View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Parental Reflective Functioning and Preschool Children's Psychosocial Functioning: The Mediating Role of Children's Emotion Regulation

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Parental Reflective Functioning and Preschool Children's Psychosocial Functioning: The Mediating Role of Children's Emotion Regulation
Language: English
Authors: Ghanbari, Sae (ORCID 0000-0002-7269-6014), Vahidi, Elahe (ORCID 0000-0001-5296-2090), Behzadpoor, Samaneh, Goudarzi, Zahra, Ghabezi, Fateme
Source: European Journal of Developmental Psychology. 2023 20(2):229-250.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 22
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Preschool Children, Mothers, Emotional Response, Self Control, Psychological Patterns, Interpersonal Competence, Reflection, Behavior Problems, Child Behavior, Foreign Countries
Geographic Terms: Iran
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, Social Skills Rating System
DOI: 10.1080/17405629.2022.2079631
ISSN: 1740-5629
1740-5610
Abstract: Parental reflective functioning (PRF) is considered to be a key factor in the development of emotion regulation in children, which in turn plays an important role in their psychosocial functioning. This study aimed to explore the mediating role of children's emotion regulation in the relationship between parental reflective functioning and children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning in a sample of preschool-age children. Participants were 257 mothers (Mean age = 35.63, SD = 4.55) and their preschool children (Mean age = 4.83, SD = 0.89; 46.7% girls), recruited through convenience sampling. Mothers' reflective functioning was measured using Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (PRFQ), which includes three subscales: Pre-Mentalizing (PM), Certainty about Mental States (CMS), and Interest and Curiosity in the Mental States (IC). Also, mothers reported on their child's emotion regulation and psychosocial functioning using the Emotion Regulation Checklist (ERC), Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and Social Skills Rating System (SSRS). Findings revealed that PM, as expected, was positively associated with psychosocial difficulties and negatively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. IC, as expected, was negatively associated with psychosocial difficulties and positively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. CMS, unexpectedly, was not associated with psychosocial difficulties and was positively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. In addition, results of structural equation modelling showed that children's emotion regulation mediated the relationship between parental reflective functioning and children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning. Our results highlight the importance of parental reflective functioning and children's emotion regulation for children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning, and shed light on the possible role of emotion regulation through which parental reflective functioning exerts its influence on children's psychosocial functioning.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2023
Accession Number: EJ1381931
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHzjQrXJKXycJOs-GKrYwG5AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDLCwHsLZhEj5IXrkWgIBEICBmwW6617_-mT1tMqmwkrt8OLjPHZRJCXT_Hj0NOnmHFBJAvt5EOax_g6lg8GaW8Aiwx9CcmF4XBuoXgLz-lzRQ67O-QwVtgc18HelPRySDwaahRoRC74ZCE6e0BauCPhiAarpmrylrk4UgVOwN1ZVXWCSo_NmxaUPHTJZ4zE6_tBseIaaji16GiO2OOvPUXpOMJ9OjFM_dsN62nNc
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0161984245;a9o01mar.23;2023Feb22.03:38;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0161984245-1">Parental reflective functioning and preschool children's psychosocial functioning: the mediating role of children's emotion regulation </title> <p>Parental reflective functioning (PRF) is considered to be a key factor in the development of emotion regulation in children, which in turn plays an important role in their psychosocial functioning. This study aimed to explore the mediating role of children's emotion regulation in the relationship between parental reflective functioning and children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning in a sample of preschool-age children. Participants were 257 mothers (Mean age = 35.63, SD = 4.55) and their preschool children (Mean age = 4.83, SD =.89; 46.7% girls), recruited through convenience sampling. Mothers' reflective functioning was measured using Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (PRFQ), which includes three subscales: Pre-Mentalizing (PM), Certainty about Mental States (CMS), and Interest and Curiosity in the Mental States (IC). Also, mothers reported on their child's emotion regulation and psychosocial functioning using the Emotion Regulation Checklist (ERC), Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and Social Skills Rating System (SSRS). Findings revealed that PM, as expected, was positively associated with psychosocial difficulties and negatively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. IC, as expected, was negatively associated with psychosocial difficulties and positively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. CMS, unexpectedly, was not associated with psychosocial difficulties and was positively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. In addition, results of structural equation modelling showed that children's emotion regulation mediated the relationship between parental reflective functioning and children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning. Our results highlight the importance of parental reflective functioning and children's emotion regulation for children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning, and shed light on the possible role of emotion regulation through which parental reflective functioning exerts its influence on children's psychosocial functioning.</p> <p>Keywords: Mentalization; parental reflective functioning; emotion regulation; psychosocial functioning; children</p> <p>Parental reflective functioning (PRF) refers to the parents' imaginative ability to reflect upon the mental states of their child and upon their own inner experiences as a parent (Slade, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref1">58</reflink>]). More specifically, PRF is defined as a parent's capacity to perceive his/her child as a subject with his/her own individual world of inner experiences and emotions (Sharp & Fonagy, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref2">55</reflink>]). PRF is assumed to underlie parent sensitivity, as it allows parents to respond appropriately to their infant's needs sensitively and predictably, which in turn develops secure attachment and emotional and communication abilities in the child (Rostad & Whitaker, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref3">49</reflink>]). PRF empowers a parent to adjust his/her parenting to the physiological and psychological needs of their children (Taubner, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref4">64</reflink>]). So, PRF is considered to strongly impact on the quality of child-parent relationships (Luyten et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref5">37</reflink>]) and is the core of secure attachment (Taubner, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref6">64</reflink>]).</p> <p>Studies have indicated that PRF is multidimensional and contains at least three main dimensions, including Pre-Mentalizing (PM(, Certainty about Mental States (CMS), and Interest and Curiosity in the Mental States (ICM; Luyten et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref7">37</reflink>]). Prementalizing mode refers to parents' inability to interpret children's mental states and consider children's inner world in their minds. It is considered as the tendency to make inaccurate and maladaptive attributions towards their children (Fonagy et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref8">18</reflink>]; Luyten et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref9">37</reflink>]). Thus, this subscale measures the maladaptive aspect of mentalizing. Certainty about the mental states refers to a parent's inability to recognize the impossibility of understanding what is going on in the child's mind (Monica R. Ordway et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref10">45</reflink>]). High scores on this dimension show being overly certain and intrusive mentalizing. On the other hand, the interest and curiosity in a child's mental states reflects an interest in parents to think about their child's inner world (Luyten et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref11">36</reflink>]; Monica R. Ordway et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref12">45</reflink>]), and reflects an adaptive facet of mentalizing.</p> <p>Developmental research has long investigated whether and how caregiver-child relational processes, including PRF from infancy influence a children's psychological development (King et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref13">31</reflink>]; Verhage et al., [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref14">67</reflink>]). In this regard, several studies have indicated that mothers who have difficulty in tolerating or attuning to their children's emotions and needs and show a lower level of mentalizing have a negative impact on their children's psychosocial functioning because these children did not receive support from their caregivers in the acquisition of self-regulatory ability (Camoirano, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref15">7</reflink>]). Within a context of secure relationships, it is suggested that PRF plays a crucial role to foster the children's own ability for reflective functioning (RF), which in turn is thought to develop effortful control, a sense of autonomy, the capacity to build social relationships, and emotion regulation (Calkins & Hill, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref16">6</reflink>]; Cooper & Redfern, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref17">8</reflink>]; Ensink & Mayes, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref18">13</reflink>]; Slade, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref19">58</reflink>]). It is argued that PRF can promote emotional self-regulation in children at the time of distress (Camoirano, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref20">7</reflink>]; Gordo et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref21">21</reflink>]; Rutherford et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref22">50</reflink>]). Thus, PRF seems to be a key factor in fostering the ability of emotional regulation in young children, which in turn is related to later adjustment in several domains, including lowered externalizing problems, social competence, and mental health (Loevaas et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref23">35</reflink>]; Mitchison et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref24">41</reflink>]).</p> <p>In this context, evidence indicates that the children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning can be affected if a caregiver consistently fails to understand the child's emotions and behaviours and either pay no attention to his/her distress or represents it back without modification (Fonagy et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref25">16</reflink>]). Consistent with such theorizing, evidence shows that parents with high PRF have a positive impact on the biological, emotional, social, and cognitive experiences of the child (Bekar et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref26">2</reflink>]; Hughes et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref27">28</reflink>]; Senehi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref28">53</reflink>]). In contrast, inadequate PRF has been linked to children's social, emotional, and behavioural problems (Benbassat & Priel, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref29">3</reflink>]; Camoirano, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref30">7</reflink>]; Ensink et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref31">14</reflink>]; Smaling et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref32">59</reflink>]). PRF has been indicated to underlie more sensitive and less negative parental relations, which in turn are linked with better child outcomes (Ensink et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref33">14</reflink>]). The parent's ability to look beyond the child's misbehaviour and attend to his/her subjective experiences helps the parent maintain self-control and does not react in ways that intensify the child's difficult behaviour and distress (Ensink et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref34">14</reflink>]). In a sample of 433 mothers and 113 fathers of infants, Gordo et al. ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref35">21</reflink>]) reported that PRF was related to children's socioemotional adjustment, as parents who could understand the opacity of their infant's mental states and with higher levels of interest and curiosity have children with more socioemotional adjustment. Conversely, parental pre-mentalizing modes were negatively related to children's socioemotional adjustment.</p> <p>In short, it seems that parents with high reflective functioning are more likely attune to their children's emotions and sensitively respond to their needs. This, in turn, promotes RF abilities, greater emotion regulation abilities, and better psychosocial functioning in children (Bekar et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref36">2</reflink>]; Hughes et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref37">28</reflink>]; Senehi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref38">53</reflink>]; Suardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref39">61</reflink>]). So, the children's ability for emotion regulation could be a mediating mechanism through which PRF exerts its influence on children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning. Hence, although some studies report that PRF may be related to emotion regulation in children, to our knowledge, no studies have directly examined whether children's emotion regulation is indeed a mediator in the relationship between PRF and children's psychosocial functioning.</p> <p>We decided to study a sample of preschoolers, as evidence shows that preschool age is one of the most important periods for social and emotional development, and the lack of enough attention to this crucial life period can increase the risk of serious impairments in a children's social-emotional development (Kramer et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref40">33</reflink>]; Maleki et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref41">39</reflink>]; Moore et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref42">42</reflink>]). Additionally, studies on PRF mainly focus on infants and school-aged children (Gordo et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref43">21</reflink>]; Nijssens et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref44">43</reflink>]; Pazzagli et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref45">48</reflink>]; Schultheis et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref46">51</reflink>]), and less research has been conducted on the effect of PRF on preschoolers. On the other hand, research findings in Iran show that maternal caring attitudes and behaviours change during preschool years when the child is experiencing significant emotional, linguistic and cognitive changes, and these developmental changes may affect the caregiver's ability to reflective functioning (Shokoufefard et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref47">57</reflink>]). So this study could show the vital role of PRF on the preschoolers' emotion regulation and also their psychosocial functioning.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-2">Present Study</hd> <p>The present study aimed to contribute to the understanding of the role of PRF and children's emotion regulation in psychosocial functioning. Specifically, we investigated whether children's emotion regulation mediated the relationship between PRF and children's psychosocial functioning. We expected a positive and significant association between the adaptive dimension of PRF (interest and curiosity in mental states), children's emotion regulation, and children's psychosocial functioning (higher levels of psychological strengths, and lower levels of psychological problems). In contrast, we expected a high level of the maladaptive dimension of PRF (pre-mentalizing modes and certainty about mental states) to be associated with poorer emotion regulation, and lower level of psychological functioning. Also, we expected children's emotion regulation to mediate the relationship between PRF and psychosocial functioning of children.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-3">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0161984245-4">Participants</hd> <p>Participants were 257 mother-child dyads. Children (46.7% girls) aged between 4 and 6 years (Mean age = 4.83, <emph>SD</emph> =.89). Mothers aged between 23 to 47 years (Mean age = 35.63, <emph>SD</emph> = 4.55). All mothers had Iranian nationality. In terms of mothers' level of education, 76.3% of the mothers had higher education. Distribution according to educational level of mothers was as follows: <emph>n</emph> = 2 (0.8%) primary education, <emph>n</emph> = 59 (23%) secondary education, <emph>n</emph> = 112 (43.6%) had a bachelor's degree, <emph>n</emph> = 64 (24.9%) had a master's degree, and <emph>n</emph> = 20 (7.8%) had a PhD. With regard to employment status, 35.7% of the mothers were in full-time or at-least part-time employment.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-5">Procedures</hd> <p>Participants were recruited through preschools in Tehran, Iran. The data collection took place in winter 2020. In total, ten preschools in different regions of Tehran were visited by two research assistants. After the consent of the school principals, the study and its objectives were explained to mothers. No economic incentives were given for participating in the study. It was emphasized that participation in the study was entirely voluntary. Full confidentiality was guaranteed, and participants were told they could stop their participation in the study at any time. When mothers agreed to participate (approximately 30%), after providing informed consent, they were requested to complete a booklet of questionnaires. Confidentiality was ensured by replacing personal information with a numeric code. Some of the mothers completed the questionnaires on the same day. Others completed questionnaires at home and returned them to school via their child within a week. Questionnaires were then collected by the research assistants. The Attachment and Interpersonal Studies Research Group of the university reviewed and approved the study. It was approved that in the present study, ethical principles including informed consent, confidentiality, observance of honesty and scientific trust, respect for the personality and human dignity of the participants were observed.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-6">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0161984245-7">Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (PRFQ)</hd> <p>The PRFQ is a brief self-report instrument that is designed to assess parental mentalizing (Luyten et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref48">36</reflink>]). The PRFQ includes three theoretically consistent and clinically meaningful subscales: Pre-Mentalizing (PM), Certainty about Mental States (CMS), and Interest and Curiosity in the Mental States (IC). PM with 6 items reflects a non-mentalizing stance or defence against mentalizing in parents (e.g., <emph>My child cries around strangers to embarrass me</emph>). CMS consists of 6 items which reflect either being overly certain of the mental states of the child (hypermentalizing) or overly uncertain (hypomentalizing) (e.g., <emph>I always know what my child wants</emph>). The IC subscale captures the interest and curiosity that parents exhibit towards their children's mental states (e.g., <emph>I wonder a lot about what my child is thinking and feeling</emph>). Each item is scored on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (<emph>strongly disagree), to</emph> 7 (<emph>strongly agree</emph>). The following Cronbach's alpha coefficients are reported by Luyten et al. ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref49">36</reflink>]): <emph>α<subs>PM</subs></emph> =.70, <emph>α<subs>CMS</subs></emph> =.82, and <emph>α<subs>IC</subs></emph> =.74. Psychometric properties of the Iranian/ Persian version of the PRFQ have been examined by Goudarzi ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref50">23</reflink>]). That study supported the three-factor structure and acceptable internal consistency (.69 for PM,.77 for CMS, and.69 for IC) of the Persian-PRFQ. In the present study, Cronbach's alpha for PM, CMS, and IC were.69,.79 and.67, respectively.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-8">The Emotion Regulation Checklist (ERC)</hd> <p>The ERC (Shields & Cicchetti, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref51">56</reflink>]) is a checklist that measures two dimensions of emotion regulation, regulation, and lability/ negativity, in preschoolers and school-aged children. In the current study, parent reports were used. The ERC items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale (<emph>1 = Rarely/Never</emph> to <emph>4 = Almost Always</emph>). Lability/ negativity (L/N) subscale consists of 15 items, which measure mood swings, anger outbursts, and reactivity (e.g., <emph>Is prone to angry outbursts/tantrums easily</emph>). The Emotion Regulation (ER) subscale consists of 8 items that assess the social appropriateness of the child's affective displays, including emotional self-awareness and empathy (e.g., <emph>Responds positively to neutral or friendly approaches by peers</emph>). Shields and Cicchetti ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref52">56</reflink>]) reported the factor analysis and internal consistency coefficients (<emph>α<subs>ER</subs></emph>=.83, <emph>α<subs>L/N</subs></emph> =<subs></subs>.96). In addition, in their study, a composite score (ERc) was generated, as a single emotion regulation criterion measure, with a reliability coefficient of.89.</p> <p>Psychometric properties of the Iranian version of the checklist among preschool children are examined by Meybodi Aghaie et al. ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref53">40</reflink>]). They reported Cronbach's alpha coefficient (<emph>α<subs>ER</subs></emph>=.68, <emph>α<subs>L/N</subs></emph>=<subs></subs>.81), and test-retest reliability (<emph>r<subs>ER</subs></emph>=.84, <emph>r<subs>L/N</subs></emph>=.68). In the current study, the composite score (ERc) was used which is an index of positive regulation (negative items are reverse-scored). The Cronbach's alpha for ER and L/N subscales and the composite score were.73,.79, and.77, respectively.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-9">Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)</hd> <p>Mothers completed the SDQ, a brief measure of adjustment and psychopathology of children (Goodman, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref54">20</reflink>]). It consists 25 items, describing positive and negative attributes, divided over five scales of 5 items each. Scores of four scales, consisting of Emotional Symptoms (e.g., <emph>Often complains of headaches, stomach-aches or sickness</emph>), Conduct Problems (e.g., <emph>Often loses temper</emph>), Hyperactivity–Inattention (e.g., <emph>Restless, overactive, cannot stay still for long</emph>), and Peer Relationship Problems (e.g., <emph>Rather solitary, prefers to play alone</emph>) represent difficulties. They are additionally summed to generate the total difficulties score (SDQ-d). The other scale, Prosocial Behaviour (e.g., <emph>Considerate of other people's feelings</emph>), reflects strengths (SDQ-s). All the 25 items are rated on a 3-point scale (<emph>0 = not true, 1 = somewhat true, 2 = certainly true</emph>). Goodman ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref55">20</reflink>]) reported the acceptable internal consistency (<emph>α = </emph>.73) and test-retest reliability (4 to 6 months; <emph>r</emph> =.62) for the total difficulties score.</p> <p>In this study, the Iranian/ Persian parent version of the SDQ is used. For the Iranian version, acceptable internal consistency (.66 to.84) is reported by Vafaie and Roshan ([<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref56">66</reflink>]). Moreover, the Iranian SDQ scores have shown meaningful associations with other measures of psychopathology (Tehrani-Doust et al., [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref57">65</reflink>]). The Cronbach's alpha coefficients in this study were.75 and.58 for total difficulties and prosocial subscale, respectively.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-10">Social Skills Rating System-Parent (SSRS-P)</hd> <p>The SSRS-P (Gresham & Elliott, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref58">24</reflink>]) was used to assess children's social skills through the parents' reports. The SSRS-P consists of 39 items that are rated on a 3-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (<emph>Never</emph>) to 3 (<emph>Most often</emph>). Three subscales of the questionnaire are: the Cooperation subscale which describes behaviours that indicate helping others, sharing things, and following rules (e.g., <emph>Volunteers to help peers</emph>), the Assertion subscale which describes initiating behaviours such as asking others for information, or introducing oneself (e.g., <emph>Appropriately questions rules</emph>), and the Self-control subscale which describes behaviours that are shown in conflict situations, such as responding appropriately to teasing, or in non-conflict situations that require the ability to compromise and take turns (e.g., <emph>Responds appropriately to pressure</emph>). The overall social skills score is obtained by summing up the subscales scores. The total social skills score ranges from 0 to 78. The internal reliabilities for the SSRS in preschool age are reported to be satisfactory (cooperation <emph>α</emph> =.81, assertion <emph>α</emph> =.76, self-control <emph>α</emph> =.83, total social skills <emph>α</emph> =.90; Gresham & Elliott, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref59">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>For the Iranian/ Persian version, Shahim ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref60">54</reflink>]) reported adequate test-retest reliability (4–5 weeks; <emph>r</emph> =.70) among preschool children. These studies also supported the factor structure of the Persian version of SSRS-P. reported good internal consistency (<emph>α</emph> =.93) for the total social skills score of the Persian version. The Cronbach's alpha in this study was.84 for the total social skills.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-11">Data Analysis</hd> <p>First, Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to explore the relationships among the variables. Next, to examine the mediating role of Emotion regulation-composite score (ERC) between parental reflective functioning and indices of children's psychosocial functioning, a structural equation model was used to investigate the theoretical model presented in Figure 1. There are many advantages to using the SEM in the context of mediation analysis; SEM is suitable for modelling complex relationships involving latent constructs because it is designed to test more complicated mediation models in a single analysis, in contrast with the standard regression in which ad hoc methods must be used for inference about indirect and total effects (Gunzler et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref61">25</reflink>]). To investigate the fitness of the model, the chi-squared test was used, which should be non-significant or have low values. Also, the ratio between the chi-squared and the degrees of freedom of the model (<emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph>/df), should have a value < 3 (Kline, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref62">32</reflink>]; Tabachnick & Fidell, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref63">63</reflink>]). As chi-square is sensitive to sample size, model fit was also evaluated using four additional fit indices, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), Comparative Fix Index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI), and Goodness of Fit Index (GFI). Values greater than.95 for TLI, CFI, and GFI, lower than 0.05 for RMSEA indicate good model fit (Hu & Bentler, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref64">27</reflink>]; MacCallum et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref65">38</reflink>]). A RMSEA value between.05 and.08 indicates fair fit and between.08 and.10 indicates mediocre fit (MacCallum et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref66">38</reflink>]). The significance of indirect effects was tested using bootstrapped bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals. If these confidence intervals do not include zero, the indirect effect is significant. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS (IBM SPSS statistics 23) and AMOS software.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Proposed Model.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-12">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0161984245-13">Zero-order correlations</hd> <p>Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics of the variables and the Pearson correlation coefficients between them. The mean total difficulties score of the SDQ was 10.46 (SD =.31; M<subs>girl</subs> = 9.85, SD<subs>girl</subs> =.37; M<subs>boy</subs> = 11.20, SD<subs>boy</subs> =.50). Using a cut-off point of 13–15 for borderline and 16–24 for abnormal range for total difficulties score (Gharehbaghy & Aguilar-Vafaie, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref67">19</reflink>]), 25 (17.8%) girls were shown to have borderline scores and 16 (11.2%) had abnormal scores. Results also indicated that 18 (15.5%) boys had borderline scores and 25 (21.6%) had abnormal scores. In addition, the mean score of pro-social in children was 6.79 (SD =.11; M<subs>girl</subs> = 6.91, SD<subs>girl</subs> =.15; M<subs>boy</subs> = 6.65, SD<subs>boy</subs> =.16). Considering 0–4 as the cut-off point for pro-social abnormal ranges, 11 (7.8%) girls and 12 (10.4%) boys were within this range.</p> <p>Table 1. Correlations among Parental Reflective Functioning, Children's Emotion Regulation, and Indices of Children's Psychological Functioning; And Mean and Standard Deviation for All Variables.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Measures</td><td>Pearson correlation</td><td /><td /><td>Mean (SD)</td><td>Range</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td /><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>6</td><td>7</td><td>8</td><td>9</td><td>10</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>1.PM</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>2.66 (1.37)</td><td>1.00–13.67</td></tr><tr><td>2.IC</td><td>−.25**</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>5.91 (.77)</td><td>4.00–7.00</td></tr><tr><td>3.CMS</td><td>.16*</td><td>.15*</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>4.61 (1.01)</td><td>1.00–6.83</td></tr><tr><td>4.ERc</td><td>−.48**</td><td>.31**</td><td>.05</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>5.14 (.74)</td><td>3.02–6.67</td></tr><tr><td>5.SDQ-d</td><td>.51**</td><td>−.24**</td><td>.10</td><td>−71**</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>10.54 (4.95)</td><td>2.00–25.00</td></tr><tr><td>6.SDQ-s</td><td>−.29**</td><td>.36**</td><td>.14*</td><td>.47**</td><td>−47**</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>6.77 (1.79)</td><td>2.00–10.00</td></tr><tr><td>7. Social skills</td><td>−.30**</td><td>.29**</td><td>.15*</td><td>.54**</td><td>−.50**</td><td>.51**</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td>49.39 (8.66)</td><td>24.00–74.36</td></tr><tr><td>8.ES</td><td>.42**</td><td>−.13*</td><td>.15*</td><td>−.58**</td><td>.73**</td><td>−.31**</td><td>−.36**</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td>2.10 (1.87)</td><td>0.00–9.00</td></tr><tr><td>9.H/I</td><td>.26**</td><td>−.08</td><td>−.03</td><td>−.34**</td><td>.60**</td><td>−.21**</td><td>−.33**</td><td>.16**</td><td>1</td><td /><td>3.96 (1.98)</td><td>0.00–10.00</td></tr><tr><td>10.CP</td><td>.34**</td><td>−.21**</td><td>−.02</td><td>−.56**</td><td>.73**</td><td>−.38**</td><td>−.40**</td><td>.34**</td><td>.35**</td><td /><td>2.21 (1.71)</td><td>0.00–12.00</td></tr><tr><td>11.PRP</td><td>.37**</td><td>−.24**</td><td>.13*</td><td>−.48**</td><td>.68**</td><td>−.33**</td><td>−.29**</td><td>.49**</td><td>.06</td><td>.34**</td><td>2.22 (1.77)</td><td>0.00–8.00</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 Notes. PM = Pre-mentalizing modes, IC = Interest and curiosity, CMS = Ceratinty about mental states, ERc = Emotion regulation-composite score, SDQ-d = Strengths and difficulties questionnaire- difficulties, SDQ-s = Strengths and difficulties questionnaire- strengths, ES = Emotional symptoms, H/I = Hyperactivity/Inattention, CP = Conduct problems, PRP = Peer relationships problems, SD = Standard deviation.</p> <p>2 ** <emph>p</emph> <.001, * <emph>p</emph> <.01</p> <p>As Table 1 indicates, PM was significantly correlated with all the indices of children's psychological functioning. It was, as expected, negatively associated with ERc (<emph>r</emph> = −.48, <emph>p</emph> <.0001), positively associated with SDQ-d (<emph>r</emph> =.51, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), negatively associated with SDQ-s (<emph>r</emph> = −.29, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), and positively associated with social skills (<emph>r</emph> = −.30, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001). IC was also significantly correlated with all the indices of children's psychological functioning, all in the expected direction, consisting of ERc (<emph>r</emph> =.31, <emph>p</emph> <.0001), SDQ-d (<emph>r</emph> = −.24, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), SDQ-s (<emph>r</emph> =.36, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), and social skills (<emph>r</emph> =.29, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001). CMS, unexpectedly, was just weakly but significantly correlated with SDQ-s (<emph>r</emph> =.14, <emph>p</emph> =.023), and social skills (<emph>r</emph> =.13, <emph>p</emph> =.025).</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-14">Structural Equation Modelling</hd> <p>In order to examine the proposed model (Figure 1), in the first step, the theoretical model did not provide a good fit to the data (<emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph> = 73.49, <emph>p</emph> <.001; df = 26; <emph>χ <sups>2</sups></emph>/df = 2.83, CFI =.93, TLI =.89, GFI =.94, RMSEA =.08). In this model, several paths were not significant, namely all the paths from CMS, the direct path from IC to SDQ-d, and the direct path from PM to Social strengths. These paths were removed from the model. Also, the statistical software, AMOS, suggested adding three error covariances between the errors of SDQ-d observed variables, most probably because of the similar formulation of their items. These changes led to the final model (Figure 2), which provided a good fit to the data (<emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph> = 32.92, <emph>p</emph> =.03; df = 20; <emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph>/df = 1.65, CFI =.98; TLI =.96, GFI =.97, RMSEA =.05 [90% intervals = 0.01–0.08]). As Table 2 indicates, there were statistically significant indirect effects of PM, and IC on SDQ-d, and Social strengths when mediated by ERc. The standardized regression coefficients are presented in Figure 2. The explained variance by the predictors in the model for ERc, Emotional Symptoms, Hyperactivity/Inattention, Conduct Problems, Peer Relationships Problems, Social Skills, and SDQ-s were.27,.38,.13,.32,.27,.52 and.47, respectively.</p> <p>Table 2. Indirect Effects for the Hypothesized Mediations.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td /><td>Bootstrapping Bias-Corrected 95% CI</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Indirect Effect</td><td>Β</td><td>Lower</td><td>Upper</td></tr><tr><td>PM → ERc → SDQ-d</td><td>.35*</td><td>.24</td><td>.47</td></tr><tr><td>IC → ERc → SDQ-d</td><td>−.16*</td><td>−.29</td><td>−.06</td></tr><tr><td>PM → ERc→ Social Strengths</td><td>−.28*</td><td>−.37</td><td>−.16</td></tr><tr><td>IC → ERc → Social Strengths</td><td>.13*</td><td>.05</td><td>.22</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 Note. PM = Pre-mentalizing modes, IC = Interest and curiosity, ERc = Emotion regulation-composite score, SDQ-d = Strengths and difficulties questionnaire- difficulties.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Structural Model Corresponding to the Final Model Proposed by the Study.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-15">Discussion</hd> <p>Although some studies have investigated the relationships among PRF, children's emotion regulation, and psychosocial functioning in children, few have focused on the putative role of children's emotion regulation in the relationship between PRF and children's psychological development. This is one of the first studies to attempt to obtain better insight into the possible mediating role of children's emotion regulation in the relation between PRF and psychosocial functioning in preschool children. This study aimed to examine the associations between PRF, children's emotion regulation and children's psychosocial functioning, and the mediating role of children's emotion regulation in the relationship between PRF and psychosocial functioning of children. The main findings are summarized below:</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-16">Associations Among PRF, Children's Emotion Regulation, and Children's Psychosocial Functionin...</hd> <p>As predicted PRF was related to higher levels of social, emotional, and behavioural strengths and lower levels of social, emotional, and behavioural problems in children not only directly but also indirectly. Parents with higher levels of interest and curiosity about their children's mental states might exert positive influence on their children's development of emotion regulation capacity, which in turn, is related to better psychosocial functioning in children. These findings provide further evidence that parents who have interest and curiosity about their children's inner mental states are more attuned and sensitive to their children's needs and emotions. Parents' acceptance of different emotions in their children is important for the development of emotional regulation, as children whose parents are attuned to their emotions and accepting them feel free to express both negative and positive emotions and are better able to manage these emotions (Berlin & Cassidy, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref68">4</reflink>]; N. Eisenberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref69">11</reflink>]). Evidence shows that these children have better psychosocial functioning (Loevaas et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref70">35</reflink>]; Mitchison et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref71">41</reflink>]). These analyses are consistent with previous studies that reported that sensitive and attuned parents raised children with better socioemotional adjustments because they allow children to develop the capacity for emotion regulation (Camoirano, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref72">7</reflink>]; Gordo et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref73">21</reflink>]; Pazzagli et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref74">48</reflink>]; Smaling et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref75">59</reflink>]). Sroufe ([<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref76">60</reflink>]) stated parents who are attuned to the children's needs in emotionally challenging situations teach them the most effective strategies to down-regulate their arousal and manage their impulsive behaviours; in turn, this knowledge can be transferred to the larger social environments and influence psychosocial functioning. In addition, parents with higher levels of IC comment more about their children's emotions, cognitions, and intentions. This helps children obtain more emotional information and identify different emotions in themselves and others (LaBounty et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref77">34</reflink>]), which would contribute to better regulatory skills by facilitating children's capacity for recognition and expression of mental states (Gottman et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref78">22</reflink>]). Finally, these abilities lead to more regulatory behaviours and adaptive behaviours (Senehi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref79">53</reflink>]).</p> <p>In support of our predictions, in this study parental pre-mentalizing modes were negatively associated both directly and indirectly with higher levels of social, emotional, and behavioural strengths and lower levels of social, emotional, and behavioural problems in children. These results are consistent with theoretical assumptions that maladaptive PRF adversely impacts children's psychosocial functioning (Ensink & Mayes, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref80">13</reflink>]; Slade, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref81">58</reflink>]). Parents with greater levels of PM usually make inaccurate and maladaptive attributions about their children's mental states, which may contribute to a feeling of non-markedness in their kids. Consequently, this might hinder the children's development of the ability to reflect on emotions and their effects, resulting in emotion regulation difficulties (Fonagy et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref82">16</reflink>]). Emotion regulation problems have been indicated to be related to problems in psychosocial functioning (Halligan et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref83">26</reflink>]). Additionally, PM in parents hampers their self-understanding and influences emotional and behavioural regulation (Fonagy et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref84">16</reflink>]; Fonagy & Target, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref85">15</reflink>]), contributing to less attuned and sensitive responses to the children's needs and emotions (Ensink et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref86">14</reflink>]; Suchman et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref87">62</reflink>]), and as a result continuing children's behavioural difficulties (Dejko–Wańczyk et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref88">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>Unexpectedly, parental certainty about mental states was positively correlated with social, emotional, and behavioural strengths. The designers of PRFQ would suggest that greater certainty about children's mental states would not be associated with better parenting behaviours because this subscale is designed to indicate a parent's inability to notice that mental states are not exactly apparent (Luyten et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref89">36</reflink>]). In line with our finding, Rostad and Whitaker ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref90">49</reflink>]) and Pazzagli et al. ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref91">48</reflink>]) also reported a positive relationship between this subscale of PRFQ and positive parenting behaviours. They discussed that extremely high certainty may show unrealistic confidence in the capacity to mentalize thoughts and emotions of oneself and others or hypermentalizing, whereas average levels of certainty is related to interest and curiosity about mental states and a realistic level of confidence in the capacity to mentalize them. Average levels of certainty reveal 'the acknowledgement of mental states' opaqueness and a genuine level of mentalizing' (Schwarzer et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref92">52</reflink>]). So we can expect a positive relationship between average-range scores and positive outcomes. Another reason for the positive relationship between CMS and social, emotional, and behavioural strengths can be associated with the nature of the correlational studies. In correlational studies, it would be possible that individuals with high certainty about the mental states overestimate their understanding of children's mental states to feel better as caregivers (Rostad & Whitaker, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref93">49</reflink>]). So, it can make an unreal positive and negative correlation between certainty and psychological outcome. On the other hand, we used a self-report questionnaire that measured perceived certainty about mental states rather than actual certainty about mental states. Actually, the high certainty about mental states can also be reflected in parent's answers to the questionnaire, so it indicated positive relationships with positive psychological outcomes.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-17">Mediating Role of Children's Emotion Regulation</hd> <p>Generally, attachment theory and mentalization-based approach present a strong framework to understand relationships between the parental reflective functioning and social, emotional, and behavioural functioning in children. Within this framework, it would seem that emotion regulation represents substantial contributors to this relationship. Specifically, according to attachment theory, parent–child interaction affects the development of emotion regulation thought to be crucial for psychological functioning in children (Bowlby, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref94">5</reflink>]; DeKlyen & Greenberg, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref95">10</reflink>]). A mother's ability to keep in her mind a representation of her child as a subject with her/his own desires, feelings, and intentions allows the child to a better understanding of his/her own mental states via the mother's representation, thereby supporting the EF-ability in the child (Sharp & Fonagy, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref96">55</reflink>]; Slade, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref97">58</reflink>]). The capacity for reflective functioning allows the child to discover fundamental aspects of his/her subjective experience, and underlies deep self-knowledge. This process, whereby mental states are mentalized, results in the development of structures important to self and emotion regulation (Jurist, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref98">29</reflink>]; Slade, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref99">58</reflink>]). In contrast, when parents are unable to discern their own and their children's separate and individual emotional states, there is a risk for miscommunication that may lead to deficits in emotion regulation (Monica Roosa Ordway et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref100">46</reflink>]). In fact, these parents may fail to create a calm space for their children to safely express their emotions, especially negative ones such as anger and sadness (Bekar et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref101">2</reflink>]). Skills for managing emotions enable children to control their inappropriate impulses, to direct their behaviour, to adapt to new situations, people, and the environment, and to build a desirable social relationship with their peers (Mitchison et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref102">41</reflink>]; Nancy Eisenberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref103">12</reflink>]). Impairments in emotion regulation, however, may create hyperarousal in interpersonal situations, which in turn interfere with social and emotional functioning (Fonagy et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref104">17</reflink>]). So, children's ability to regulate emotion in appropriate ways is considered as a guarantee to success in interpersonal relationships, in dealing with problematic situations, and finally, in psychological adjustments (Barthel et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref105">1</reflink>]; Pace et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref106">47</reflink>]).</p> <p>Taken together, this study provides support for the notion that parental reflective functioning may exert influence on children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning through the development of emotion regulation. However, this study has some limitations. Only parent-reported questionnaires were used to assess parental reflective functioning, children's psychological functioning, and children's emotion regulation. Parent-report questionnaires might measure participant's own assessment of their RF and child's functioning, which to a certain extent rely on parents' insight and honesty in order to accurately assess these variables. Therefore, future researchers should evaluate the parents' report and use independent observations to obtain a wider view of the variables. Also, the study was cross-sectional in nature, so understanding of causal effects and possible bidirectional relationships in particular was not possible in the present study.</p> <p>In spite of these limitations, our findings highlight the importance of PRF in children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning. We suggest health care professionals pay attention to parental reflective functioning in their work with children and families. Helping parents to boost their parental reflective functioning might have a positive impact on children's psychosocial functioning. We suggest future researchers to study other mechanisms such as parents' mental illness, parent emotion regulation, and interoception that may have an important role for children's functioning (Keren & Tyano, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref107">30</reflink>]; Opdensteinen et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref108">44</reflink>].,Zahn-Waxler et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref109">68</reflink>]). In addition, we used broad variables in this research, it is suggested to do research about the relation between PRF and more specific variables in children.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-18">Highlights</hd> <p>● We investigated the role of Parental Reflective Functioning (PRF) and children's emotion regulation in preshoolers' psychosocial functioning.</p> <p>● Results showed that children's emotion regulation mediated the relationship between PRF and preschoolers' psychosocial functioning.</p> <p>● These findings provide further evidence for the importance of PRF for preschoolers' psychosocial functioning.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-19">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-20">Informed consent</hd> <p>Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.</p> <hd id="AN0161984245-21">Data Availability Statement</hd> <p>The data that supports the findings of this article would be available by contacting the corresponding author.</p> <ref id="AN0161984245-22"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref105" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Barthel, A. L., Hay, A., Doan, S. N., & Hofmann, S. G. (2018). Interpersonal Emotion Regulation: A Review of Social and Developmental Components. Behaviour Change, 35 (4), 203 – 216. https://doi.org/10.1017/bec.2018.19</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref26" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bekar, O., Steele, M., Shahmoon-Shanok, R., & Steele, H. (2018). Mothers' Mental State Talk and Preschool Children's Social-Behavioral Functioning: A Multidimensional Account. Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 17 (2), 119 – 133. https://doi.org/10.1080/15289168.2018.1456890</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref29" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Benbassat, N., & Priel, B. (2012). Parenting and adolescent adjustment: The role of parental reflective function. Journal of Adolescence, 35 (1), 163 – 174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.03.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref68" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Berlin, L. J., & Cassidy, J. (2003). Mothers' Self-Reported Control of Their Preschool Children's Emotional Expressiveness: A Longitudinal Study of Associations with Infant-Mother Attachment and Children's Emotion Regulation. Social Development, 12 (4), 477 – 495. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00244</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref94" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Retrospect and prospect. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 52 (4), 664 – 678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1982.tb01456.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref16" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Calkins, S. D., & Hill, A. (2007). Caregiver Influences on Emerging Emotion Regulation: Biological and Environmental Transactions in Early Development. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 229 – 248). The Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-01392-011</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref15" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Camoirano, A. (2017). Mentalizing makes parenting work: A review about parental reflective functioning and clinical interventions to improve it. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 (14), 1 – 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00014</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref17" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Cooper, A., & Redfern, S. (2016). Reflective parenting : A guide to understanding what's going on in your child's mind. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref88" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Dejko–Wańczyk, K., Janusz, B., & Józefik, B. (2020). Understanding the Externalizing Behavior of School-Age Boys: The Role of a Mother's Mentalization and Attachment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29 (1), 155 – 166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01543-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DeKlyen, M., & Greenberg, M. T. (2008). Attachment and psychopathology in childhood. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment, theory, research and clinical applications (2nd ed., pp. 637 – 666). Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Murphy, B. C. (1996). Parents' reactions to children's negative emotions: Relations to children's social competence and comforting behavior. Child Development, 67 (5), 2227 – 2247. Accessed 24 December 2020 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9022240/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., Morris, A. S., Fabes, R. A., Cumberland, A., Reiser, M., Gershoff, E. T., Shepard, S. A., & Losoya, S. (2003). Longitudinal Relations among Parental Emotional Expressivity, Children's Regulation, and Quality of Socioemotional Functioning. Developmental Psychology, 39 (1), 3 – 19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.1.3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ensink, K., & Mayes, L. C. (2010). The development of mentalisation in children from a theory of mind perspective. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 30 (4), 301 – 337. https://doi.org/10.1080/07351690903206504</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ensink, K., Bégin, M., Normandin, L., & Fonagy, P. (2016). Maternal and child reflective functioning in the context of child sexual abuse: Pathways to depression and externalising difficulties. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 7 (3), 117 – 133. https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v7.30611</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fonagy, P., & Target, M. (1997). Attachment and reflective function: Their role in self-organization. Development and Psychopathology, 9 (4), 679 – 700. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579497001399</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fonagy, P., Gergely, G., Jurist, E., & Target, M. (2005). Affect regulation, mentalization, and the development of the self. Other Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fonagy, P., Luyten, P., & Bateman, A. (2015). Translation: Mentalizing as Treatment Target in Borderline Personality Disorder. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 6 (4), 380 – 392. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000113</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fonagy, P., Luyten, P., Moulton-Perkins, A., Lee, Y., Warren, F., Howard, S., Ghinai, R., Fearon, P., & Lowyck, B. (2016). Development and validation of a self-report measure of mentalizing: The reflective functioning questionnaire. PLoS ONE, 11 (7), 158678. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158678</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gharehbaghy, F., & Aguilar-Vafaie, M. (2008). Psychometric Properties of Persian Parent and Teacher Versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a Sample of Iranian Children. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology, 15 (3), 231 – 241. https://ijpcp.iums.ac.ir</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40 (11), 1337 – 1345. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gordo, L., Martínez-Pampliega, A., Iriarte Elejalde, L., & Luyten, P. (2020). Do Parental Reflective Functioning and Parental Competence Affect The Socioemotional Adjustment Of Children? Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29 (12), 3621 – 3631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01840-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gottman, J. M., Katz, L. F., & Hooven, C. (1997). Meta-emotion: How families communicate emotionally. Erlbaum. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-97400-000. Accessed 24 December 2020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goudarzi, Z. (2020). The mediating role of emotion regulation between maternal reflective functioning and children's internalizing and externalizing problems. [ Unpublished master's thesis ]. Shahid Beheshti University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Social Skills Rating System. American Guidance Service.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gunzler, D., Chen, T., Wu, P., & Zhang, H. (2013). Introduction to mediation analysis with structural equation modeling. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 25 (6), 390. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.1002-0829.2013.06.009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Halligan, S. L., Cooper, P. J., Fearon, P., Wheeler, S. L., Crosby, M., & Murray, L. (2013). The longitudinal development of emotion regulation capacities in children at risk for externalizing disorders. Development and Psychopathology, 25 (2), 391 – 406. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579412001137</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6 (1), 1 – 55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, C., Aldercotte, A., & Foley, S. (2017). Maternal Mind-Mindedness Provides a Buffer for Pre-Adolescents at Risk for Disruptive Behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 45 (2), 225 – 235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-016-0165-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jurist, E. (2018). Minding Emotions: Cultivating Mentalization in Psychotherapy. Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Keren, M., & Tyano, S. (2015). Psychopathology and its early impact on parenting behaviors in mothers: The interface between adult and infant psychiatry. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 52 (2), 92 – 99. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26431412/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> King, K. L., Priddis, L. E., & Kane, R. T. (2015). Enhancing Maternal Sensitivity and Emotional Wellbeing Through a Preventative Parent–Child Relationship Intervention in a Community Setting. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24 (6), 1582 – 1592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-9962-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2005-03476-000. Accessed 13 January 2021</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kramer, T. J., Caldarella, P., Christensen, L., & Shatzer, R. H. (2010). Social and emotional learning in the kindergarten classroom: Evaluation of the Strong Start curriculum. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37 (4), 303 – 309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0354-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LaBounty, J., Wellman, H. M., Olson, S., Lagattuta, K., & Liu, D. (2008). Mothers' and fathers' use of internal state talk with their young children. Social Development, 17 (4), 757 – 775. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00450.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Loevaas, M. E. S., Sund, A. M., Patras, J., Martinsen, K., Hjemdal, O., Neumer, S.-P., Holen, S., & Reinfjell, T. (2018). Emotion regulation and its relation to symptoms of anxiety and depression in children aged 8-12 years: Does parental gender play a differentiating role? BMC Psychology, 6 (1), 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-018-0255-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luyten, P., Nijssens, L., Fonagy, P., & Mayes, L. C. (2017a). Parental Reflective Functioning: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 70 (1), 174 – 199. https://doi.org/10.1080/00797308.2016.1277901</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luyten, P., Mayes, L., Nijssens, L., & Fonagy, P. (2017b). The parental reflective functioning questionnaire: Development and preliminary validation. PLoS ONE, 12 (5), e0176218. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176218</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1 (2), 130.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maleki, M., Chehrzad, M. M., Kazemnezhad Leyli, E., Mardani, A., & Vaismoradi, M. (2019). Social Skills in Preschool Children from Teachers' Perspectives. Children, 6 (5), 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/children6050064</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meybodi Aghaie, F., Mohammadkhani, P., Pourshahbaz, A., Dolatshahi, B., Ebrahimzadeh Mousavi, M., & Heydari, H. (2018). Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of the Emotion Regulation Checklist. World Family Medicine Journal: Incorporating the Middle East Journal of Family Medicine, 99 (5832), 1 – 6. https://doi.org/10.5742/mewfm.2018.93260</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mitchison, G. M., Liber, J. M., Hannesdottir, D. K., & Njardvik, U. (2020). Emotion Dysregulation, ODD and Conduct Problems in a Sample of Five and Six-Year-Old Children. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 51 (1), 71 – 79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-019-00911-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moore, J. E., Cooper, B. R., Domitrovich, C. E., Morgan, N. R., Cleveland, M. J., Shah, H., Jacobson, L., & Greenberg, M. T. (2015). The effects of exposure to an enhanced preschool program on the social-emotional functioning of at-risk children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 32 (3), 127 – 138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.03.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nijssens, L., Vliegen, N., & Luyten, P. (2020). The Mediating Role of Parental Reflective Functioning in Child Social–emotional Development. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29 (8), 2342 – 2354. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10826-020-01767-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Opdensteinen, K. D., Schaan, L., Pohl, A., Schulz, A., Domes, G., & Hechler, T. (2021). Interoception in preschoolers: New insights into its assessment and relations to emotion regulation and stress. Biological Psychology, 165, 108166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2021.108166</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ordway, M. R., Sadler, L. S., Dixon, J., & Slade, A. (2014). Parental reflective functioning: Analysis and promotion of the concept for paediatric nursing. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 23 (23–24), 3490 – 3500. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12600</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ordway, M. R., Webb, D., Sadler, L. S., & Slade, A. (2015). Parental Reflective Functioning: An Approach to Enhancing Parent-Child Relationships in Pediatric Primary Care. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 29 (4), 325 – 334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2014.12.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pace, U., Zappulla, C., & Di Maggio, R. (2016). The mediating role of perceived peer support in the relation between quality of attachment and internalizing problems in adolescence: A longitudinal perspective. Attachment and Human Development, 18 (5), 508 – 524. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2016.1198919</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pazzagli, C., Delvecchio, E., Raspa, V., Mazzeschi, C., & Luyten, P. (2018). The Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire in Mothers and Fathers of School-Aged Children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27 (1), 80 – 90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0856-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rostad, W. L., & Whitaker, D. J. (2016). The Association Between Reflective Functioning and Parent–Child Relationship Quality. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25 (7), 2164 – 2177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016-0388-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rutherford, H. J. V., Booth, C. R., Luyten, P., Bridgett, D. J., & Mayes, L. C. (2015). Investigating the association between parental reflective functioning and distress tolerance in motherhood. Infant Behavior and Development, 40, 54 – 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2015.04.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schultheis, A. M., Mayes, L. C., & Rutherford, H. J. V. (2019). Associations between Emotion Regulation and Parental Reflective Functioning. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28 (4), 1094 – 1104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-01326-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schwarzer, N. H., Nolte, T., Fonagy, P., Griem, J., Kieschke, U., & Gingelmaier, S. (2021). The relationship between global distress, mentalizing and well-being in a German teacher sample. Current Psychology, 1 – 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01467-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Senehi, N., Brophy-Herb, H. E., & Vallotton, C. D. (2018). Effects of maternal mentalization-related parenting on toddlers' self-regulation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 44, 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.02.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shahim, S. (2005). Standardization of Social Skills Rating System for Preschool Children. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology, 11 (2), 176 – 186. Accessed 9 January 2021 <ulink href="http://ijpcp.iums.ac.ir/article-1-70-en.html">http://ijpcp.iums.ac.ir/article-1-70-en.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sharp, C., & Fonagy, P. (2008). The Parent's Capacity to Treat the Child as a Psychological Agent: Constructs, Measures and Implications for Developmental Psychopathology. Social Development, 17 (3), 737 – 754. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00457.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shields, A., & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Emotion regulation among school-age children: The development and validation of a new criterion Q-sort scale. Developmental Psychology, 33 (6), 906 – 916. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.33.6.906</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shokoufefard, S., Mazaheri, M., Heidari, M., & Seyed Mousavi, P. (2018). Development of Attachment Representations and Maternal Sensitivity. Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14 (56), 355 – 371. <ulink href="http://jip.azad.ac.ir/article%5f543919.html?lang=en">http://jip.azad.ac.ir/article%5f543919.html?lang=en</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Slade, A. (2005). Parental reflective functioning: An introduction. Attachment and Human Development, 7 (3), 269 – 281. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616730500245906</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smaling, H. J. A., Huijbregts, S. C. J., van der Heijden, K. B., Hay, D. F., van Goozen, S. H. M., & Swaab, H. (2017). Prenatal Reflective Functioning and Development of Aggression in Infancy: The Roles of Maternal Intrusiveness and Sensitivity. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 45 (2), 237 – 248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-016-0177-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sroufe, L. A. (1996). Emotional development: The organization of emotional life in the early years. In Emotional Development. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511527661</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Suardi, F., Moser, D. A., Sancho Rossignol, A., Manini, A., Vital, M., Merminod, G., Kreis, A., Ansermet, F., Rusconi Serpa, S., & Schechter, D. S. (2020). Maternal reflective functioning, interpersonal violence-related posttraumatic stress disorder, and risk for psychopathology in early childhood. Attachment and Human Development, 22 (2), 225 – 245. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2018.1555602</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Suchman, N. E., Decoste, C., Mcmahon, T. J., Rounsaville, B., & Mayes, L. (2011). The Mothers and Toddlers program, an attachment-based parenting intervention for substance-using women: Results at 6-week follow-up in a randomized clinical pilot. Infant Mental Health Journal, 32 (4), 427 – 449. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20303</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taubner, S. (2020). Parental mentalizing as a key resource for difficult transitions. Attachment and Human Development, 22 (1), 46 – 50. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2019.1589060</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tehrani-Doust, M., Shahrivar, Z., Pakbaz, B., Rezaei, A., & Ahmadi, F. (2007). Validity of Farsi version of strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ). Advances in Cognitive Science, 8 (4), 33 – 39. https://icssjournal.ir/article-1-266-en.html</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vafaie, M., & Roshan, M. (2007). Investigating the relationship between family risk factors and protectors with adolescents' abilities and emotional-behavioral disorders. Contemporary Psychology, 13 (2), 4 – 17.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Verhage, M. L., Schuengel, C., Madigan, S., Pasco Fearon, R. M., Oosterman, M., Cassibba, R., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (2016). Narrowing the transmission gap: A synthesis of three decades of research on intergenerational transmission of attachment. Psychological Bulletin, 142 (4), 337 – 366. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000038</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zahn-Waxler, C., Duggal, S., & Gruber, R. (2002). Parental psychopathology. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Social conditions and applied parenting (pp. 295 – 327). Erlbaum. Accessed 17 May 2020. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2002-02522-012</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Saeed Ghanbari; Elahe Vahidi; Samaneh Behzadpoor; Zahra Goudarzi and Fateme Ghabezi</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref109"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1381931
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Parental Reflective Functioning and Preschool Children's Psychosocial Functioning: The Mediating Role of Children's Emotion Regulation
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ghanbari%2C+Sae%22">Ghanbari, Sae</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7269-6014">0000-0002-7269-6014</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vahidi%2C+Elahe%22">Vahidi, Elahe</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5296-2090">0000-0001-5296-2090</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Behzadpoor%2C+Samaneh%22">Behzadpoor, Samaneh</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Goudarzi%2C+Zahra%22">Goudarzi, Zahra</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ghabezi%2C+Fateme%22">Ghabezi, Fateme</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Journal+of+Developmental+Psychology%22"><i>European Journal of Developmental Psychology</i></searchLink>. 2023 20(2):229-250.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 22
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preschool+Children%22">Preschool Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mothers%22">Mothers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Emotional+Response%22">Emotional Response</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Control%22">Self Control</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychological+Patterns%22">Psychological Patterns</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Competence%22">Interpersonal Competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reflection%22">Reflection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Behavior+Problems%22">Behavior Problems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Behavior%22">Child Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Iran%22">Iran</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Strengths+and+Difficulties+Questionnaire%22">Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Social+Skills+Rating+System%22">Social Skills Rating System</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/17405629.2022.2079631
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1740-5629<br />1740-5610
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Parental reflective functioning (PRF) is considered to be a key factor in the development of emotion regulation in children, which in turn plays an important role in their psychosocial functioning. This study aimed to explore the mediating role of children's emotion regulation in the relationship between parental reflective functioning and children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning in a sample of preschool-age children. Participants were 257 mothers (Mean age = 35.63, SD = 4.55) and their preschool children (Mean age = 4.83, SD = 0.89; 46.7% girls), recruited through convenience sampling. Mothers' reflective functioning was measured using Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (PRFQ), which includes three subscales: Pre-Mentalizing (PM), Certainty about Mental States (CMS), and Interest and Curiosity in the Mental States (IC). Also, mothers reported on their child's emotion regulation and psychosocial functioning using the Emotion Regulation Checklist (ERC), Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and Social Skills Rating System (SSRS). Findings revealed that PM, as expected, was positively associated with psychosocial difficulties and negatively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. IC, as expected, was negatively associated with psychosocial difficulties and positively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. CMS, unexpectedly, was not associated with psychosocial difficulties and was positively associated with emotion regulation and social strengths. In addition, results of structural equation modelling showed that children's emotion regulation mediated the relationship between parental reflective functioning and children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning. Our results highlight the importance of parental reflective functioning and children's emotion regulation for children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning, and shed light on the possible role of emotion regulation through which parental reflective functioning exerts its influence on children's psychosocial functioning.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1381931
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1381931
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/17405629.2022.2079631
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 22
        StartPage: 229
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Preschool Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mothers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Emotional Response
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Control
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychological Patterns
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Competence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reflection
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Behavior Problems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Iran
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Skills Rating System
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Parental Reflective Functioning and Preschool Children's Psychosocial Functioning: The Mediating Role of Children's Emotion Regulation
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ghanbari, Sae
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vahidi, Elahe
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Behzadpoor, Samaneh
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Goudarzi, Zahra
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ghabezi, Fateme
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2023
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1740-5629
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1740-5610
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 20
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Journal of Developmental Psychology
              Type: main
ResultId 1