View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Behavioral Inhibition in Early Childhood and Adjustment in Late Adolescence in China

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Behavioral Inhibition in Early Childhood and Adjustment in Late Adolescence in China
Language: English
Authors: Chen, Xinyin (ORCID 0000-0002-0952-8659), Fu, Rui, Li, Dan, Chen, Huichang, Wang, Zhengyan (ORCID 0000-0003-0178-804X), Wang, Li
Source: Child Development. May-Jun 2021 92(3):994-1010.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 17
Publication Date: 2021
Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation (NSF)
Contract Number: BCS1225620
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Inhibition, Child Behavior, Young Children, Late Adolescents, Social Adjustment, Student Adjustment, Psychological Patterns, Peer Relationship, Interpersonal Competence, Depression (Psychology), Predictor Variables, Child Development, Foreign Countries
Geographic Terms: China
DOI: 10.1111/cdev.13463
ISSN: 0009-3920
Abstract: This study examined relations between behavioral inhibition in toddlerhood and social, school, and psychological adjustment in late adolescence in China. Data on behavioral inhibition were collected from a sample of 2-year-olds (initial N = 247). Follow-up data were collected at 7 years for peer relationships and 19 years for adjustment across domains. The results showed that early inhibition positively predicted later social competence and school adjustment. Peer relationships in middle childhood served as a protective factor in the development of depression of inhibited children. The results indicate the distinct functional meaning of behavioral inhibition in the Chinese context from a developmental perspective.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2021
Accession Number: EJ1297169
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHeXJqQ7M8dg7WV0I6RecokAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCRgGdRJsSW01JrCBwIBEICBmsYxcU3Huq7C4F7lj39DdPg6lJvasg53QsMavqEn7YziuJdBKoYXUH1gbmCOjl7I1zo-r2zIp-KNuhURPV_23ePGmt8c52UgeMR5Amfvsq0Va3ieTz300jW8-LwDqLRG0rIU8an4irg6UufInbCJfddTvAyqMQ6cCjE-QUfzuabe1VxCskrzIfyZ7kKPrIyniPO0cgSaKZ6eco4=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0150671899;cdv01may.21;2021Jun05.05:04;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0150671899-1">Behavioral Inhibition in Early Childhood and Adjustment in Late Adolescence in China </title> <p>This study examined relations between behavioral inhibition in toddlerhood and social, school, and psychological adjustment in late adolescence in China. Data on behavioral inhibition were collected from a sample of 2‐year‐olds (initial N = 247). Follow‐up data were collected at 7 years for peer relationships and 19 years for adjustment across domains. The results showed that early inhibition positively predicted later social competence and school adjustment. Peer relationships in middle childhood served as a protective factor in the development of depression of inhibited children. The results indicate the distinct functional meaning of behavioral inhibition in the Chinese context from a developmental perspective.</p> <p>Behavioral inhibition, which is concerned with wary and anxious reactions to unfamiliar or challenging situations, is one of the fundamental socioemotional characteristics in early childhood that may have pervasive implications for individual development in various social and psychological domains (e.g., Fox, Henderson, Marshall, Nichols, & Ghera, 2005; Kagan, 1997; Rothbart & Bates, 2006). Research has shown that considerable individual differences on behavioral inhibition emerge in infancy and toddlerhood; when facing challenging situations, whereas some children are relaxed and display a low level of distress, others tend to be vigilant, anxious, and fearful (Garcia‐Coll, Kagan, & Reznick, 1984; Rubin, Hastings, Stewart, Henderson, & Chen, 1997). Although Kagan and colleagues' work (e.g., Garcia‐Coll et al., 1984; Kagan et al., 2007) focused on the examination of group differences between highly inhibited and uninhibited children (e.g., using top and bottom 15%–20% as the identification criteria), many researchers consider behavioral inhibition a behavioral characteristic varying on a continuum among children (e.g., Asendorpf, 1994; Pérez‐Edgar et al.., 2011; Smith, Hastings, Henderson, & Rubin, 2019; Volbrecht & Goldsmith, 2010; White et al., 2017). Researchers have found that behavioral inhibition was associated with biological measures, such as heart rate, cortisol, the frontal brain asymmetry, genetic, and executive attention processes (e.g., Pérez‐Edgar et al., 2014; Schmidt et al., 1997; White et al., 2017; also see Chen & Schmidt, 2015; Fox et al., 2005 for reviews).</p> <p>Research has indicated that early behavioral inhibition contributes to development in social, cognitive, and psychological domains. For example, it has been found in Western countries that behavioral inhibition in early childhood is associated with concurrent and later difficulties in social relationships and school performance (e.g., Asendorpf, Denissen, & van Aken, 2008; Caspi et al., 2003; Pérez‐Edgar et al., 2010; Stevenson‐Hinde, Shouldice, & Chicot, 2011; Volbrecht & Goldsmith, 2010). When inhibited children realize their difficulties in social interactions, they are likely to develop psychological problems, such as loneliness and depression (e.g., Chronis‐Tuscano et al, 2009; Degnan & Fox, 2007; Kagan et al., 2007; Schwartz, Snidman, & Kagan, 1999; White et al., 2017). Thus, it has been argued that behavioral inhibition represents a risk factor in the development of psychopathological symptoms (Kagan et al., 2007; Rubin, Coplan, & Bowker, 2009).</p> <p>Behavioral patterns reflecting the construct of inhibition in unfamiliar or challenging situations have been found in many societies such as China, Germany, Italy, Japan, and Sweden (e.g., Asendorpf, 1994; Broberg, Lamb, & Hwang, 1990; Zappulla & Lo Coco, 2003). What is less clear is the functional meaning that inhibition carries with it in different contexts, especially from a developmental perspective. It has long been argued that the functional meanings of individual characteristics may differ in different societies (e.g., Benedict, 1934; Bornstein, 1995; Chen, 2018). Thus, one needs to be careful in generalizing findings concerning the developmental outcome of behavioral inhibition from Western children to other societies. Despite the argument, however, there is little research on the significance of behavioral inhibition for development in non‐Western countries. Chen, Chen, Li, and Wang (2009) studied relations between behavioral inhibition at 2 years and social and school performance at 7 years in a Chinese sample. The results showed that toddlerhood inhibition was associated with later socially appropriate behavior, peer liking, perceived social integration, and school competence, which was different from what has been found in the West (e.g., Fox et al., 2005). To expand the research in this area, we conducted the present study to examine long‐term relations between early inhibition and adjustment outcomes in late adolescence in China.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-2">Behavioral Inhibition and Adjustment</hd> <p>The social and psychological difficulties that inhibited children experience in Western societies are likely due to the emphasis on social assertiveness, autonomy, and self‐expression (Greenfield, Suzuki, & Rothstein‐Fisch, 2006; Rubin et al., 2009). During socialization, children are encouraged to learn and display increasingly assertive and independent behaviors (Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Behavioral inhibition, which indicates wariness, anxiety, and lack of confidence in expressing the self and exploring the environment, is inconsistent with the socialization goal and thus is regarded as immature, incompetent, and maladaptive (Rubin et al., 2009). As a result, the behaviors that inhibited children display are often negatively evaluated and responded to by others. The negative social evaluations and responses may constitute a social environment for inhibited children to develop problems (e.g., Rubin et al., 2009).</p> <p>In Chinese and perhaps some other group‐oriented societies, individuals are encouraged to control personal desires and actions in order to achieve and maintain social harmony and group functioning (Chen, 2010; Greenfield et al., 2006). Behavioral vigilance, cautiousness, and self‐restraint are viewed as indicating social maturity and accomplishment (Liang, 1987). This general background may have implications for the development of behavioral inhibition. In the group‐oriented context, inhibited children may not have evident obstacles in getting involved in social interactions because peers may view wary and reticent behaviors that inhibited children display as acceptable and appropriate (Chen & French, 2008). The favorable experiences help them develop positive self‐regard and confidence in coping with adjustment difficulties (e.g., Chen, DeSouza, Chen, & Wang, 2006). At the same time, engagement in activities with peers provides opportunities for inhibited children to learn social expectations and skills and to exhibit their strengths in social settings. Social relationships that inhibited children establish also help them develop positive attitudes and motivation to achieve in the school. It has been found that shyness–sensitivity in middle and late childhood, as anxious reactivity to challenging social situations that is conceptually linked with behavioral inhibition, is associated with peer acceptance, teacher‐rated competence, and other indexes of achievement in Chinese children (e.g., Chen, Rubin, & Li, 1995). The results suggest that the context may play a role in shaping the developmental significance of behavioral inhibition.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-3">Early Inhibition, Peer Relationships, and Adjustment in Late Adolescence in China: The Presen...</hd> <p>The main purpose of the present study was to examine long‐term relations between behavioral inhibition in toddlerhood and adjustment in late adolescence in China. A sample of Chinese children participated in the longitudinal study. Data on behavioral inhibition were collected at 2 years from laboratory observations, and data on adjustment were collected at 19 years from self‐reports. As developmental outcomes, we focused on adjustment in three main aspects: social competence, school/educational performance (academic achievement, school effort, educational status), and psychological well‐being (self‐esteem, depression), which represent important developmental tasks in late adolescence (e.g., Liu, Chen, Li, & French, 2012; Morison & Masten, 1991). Based on the discussion in the previous section, we expected that, in general, early inhibition would be positively associated with later social competence, school achievement, and psychological well‐being.</p> <p>It has been argued that the development of behavioral characteristics is likely to be constrained by social factors (e.g., Rubin, Bukowski, & Bowker, 2015; Sameroff, 2009). From middle childhood, peer relationships, including peer acceptance, belonging, and experiences in the peer setting, serve as a major social context in which children learn social norms and affect each other in socioemotional and cognitive development (Rubin et al., 2015). From a contextual‐developmental perspective, Chen (2018) and Chen and French (2008) argue that peer relationships play a particularly important role in regulating the development of children's behaviors according to socialization goals. In the present study, we were interested in the mediating and moderating effects of peer relationships in middle childhood on the relations between early behavioral inhibition and later adjustment. We believed that investigating how peer relationships served to mediate the longitudinal relations between inhibition and adjustment and moderate the pattern of the relations would help achieve a better understanding of the nature of behavioral inhibition in Chinese children.</p> <p>We expected that peer relationships would be a significant mediator of the relations between inhibition and later adjustment. Specifically, social approval and assistance that inhibited children receive from peers are likely to help them learn cooperative and rule‐abiding behaviors, which are highly valued in Chinese society (Chen, 2010; Liang, 1987). At the same time, the supportive environment is conducive to developing positive attitudes about the self and others in coping with emotional distress (Rubin et al., 2015). China has evolved into a more competitive society, which may have undermined the value of behavioral inhibition (e.g., Chen, Cen, Li, & He, 2005). However, the early positive experiences of inhibited children may have provided them a foundation of acquiring competencies to adapt to the changing environment and to overcome the challenges during development. Morevoer, the positive social relationships they have established in childhood and adolescence likely constitute resources that continue to guide them to function appropriately in the environment. Thus, unlike their counterparts in the West who tend to have negative social experiences and develop problems (e.g., Fox et al., 2005), inhibited children in China would benefit from their supportive peer relationships and, in general, continue to adjust well in social and psychological areas in late adolescence.</p> <p>Nevertheless, there are substantial variations in peer experiences among inhibited children (e.g., Chen et al., 2006, 2009; Rubin et al., 2015). Although inhibited children generally tend to obtain peer support in China, research has shown that some inhibited children display more difficulties than other inhibited children in peer relationships (e.g., Chen et al., 2009). Different peer experiences may be reflected in their moderating effects on the relations between inhibition and adjustment. Among inhibited children, those who receive a high level of peer support are likely to have an advantage in achieving positive outcomes, but those who fail to form supportive peer relationships may develop in a less favorable manner. Our perspective on the moderating effects of peer relationships is consistent with the literature on the person–context interaction (e.g., Chen & Schmidt, 2015; Masten & Wright, 1998). For example, the stress‐buffering model (Cohen & Wills, 1985; Rutter, 2013) indicates that social support may serve as a protective factor that buffers against the influence of adverse conditions and protects children who are potentially at risk from developing maladaptive outcomes. According to this model, supportive peer relationships may attenuate the anxious reactivity of inhibited children to challenging situations and reduce its negative effects on later adjustment. In contrast, unsupportive peer relationships may reinforce the links between behavioral inhibition and adjustment problems, rendering inhibited children vulnerable to maladaptive development in the later years. Statistically, this model may be represented by significant negative associations between inhibition and later adjustment or positive associations between inhibition and later maladjustment for children with unsupportive peer relationships and nonsignificant or weaker associations for children with supportive peer relationships (Cohen & Wills, 1985). From a different perspective, the resource‐potentiating model (Kupersmidt, Griesler, DeRosier, Patterson, & Davis, 1995) suggests that desirable or supportive social relationships may serve to potentiate the resources or strengths of inhibited children and enhance their positive development, whereas unsupportive peer relationships may suppress the positive development of inhibited children. Statistically, this model may be represented by significant positive associations between inhibition and later adjustment or negative associations between inhibition and later maladjustment for children with supportive peer relationships and nonsignificant or weaker associations for children with unsupportive peer relationships.</p> <p>It should be noted that, whereas the literature generally indicates the significance of peer relationships in shaping the developmental outcomes of behavioral characteristics through mediation and moderation (e.g., Rubin et al., 2015; Rutter, 2013; Sameroff, 2009), there is little research on the mediating and moderating effects of peer relationships on relations between behavioral inhibition and adjustment in specific domains. Thus, although our discussion of the role of peer relationships was guided by the theoretical perspectives and models (e.g., Chen & Schmidt, 2015; Kupersmidt et al., 1995; Masten & Wright, 1998; Rubin et al., 2015), this aspect of the study was largely exploratory.</p> <p>We checked gender differences in the relations between inhibition and adjustment. Researchers have not found consistent gender differences in the prevalence of behavioral inhibition in childhood (e.g., Chen et al., 1998; Rubin et al., 1997). However, there is evidence indicating that inhibited and similar behaviors tend to be viewed by adults and peers as less acceptable and desirable in boys than in girls (e.g., Chen et al., 1995; Doey, Coplan, & Kingsbury, 2014; Rubin et al., 2009). It has been argued that due to gender‐stereotypical ideologies, boys are encouraged to be more assertive and independent in social interactions (Chen, 2010; Maccoby, 1998). Thus, we expected that behavioral inhibition would be associated with less positive developmental outcomes in boys than in girls.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-4">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0150671899-5">Participants</hd> <p>The participants in the initial study included 247 children (119 boys and 128 girls) in two cities in China. The mean age of the children was 24.42 months (<emph>SD</emph> = 2.16) when the study started in 1994–1995. The participants were randomly selected through local birth registration offices. In the sample, approximately 65% of the mothers and the fathers had an education of vocational school, high school, or less than high school, and the others had an education of university undergraduate or graduate. Concerning occupation, approximately 60% of the mothers and 70% of the fathers were nonprofessional workers or workers with certain vocational training background (e.g., salespersons, secretaries, nurses), and the others were profesionals (e.g., teachers, doctors, financial experts). Four mothers and three fathers were unemployed. In the sample, 96% of the toddlers were only children. Due to the "one‐child‐per‐family" policy that was implemented in the late 1970s, the only child phenomenon has been an integral part of the family and sociocultural background for child development in China. Only child status did not have significant effects on the variables or relations of interest in this study. The randomly selected sample was representative of the urban population of children in China.</p> <p>From the original sample, 210 children (102 boys and 108 girls) participated for 7 years, and 130 children (62 boys and 68 girls) participated at 19 years; the others did not participate in the study mainly because the families moved to different places. The participants attended different elementary schools at 7 years. At 19 years, 92.5% of the participants attended colleges and universities at different ranks, and 7.5% did not attend postsecondary schools. There were nonsignificant differences on the demographic and other variables of interest between participants who participated in the follow‐up studies and those who did not, <emph>t</emph>(<emph>df</emph> = 176–245) = −1.25 to 1.23, <emph>p</emph>s > .05.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-6">Procedure</hd> <p>In the initial study, mothers and toddlers were invited to visit the university laboratory for the assessment of behavioral inhibition. The procedure, adapted from those in Garcia‐Coll et al. (1984) and Rubin et al. (1997), was the same as in Chen et al. (1998)'s and Rubin et al. (2006)'s studies. Specifically, after each dyad entered an unfamiliar room, the child was allowed to play with an assortment of attractive toys for 10 min while the mother sat in a chair and filled out a questionnaire (free play). Then, after a cleanup session, an unfamiliar woman entered the room with a toy dump truck and some blocks. She sat quietly for 1 min, played with the truck for 1 min, then (if the toddler had not yet approached), encouraged the child to join her in play. In the next session, the adult brought a toy robot that was black, moving, "smoking," and making noises. She was silent for 30 s, and then invited the child to play with the robot for 1 min. The child continued to experience other sessions assessing different abilities and behaviors such as reactions to frustration. The data from these sessions were not included in the present study. At 7 years, the children were invited to the university laboratory and interviewed individually about the peer relationships, such as experiences in peer affiliation and integration. In addition, teachers of the children were contacted and asked to complete a rating scale concerning each child's peer relationships. At 19 years, the participants were requested to complete a battery of questionnaires concerning social competence, school adjustment, educational status, and psychological adjustment.</p> <p>The procedure and measures used in the study have proved to be valid and appropriate in Chinese children (e.g., Chen et al., 2009; Chen et al., 1998; Rubin et al., 2006; Yang, Wu, & Peng, 2012). The administration of the sessions was conducted by the authors, as well as by graduate and senior undergraduate students in China. Written consent was obtained from parents of the participants at 2 and 7 years and from the participants at 19 years. The laboratory sessions were videotaped through a one‐way mirror. The data were coded by students in the psychology department of a Canadian university who were fluent in both Chinese and English and trained rigorously following the same procedure.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-7">Inhibition Coding at 2 Years</hd> <p>Behavioral inhibition was coded based on (a) duration of the child's physical contact with the mother in the free play, (b) duration of physical contact with the mother in truck and robot episodes, (c) latency to approach the stranger, and (d) latency to touch the toys. Specific coding and scoring systems are described in Chen et al. (1998). Reliability was computed as suggested by other researchers (e.g., Garcia‐Coll et al., 1984; Rubin et al., 2006). The intercoder reliability for the inhibited behaviors (dividing the amount of time of agreement by the total amount of time of agreement and disagreement in seconds) was 96%, ranging from 93% (contact with mother in the robot episode) to 100% (contact with mother in free play; see Chen et al., 1998 for detail). The procedure has been used and proved to be valid in North America and other countries such as China, Korea, and Italy (e.g., Rubin et al., 2006). The inhibition scores were standardized and aggregated and then used in the analyses.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-8">Peer Relationships at 7 Years</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0150671899-9">Self‐Reports of Peer Experiences at School</hd> <p>Children's perceived peer experiences were assessed during individual interviews based on a measure adapted from Harter (1985) and Hayden (1989). Children were asked to respond to six items (e.g., "Do you have a lot of kids to play with at school?" "Do you get along with other kids in school?"). Children's responses were scored 1–4 (1 = <emph>no, not at all</emph>, 4 = <emph>yes, very much⁄always</emph>). Before the measure was administered, children were provided detailed explanations about the task and trained on how to respond to the questions. When children understood the task, the researcher read aloud each item and recorded the response. Factor analysis revealed that the items indicated a single factor (accounting for 42.42% of the variance, loadings > 0.60). The item scores were averaged and used in the analyses, with higher scores indicating more positive peer experiences. The measure has been shown to be reliable and valid in Chinese children (Chen, He, Li, & Li, 2004; Chen et al., 2009). The internal reliability of the measure was 0.71 in the present study.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-10">Teacher Ratings of Peer Relationships</hd> <p>In Chinese schools, one teacher is usually in charge of a class. This head instructor often teaches one major course, such as Chinese language or mathematics. He or she also takes care of the various social and daily activities of the class and thus is very familiar with the students. In this study, the head teacher was contacted and asked to rate each child on a measure of peer relationships, adapted from the Teacher–Child Rating Scale (Hightower et al., 1986). Teachers rated, on a 5‐point scale, ranging from 1 (<emph>not true at all</emph>) to 5 (<emph>very true</emph>), how well each item described the child. This measure included 12 items tapping peer relationships (e.g., "Has many friends," "Well liked by classmates"). Factor analyses revealed that the items indicated a single factor (accounting for 40.03% of the variance, loadings > 0.45), and the item scores were averaged to form teacher‐rating variable, with higher scores indicating more positive peer relationships. The measure has shown to be reliable and valid in Chinese children (Chen et al., 1995, 2009). The internal reliability of the measure was 0.86 in the present study. Teacher‐rated peer relationships and self‐reported peer experiences were significantly correlated, <emph>r</emph> = .27, <emph>p</emph> < .01, and were aggregated to form an index of peer relationships. Preliminary analyses based on separate teacher ratings and self‐reports showed virtually the same results.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-11">Adjustment at 19 Years</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0150671899-12">Social Competence</hd> <p>A self‐report measure of social competence, adapted from Chen, Rubin, and Sun (1992), was used to assess youth's social competence. The measure consisted of five items (e.g., "I am willing to help others when they need it," "I am friendly to others," "I make new friends easily") concerning specific aspects of social competence. The participants were asked to rate, on the 3‐point scale (1 = <emph>not true</emph>; 2 = <emph>somewhat or sometimes true</emph>; 3 = v<emph>ery true or often true</emph>), for each of the items according to how well they described them. Factor analysis revealed that the items indicated a single factor (accounting for 46% of the variance, loadings > 0.45). The average score of the items was calculated, with higher scores indicating higher levels of social competence. The internal reliability of this measure was 0.70.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-13">Academic Achievement and School Effort</hd> <p>Participants who were college/university students were asked to report their cumulative grade point average at their college/university. In addition, school engagement and effort were assessed using a scale adapted from Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, and Darling (1992). The measures of academic achievement and school effort have been used and shown to be reliable and valid in Chinese adolescents (e.g., Chao, 2001; Fuligni & Witkow, 2004). For school effort, the participants were asked to respond to five items (e.g., "How often do you complete assignments?" "How often do you study before an exam?" "How often do you pay attention to the lecture and other academic activities in class?") on a 5‐point scale (1 = <emph>never or rarely</emph>; 5 = <emph>always</emph>). Factor analysis revealed that the items indicated a single factor (accounting for 53.25% of the variance, loadings > 0.62). The average score of the responses was computed and used in the study, with higher scores indicating greater effort on studying. The internal reliability of the measure was 0.70.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-14">Educational Status</hd> <p>The information on youth's educational status was obtained from self‐reports. Universities and colleges in China are hierarchically ranked according to different levels from the key or leading universities in the country to professional or technical training schools; the system was formally established by the Ministry of Education of China (China's University Rankings, 2018). Students are admitted into universities or colleges based mainly on their performance at the national college entrance examinations, awards they receive during the high school, and their interests in the application. Educational status in this study was indexed by the rank of the university or college the participant attended, which has been shown to be reliable and valid in predicting future socioeconomic status, health status, and life adjustment (e.g., MYCOS, 2017; Zheng & Zeng, 2016). Participants received a score of 5 for attending a key or leading university at the national level, 4 for attending a key university at the provincial level, 3 for attending a 4‐year general university, 2 for attending a 3‐year college, and 1 for attending a professional or technical training school. Participants who did not attend any postsecondary schools received a score of 0.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-15">Self‐Esteem</hd> <p>Participants completed a Chinese version of the Rosenberg Self‐esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965), a 10‐item measure of global self‐esteem (e.g., "I feel that I have a number of good qualities", "On the whole, I am satisfied with myself") on a 4‐point scale, ranging from 1 (<emph>strongly disagree</emph>) to 4 (<emph>strongly agree</emph>). The average score of participants' responses was calculated to form the variable of self‐esteem, with higher scores indicating higher levels of self‐acceptance in self‐evaluation. The measure has been shown to be reliable and valid in Chinese samples (e.g., Ji & Yu, 1999). Factor analysis revealed that the items indicated a single factor (accounting for 40.34% of the variance, loadings > 0.46). The internal reliability of the measure was 0.83 in the present study.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-16">Depression</hd> <p>Children's depression was measured using a Chinese version of the Beck Depression Inventory–II (Beck, Steer, & Brown, 1996). The items center on a given thought, feeling, or behavior associated with depression, such as self‐dislike, reduced interest, anhedonia, fatigue, and self‐blame. Each of the items provides four alternative responses (e.g., "I don't cry any more than I used to," "I cry more than I used to," "I cry over every little thing," "I feel like crying, but I can't") from which the participant chooses one that best describes him or her in the past 2 weeks. Two items concerning suicidal thoughts and interest in sex were not included in this study. The measure has been shown to be reliable and valid in Chinese samples (e.g., Yang et al., 2012). Factor analysis revealed that the items indicated a single factor (accounting for 40.53% of the variance, loadings >0.5). Following the procedure outlined by Beck et al. (1996), the average score of 19 items was computed, with higher scores indicative of greater depression. The internal reliability of the measure was 0.80 in the present study.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-17">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0150671899-18">Descriptive Data</hd> <p>The means and standard deviations of variables for boys and girls are presented in Table 1. There were significant gender effects on peer relationships (β = .14, <emph>B</emph> = .20, <emph>SE</emph> = .10, <emph>t</emph> = 2.00, <emph>p</emph> < .05) at 7 years, and academic achievement (β = .26, <emph>B</emph> = .51, <emph>SE</emph> = .14, <emph>t</emph> = 3.62, <emph>p</emph> < .01) and school effort (β = .21, <emph>B</emph> = .34, <emph>SE</emph> = .11, <emph>t</emph> = 2.96, <emph>p</emph> < .01) at 19 years; girls had higher scores than boys on peer relationships at 7 years and on academic achievement and school effort at 19 years. Intercorrelations among the adjustment variables are presented in Table 2. The magnitudes of the correlations were generally weak to moderate, suggesting that these measures tapped different, overlapping aspects of social, school, and psychological adjustment.</p> <p>1 TableRanges, Means, and Standard Deviations of Variables</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="top"><tr><th align="left">Variable</th><th align="left">Range</th><th align="left">Boys <italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</th><th align="left">Girls <italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left">1. Peer relationships</td><td align="left">(−2.69–1.94)</td><td align="char" char="(">−0.08 (0.82)</td><td align="char" char="(">0.11 (0.75)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Social competence</td><td align="left">(1.20–3.00)</td><td align="char" char="(">2.46 (0.42)</td><td align="char" char="(">2.55 (0.52)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Academic achievement</td><td align="left">(1.00–5.00)</td><td align="char" char="(">3.15 (0.93)</td><td align="char" char="(">3.68 (0.96)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">4. School effort</td><td align="left">(2.00–5.00)</td><td align="char" char="(">3.52 (0.75)</td><td align="char" char="(">3.84 (0.76)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">5. Educational status</td><td align="left">(0.00–5.00)</td><td align="char" char="(">2.93 (1.02)</td><td align="char" char="(">3.24 (1.09)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">6. Self‐esteem</td><td align="left">(2.00–4.00)</td><td align="char" char="(">3.16 (0.45)</td><td align="char" char="(">3.15 (0.39)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">7. Depression</td><td align="left">(.05–1.89)</td><td align="char" char="(">0.43 (0.26)</td><td align="char" char="(">0.50 (0.33)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">8. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="left">(−1.51–3.26)</td><td align="char" char="(">−0.06 (1.04)</td><td align="char" char="(">0.04 (0.95)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 TableCorrelations Among Variables by Gender</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="top"><tr><th align="left">Variable</th><th align="left">1</th><th align="left">2</th><th align="left">3</th><th align="left">4</th><th align="left">5</th><th align="left">6</th><th align="left">7</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left">Boys</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Peer relationships</td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Social competence</td><td align="char" char=".">.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Academic achievement</td><td align="char" char=".">.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">4. School effort</td><td align="char" char=".">.33<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">5. Educational status</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="char" char=".">.11</td><td align="char" char=".">.27<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.12</td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">6. Self‐esteem</td><td align="char" char=".">.20<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.51<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.20<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.10</td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">7. Depression</td><td align="char" char=".">−.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.20<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.08</td><td align="char" char=".">−.60<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">8. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.17<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.38<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.21<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.15</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="char" char=".">.15</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Girls</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Peer relationships</td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Social competence</td><td align="char" char=".">.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Academic achievement</td><td align="char" char=".">.37<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">4. School effort</td><td align="char" char=".">.32<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.46<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.54<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">5. Educational status</td><td align="char" char=".">.21<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="char" char=".">.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">6. Self‐esteem</td><td align="char" char=".">.21<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.38<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.30<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">7. Depression</td><td align="char" char=".">−.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.23<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.33<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">−.57<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td align="left">8. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.18<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.23<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn3" /></td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>2 * <emph>p</emph> < .05.</item> <item>3 ** <emph>p</emph> < .01.</item> <item>4 *** <emph>p</emph> < .001.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0150671899-19">Relations Among Inhibition, Peer Relationships, and Adjustment</hd> <p>Little's Missing Completely at Random (MCAR) test (Little, 1988) indicated that the data were missing completely at random, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib188" id="ref1">188</reflink>) = 217.47, <emph>p </emph>> .05. Full‐information maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation was used to handle the missing data for children who had incomplete data on the variables, as suggested by other researchers (e.g., Graham, 2009). FIML utilized the information for the variables at all waves and auxiliary variables, including child gender, parental education, and parental occupation, were incorporated in the analyses to reduce parameter biases. This approach is proved to be effective in providing accurate estimates with missing data (Collins, Schafer, & Kam, 2001). Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to examine the relations of behavioral inhibition at 2 years with peer relationships at 7 years and adjustment variables at 19 years. Child gender, parental education and occupation, and behavioral inhibition were entered hierarchically. The adjustment variables were included in the same model. As shown in Table 3, controlling for child gender and parental education and occupation, inhibition at 2 years was positively associated with peer relationships at 7 years and social competence, academic achievement, and school effort at 19 years, with cohen's <emph>f</emph><sups>2</sups> ranging from.07 (peer relationships) to.20 (academic achievement). The main effects of inhibition were nonsignificant in predicting educational status, self‐esteem, and depression. The results indicated that children higher on inhibition in the early years had more positive peer relationships in middle childhood and displayed better social and school adjustment in late adolescence. The Wald test that examines the equality of parameters between boys and girls, controlling for parental education and occupation, indicated no gender differences in the relations between early inhibition and later adjustment outcomes, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref2">6</reflink>) = 3.56, <emph>p </emph>> .05.</p> <p>3 TableMain Effects of Behavioral Inhibition at 2 Years in Predicting Peer Relationships at 7 Years and Adjustment Outcomes at 19 Years</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="top"><tr><th align="left">Outcome</th><th align="left">β</th><th align="left"><italic>B</italic></th><th align="left"><italic>SE</italic></th><th align="left">95% CI</th><th align="left"><italic>t</italic> value</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Gender</td><td align="char" char=".">.14</td><td align="char" char=".">.21</td><td align="char" char=".">.10</td><td align="left">(.00,.41)</td><td align="char" char=".">2.02<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Parental education</td><td align="char" char=".">−.10</td><td align="char" char=".">−.08</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="left">(−.23,.08)</td><td align="char" char=".">−0.99</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parental occupation</td><td align="char" char=".">.02</td><td align="char" char=".">.02</td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="left">(−.16,.21)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.26</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.13</td><td align="char" char=".">.10</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="left">(.00,.20)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.98<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Social competence</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Gender</td><td align="char" char=".">.11</td><td align="char" char=".">.11</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="left">(−.03,.25)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.51</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Parental education</td><td align="char" char=".">−.10</td><td align="char" char=".">−.05</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="left">(−.16,.06)</td><td align="char" char=".">−0.91</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parental occupation</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.06</td><td align="left">(−.08,.16)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.61</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.29</td><td align="char" char=".">.14</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(.07,.21)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.78<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn7" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Academic achievement</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Gender</td><td align="char" char=".">.27</td><td align="char" char=".">.52</td><td align="char" char=".">.14</td><td align="left">(.25,.80)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.68<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn7" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Parental education</td><td align="char" char=".">−.09</td><td align="char" char=".">−.09</td><td align="char" char=".">.11</td><td align="left">(−.29,.12)</td><td align="char" char=".">−0.80</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parental occupation</td><td align="char" char=".">.10</td><td align="char" char=".">.11</td><td align="char" char=".">.13</td><td align="left">(−.14,.36)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.89</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.29</td><td align="char" char=".">.28</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="left">(.14,.42)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.90<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn7" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">School effort</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Gender</td><td align="char" char=".">.22</td><td align="char" char=".">.34</td><td align="char" char=".">.11</td><td align="left">(.12,.57)</td><td align="char" char=".">2.98<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Parental education</td><td align="char" char=".">.16</td><td align="char" char=".">.12</td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="left">(−.05,.29)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.42</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parental occupation</td><td align="char" char=".">−.14</td><td align="char" char=".">−.13</td><td align="char" char=".">.10</td><td align="left">(−.33,.06)</td><td align="char" char=".">−1.33</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.24</td><td align="char" char=".">.19</td><td align="char" char=".">.06</td><td align="left">(.07,.31)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.05<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Educational status</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Gender</td><td align="char" char=".">.13</td><td align="char" char=".">.28</td><td align="char" char=".">.17</td><td align="left">(−.06,.62)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.64</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Parental education</td><td align="char" char=".">.15</td><td align="char" char=".">.16</td><td align="char" char=".">.12</td><td align="left">(−.06,.39)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.40</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parental occupation</td><td align="char" char=".">.17</td><td align="char" char=".">.22</td><td align="char" char=".">.14</td><td align="left">(−.04,.49)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.65</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.15</td><td align="char" char=".">.16</td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="left">(−.02,.33)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.72</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Self‐esteem</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Gender</td><td align="char" char=".">.00</td><td align="char" char=".">.00</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="left">(−.13,.13)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.04</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Parental education</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="left">(−.06,.13)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.71</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parental occupation</td><td align="char" char=".">.00</td><td align="char" char=".">.00</td><td align="char" char=".">.06</td><td align="left">(−.11,.11)</td><td align="char" char=".">−0.02</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="char" char=".">.03</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(−.04,.11)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.93</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Depression</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1. Gender</td><td align="char" char=".">.12</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="left">(−.02,.17)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.53</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2. Parental education</td><td align="char" char=".">−.11</td><td align="char" char=".">−.03</td><td align="char" char=".">.03</td><td align="left">(−.10,.04)</td><td align="char" char=".">−0.96</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parental occupation</td><td align="char" char=".">−.05</td><td align="char" char=".">−.02</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(−.10,.06)</td><td align="char" char=".">−0.50</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3. Behavioral inhibition</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="char" char=".">.03</td><td align="left">(−.04,.07)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.45</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>5 * <emph>p</emph> < .05.</item> <item>6 ** <emph>p</emph> < .01.</item> <item>7 *** <emph>p</emph> < .001.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0150671899-20">Mediating Effects of Peer Relationships on Relations Between Behavioral Inhibition and Adjust...</hd> <p>We conducted analysis to examine mediating and moderating effects of peer relationships on relations between inhibition and later adjustment. In the analysis, interaction terms and indirect effect paths in predicting all adjustment outcomes were included in the model. The bias‐corrected (BC) bootstrapping was used to estimate indirect effects, as suggested by others (e.g., Preacher & Hayes, 2008; Williams & MacKinnon, 2008). This method produces bootstrapped confidence intervals, with mediation occurring when the indirect effect is significant, and its 95% BC confidence interval does not contain zero (Williams & MacKinnon, 2008). Child gender and parental education and occupation were included as covariates and controlled in the analyses. The results showed that the overall model fit was good, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref3">10</reflink>) = 19.08, <emph>p</emph> < .05, χ<sups>2</sups>/<emph>df</emph> = 1.91, comparative fit index = .97, Tucker–Lewis index = .93, root mean square error of approximation = .03, as indicated by other researchers (e.g., Brown, 2006; Hu & Bentler, 1999). Cohen's <emph>f</emph><sups>2</sups> for the adjustment variables in the mediation and moderation model ranged from.10 (self‐esteem) to.37 (school effort). The analytical diagram is presented in Figure 1. As shown in Table 4, peer relationships in middle childhood significantly mediated the relations of early inhibition with social competence, academic achievement, and school effort.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/CDV/01may21/cdev13463-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="cdev13463-fig-0001.jpg" title="1 Analytic mediation and moderation model of behavioral inhibition, peer relationships, and adjustment outcomes, controlling for gender and parental education and occupation. Significant paths are represented by solid lines, and standardized coefficients are presented above the lines.*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001." /> </p> <p></p> <p>4 TableIndirect Effects of Peer Relationships on Relations Between Inhibition and Adjustment Outcomes</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="top"><tr><th align="left">Outcome</th><th align="left">β</th><th align="left"><italic>B</italic></th><th align="left"><italic>SE</italic></th><th align="left">95% CI</th><th align="left"><italic>t</italic> value</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition (a)</td><td align="char" char=".">.14</td><td align="char" char=".">.15</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="left">(.04,.24)</td><td align="char" char=".">2.80<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Social competence</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships (b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.27</td><td align="char" char=".">.13</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(.06,.22)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.45<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition–Peer relationships (a × b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.02</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="left">(.01,.05)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.98<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn9" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition (c′)</td><td align="char" char=".">.29</td><td align="char" char=".">.14</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(.06,.22)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.50<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn11" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total effect (c)</td><td align="char" char=".">.33</td><td align="char" char=".">.16</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(.08,.24)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.84<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn11" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Academic achievement</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships (b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.30</td><td align="char" char=".">.29</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="left">(.12,.44)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.45<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition–peer relationship (a × b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.02</td><td align="left">(.01,.09)</td><td align="char" char=".">2.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn9" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition (c′)</td><td align="char" char=".">.27</td><td align="char" char=".">.27</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="left">(.13,.39)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.85<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn11" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total effect (c)</td><td align="char" char=".">.31</td><td align="char" char=".">.31</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="left">(.17,.45)</td><td align="char" char=".">4.33<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn11" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">School effort</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships (b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.37</td><td align="char" char=".">.29</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="left">(.17,.44)</td><td align="char" char=".">4.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn11" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition–Peer relationships (a × b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.02</td><td align="left">(.01,.09)</td><td align="char" char=".">2.30<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn9" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition (c′)</td><td align="char" char=".">.22</td><td align="char" char=".">.18</td><td align="char" char=".">.06</td><td align="left">(.06,.29)</td><td align="char" char=".">2.90<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total effect (c)</td><td align="char" char=".">.28</td><td align="char" char=".">.22</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="left">(.10,.34)</td><td align="char" char=".">3.36<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Educational status</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships (b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="char" char=".">.08</td><td align="char" char=".">.13</td><td align="left">(−.18,.32)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.66</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition–Peer relationships (a × b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="char" char=".">.02</td><td align="left">(−.02,.06)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.57</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition (c′)</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="char" char=".">.05</td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="left">(−.11,.22)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.57</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total effect (c)</td><td align="char" char=".">.06</td><td align="char" char=".">.06</td><td align="char" char=".">.09</td><td align="left">(−.10,.23)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.71</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Self‐esteem</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships (b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.18</td><td align="char" char=".">.07</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(.00,.15)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.90</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition–Peer relationships (a × b)</td><td align="char" char=".">.03</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="left">(.00,.03)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.45</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition (c′)</td><td align="char" char=".">−.01</td><td align="char" char=".">.00</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(−.09,.07)</td><td align="char" char=".">−0.06</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total effect (c)</td><td align="char" char=".">.02</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(−.09,.08)</td><td align="char" char=".">0.20</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Depression</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Peer relationships (b)</td><td align="char" char=".">−.16</td><td align="char" char=".">−.05</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="left">(−.13,.03)</td><td align="char" char=".">−1.15</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition–Peer relationships (a × b)</td><td align="char" char=".">−.02</td><td align="char" char=".">−.01</td><td align="char" char=".">.01</td><td align="left">(−.03,.00)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.04</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inhibition (c′)</td><td align="char" char=".">.12</td><td align="char" char=".">.04</td><td align="char" char=".">.03</td><td align="left">(−.02,.10)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.28</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total effect (c)</td><td align="char" char=".">.10</td><td align="char" char=".">.03</td><td align="char" char=".">.03</td><td align="left">(−.02,.09)</td><td align="char" char=".">1.08</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 Note</p> <ulist> <item>8 a, b, and c′ represent direct effects; a × b represents indirect effects. β for a × b represents completely standardized indirect effect.</item> <item>9 * <emph>p</emph> < .05.</item> <item>10 ** <emph>p</emph> < .01.</item> <item>11 *** <emph>p</emph> < .001.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0150671899-22">Moderating Effects of Peer Relationships on Relations Between Behavioral Inhibition and Adjus...</hd> <p>Also in this model, significant interactions were found between early behavioral inhibition and middle childhood peer relationships in predicting later educational status (β = .23, <emph>B</emph> = .29, <emph>SE</emph> = .11, <emph>t</emph> = 2.68, <emph>p</emph> < .01, Cohen's <emph>f</emph><sups>2</sups> = .19), self‐esteem (β = .19, <emph>B</emph> = .10, <emph>SE</emph> = .05, <emph>t</emph> = 2.13, <emph>p</emph> < .05, Cohen's <emph>f</emph><sups>2</sups> = .10), and depression (β = −.18, <emph>B</emph> = −.07, <emph>SE</emph> = .03, <emph>t</emph> = −2.27, <emph>p</emph> < .05, Cohen's <emph>f</emph><sups>2</sups> = .12), controlling for the effects of gender and parental education and occupation. Further analyses were conducted to examine simple slopes of the regression of the variables on inhibition at a high value and a low value (1 <emph>SD</emph> above and 1 <emph>SD</emph> below the mean) of peer relationships, as suggested by Aiken and West (1991). The simple slopes are shown in Figure 2. The results indicated that early inhibition was positively associated with later educational status (<emph>B = </emph>.34, <emph>SE = </emph>.12, <emph>t</emph> = 2.90, <emph>p</emph> < .01) and self‐esteem (<emph>B</emph> = .10, <emph>SE =</emph> .05, <emph>t</emph> = 2.00, <emph>p</emph> < .05) for children who had high scores on peer relationships; the associations were nonsignificant for children who had low scores on peer relationships (<emph>B</emph> = −.25 and −.10, <emph>SE</emph> = .16 and.07, <emph>t</emph> = −1.55 and −1.36, <emph>p</emph>s > .05). The results also indicated that inhibition was positively associated with later depression (<emph>B</emph> = .11, <emph>SE = </emph>.05, <emph>t</emph> = 2.13, <emph>p</emph> < .05) for children who had low scores on peer relationships; the association was nonsignificant (<emph>B</emph> = −.03, <emph>SE</emph> = .03, <emph>t</emph> = −.92, <emph>p </emph>> .05) for children who had high scores on peer relationships. Johnson–Neyman technique was also applied to probe the significant regions for significant interactions. As shown in Figure 3, early inhibition was positively associated with later educational status for children who were 0.39 <emph>SD</emph>s or higher on peer relationships. Early inhibition was positively associated with later self‐esteem for children who were 0.99 <emph>SD</emph>s or higher on peer relationships. In addition, early inhibition was positively associated with later depression for children who scored lower than 0.60 <emph>SD</emph>s below the mean of peer relationships.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/CDV/01may21/cdev13463-fig-0002.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="cdev13463-fig-0002.jpg" title="2 Simple slopes for interactions between behavioral inhibition and peer relationships in predicting adjustment outcomes. Error bars are displayed for slopes.*p < .05. **p < .01. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]" /> </p> <p></p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/CDV/01may21/cdev13463-fig-0003.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="cdev13463-fig-0003.jpg" title="3 Adjusted effects of behavioral inhibition on adjustment outcomes as a function of peer relationships using Johnson–Neyman technique. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]" /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0150671899-25">Discussion</hd> <p>Behavioral inhibition is a major socioemotional characteristic in early childhood that is consistently found to be associated with later adjustment problems in Western societies (e.g., Caspi et al., 2003; Chronis‐Tuscano et al., 2009; Fox et al., 2005; Kagan et al., 2007; Pérez‐Edgar et al., 2010). Thus, early inhibition is believed to be a risk factor in social and psychological development (Kagan, 1997; Rubin et al., 2009). The results of the present longitudinal study in a Chinese sample indicated that behavioral inhibition in toddlerhood positively predicted social and school competence. Inhibition also positively predicted postsecondary educational status and self‐esteem for children with supportive peer relationships. Inhibition predicted later depression for children with poor peer relationships, but not for children with supportive peer relationships. These results suggest that behavioral inhibition in early childhood may have distinct implications for human development in Chinese society.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-26">Early Behavioral Inhibition and Social and School Adjustment</hd> <p>The results concerning the associations between behavioral inhibition and social and school outcomes indicated that inhibited children in China were more likely to behave competently in social settings than others and to obtain high achievement in late adolescence, which was consistent with our hypotheses. These results are different from the general literature in Western societies (e.g., Asendorpf et al., 2008; Caspi et al., 2003; Rubin et al., 2009; Stevenson‐Hinde et al., 2011) that inhibited children tend to develop adjustment problems in social and school domains. Thus, it appears reasonable to argue (Chen, 2018) that inhibited children are not inherently at risk for maladaptive development. In contexts where wary, vigilant, and reserved behaviors they display are viewed as normal or appropriate, inhibited children may demonstrate a good "fit" with the environment and are more likely than others to become well adjusted in social and school areas.</p> <p>As indicated earlier, behavioral restraint and wariness are traditionally encouraged in Chinese society (Chen, 2010), which constitutes a context in which inhibited children may not experience difficulties in social interactions. Social approval that Chinese inhibited children receive helps them display strengths and form positive social relationships with others (Chen & French, 2008). Supportive social relationships in turn may provide opportunities for inhibited children to learn skills to express their reactivity in a socially acceptable manner. At the same time, the favorable experiences of inhibited children in school may help them develop positive school attitudes and motivate them to make efforts to achieve academic success. Moreover, the participation of inhibited children in school activities, such as extracurricular academic activities, and instrumental assistance that they receive from others may enhance their school performance and facilitate their development of problem‐solving and other intellectual abilities. The experiences and social‐cognitive competencies that inhibited children acquire in the early years may also be useful in guiding them to adapt to the new environment during development. The findings that peer relationships were a significant mediator of the contributions of inhibition to social and school adjustment in late adolescence suggest that social relationships may serve to bridge the links between early inhibition and developmental outcomes.</p> <p>The role of peer relationships was also reflected in their effects on the relations between inhibition and postsecondary educational status. Our results suggested that early inhibition was positively associated with educational status for children with supportive peer relationships, but not for children with unsupportive peer relationships. Educational status that individuals attain in China depends on a variety of factors, such as academic interest, career goals and plans, and performance on the highly stressful national college‐entrance examinations (Du, Ni, & Huang, 2018). Behavioral inhibition alone might not offer a significant advantage to attain a higher educational status; the combination of behavioral inhibition with a supportive social environment seemed to be a necessary condition for individuals to achieve such status. Similar results were found for self‐esteem, which is likely due to the crucial role of academic performance and educational attainment in shaping perceptions of self‐worth in Chinese youth (Chen, 2010; Chen et al., 2004). These results were consistent with the resource‐potentiating model (Kupersmidt et al., 1995). Peer relationships might facilitate the relations between early inhibition and later educational status and perceived self‐worth.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-27">Early Behavioral Inhibition and Depression</hd> <p>Early inhibition did not have significant main effects in predicting adolescent psychological problems, which was inconsistent with our hypotheses. Our results indicated that the relations were moderated by peer relationships. Specifically, inhibition was positively associated with depression for children who had unsupportive peer relationships, but not for children who had supportive peer relationships. These results suggested that supportive peer relationships might be a protective factor in the development of psychopathological outcomes among inhibited children.</p> <p>The characteristics of behavioral inhibition may make children vulnerable to psychological distress (Chronis‐Tuscano et al., 2009; Degnan & Fox, 2007; Kagan et al., 2007). Inhibited children are typically interested in interactions and activities with others but their approach motivation is hindered by their internal fear and anxiety about the challenging situation (Asendorpf, 1991; Fox et al., 2005). As a result, inhibited children have a tendency to develop internalizing problems (Fox et al., 2005; Rubin et al., 2009). This may be particularly the case from middle childhood to adolescence, as extensive communications and interactions become increasingly important with age (Chen et al., 1995; Rubin et al., 2015). The negative emotional experience of inhibited children may be exacerbated by the recent social change in urban China in which assertiveness and self‐expression are increasingly valued and encouraged (Chen et al., 2005). Nevertheless, our results showed that supportive peer relationships served to buffer against the adverse effect and thus protected inhibited children from developing problems, which was consistent with the stress‐buffering model (Cohen & Wills, 1985). Consequently, whereas inhibited children with unsupportive peer relationships reported depressive affect, their counterparts with supportive peer relationships did not develop such problems. From a practical perspective, parents and professionals should pay attention to the development of internalizing symptoms of inhibited children. Although inhibited children in China may generally tend to develop positive peer relationships, those who fail to do so are likely to develop psychopathological outcomes. It may also be an effective strategy to incorporate efforts to improve peer relationships into prevention and intervention programs to help inhibited children reduce the risk for the development of depression.</p> <hd id="AN0150671899-28">Limitations and Future Directions</hd> <p>Several limitations and weaknesses in the study should be noted. First, the main purpose of the study was to investigate the relations between behavioral inhibition in early childhood and adjustment in late adolescence in China. We examined the role of peer experiences tapping peer acceptance and integration in middle childhood in mediating and moderating the relations. Although the longitudinal design of the study was largely consistent with the literature concerning the developmental significance of early temperamental characteristics and peer relationships in middle childhood (e.g., Rothbart & Bates, 2006; Rubin et al., 2015), the data were correlational in nature and thus, the results should be interpreted with caution in terms of causality. For example, peer relationships and school and psychological adjustment may predict each other in a reciprocal manner. Researchers should examine the relations from a broader perspective, perhaps with longitudinal panel data. As children enter late childhood and early adolescence, friendships and peer groups may be increasingly involved in shaping the relations between inhibition and adjustment. It will be important to explore how friendships and peer groups, as well as other social contexts, such as parent–child and teacher–student relationships, work with behavioral inhibition in predicting developmental outcomes. For example, research has shown that, whereas unsupportive parenting may serve to exacerbate adjustment problems of children with difficult characteristics, supportive parenting may be a protective factor in maladaptive development (e.g., van Leeuwen, Mervielde, De Clerco, & De Fruyt, 2007). Given cultural influence on socialization practices (e.g., Bornstein, 2012), it will be interesting to study how parenting moderates the development of behavioral inhibition in Chinese children. Relatedly, the sample of this study consisted mostly children without siblings, due to the "one‐child‐per‐family" policy in China. It will be important to examine whether and how sibling experiences shape relations between inhibition and later adjustment. In addition, it will be interesting to investigate how other individual dispositional or behavioral characteristics, such as self‐control, affect the relations between inhibition and adjustment measures that were included in this study as well as others such as anxiety and loneliness.</p> <p>Second, as indicated earlier, although our discussion of the role of peer relationships in shaping the development of behavioral inhibition was guided by the theoretical perspectives and models (e.g., Chen & Schmidt, 2015; Kupersmidt et al., 1995; Rubin et al., 2015; Rutter, 2013), the study was largely exploratory in this aspect. Thus, the results concerning the mediating and moderating effects of peer relationships on relations between behavioral inhibition and specific adjustment variables need to be replicated in future research before conclusions can be made.</p> <p>Third, we expected that behavioral inhibition might be associated with more positive developmental outcomes in girls than in boys because inhibited behavior is often viewed as more acceptable in girls than boys, due to the gender‐stereotypical ideologies (e.g., Chen et al., 1995; Doey et al., 2014; Rubin et al., 2009). However, no significant interactions between gender and inhibition were found, suggesting that the relations between inhibition and adjustment outcomes were consistent for boys and girls. This issue should be investigated further in the future given the literature that inhibited boys often receive more negative social evaluations and thus experience more difficulties in adjustment than girls (Rubin et al., 2009).</p> <p>Fourth, the initial study, in which behavioral inhibition was assessed, was conducted in 1994–1995. Dramatic social changes have occurred in China in the past several decades, due to the massive market‐oriented economic reform. During the period, social assertiveness and competitiveness are increasingly required to succeed in the society (Chen, 2010). Accordingly, social wariness and behavioral restraint are viewed as less adaptive and desirable for individual adjustment (e.g., Chen et al., 2005). It will be interesting to examine the developmental outcomes of behavioral inhibition in the more recent competitive environment of China. It will also be interesting to study how societal changes affect the development of behavioral inhibition.</p> <p>Despite the limitations, the results of the present study indicate that behavioral inhibition is an important individual characteristic in early childhood that may have long‐term implications for development in social, school, and psychological domains. Social relationships may play a significant role in shaping the relations between inhibition and adjustment outcomes. The study provided valuable information about the involvement of contexts in human development.</p> <ref id="AN0150671899-29"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> This research was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (#BCS‐1225620) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). We are grateful to the children, parents, and teachers for their participation.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0150671899-30"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA : Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Asendorpf, J. B. (1991). Development of inhibited children's coping with unfamiliarity. Child Development, 62, 1460 – 1474. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐8624.1991.tb01618.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Asendorpf, J. B. (1994). The malleability of behavioral inhibition: A study of individual developmental functions. Developmental Psychology, 30, 912 – 919. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012‐1649.30.6.912</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Asendorpf, J. B., Denissen, J. J. A., & van Aken, M. A. G. (2008). Inhibited and aggressive preschool children at 23 years of age: Personality and social transition into adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 44, 997 – 1011. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012‐1649.44.4.997</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory–II. San Antonio, TX : Psychological Corporation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref2" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Benedict, R. (1934). Patterns of culture. Boston, MA : Houghton Mifflin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bornstein, M. H. (1995). Form and function: Implications for studies of culture and human development. Culture and Psychology, 1, 123 – 137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X9511009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bornstein, M. H. (2012). Cultural approaches to parenting. Parenting, 12, 212 – 221. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2012.683359</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Broberg, A., Lamb, M. E., & Hwang, P. (1990). Inhibition: Its stability and correlates in 16‐ to 40‐month‐old children. Child Development, 61, 1153 – 1163. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130883</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY : Guilford.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Caspi, A., Harrington, H., Milne, B., Amell, J. W., Theodore, R. F., & Moffitt, T. E. (2003). Children's behavioral styles at age 3 are linked to their adult personality traits at age 26. Journal of Personality, 71, 495 – 513. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467‐6494.7104001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chao, R. (2001). Extending research on the consequences of parenting style for Chinese Americans and European Americans. Child Development, 72, 1832 – 1843. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467‐8624.00381</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X. (2010). Socioemotional development in Chinese children. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), Handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 37 – 52). Oxford, UK : Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X. (2018). Culture, temperament, and social and psychological adjustment. Developmental Review, 50, 42 – 53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2018.03.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., Cen, G., Li, D., & He, Y. (2005). Social functioning and adjustment in Chinese children: The imprint of historical time. Child Development, 76, 182 – 195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐8624.2005.00838.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., Chen, H., Li, D., & Wang, L. (2009). Early childhood behavioral inhibition and social and school adjustment in Chinese children: A 5‐year longitudinal study. Child Development, 80, 1692 – 1704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐8624.2009.01362.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., DeSouza, A. T., Chen, H., & Wang, L. (2006). Reticent behavior and experiences in peer interactions in Chinese and Canadian children. Developmental Psychology, 42, 656 – 665. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012‐1649.42.4.656</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., & French, D. C. (2008). Children's social competence in cultural context. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 591 – 616. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093606</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., Hastings, P. D., Rubin, K. H., Chen, H., Cen, G., & Stewart, S. L. (1998). Child‐rearing attitudes and behavioral inhibition in Chinese and Canadian toddlers: A cross‐cultural study. Developmental Psychology, 34, 677 – 686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012‐1649.34.4.677</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., He, Y., Li, D., & Li, B. (2004). Self‐perceptions of social competence and self‐worth in Chinese children: Relations with social and school performance. Social Development, 13, 570 – 589. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐9507.2004.00284.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., Rubin, K. H., & Li, Z. (1995). Social functioning and adjustment in Chinese children: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 31, 531 – 539. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012‐1649.31.4.531</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., Rubin, K. H., & Sun, Y. (1992). Social reputation and peer relationships in Chinese and Canadian children: A cross‐cultural study. Child Development, 63, 1336 – 1343. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131559</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., & Schmidt, L. (2015). Temperament and personality. In M. E. Lamb (Vol. Ed.) & R. M. Lerner (Series Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science. Vol. 3: Socioemotional processes (7th ed., pp. 152 – 200). Hoboken, NJ : Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> China's University Rankings. (2018). Rankings of the national universities. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.gaokao.com/dxpm/zgdxpm/">http://www.gaokao.com/dxpm/zgdxpm/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chronis‐Tuscano, A., Degnan, K. A., Pine, D. S., Perez‐Edgar, K., Henderson, H. A., Diaz, Y., ... Fox, N. A. (2009). Stable early maternal report of behavioral inhibition predicts lifetime social anxiety disorder in adolescence. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 48, 928 – 935. https://doi.org/10.1097/CHI.0b013e3181ae09df</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310 – 357. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033‐2909.98.2.310</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Collins, L. M., Schafer, J. L., & Kam, C. M. (2001). A comparison of restrictive strategies in modern missing data procedures. Psychological Methods, 6, 330 – 351. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082‐989X.6.4.330</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Degnan, K. A., & Fox, N. A. (2007). Behavioral inhibition and anxiety disorders: Multiple levels of a resilience process. Development and Psychopathology, 19, 729 – 746. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579407000363</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Doey, L., Coplan, R. J., & Kingsbury, M. (2014). Bashful boys and coy girls: A review of gender differences in childhood shyness. Sex Roles, 70, 255 – 266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199‐013‐0317‐9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Du, J., Ni, L., & Huang, Y. (2018). A study of factors that influence individual educational levels. Higher Education Forum, 10, 119 – 124. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.doc88.com/p‐1357829546243.html">http://www.doc88.com/p‐1357829546243.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fox, N. A., Henderson, H. A., Marshall, P. J., Nichols, K. E., & Ghera, M. M. (2005). Behavioral inhibition: Linking biology and behavior within a developmental framework. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 235 – 262. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141532</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fuligni, A., & Witkow, M. (2004). The postsecondary educational progress of youth from immigrant families. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14, 159 – 183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532‐7795.2004.01402002.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garcia‐Coll, C., Kagan, J., & Reznick, J. S. (1984). Behavioral inhibition in young children. Child Development, 55, 1005 – 1019. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130152</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549 – 576. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Greenfield, P. M., Suzuki, L. K., & Rothstein‐Fisch, C. (2006). Cultural pathways through human development. In K. A. Renninger & I. E. Sigel (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. 4: Child psychology in practice (6th ed., pp. 655 – 699). Hoboken, NJ : Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harter, S. (1985). Manual for the self‐perception profile for children. Denver, CO : University of Denver.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hayden, L. K. (1989). Children's loneliness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hightower, A. D., Work, W. C., Cohen, E. L., Lotyczewski, B. S., Spinell, A. P., Guare, J. C., & Rohrbreck, C. A. (1986). The Teacher–Child Rating Scale: A brief objective measure of elementary children's school problem behaviours and competences. School Psychology Review, 15, 393 – 409.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1 – 55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ji, Y., & Yu, X. (1999). The self‐esteem scale. Chinese Journal of Mental Health, 13, 318 – 320.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kagan, J. (1997). Temperament and the reactions to unfamiliarity. Child Development, 68, 139 – 143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐8624.1997.tb01931.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kagan, J., Snidman, N., Kahn, V., Towsley, S., Steinberg, L., & Fox, N. A. (2007). The preservation of two infant temperaments into adolescence: Abstract. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 72, 61–76.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kupersmidt, J. B., Griesler, P. C., DeRosier, M. E., Patterson, C. J., & Davis, P. W. (1995). Childhood aggression and peer relations in the context of family and neighborhood factors. Child Development, 66, 360 – 375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐8624.1995.tb00876.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liang, S. (1987). The outline of Chinese culture. Shanghai, China : Shanghai Teachers' University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Little, R. J. A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 1198 – 1202.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liu, J., Chen, X., Li, D., & French, D. (2012). Shyness‐sensitivity, aggression, and adjustment in urban Chinese adolescents at different historical times. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 393 – 399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532‐7795.2012.00790.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maccoby, E. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In P. H., Mussen & E. M., Hetherington (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 1 – 101). New York, NY : Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Masten, A., & Wright, M. O. (1998). Cumulative risk and protection models of child maltreatment. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 2, 7 – 30. https://doi.org/10.1300/J146v02n01_02</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morison, P., & Masten, A. (1991). Peer reputation in middle childhood as a predictor of adaptation in adolescence: A seven‐year follow‐up. Child Development, 62, 991 – 1007. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131148</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MYCOS. (2017). Blue book of employment. Beijing, China : Social Sciences Academic Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pérez‐Edgar, K., Bar‐Haim, Y., McDermott, J. M., Chronis‐Tuscano, A., Pine, D. S., & Fox, N. A. (2010). Attention biases to threat and behavioral inhibition in early childhood shape adolescent social withdrawal. Emotion, 10, 349 – 357. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018486</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pérez‐Edgar, K., Hardee, J. E., Guyer, A. E., Benson, B. E., Nelson, E. E., Gorodetsky, E., ... Ernst, M. (2014). DRD4 and striatal modulation of the link between childhood behavioral inhibition and adolescent anxiety. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9, 445 – 453. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nst001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pérez‐Edgar, K., Reeb‐Sutherland, B. C., McDermott, J. M., White, L. K., Henderson, H. A., Degnan, K. A., ... Fox, N. A. (2011). Attention biases to threat link behavioral inhibition to social withdrawal over time in very young children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 39, 885 – 895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802‐011‐9495‐5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (pp. 13 – 54). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self‐image. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (2006). Temperament. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 99 – 166). Hoboken, NJ : Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Bowker, J. C. (2015). Children in peer groups. In M. H. Bornstein & T. Leventhal (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science. Vol. 4: Ecological settings and processes (pp. 321 – 412). Hoboken, NJ : Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubin, K. H., Coplan, R. J., & Bowker, J. C. (2009). Social withdrawal in childhood. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 141 – 171. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163642</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubin, K. H., Hastings, P. D., Stewart, S., Henderson, H. A., & Chen, X. (1997). The consistency and concomitants of inhibition: Some of the children, all of the time. Child Development, 68, 467 – 483. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131672</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubin, K. H., Hemphill, S. A., Chen, X., Hastings, P., Sanson, A., Coco, L. O., & Cui, L. (2006). Across‐cultural study of behavioral inhibition in toddlers: East–west‐north–south. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 219 – 226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025406066723</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rutter, M. (2013). Annual research review: Resilience–clinical implications. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54, 474 – 487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469‐7610.2012.02615.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sameroff, A. (2009). The transactional model of development: How children and contexts shape each other. Washington, DC : American Psychological Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schmidt, L. A., Fox, N. A., Rubin, K. H., Sternberg, E. M., Gold, P. W., Smith, C. C., & Schulkin, J. (1997). Behavioral and neuroendocrine responses in shy children. Developmental Psychobiology, 30, 127 – 140. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098‐2302(199703)30:2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schwartz, C. E., Snidman, N., & Kagan, J. (1999). Adolescent social anxiety as an outcome of inhibited temperament in childhood. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 38, 1008 – 1015. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583‐199908000‐00017</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, K. A., Hastings, P. D., Henderson, H. A., & Rubin, K. H. (2019). Multidimensional emotion regulation moderates the relation between behavioral inhibition at age 2 and social reticence with unfamiliar peers at age 4. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 47, 1239 – 1251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802‐018‐00509‐y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63, 1266 – 1281. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131532</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stevenson‐Hinde, J., Shouldice, A., & Chicot, R. (2011). Maternal anxiety, behavioral inhibition, and attachment. Attachment & Human Development, 13, 199 – 215. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2011.562409</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Van Leeuwen, K. G., Mervielde, I., De Clerco, B. J., & De Fruyt, F. (2007). Extending the spectrum idea: Child personality, parenting and psychopathology. European Journal of Personality, 21, 63 – 89. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.598</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Volbrecht, M. M., & Goldsmith, H. H. (2010). Early temperamental and family predictors of shyness and anxiety. Developmental Psychology, 46, 1192 – 1205. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020616</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> White, L. K., Degnan, K. A., Henderson, H. A., Pérez‐Edgar, K., Walker, O. L., Shechner, T., ... Fox, N. A. (2017). Developmental relations between behavioral inhibition, anxiety, and attention biases to threat and positive information. Child Development, 88, 141 – 155. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12696</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Williams, J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Resampling and distribution of the product methods for testing indirect effects in complex models. Structural Equation Modeling, 15, 23 – 51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701758166</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yang, W., Wu, D., & Peng, F. (2012). Application of Chinese version of Beck Depression Inventory–Ⅱ to Chinese first‐year college students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20, 762 – 764.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zappulla, C., & Lo Coco, A. (2003). L'inibizione comportamentale in eta prescolare [Behavioral inhibition in preschool children]. Eta Evolutiva, 74, 21 – 32.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zheng, L., & Zeng, X. (2016). Gender differences in the SES and health gradient in China: A life course longitudinal study. Chinese Journal of Sociology, 36, 209 – 237.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Xinyin Chen; Rui Fu; Dan Li; Huichang Chen; Zhengyan Wang and Li Wang</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib188" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref3"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1297169
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Behavioral Inhibition in Early Childhood and Adjustment in Late Adolescence in China
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chen%2C+Xinyin%22">Chen, Xinyin</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0952-8659">0000-0002-0952-8659</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fu%2C+Rui%22">Fu, Rui</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Li%2C+Dan%22">Li, Dan</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chen%2C+Huichang%22">Chen, Huichang</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wang%2C+Zhengyan%22">Wang, Zhengyan</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0178-804X">0000-0003-0178-804X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wang%2C+Li%22">Wang, Li</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Child+Development%22"><i>Child Development</i></searchLink>. May-Jun 2021 92(3):994-1010.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 17
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: SourceSuprt
  Label: Sponsoring Agency
  Group: SrcSuprt
  Data: National Science Foundation (NSF)
– Name: NumberContract
  Label: Contract Number
  Group: NumCntrct
  Data: BCS1225620
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inhibition%22">Inhibition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Behavior%22">Child Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Young+Children%22">Young Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Late+Adolescents%22">Late Adolescents</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Adjustment%22">Social Adjustment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Adjustment%22">Student Adjustment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychological+Patterns%22">Psychological Patterns</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Relationship%22">Peer Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Competence%22">Interpersonal Competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Depression+%28Psychology%29%22">Depression (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Predictor+Variables%22">Predictor Variables</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Development%22">Child Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22China%22">China</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/cdev.13463
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0009-3920
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study examined relations between behavioral inhibition in toddlerhood and social, school, and psychological adjustment in late adolescence in China. Data on behavioral inhibition were collected from a sample of 2-year-olds (initial N = 247). Follow-up data were collected at 7 years for peer relationships and 19 years for adjustment across domains. The results showed that early inhibition positively predicted later social competence and school adjustment. Peer relationships in middle childhood served as a protective factor in the development of depression of inhibited children. The results indicate the distinct functional meaning of behavioral inhibition in the Chinese context from a developmental perspective.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1297169
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1297169
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/cdev.13463
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 994
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Inhibition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Young Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Late Adolescents
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Adjustment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Adjustment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychological Patterns
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Peer Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Competence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Depression (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Predictor Variables
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: China
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Behavioral Inhibition in Early Childhood and Adjustment in Late Adolescence in China
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chen, Xinyin
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fu, Rui
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Li, Dan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chen, Huichang
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wang, Zhengyan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wang, Li
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0009-3920
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 92
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Child Development
              Type: main
ResultId 1