the

girls

Parental

characteristics

Little

research

has

focused

on

parental

personality

as

a

potential

predictor

of

externalizing

problems

in

children

The

available

studies

only

focused

on

aspects

of

parental

psychopathology

like

antisocial

personality

-LRB-

Shaw

Vondra

Hommerding

Keenan

Dunn

-RRB-

or

maternal

depression

-LRB-

Cummings

Davies

Shaw

Gilliom

Ingoldsby

Nagin

-RRB-

Less

attention

has

been

paid

to

the

effects

of

more

or

less

adaptive

parental

characteristics

which

is

why

we

included

parental

ego-resiliency

as

a

potential

predictor

of

externalizing

problems

Block

and

Block

-LRB-

-RRB-

defined

ego-resiliency

as

a

resourceful

adaptation

to

changing

circumstances

flexible

invocation

of

the

available

repertoire

of

problem-solving

strategies

and

the

ability

to

maintain

integrated

performance

while

under

stress

-LRB-

p.

-RRB-

As

such

ego-resilient

individuals

should

be

particularly

well-equipped

to

cope

with

the

often

stressful

task

of

parenting

And

as

outlined

before

higher

quality

parenting

is

hypothesized

to

predict

lower

levels

of

externalizing

behavior

in

children

In

the

assessment

-LRB-

Van

Bakel

Riksen-Walraven

-RRB-

parental

ego-resiliency

was

found

to

be

related

to

the

infants

socioemotional

development

partially

via

the

quality

of

the

parent-infant

interaction

Based

on

the

above

and

in

line

with

the

findings

we

expected

higher

levels

of

parental

ego-resiliency

to

predict

lower

levels

of

externalizing

behavior

in

the

children

at

age

and

we

expected

this

relation

to

be

mediated

by

lower

quality

parent-child

interactions

Contextual

characteristics

Besides

parental

and

child

attributes

specific

characteristics

of

the

social

and

economic

context

in

which

the

parent-child

interaction

is

embedded

may

also

contribute

to

the

development

of

externalizing

problems

-LRB-

Belsky

Greenberg

Speltz

DeKlyen

-RRB-

We

included

three

characteristics

of

the

child-rearing

context

that

earlier

studies

have

shown

to

be

associated

with

externalizing

problems

-LRB-

-RRB-

high

incidence

of

stressful

life

events

-LRB-

Aguilar

et

al.

-RRB-

-LRB-

-RRB-

a

lack

of

partner

support

-LRB-

Jouriles

Murphy

Farris

Smith

Richters

Waters

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

and

-LRB-

-RRB-

low

socio-economic

status

-LRB-

SES

Côté

et

al

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

It

needs

to

be

stressed

though

that

in

previous

research

the

effects

of

sociodemographic

factors

like

SES

proved

modest

compared

to

the

effects

of

parental

or

child

risk

factors

-LRB-

for

a

review

see

Loeber

and

Dishion

also

see

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

Nevertheless

based

on

earlier

findings

we

expected

stressful

life

events

partner

support

and

SES

to

contribute

to

the

development

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

In

sum

the

aim

of

the

present

study

was

to

predict

the

occurrence

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

in

a

sample

of

children

on

the

basis

of

various

parental

child

dyadic

and

contextual

factors

assessed

at

and

months

and

at

age

We

expected

the

following

specific

factors

to

independently

or

interactively

contribute

to

the

development

of

externalizing

problems

-LRB-

a

-RRB-

a

low

quality

of

parent-child

interaction

at

and

months

-LRB-

b

-RRB-

disorganized

parent-infant

attachment

-LRB-

c

-RRB-

child

temperament

-LRB-

i.e.

high

anger

proneness

and

low

fearfulness

-RRB-

at

both

and

months

and

particularly

in

interaction

with

low

quality

parenting

-LRB-

d

-RRB-

low

levels

of

child

cognitive

ability

at

months

-LRB-

e

-RRB-

low

parental

ego-resiliency

-LRB-

f

-RRB-

high

incidence

of

stressful

life

events

between

months

and

years

-LRB-

g

-RRB-

lack

of

partner

support

and

-LRB-

h

-RRB-

low

SES

Furthermore

the

contribution

of

parental

ego-resiliency

to

child

externalizing

behavior

was

expected

to

be

mediated

by

the

quality

of

parent-child

interaction

and

the

contribution

of

the

early

parent-child

interaction

by

the

quality

of

infant-parent

attachment

Method

Participants

The

original

sample

-LRB-

M

SD

-RRB-

consisted

of

healthy

children

-LRB-

boys

girls

-RRB-

and

their

primary

caregivers

The

children

were

recruited

on

the

basis

of

the

records

from

health-care

centers

in

the

Dutch

city

of

Nijmegen

During

nine

consecutive

months

all

families

-LRB-

n

-RRB-

with

a

baby

from

various

socioeconomic

backgrounds

were

sent

a

recruitment

letter

with

a

brief

description

of

the

research

procedures

and

an

invitation

to

participate

in

this

study

that

aimed

to

gain

more

insight

into

children

's

development

in

the

first

years

of

life

If

they

met

the

two

specified

eligibility

criteria

-LRB-

i.e.

sufficient

fluency

in

Dutch

and

child

without

serious

health

problems

-RRB-

and

were

interested

in

participation

they

were

requested

to

return

a

response

card

Of

the

families

who

responded

parent-child

dyads

-LRB-

the

maximum

attainable

given

the

time

and

resources

available

for

the

project

-RRB-

were

randomly

selected

for

the

study

Of

the

infants

were

first-borns

and

had

one

or

more

older

siblings

The

sample

included

two-parent

families

and

six

single-parent

families

In

three

families

the

father

was

the

primary

caregiver

and

in

the

remainder

of

the

families

this

was

the

mother

The

percentages

of

single

parents

and

fathers

acting

as

primary

caregivers

are

representative

of

families

in

the

Netherlands

with

children

in

this

age

group

The

primary

caregivers

were

between

the

ages

of

and

years

at

the

time

of

recruitment

The

level

of

education

for

the

primary

caregivers

was

indicated

on

a

seven-point

scale

from

low

-LRB-

elementary

school

-RRB-

to

high

-LRB-

college

degree

or

more

-RRB-

with

a

mean

of

-LRB-

SD

-RRB-

the

category

equivalent

of

is

high

school

degree

Of

the

children

-LRB-

boys

girls

-RRB-

participated

in

the

second

wave

of

measurements

at

age

months

-LRB-

M

SD

-RRB-

and

-LRB-

boys

girls

-RRB-

in

the

third

assessment

at

age

years

-LRB-

M

months

SD

-RRB-

At

this

third

assessment

there

were

two-parent

families

nine

single-parent

families

and

again

three

families

with

the

father

as

the

primary

caregiver

To

determine

whether

there

was

selective

drop-out

or

not

the

families

participating

in

the

assessment

were

compared

to

the

families

that

did

not

take

part

Independent

t-tests

for

all

the

major

study

variables

revealed

a

significant

difference

for

parental

ego-resiliency

only

t

-LRB-

-RRB-

p

with

a

tendency

for

primary

caregivers

with

lower

levels

of

ego-resiliency

to

drop

out

Procedure

The

data

were

available

from

an

earlier

study

focusing

on

the

determinants

of

parenting

and

infant

development

-LRB-

Van

Bakel

Riksen-Walraven

-RRB-

The

assessment

involved

data

collection

during

a

single

home

visit

and

a

single

visit

of

the

primary

caregiver

and

infant

to

the

research

center

During

the

home

visit

the

primary

caregiver

completed

a

Q-sort

and

a

set

of

questionnaires

assessing

child

temperament

parental

ego-resiliency

partner

support

and

additional

background

information

Next

the

parent-child

interaction

was

videotaped

during

the

performance

of

four

instructional

tasks

lasting

three

to

four

minutes

each

At

the

subsequent

assessment

at

the

research

center

the

child

's

cognitive

ability

was

assessed

and

the

quality

of

the

infant-parent

attachment

with

an

abbreviated

version

of

the

Strange

Situation

-LRB-

Ainsworth

et

al.

-RRB-

For

a

more

detailed

description

of

the

data

collection

see

Van

Bakel

Riksen-Walraven

-LRB-

-RRB-

The

assessment

was

conducted

during

a

single

home

visit

The

primary

caregiver

was

interviewed

about

stressful

life

events

since

the

first

assessment

and

asked

to

complete

a

questionnaire

to

assess

child

temperament

The

parent-child

interaction

was

videotaped

during

four

instructional

tasks

comparable

to

those

performed

at

months

At

the

assessment

the

primary

caregiver

was

interviewed

at

home

about

stressful

life

events

since

the

previous

assessment

and

asked

to

complete

a

questionnaire

to

assess

child

behavior

problems

The

child

's

teacher

completed

a

questionnaire

to

assess

any

behavior

problems

and

asked

to

return

this

by

mail

which

was

done

by

all

but

one

teacher

Instruments

and

measures

Quality

of

parent-child

interaction

-LRB-

at

and

months

-RRB-

The

videotaped

parent-child

interaction

episodes

were

rated

using

five

scales

-LRB-

Erickson

et

al.

-RRB-

to

assess

the

quality

of

parental

interactive

behavior

-LRB-

-RRB-

supportive

presence

or

the

provision

of

emotional

support

-LRB-

-RRB-

respect

for

the

child

's

autonomy

or

nonintrusiveness

-LRB-

-RRB-

effective

structure

and

limit

setting

-LRB-

-RRB-

quality

of

instructions

and

-LRB-

-RRB-

hostility

Subsequently

child

interactive

behavior

was

rated

on

four

scales

-LRB-

Erickson

et

al.

-RRB-

-LRB-

I

-RRB-

negativity

or

anger

dislike

and

hostility

towards

the

parent

-LRB-

II

-RRB-

avoidance

of

interaction

with

the

parent

-LRB-

III

-RRB-

compliance

to

suggestions

and

directions

given

by

the

parent

and

-LRB-

IV

-RRB-

positive

affect

expressed

towards

the

parent

Each

interaction

episode

at

months

was

rated

independently

by

two

trained

observers

and

each

interaction

episode

at

months

by

four

independent

observers

Based

on

cases

-LRB-

-RRB-

for

the

assessment

and

cases

-LRB-

-RRB-

for

the

assessment

the

interrater

reliabilities

expressed

as

adjusted

kappas

were

all

above

Evidence

for

the

validity

of

the

scales

has

been

provided

in

various

studies

-LRB-

see

Van

Bakel

Riksen-Walraven

for

a

review

-RRB-

To

obtain

robust

dyadic

measures

for

parent-child

interaction

the

ratings

of

parental

and

child

interactive

behavior

were

factor

analyzed

together

for

the

and

assessment

separately

using

varimax

rotation

Scree

plots

of

eigenvalues

indicated

the

emergence

of

two

clear

and

comparable

factors

at

both

ages

The

two

factors

explained

of

the

variance

in

parent-child

interaction

at

months

and

of

the

variance

at

months

The

first

factor

labeled

effective

guidance

was

marked

by

high

loadings

on

the

following

parent-child

interaction

variables

-LRB-

factor

loadings

for

and

months

within

parenthesis

-RRB-

effective

structure

and

limit

setting

-LRB-

-RRB-

high

quality

of

instructions

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

supportive

presence

-LRB-

-RRB-

on

the

part

of

the

parents

and

compliance

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

low

avoidance

-LRB-

-RRB-

on

the

part

of

the

child

The

second

factor

labeled

negative

interaction

was

characterized

by

high

loadings

on

the

following

variables

-LRB-

factor

loadings

for

and

months

within

parenthesis

-RRB-

parental

hostility

-LRB-

-RRB-

low

respect

-LRB-

-RRB-

child

negativity

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

an

increasing

lack

of

positive

affect

in

both

partners

as

evident

from

low

parental

supportive

presence

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

low

child

positive

affect

-LRB-

-RRB-

Quality

of

parent-child

attachment

-LRB-

at

months

-RRB-

An

abbreviated

version

of

the

Strange

Situation

Procedure

-LRB-

Ainsworth

et

al.

-RRB-

i.e.

including

one

as

opposed

to

two

separation-reunion

situations

was

used

to

assess

the

quality

of

infant-parent

attachment

A

similarly

abbreviated

version

of

the

Strange

Situation

has

been

found

to

be

valid

for

the

assessment

of

attachment

quality

both

within

normal

-LRB-

Lewis

Feiring

McGuffog

Jaskir

Waters

Wippman

Sroufe

-RRB-

and

within

clinical

samples

-LRB-

Willemsen-Swinkels

Bakermans-Kranenburg

Buitelaar

Van

IJzendoorn

Van

Engeland

-RRB-

Two

trained

coders

-LRB-

the

second

author

and

D.C

van

den

Boom

from

the

University

of

Amsterdam

-RRB-

rated

the

videotaped

separation-reunion

episodes

and

classified

the

infants

as

Secure

-LRB-

B

-RRB-

Avoidant

-LRB-

A

-RRB-

Resistant

-LRB-

C

-RRB-

or

Disorganized

disoriented

-LRB-

D

-RRB-

consistent

with

the

directions

provided

by

Ainsworth

et

al.

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

by

Main

Solomon

-LRB-

-RRB-

Intercoder

reliability

on

cases

-LRB-

-RRB-

was

adequate

with

agreement

on

the

main

classifications

Child

temperament

-LRB-

at

and

months

-RRB-

Child

temperament

was

evaluated

using

the

Toddler

Behavior

Assessment

Questionnaire

-LRB-

TBAQ

Goldsmith

-RRB-

The

TBAQ

comprises

items

organized

in

five

scales

For

the

present

study

two

scales

were

used

that

have

earlier

been

found

associated

with

externalizing

problems

i.e.

Anger

proneness

-LRB-

items

Cronbach

's

alpha

and

for

and

months

respectively

-RRB-

and

Social

fear

-LRB-

items

Cronbach

's

alpha

and

for

and

months

respectively

-RRB-

Cognitive

ability

-LRB-

at

months

-RRB-

A

Dutch

version

of

the

Bayley

-LRB-

-RRB-

Mental

Scale

of

Infant

Development

-LRB-

Van

der

Meulen

Smrkovsky

-RRB-

was

used

to

assess

the

child

's

level

of

cognitive

functioning

at

months

expressed

in

the

standardized

Mental

Developmental

Index

-LRB-

MDI

M

SD

-RRB-

Parental

ego-resiliency

-LRB-

at

months

-RRB-

Primary

caregivers

rated

their

own

ego-resiliency

using

a

Dutch

translation

of

the

California

Adult

Q-set

-LRB-

CAQ

Block

-RRB-

The

CAQ

consists

of

descriptive

statements

that

sample

a

broad

domain

of

personal

and

interpersonal

characteristics

and

functioning

The

primary

caregivers

were

asked

to

sort

each

statement

into

one

of

nine

possible

categories

ranging

from

least

characteristic

to

most

characteristic

in

terms

of

salience

for

themselves

An

ego-resiliency

score

was

then

attained

by

correlating

the

Q-sort

description

for

each

parent

with

the

criterion

profile

provided

by

experts

for

a

prototypically

ego-resilient

person

-LRB-

see

Block

-RRB-

The

ego-resiliency

scores

could

range

from

-LRB-

very

ego-resilient

-RRB-

to

-LRB-

very

ego-brittle

-RRB-

Stressful

life

events

-LRB-

at

months

and

years

-RRB-

A

semi-structured

interview

was

used

to

obtain

information

regarding

stressful

life

events

occurring

between

the

three

assessments

The

questions/items

were

derived

from

Saranson

Johnson

and

Siegel

's

-LRB-

-RRB-

Life

Experiences

Survey

and

Coddington

's

-LRB-

-RRB-

Life

Events

Scale

for

Children

Both

measures

have

sound

psychometric

properties

and

have

been

widely

used

in

international

research

-LRB-

Abela

Johnston

-RRB-

Stressful

events

that

were

likely

to

have

a

negative

impact

on

the

child

's

development

were

selected

for

inclusion

-LRB-

e.g.

loss

of

a

loved

one

serious

physical

or

mental

illness

on

the

part

of

a

parent

or

the

child

divorce

-RRB-

All

items

required

a

yes

or

no

response

The

total

number

of

stressful

life

events

between

and

months

and

months

and

age

were

taken

together

to

constitute

the

stressful

life

event

scores

between

months

and

age

Partner

support

-LRB-

at

months

-RRB-

A

subscale

of

a

Dutch

questionnaire

to

assess

family

problems

-LRB-

VGP

Koot

-RRB-

was

used

to

assess

the

support

the

primary

caregiver

received

from

the

partner

The

subscale

comprises

five

statements

gauging

partner

support

during

child

rearing

such

as

My

partner

supports

me

in

my

role

as

a

parent

and

My

partner

and

I

agree

about

child

rearing

Cronbach

's

alpha

was

Single

parents

were

also

asked

to

complete

the

questionnaire

when

they

were

still

in

contact

with

the

other

parent

or

were

living

with

a

new

partner

Otherwise

they

were

assigned

a

minimum

score

Evidence

supporting

the

validity

of

the

subscale

has

been

reported

in

various

studies

-LRB-

Van

Bakel

Riksen-Walraven

Van

Zeijl

et

al.

-RRB-

Socioeconomic

status

-LRB-

SES

at

months

-RRB-

SES

scores

were

assigned

on

the

basis

of

the

level

of

education

-LRB-

along

a

scale

-RRB-

and

level

of

occupation

-LRB-

along

a

scale

-RRB-

for

both

parents

SES

scores

based

on

education

and

occupation

of

both

parents

have

frequently

been

used

in

other

studies

-LRB-

e.g.

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

The

levels

of

education

and

occupation

for

the

two

parents

were

first

standardized

and

then

summed

to

derive

a

single

SES

score

For

single

parents

the

level

of

education

and

occupation

for

the

primary

caregiver

were

summed

to

compute

the

SES

score

-LRB-

cf.

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

Externalizing

problems

as

rated

by

parents

and

teachers

-LRB-

years

-RRB-

To

assess

externalizing

problems

at

age

the

parents

completed

the

Dutch

version

of

the

Child

Behavior

Checklist

for

ages

-LRB-

Achenbach

Verhulst

Van

der

Ende

Koot

-RRB-

The

Aggressive

behavior

subscale

-LRB-

items

-RRB-

and

the

Delinquent

behavior

subscale

-LRB-

items

-RRB-

from

the

were

summed

-LRB-

combined

α

-RRB-

to

determine

the

externalizing

score

for

the

child

at

years

Teachers

completed

the

teacher

version

of

the

CBCL

-LRB-

TRF

Achenbach

-RRB-

the

externalizing

score

was

based

on

the

scores

for

the

subscales

Aggressive

behavior

-LRB-

items

-RRB-

and

Delinquent

behavior

-LRB-

items

-RRB-

which

were

summed

-LRB-

combined

α

-RRB-

to

derive

an

externalizing

score

for

each

child

Results

Results

are

presented

in

two

sections

In

the

first

section

we

report

the

results

of

preliminary

analyses

i.e.

the

distributions

of

the

various

predictor

and

outcome

variables

as

well

as

their

intercorrelations

and

the

parental

and

teacher

ratings

of

the

children

's

externalizing

behaviors

are

compared

and

related

to

each

other

The

second

section

reports

the

main

results

of

the

study

namely

the

prediction

of

externalizing

behavior

at

age

from

the

various

predictors

at

earlier

ages

First

hierarchical

regression

analysis

is

conducted

to

estimate

the

unique

and

interactive

contributions

of

the

multiple

predictors

to

the

variance

in

Externalizing

scores

at

age

Next

the

hypothesized

mediated

pathways

are

tested

Finally

path

analysis

using

AMOS

-LRB-

Arbuckle

-RRB-

is

applied

to

test

the

complete

longitudinal

model

comprising

all

the

direct

moderated

and

mediated

pathways

of

influence

between

the

predictors

at

the

various

ages

and

age

externalizing

behavior

Preliminary

analyses

Table

presents

the

means

and

standard

deviations

for

the

study

variables

as

well

as

their

intercorrelations

The

distribution

of

children

across

attachment

categories

-LRB-

B

A

C

and

D

-RRB-

did

not

differ

from

the

distribution

reported

by

Van

IJzendoorn

et

al.

-LRB-

-RRB-

for

normal

i.e.

middle-class

non-clinical

groups

in

North

America

The

scores

for

child

cognitive

ability

were

normally

distributed

with

a

mean

score

close

to

the

population

mean

of

M

The

distribution

of

the

scores

for

ego-resiliency

was

in

line

with

the

findings

of

earlier

studies

and

the

distribution

of

scores

for

partner

support

was

mildly

to

moderately

skewed

to

the

left

but

showed

sufficient

variation

Table

also

shows

significant

stability

for

the

two

parent-child

interaction

measures

as

well

as

for

child

social

fear

and

anger

proneness

from

to

months

For

the

predictor

variables

no

differences

were

found

between

boys

and

girls

Table

means

and

standard

deviations

for

the

study

Effective

guidance

Negative

interaction

B

vs.

non-B

attachmenta

A

vs.

non-A

attachmenta

C

vs.

non-C

attachmenta

D

vs.

non-D

attachmenta

Child

social

fear

Child

anger

proneness

Child

cognitive

ability

Child

sex

Parental

Partner

support

SES

Effective

guidance

Negative

interaction

Child

social

fear

Child

anger

proneness

Life

events

yr

Externalizing

behavior

.640.140.080.143.683.38103.900.470.448.320.00

.001.000.480.350.270.340.850.7216.930.500.192.052.811.001.000.800.721.311.73

Note

N

aAttachment

was

dummy

coded

as

B

-LRB-

-RRB-

vs.

ACD

-LRB-

-RRB-

A

-LRB-

-RRB-

vs.

BCD

-LRB-

-RRB-

C

-LRB-

-RRB-

vs.

ABD

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

D

-LRB-

-RRB-

vs.

ABC

-LRB-

-RRB-

bThe

parent-child

interaction

variables

are

factor

scores

with

a

mean

score

of

and

a

standard

deviation

of

cSES

and

Externalizing

behavior

are

composed

variables

which

were

first

standardized

and

then

summed

p

p

Table

regression

results

for

predicting

age

externalizing

scores

-LRB-

Total

Model

-RRB-

Hierarchical

regression

resultsBlockBSE

-LRB-

-RRB-

versus

non-D

Negative

interaction

Sex

-LRB-

male

-RRB-

Anger

proneness

cPartner

support

Interaction

termsEffective

guidance

Anger

proneness

months

final

model

F

-LRB-

-RRB-

final

model

aD

vs.

non-D

coded

as

D

and

non-D

bSex

was

coded

as

-LRB-

girls

-RRB-

or

-LRB-

boys

-RRB-

cAlthough

anger

proneness

was

not

significantly

correlated

with

externalizing

behavior

it

had

a

significant

Beta

weight

This

effect

seems

due

to

a

suppressor

variable

As

recommended

by

Tabachnick

Fidell

-LRB-

-RRB-

predictors

were

systematically

deleted

from

the

regression

equation

to

identify

which

variable

is

the

suppressor

indicating

that

D

versus

non-D

attachment

acted

as

the

suppressor

variable

p

p

The

mean

score

on

the

Externalizing

scale

was

-LRB-

SD

N

-RRB-

for

the

with

-LRB-

n

-RRB-

of

the

children

scoring

in

the

clinical

range

-LRB-

T-score

of

Achenbach

-RRB-

For

the

TRF

the

mean

score

was

-LRB-

SD

N

-RRB-

with

-LRB-

n

-RRB-

of

the

children

scoring

in

the

clinical

range

-LRB-

T

Achenbach

-RRB-

Both

the

CBCL

and

TRF

Externalizing

scores

were

significantly

higher

than

those

reported

for

in

the

Dutch

norm

population

for

the

-LRB-

M

SD

Verhulst

et

al.

-RRB-

and

the

TRF

-LRB-

M

SD

Verhulst

Van

der

Ende

Koot

-RRB-

t

-LRB-

-RRB-

p

for

the

and

t

-LRB-

-RRB-

p

for

the

TRF

A

paired-samples

t-test

showed

parents

to

report

significantly

more

externalizing

behaviors

than

school

teachers

t

-LRB-

-RRB-

p

The

correlation

between

the

CBCL

and

TRF

scores

was

p

To

obtain

a

robust

measure

of

externalizing

behavior

a

composite

Total

Externalizing

score

was

computed

by

first

standardizing

and

then

summing

the

children

's

Externalizing

scores

on

the

CBCL

and

TRF

For

sex

differences

on

this

measure

a

t-test

revealed

a

significantly

higher

score

for

boys

on

Total

Externalizing

-LRB-

Mboys

SD

Mgirls

SD

t

-LRB-

-RRB-

p

-RRB-

Predicting

age

externalizing

scores

Hierarchical

regression

analysis

To

examine

the

unique

and

interactive

contributions

of

the

predictors

to

the

variance

in

Externalizing

scores

at

age

hierarchical

multiple

regression

analysis

was

conducted

with

Total

Externalizing

as

the

dependent

variable

and

the

predictors

at

the

different

ages

as

the

independent

variables

The

predictors

were

entered

in

the

first

block

In

the

second

block

the

interaction

terms

hypothesized

in

the

introduction

to

predict

Externalizing

scores

were

entered

i.e.

child

temperament

-LRB-

measures

-RRB-

parent-child

interaction

-LRB-

measures

-RRB-

at

both

and

months

and

child

cognitive

development

parent-child

interaction

-LRB-

measures

-RRB-

at

months

The

interaction

terms

were

computed

according

to

the

procedure

recommended

by

Aiken

and

West

-LRB-

-RRB-

To

limit

the

number

of

interaction

terms

in

the

regression

analysis

only

those

interaction

terms

that

significantly

predicted

externalizing

behavior

at

age

when

examined

in

isolation

were

included

in

the

regression

analysis

-LRB-

see

also

Leve

et

al.

-RRB-

i.e.

Effective

guidance

Anger

proneness

at

months

and

Negative

interaction

Anger

proneness

at

months

Table

presents

the

results

for

the

final

model

The

overall

model

proved

significant

and

explained

of

the

variance

in

the

Total

Externalizing

scores

In

the

first

block

D

versus

non-D

attachment

at

months

explained

a

significant

of

the

variance

in

the

Total

Externalizing

scores

at

age

Negative

interactions

at

months

explained

an

additional

of

the

variance

child

sex

accounted

for

another

just

like

anger

proneness

at

months

and

partner

support

at

months

contributed

another

to

the

regression

equation

In

the

second

block

Effective

guidance

Anger

proneness

at

months

explained

another

of

the

variance

in

Total

Externalizing

scores

at

age

Fig.

externalizing

behavior

scores

in

relation

to

effective

guidance

for

children

high

and

low

on

anger-proneness

To

examine

the

nature

of

the

interaction

effect

of

effective

guidance

and

anger

proneness

at

months

on

externalizing

behavior

at

age

the

relationship

between

effective

guidance

and

externalizing

behavior

was

determined

for

children

with

high

-LRB-

SD

above

the

mean

-RRB-

and

low

-LRB-

SD

below

the

mean

-RRB-

levels

of

anger

proneness

following

the

procedures

of

Aiken

and

West

-LRB-

-RRB-

The

regression

lines

for

high

and

low

anger

prone

children

are

plotted

in

Fig.

The

simple

slope

of

effective

guidance

was

significant

at

high

levels

of

anger

proneness

-LRB-

B

t

-LRB-

-RRB-

p

-RRB-

but

not

at

low

levels

of

anger

proneness

-LRB-

B

t

-LRB-

-RRB-

ns

-RRB-

Thus

a

lack

of

effective

guidance

was

associated

with

more

externalizing

behavior

for

highly

anger

prone

children

but

not

for

low

anger

prone

children

Mediational

analyses

Next

the

hypothesized

mediated

pathways

between

the

predictors

and

age

externalizing

behavior

were

tested

using

regression

analysis

according

to

the

procedure

outlined

by

Baron

and

Kenny

-LRB-

-RRB-

According

to

this

procedure

three

conditions

must

hold

in

order

to

establish

mediation

-LRB-

a

-RRB-

the

predictor

is

significantly

associated

with

the

outcome

-LRB-

b

-RRB-

the

predictor

is

significantly

associated

with

the

mediator

and

-LRB-

c

-RRB-

the

mediator

is

significantly

associated

with

the

outcome

If

these

conditions

hold

in

the

predicted

direction

mediation

is

proven

when

the

effect

of

the

predictor

on

the

outcome

is

shown

to

decrease

when

the

mediator

is

also

entered

as

a

predictor

in

the

regression

equation

First

we

tested

whether

D

versus

non-D

attachment

mediated

the

effect

of

the

parent-child

interaction

-LRB-

two

measures

-RRB-

at

months

on

age

externalizing

behavior

For

both

hypothesized

pathways

the

three

abovementioned

conditions

for

establishing

mediation

were

met

-LRB-

see

Table

for

correlations

-RRB-

Furthermore

the

effect

of

effective

guidance

at

months

on

externalizing

behavior

-LRB-

β

p

-RRB-

dropped

to

a

nonsignificant

level

-LRB-

β

ns

-RRB-

when

D

versus

non-D

attachment

was

controlled

for

-LRB-

Sobel

test

z

p

-RRB-

showing

that

D

versus

non-D

attachment

completely

mediated

the

effect

of

effective

guidance

at

months

on

externalizing

behavior

The

effect

of

negative

interactions

at

months

on

externalizing

behavior

-LRB-

β

p

-RRB-

decreased

but

remained

significant

when

D

versus

non-D

attachment

was

controlled

for

-LRB-

β

p

-RRB-

Sobel

's

test

showed

the

decrease

to

be

significant

-LRB-

z

p

-RRB-

These

findings

indicate

that

negative

interactions

at

months

are

associated

with

age

externalizing

behavior

both

directly

and

via

D

versus

non-D

attachment

Next

we

tested

whether

the

effect

of

parental

ego-resiliency

on

child

externalizing

behavior

was

mediated

by

the

quality

of

the

parent-child

interaction

-LRB-

two

measures

-RRB-

at

and

months

As

evident

from

Table

the

three

conditions

for

establishing

mediation

only

held

for

one

of

the

four

possible

pathways

namely

for

the

pathway

mediated

by

negative

interactions

at

months

For

this

pathway

multiple

regression

showed

the

effect

of

parental

ego-resiliency

on

externalizing

behavior

-LRB-

β

p

-RRB-

to

decrease

-LRB-

Sobel

test

z

p

-RRB-

to

a

nonsignificant

level

-LRB-

β

ns

-RRB-

when

negative

interactions

at

months

was

controlled

for

These

results

indicate

that

the

effect

of

parental

ego-resiliency

on

children

's

externalizing

behavior

was

completely

mediated

by

negative

parent-child

interactions

at

months.Fig

path

model

summarizing

the

pattern

of

direct

moderated

and

mediated

relations

between

predictors

at

and

months

and

age

externalizing

behavior

Values

given

are

standardized

path

coefficients

p

p

Path

analysis

Finally

path

analysis

using

AMOS

-LRB-

Arbuckle

-RRB-

was

applied

to

test

the

complete

longitudinal

model

for

predicting

age

externalizing

behavior

including

-LRB-

-RRB-

all

the

direct

and

moderated

relations

between

the

predictors

and

age

externalizing

behavior

found

in

the

regression

analysis

-LRB-

-RRB-

the

three

significant

mediated

pathways

resulting

from

the

mediational

analyses

and

-LRB-

-RRB-

the

longitudinal

relations

between

the

and

assessments

of

the

two

parent-child

interaction

factors

-LRB-

i.e.

effective

guidance

and

negative

parent-child

interactions

-RRB-

A

good

model

fit

is

indicated

by

a

nonsignificant

χ2

statistic

a

Bentler

comparative

fit

index

-LRB-

CFI

-RRB-

of

or

above

and

root

mean

square

error

of

approximation

-LRB-

RMSEA

-RRB-

of

or

below

The

analysis

of

the

initial

model

yielded

a

significant

fit

-LRB-

χ2

df

p

CFI

RMSEA

-RRB-

indicating

that

the

model

fits

the

data

well

The

final

model

including

the

standardized

path

coefficients

is

depicted

in

Fig.

Discussion

The

present

study

is

one

of

the

first

attempts

and

the

first

with

a

community

sample

to

include

the

theoretically

most

important

parental

child

dyadic

and

contextual

characteristics

longitudinally

assessed

in

both

infancy

and

toddlerhood

in

the

prediction

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

at

age

Data

were

gathered

using

multiple

sources

-LRB-

parents

and

teachers

-RRB-

and

multiple

methods

including

questionnaires

standardized

tests

and

extensive

observations

of

the

parent-child

interaction

Predictors

from

all

four

domains

were

found

to

be

associated

with

children

's

externalizing

behavior

at

age

which

is

in

accordance

with

the

results

of

earlier

studies

using

high-risk

samples

-LRB-

Aguilar

et

al.

Erickson

et

al.

Lyons-Ruth

et

al.

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

The

longitudinal

model

that

emerged

from

our

analyses

provides

more

insight

into

the

pattern

of

direct

moderated

and

mediated

influences

that

work

together

to

shape

the

development

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

across

the

first

five

years

of

life

As

emphasized

in

the

introduction

the

present

study

was

conducted

on

a

non

high-risk

sample

in

contrast

to

the

above

prior

longitudinal

studies

that

were

all

conducted

on

high-risk

samples

After

recruitment

when

the

children

were

months

of

age

the

sample

appeared

to

be

representative

of

the

Dutch

population

of

families

with

young

children

and

therefore

was

not

considered

as

a

high-risk

sample

-LRB-

see

Van

Bakel

Riksen-Walraven

-RRB-

At

the

assessment

the

selective

drop-out

of

families

with

relatively

low

ego-resilient

parents

seemed

to

make

the

risk

status

of

the

remaining

sample

even

lower

In

this

light

our

finding

that

the

children

had

higher

CBCL

and

TRF

externalizing

scores

than

the

relevant

normative

Dutch

samples

is

puzzling

It

may

be

that

the

level

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

has

increased

over

the

last

few

years

unfortunately

no

recent

normative

data

are

available

An

alternative

explanation

may

be

that

in

middle-class

communities

families

with

concerns

about

their

children

's

development

are

more

likely

to

volunteer

for

research

studies

Because

relevant

information

is

not

available

for

the

present

sample

this

remains

an

issue

for

further

study

The

only

hypothesized

predictors

that

were

not

associated

with

later

externalizing

behavior

were

SES

and

child

temperament

and

cognitive

ability

at

months

The

lack

of

association

between

SES

and

externalizing

behavior

is

in

line

with

earlier

studies

that

also

reported

parental

and

child

characteristics

to

be

more

consistently

associated

with

externalizing

behavior

than

contextual

characteristics

-LRB-

Shaw

et

al.

-RRB-

Restriction

of

range

in

SES

scores

in

our

sample

is

not

a

likely

explanation

for

the

findings

given

that

the

sample

seems

to

be

fairly

representative

of

the

Dutch

population

of

families

with

children

in

the

same

age

range

as

indicated

above

Yet

it

may

be

that

the

variation

of

SES

in

the

Netherlands

is

less

than

in

other

countries

such

as

the

USA

Further

research

is

recommended

to

examine

how

well

the

model

that

our

analyses

generated

applies

in

community

samples

from

other

countries

or

for

ethnically

diverse

samples

of

parents

and

children

The

present

nonsignificant

relations

between

infant

temperament

and

cognitive

ability

on

the

one

hand

and

externalizing

behavior

on

the

other

are

in

line

with

the

results

of

two

other

recent

longitudinal

studies

both

using

high-risk

samples

-LRB-

Aguilar

et

al.

Brennan

Hall

Bor

Majman

Williams

-RRB-

that

also

failed

to

find

an

association

between

early

temperamental

and

neuropsychological

risks

on

the

one

hand

and

persistent

aggressive

behavior

on

the

other

Given

that

as

argued

in

the

introduction

the

predictive

power

of

risk

factors

may

be

higher

in

high-risk

samples

than

in

lower-risk

samples

it

is

not

surprising

that

variables

that

failed

to

predict

externalizing

behavior

in

high-risk

samples

also

failed

to

predict

such

problems

in

a

lower-risk

sample

like

ours

With

regard

to

the

predictive

power

of

risk

factors

in

relation

to

sample

risk

status

it

should

be

noticed

that

comparing

the

predictive

power

of

risk

factors

in

studies

differing

in

sample

risk

status

is

not

the

most

elegant

way

to

address

this

question

A

more

direct

way

to

test

whether

risk

factors

interact

with

sample

risk

status

is

by

testing

for

interactive

effects

in

a

sample

with

a

greater

range

of

risk

-LRB-

see

for

example

Lacourse

et

al.

-RRB-

Although

temperament

assessed

in

infancy

did

not

interact

with

the

parent-child

interaction

in

the

prediction

of

externalizing

behavior

temperament

assessed

in

toddlerhood

did

More

specifically

a

parent-child

interaction

characterized

by

a

lack

of

effective

guidance

in

toddlerhood

predicted

externalizing

behavior

only

in

highly

anger-prone

toddlers

but

not

in

less

anger-prone

toddlers

This

finding

seems

to

support

Belsky

's

-LRB-

-RRB-

differential

susceptibility

hypothesis

that

not

all

children

are

similarly

affected

by

the

same

rearing

experience

It

should

be

kept

in

mind

however

that

our

effective

guidance

factor

not

only

includes

parental

behavior

but

child

behavior

as

well

With

the

same

reserve

our

findings

appear

to

also

be

in

line

with

the

results

of

studies

that

showed

child

negative

emotionality

to

interact

with

parenting

in

predicting

externalizing

problems

-LRB-

Belsky

et

al.

Leve

et

al.

-RRB-

Rather

than

an

association

with

negative

parent-child

interactions

and

hence

in

contrast

to

earlier

reports

our

findings

showed

temperament

to

interact

with

a

different

dimension

of

the

parent-child

interaction

namely

a

lack

of

effective

guidance

This

is

not

to

say

that

negative

parent-child

interactions

as

such

carried

no

weight

in

the

prediction

of

externalizing

problems

in

the

present

study

Quite

the

contrary

the

factor

proved

to

be

one

of

the

most

powerful

predictors

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

in

the

present

study

and

this

was

true

for

all

the

children

in

our

sample

and

not

just

for

a

subsample

of

temperamentally

difficult

children

Our

results

on

the

interaction

between

temperament

and

parenting

in

the

development

of

externalizing

problems

extend

those

of

earlier

studies

by

showing

that

a

specific

temperament

by

parenting

interaction

may

work

particularly

in

a

specific

developmental

phase

That

the

interaction

between

anger

proneness

and

effective

guidance

proved

to

predict

externalizing

problems

particularly

for

toddlers

makes

sense

when

interpreted

from

a

developmental

psychopathology

perspective

establishing

autonomy

and

learning

to

comply

with

social

rules

and

expectations

are

major

developmental

tasks

for

toddlers

that

challenge

the

parents

ability

to

provide

effective

guidance

by

imposing

structure

and

setting

limits

while

at

the

same

time

remaining

emotionally

supportive

of

the

child

As

a

result

of

the

child

's

striving

for

autonomy

the

second

year

is

marked

by

parent-toddler

conflicts

Toddlers

that

are

prone

to

show

angry

behaviors

in

such

discord

situations

are

particularly

in

need

of

effective

guidance

in

order

to

prevent

their

lack

of

emotional

and

behavioral

self-control

to

further

escalate

and

evolve

into

externalizing

behavior

problems

Our

finding

that

D

attachment

was

among

the

strongest

predictors

of

externalizing

behavior

at

age

supports

the

results

of

previous

research

-LRB-

Lyons-Ruth

et

al.

Munson

et

al.

Shaw

et

al.

Vondra

et

al.

-RRB-

Disorganized

attachment

has

been

found

to

reflect

a

history

of

disturbed

parent-child

interaction

on

the

one

hand

and

to

predict

later

externalizing

problems

on

the

other

-LRB-

cf.

Lyons-Ruth

Jacobvitz

-RRB-

The

results

of

our

path

analysis

have

shed

more

light

on

the

nature

of

the

contributions

of

the

parent-child

interaction

and

parent-child

attachment

to

the

development

of

externalizing

behavior

problems

First

of

all

our

path

analysis

showed

D

attachment

to

mediate

the

relations

between

the

two

aspects

of

parent-child

interaction

-LRB-

i.e.

effective

guidance

and

negative

interaction

-RRB-

at

months

and

externalizing

behavior

at

age

In

addition

the

results

showed

negative

parent-child

interactions

at

months

to

contribute

significantly

to

later

externalizing

problems

beyond

D

attachment

at

months

These

findings

are

in

line

with

earlier

findings

by

Erickson

et

al.

-LRB-

-RRB-

and

support

Greenberg

's

-LRB-

-RRB-

model

that

considers

parent-child

interaction

and

parent-child

attachment

as

two

different

domains

that

contribute

independently

to

a

child

's

development

but

that

also

reciprocally

influence

one

another

The

results

of

this

study

may

have

clinical

and

policy

implications

Many

studies

have

shown

that

children

born

in

disadvantaged

environments

are

at

risk

for

developing

externalizing

problems

later

in

life

The

present

study

showed

that

also

for

children

living

in

presumably

lower-risk

families

certain

characteristics

in

infancy

and

toddlerhood

indicate

an

increased

risk

of

externalizing

problems

at

preschool

age

It

should

be

kept

in

mind

however

that

our

sample

may

have

been

more

at

risk

than

originally

thought

because

a

relatively

large

proportion

of

children

turned

out

to

have

externalizing

behavior

scores

above

the

subclinical

cutoff

An

important

practical

implication

of

our

findings

is

that

one

of

the

most

powerful

predictors

identified

in

the

present

study

i.e.

negative

parent-child

interactions

is

relatively

easy

to

observe

already

in

infancy

and

proves

to

be

highly

stable

which

makes

it

an

interesting

candidate

for

inclusion

in

early

community

mental

health

screening

procedures

And

the

specific

interaction

of

the

other

parent-child

interaction

factor

-LRB-

i.e.

effective

guidance

-RRB-

with

temperamental

anger

proneness

in

toddlerhood

in

predicting

later

externalizing

problems

also

suggests

that

paying

more

attention

to

early

parent-child

interactions

may

be

useful

in

early

detection

of

children

at

risk

and

in

preventive

intervention

programs

for

parents

in

community

mental

health

care

But

more

research

is

needed

of

course

to

further

explore

these

possible

applications

It

is

important

to

also

point

out

limitations

of

the

present

study

First

although

it

is

a

strong

point

that

data

were

collected

using

multiple

methods

and

multiple

sources

parental

report

was

the

sole

source

of

information

regarding

four

different

predictors

of

externalizing

problems

namely

infant

temperament

parental

ego-resiliency

partner

support

and

stressful

life

events

Thus

response

bias

may

have

partially

accounted

for

the

results

What

speaks

against

this

however

is

that

the

four

predictors

were

mostly

uncorrelated

with

each

other

-LRB-

see

Table

-RRB-

Only

stressful

life

events

was

significantly

correlated

with

two

other

predictors

-LRB-

i.e.

ego-resiliency

and

partner

support

-RRB-

which

may

explain

why

negative

life

events

did

not

independently

contribute

to

the

explanation

of

later

externalizing

problems

beyond

the

other

two

predictors

Another

limitation

is

that

the

present

study

focused

on

the

role

of

children

's

experiences

with

their

primary

caregivers

in

the

development

of

externalizing

problems

which

leaves

questions

regarding

the

possible

effects

of

the

children

's

experiences

with

other

caregivers

and

with

their

peers

for

example

in

child-care

centers

-LRB-

cf.

Gevers

Deynoot-Schaub

Riksen-Walraven

-RRB-

A

third

limitation

of

the

study

is

that

we

did

not

have

additional

information

about

earlier

externalizing

behavior

and

about

characteristics

of

the

children

and

families

prior

to

our

first

assessment

at

our

disposal

Future

research

that

includes

observations

earlier

in

infancy

may

further

improve

our

understanding

of

the

mechanisms

involved

in

the

early

development

of

externalizing

problems

A

fourth

limitation

lies

in

the

relatively

small

sample

size

The

sample

was

small

by

epidemiological

standards

particularly

with

regard

to

evaluating

mediator

and

moderator

effects

And

as

a

fifth

and

final

limitation

of

the

present

study

it

should

be

mentioned

that

we

based

our

assessments

of

the

quality

of

infant-parent

attachment

on

an

abbreviated

version

of

the

Strange

Situation

that

includes

one

as

opposed

to

two

separations

from

the

parent

Despite

the

evidence

supporting

the

validity

of

the

abbreviated

procedure

-LRB-

see

Method

section

-RRB-

it

is

possible

that

we

have

underestimated

the

number

of

D

children

given

that

in

the

regular

Strange

Situation

Procedure

children

may

be

classified

as

disorganized

based

on

their

reunion

behavior

after

the

second

separation

Anyhow

the

present

study

shows

that

D

attachment

even

when

assessed

with

the

abbreviated

Strange

Situation

was

a

powerful

predictor

of

later

externalizing

behavior

problems

In

sum

the

longitudinal

model

our

analyses

generated

provides

more

insight

into

the

complex

interplay

among

parental

child

dyadic

and

contextual

characteristics

that

together

shape

the

development

of

externalizing

behavior

from

age

months

onwards

Future

research

should

reveal

whether

the

predictive

power

of

the

model

can

be

improved

for

instance

by

including

earlier

measurements

and

by

taking

into

account

the

children

's

early

experiences

with

the

other

parent

and

with

their

caregivers

and

peers

in

child-care

facilities

O O O B I O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

externalizing behavior
early predictors
longitudinal model
disorganized attachment