View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

A Pilot Study to Examine the Effects of an Emotion Coaching Parenting Program for Chinese Parents of Preschoolers

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: A Pilot Study to Examine the Effects of an Emotion Coaching Parenting Program for Chinese Parents of Preschoolers
Language: English
Authors: Suping Liu, Lixin Ren (ORCID 0000-0002-9176-3825)
Source: Prevention Science. 2025 26(2):222-233.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Adult Education
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Preschool Children, Parents, Parent Child Relationship, Parent Education, Parent Participation, Child Development, Emotional Development, Parenting Styles, Positive Reinforcement, Parent Workshops, Program Effectiveness, Program Development
Geographic Terms: China
DOI: 10.1007/s11121-025-01780-4
ISSN: 1389-4986
1573-6695
Abstract: Parental emotion socialization is crucial to children's development, yet emotion-focused parenting programs are scarce in non-Western contexts. In this study, we developed a four-week emotion-focused parenting program based on the principles of emotion coaching for Chinese families with preschool-aged children. This program integrated parent group sessions with home-based parent--child shared reading. A total of 73 parents of preschoolers were recruited and randomly assigned to experimental and waitlist control groups. Three waves of data on parents' emotion-related parenting beliefs and practices and parenting stress were collected at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and three-month follow-up. Significant reductions in parents' punitive reactions, minimization reactions, and parent-child dysfunctional interactions were found in both the experimental and the waitlist control groups immediately after completion of the program. When combining data from both groups, a significant improvement in parents' expressive encouragement was observed at post-intervention and follow-up. Additionally, delayed effects of the program were found on parents' emotion-dismissing beliefs, problem-focused reactions, and overall parenting stress. This study was one of the first in China to develop an emotion-focused parenting program and rigorously examine its feasibility and effects, offering insights into the development of similar parenting programs in China.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1461766
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEnMEjeczjUDAYxY9lYWHrjAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDMXBYXTMGJYvkEe5ewIBEICBmhxDzp1Hj3v3gWjUJPC3EfrKLhadfgUHil1lYgkKXVhFnvAHnj8bjM3ciqlUL8Aywf9Rj6zYxKYPvkTptGobFR-ECmdquE3JnQ4ZEWTdx7AAk2ePjSB1bNlxT2xXYsKeDkrNFNltnFokFwzozLDhXnC1kOuixSAXgEIIbbgdCJjZgpkqL71GwjvWPpNUC3lfyGO2Vg5IdkqFQFg=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0183578852;n9p01feb.25;2025Mar12.06:16;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183578852-1">A Pilot Study to Examine the Effects of an Emotion Coaching Parenting Program for Chinese Parents of Preschoolers </title> <p>Parental emotion socialization is crucial to children's development, yet emotion-focused parenting programs are scarce in non-Western contexts. In this study, we developed a four-week emotion-focused parenting program based on the principles of emotion coaching for Chinese families with preschool-aged children. This program integrated parent group sessions with home-based parent–child shared reading. A total of 73 parents of preschoolers were recruited and randomly assigned to experimental and waitlist control groups. Three waves of data on parents' emotion-related parenting beliefs and practices and parenting stress were collected at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and three-month follow-up. Significant reductions in parents' punitive reactions, minimization reactions, and parent–child dysfunctional interactions were found in both the experimental and the waitlist control groups immediately after completion of the program. When combining data from both groups, a significant improvement in parents' expressive encouragement was observed at post-intervention and follow-up. Additionally, delayed effects of the program were found on parents' emotion-dismissing beliefs, problem-focused reactions, and overall parenting stress. This study was one of the first in China to develop an emotion-focused parenting program and rigorously examine its feasibility and effects, offering insights into the development of similar parenting programs in China.</p> <p>Keywords: Emotion socialization; Parenting program; Chinese parenting; Preschoolers; Psychology and Cognitive Sciences Psychology Medical and Health Sciences Public Health and Health Services</p> <p>Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-025-01780-4.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Through the process of emotion socialization, parents can shape children's emotional development through their reactions to children's emotions, discussion of emotions, and emotional expressiveness (Eisenberg, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref1">13</reflink>]). Gottman and Declaire ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref2">19</reflink>]) proposed the concept of emotion coaching to describe a positive style of parental emotion socialization. Parents who embrace emotion coaching perceive children's emotional moments as opportunities for teaching and building intimacy. They accept children's emotions and mentor them by setting limits on inappropriate behaviors, teaching them emotional regulation, helping them express emotions properly, and offering guidance on problem-solving. Parental emotion coaching was found to promote children's awareness and acceptance of emotions, as well as emotional and attentional regulation skills (Denham, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref3">10</reflink>]; Gottman & Declaire., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref4">19</reflink>]). Emerging studies on Chinese families have also proved the value of adopting emotion coaching for children's social-emotional development in Chinese culture (Liang et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref5">29</reflink>]; Zhu & Dunsmore, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref6">44</reflink>]), indicating that using emotion coaching as an intervention strategy to promote parenting in Chinese families is feasible.</p> <p>A series of parenting programs have been developed to enhance parents' emotion socialization practices, but mostly originated from Western cultural contexts. In recent reviews, England-Mason and colleagues ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref7">15</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref8">14</reflink>]) found that programs targeting parental emotion socialization effectively improved parents' general parenting behaviors, emotion-related practices, psychological well-being, and children's emotional competence and behavioral adjustment. Among these programs, Tuning in to Kids (TIK; Havighurst et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref9">22</reflink>]), a program based on emotion coaching, has received abundant empirical evidence. The TIK program was originally developed in Australia, and its effectiveness in enhancing parenting practices and child's emotional development has been supported both in Australia (e.g., Havighurst et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref10">22</reflink>]; Wilson et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref11">39</reflink>]) and other countries (e.g., Noway in Bjørk et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref12">3</reflink>]; Iran in Edrissi et al.,[<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref13">12</reflink>]), including China (Chan et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref14">7</reflink>]; Qiu & Shum, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref15">30</reflink>]). Specifically, Qiu and Shum ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref16">30</reflink>]) adopted the TIK program for mainland Chinese mothers with preschoolers. Upon program completion, they displayed more encouragement and emotion-focused responses to their children's emotions, coupled with a decrease in punitive parenting and emotional dismissing. TIK was also used in Hong Kong among Chinese parents of low- to middle-class backgrounds, and significant decreases in punitive parenting and parenting stress were found after the program (Chan et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref17">7</reflink>]).</p> <p>In China, parents are increasingly aware of the significance of emotional competence in early childhood (Ren & Edwards, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref18">31</reflink>]). Yet, emotion-focused parenting programs are uncommon. The aforementioned findings on the utilization of TIK among Chinese parents provided initial evidence on the value of emotion coaching parenting programs within the Chinese context. However, Havighurst et al. ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref19">25</reflink>]) also pointed out that Chinese parents often find some TIK concepts (e.g., empathy, setting family limits) difficult to understand, are reluctant to engage in unscripted role plays, and tend to avoid noticing and discussing emotions, especially those related to the child's individual needs. Therefore, implementing emotion-focused parenting programs in Chinese culture may require reconsideration of both content and delivery methods. Although the current study was not intended to improve TIK but to develop an emotion-focused parenting program that meets the characteristics and needs of Chinese parents, the existing research on TIK has provided valuable insights. To facilitate Chinese parents' understanding of emotion coaching and engagement in emotion discussion, a concrete medium may be necessary for Chinese parents. In light of the emerging research demonstrating the benefits of parent–child shared reading for emotion socialization (Canfield et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref20">5</reflink>]; Soucie et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref21">33</reflink>]) and the growing prevalence of shared reading among Chinese families (Zheng & Mei, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref22">43</reflink>]), we chose parent–child shared reading as such a medium to enhance parents' understanding and implementation of emotion coaching.</p> <p>Picture books usually contain various characters and plots that can often convey or elicit complex emotions, providing parents with opportunities to engage in conversations on emotions with their children (e.g., recognizing emotion from facial expressions and understanding emotional triggers) (Garner & Parker, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref23">17</reflink>]). Some studies have shown that shared reading can effectively promote parents' emotion socialization practices in Western contexts (Canfield et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref24">5</reflink>]; Soucie et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref25">33</reflink>]). Nevertheless, some programs combining shared reading with emotion coaching failed to produce significant improvements in parental emotion coaching skills (Lee, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref26">28</reflink>]; Terry, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref27">35</reflink>]). One notable characteristic of these programs was their predominant emphasis on reading, which consequently overshadowed the fundamental aspect of emotion coaching. For example, in Lee's ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref28">28</reflink>]) program, only one session was focused on emotion coaching, while the remaining sessions were allocated to home-based shared reading activities. Therefore, while parent–child shared reading serves as a valuable tool in interventions aimed at improving parenting related to emotion socialization, it is essential to prioritize emotion coaching within the intervention.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-3">The Current Study</hd> <p>Recognizing the cultural differences between China and Western countries regarding emotion-focused parenting, we aimed to develop and evaluate an emotion-focused parenting program based on principles of emotion coaching for Chinese parents of preschool-aged children in the current study. The program integrated traditionally used parent group sessions with home-based parent–child shared reading activities, with emotion coaching being the "heart." Using a randomized waitlist control design, we conducted a pilot study to examine the program's feasibility and effects on parent's emotion-related parenting and parenting stress. Data were collected at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and three-month post-intervention follow-up, respectively. We hypothesized that participating in the program would significantly enhance parents' emotion-related parenting and reduce their parenting stress at post-intervention, and the effects would be maintained at follow-up.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-4">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0183578852-5">Participants</hd> <p>The ethics committee at Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University approved the study. A total of 73 volunteer families were recruited from two preschools in a large city in eastern China. The families all had typically developing children. Participating parents[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref29">1</reflink>] were randomly assigned to either the experimental (<emph>n</emph> = 37) or waitlist control (<emph>n</emph> = 36) group. Five parents dropped out at various stages (see Fig. 1). One parent in the experimental group and three in the waitlist control group withdrew before the program started by informing the classroom teachers. Following the first session, another parent in the experimental group withdrew due to scheduling conflicts, resulting in 68 parents who completed the program. However, six of the 68 parents only provided completed questionnaires for one of the measurement occasions, resulting in insufficient data to detect any potential changes in these individuals, and therefore, they were removed from the analyses. We attempted to compare the baseline data from the excluded and the retained participants. However, only three of the excluded parents provided complete baseline data, while the others provided either incomplete data or none at all, making the comparison unfeasible. Eventually, data from the remaining 62 parents were analyzed. All parents were the primary caregivers (50 mothers, 8 fathers, 4 grandmothers). The sample could be broadly defined as middle-class, with 80.6% of the parents (<emph>n</emph> = 50) having obtained a university degree or above. Almost all of the parents were over 30 years old (<emph>n</emph> = 60). Children were 4.66 (<emph>SD</emph> = 0.68) years old on average.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 Participant Flowchart</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-6">Procedures</hd> <p>With the help from classroom teachers, the research team disseminated the program information. Once parents agreed to participate, information letters, consent forms, and self-report questionnaires were delivered home. The experimental group underwent the four-week parenting program, while the waitlist control group waited. After the experimental group completed the program, the waitlist control group attended the same four-week program. To enhance learning outcomes during parent group sessions, participants in the experimental and waitlist control groups were each divided into two smaller groups, with 16 to 18 parents per group. Eventually, 95% of the parents attended at least two out of the three in-person parent group sessions. Parents who missed the group sessions received videos created by the primary facilitator, covering key concepts and techniques.</p> <p>Parents in the experimental group completed self-report questionnaires at three time points: baseline (T1), immediately after the 4-week program (T2), and three months after completion of the program (T3). As for the waitlist control group, questionnaires were completed at four intervals: baseline (T1), after waiting for 4 weeks (T2), immediately after the 4-week program (T3), and three months after program completion (T4).</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-7">The Emotion Coaching Parenting Program</hd> <p>Widely used parenting programs, such as the TIK program, usually consist of 6 to 12 weekly sessions. However, in Chinese urban settings, where most families have two full-time working parents with demanding work schedules, following a program of this length can be challenging for parents. The lack of time is also considered one of the top barriers for parents to participate in parenting programs (Wei et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref30">38</reflink>]). While longer programs tend to yield better results, previous studies have explored the feasibility of short-term parenting programs in various countries and demonstrated their effects (e.g., Tully & Hunt, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref31">36</reflink>]). Thus, after consultation and discussion with teachers and parents, we condensed our program to four weeks, comprising three weekly in-person parent group sessions and four weeks of home-based parent–child shared reading activities.</p> <p>The program was developed by the two authors, based on Gottman and Declaire's ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref32">19</reflink>]) five steps of emotion coaching: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref33">1</reflink>) recognizing children's emotions, including lower-intensity feelings; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref34">2</reflink>) viewing children's emotional moments as chances for intimacy and teaching; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref35">3</reflink>) attending to children's emotions, empathizing, and acknowledging their feelings; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref36">4</reflink>) helping children articulate and express their emotions verbally; and (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref37">5</reflink>) establishing boundaries while supporting them in exploring problem-solving strategies. The first parent group session covered the first three steps, helping parents understand and empathize with children's emotions. The second session focused on the fourth step, teaching parents how to listen to and support their children's emotional expression. The final step, along with emotion regulation strategies, was introduced in the third session.</p> <p>We also made adaptations to the delivery methods of these sessions to better suit the cultural context. While Western-based parenting programs often rely heavily on interactive activities, such as role play, which are effective for learning (Renkl et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref38">32</reflink>]), the Chinese education system predominantly uses lecture-based teaching methods (Grant et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref39">21</reflink>]), parents are accustomed to learning through formal lectures. Additionally, researchers applying the TIK program to Chinese parents found that some key concepts of emotion coaching were difficult for parents to comprehend, and many parents felt shy or unmotivated to participate in whole-group sharing (Havighurst et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref40">25</reflink>]). Therefore, in an attempt to accommodate the learning habits of Chinese parents and also harness the benefits of interactive learning, we integrated lecture-based instruction with interactive activities (e.g., group discussions and role play) in our group training sessions. The first author facilitated the group sessions, with each lasting two hours. The first author has a background in family studies and over eight years of experience in teaching young children and working with their families. The second author supervised all group sessions to ensure that session objectives were met, and program content was delivered with fidelity. The second author works in higher education and has had over 10 years of experience in researching Chinese parenting. After each session, parents also received handouts to reinforce emotion coaching at home. These handouts included comprehensive explanations of new concepts and strategies, such as the emotion coaching steps, parenting styles, and the STAR (Stop, Think, Attune, Reflect) method for empathizing with others' emotions (Gilbert et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref41">18</reflink>]). We also incorporated tables, charts, and images to enhance the aesthetics of the handouts.</p> <p>Another distinguishing aspect of our program was the simultaneous implementation of the four-week home-based parent–child shared reading activities. Parents received two picture books each week, carefully selected by the research team to encourage emotion-related conversations between parents and children. For instance, the renowned picture book, <emph>When Sophie Gets Angry-Really, Really Angry</emph>, was purposefully included. It describes how Sophie calmed down after getting angry, which can help parents discuss emotion regulation with their children. In addition to emotion-themed books, we also incorporated books in which the focus is not explicitly on emotions, but the characters experience varied emotions throughout the storyline (e.g., <emph>Giraffes Can't Dance</emph>). This strategy was deliberately used to assist parents in transferring the skills learned to shared reading of other picture books with their child. To further support shared reading at home, the research team developed a detailed reading guide for each picture book (see an example in Appendix A), providing a structured yet flexible framework for parent–child interactions. The guides highlight the emotional topics that could be discussed and provide examples of emotional conversation for most of the pages.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-8">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0183578852-9">Emotion-Related Parenting Beliefs</hd> <p>The Maternal Emotional Style Questionnaire (MESQ; Lagace-Seguin & Coplan, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref42">27</reflink>]) was used to measure parents' emotion-related parenting beliefs. The MESQ includes two subscales. The <emph>Emotion Dismissing</emph> subscale measures how much parents attempt to suppress or dismiss their children's negative emotions (7 items; e.g., "When my child is angry, my goal is to make him/her stop"). The <emph>Emotion Coaching</emph> subscale measures how often parents help their children understand and express their negative emotions (7 items; e.g., "When my child is angry, it is an opportunity for getting close"). A 5-point Likert scale (1 = <emph>strongly disagree</emph>, 5 = <emph>strongly agree</emph>) was used. The MESQ demonstrated good validity and reliability in Chinese settings (Qiu & Shum, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref43">30</reflink>]). In the current study, the Cronbach's alpha was 0.77 at pre-intervention, 0.64 at post-intervention, and 0.76 at follow-up for the Emotion Dismissing subscale, and they were 0.80, 0.71 and 0.89 for the Emotion Coaching subscale from pre-intervention to follow-up, respectively.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-10">Emotion-Related Parenting Practices</hd> <p>The Coping with Children's Negative Emotions Scale (CCNES; Fabes et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref44">16</reflink>]) was adopted to assess parents' emotion-related parenting practices. The CCNES contains 12 hypothetical scenarios depicting negative emotions in children. Parents were asked to rate their likelihood of responding to their child's negative feelings with each possible response, using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = <emph>very unlikely</emph>, 5 = <emph>very likely)</emph>. Each scenario contains six distinct responses, forming six subscales with 12 items each, including (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref45">1</reflink>) <emph>Distress Reactions</emph>, where parents feel distressed in response to their child's negative emotions; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref46">2</reflink>) <emph>Punitive Reactions</emph>, where parents use punitive measures to minimize their child's emotions; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref47">3</reflink>) <emph>Expressive Encouragement</emph>, where parents motivate their child to express negative emotions; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref48">4</reflink>) <emph>Emotion-Focused Reactions,</emph> wherein parents employ strategies aimed at helping the child feel better; (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref49">5</reflink>) <emph>Problem-Focused Reactions</emph>, capturing parents' assistance to their child in solving the problem causing their distress; and (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref50">6</reflink>) <emph>Minimization Reactions</emph>, where parents downplay the seriousness of the situation or minimize their child's problem or distressed response. The CCNES has been adapted to the Chinese context and shown good psychometric properties (Qiu & Shum, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref51">30</reflink>]; Zhang et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref52">41</reflink>]). In this study, the Cronbach's alphas obtained from pre-intervention to follow-up were 0.83, 0.81 and 0.85 for Distress Reactions, 0.72, 0.80 and 0.83 for Punitive Reactions, 0.72, 0.74 and 0.85 for Expressive Encouragement, 0.90, 0.88 and 0.90 for Emotion-Focused Reactions, 0.74, 0.73 and 0.75 for Problem-Focused Reactions, and 0.79, 0.79 and 0.84 for Minimization Reactions.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-11">Parenting Stress</hd> <p>The Parenting Stress Index-Fourth Edition-Short Form (PSI-4-SF; Abidin et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref53">1</reflink>]) was utilized to assess parents' parenting stress. This tool measures parents' perceptions of distress associated with childrearing using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = <emph>strongly disagree</emph>, 5 = <emph>strongly agree</emph>). It consists of three subscales. The <emph>Parental Distress</emph> subscale assesses the parents' distress in their parental role (12 items; e.g., "I don't enjoy the things as I used to"). The <emph>Parent–Child Dysfunctional Interaction</emph> subscale measures parents' dissatisfaction with their children's interactions (12 items; e.g., "My child smiles at me much less than I expected"). The <emph>Difficult Child</emph> subscale measures parents' perceptions of their child's difficulty level (12 items; e.g., "My child generally wakes up in a bad mood"). The PSI-4-SF has been validated in the Chinese context (Zhao et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref54">42</reflink>]). In the current study, the Cronbach's alphas from pre-intervention to follow-up were 0.88, 0.89 and 0.90 for Parental Distress, 0.89, 0.84 and 0.89 for Parent–Child Dysfunctional Interaction, and 0.83, 0.74 and 0.83 for Difficult Child.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-12">Parental Satisfaction</hd> <p>Parents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the program immediately after completion. The questionnaire included eight questions focusing three aspects: parents' overall satisfaction with the program (3 items; e.g., "I am satisfied with the program."); parents' perceived effects of the program (3 items; e.g., "It was difficult to use emotion coaching strategies learned in the training"); and parents' satisfaction with the selected books (2 items; e.g., "My child liked the books included in this program"). A 5-point Likert scale (1 = <emph>strongly disagree</emph>, 5 = <emph>strongly agree</emph>) was used in the satisfaction questionnaire.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-13">Data Analyses</hd> <p>The data was analyzed using SPSS. Firstly, Chi-squared and independent samples t-tests were employed to compare baseline measures and demographic characteristics between the experimental and waitlist control groups at T1. Next, immediate intervention effects at T2 were tested using 2 × 2 ANOVAs, with time of data collection (T1 vs. T2) as the within-subject factor and experimental condition (experimental vs. waitlist control) as the between-subjects factor. The replicated intervention effects in the waitlist control group were examined using repeated measures ANOVAs to compare the pre- and post-intervention outcome measures. Finally, using repeated measures ANOVAs, we combined data from the experimental and waitlist control groups and examined the maintenance effects and delayed effects across three time points: pre-intervention (T1 for the experimental group, T2 for the waitlist control group), post-intervention (T2 for the experimental group, T3 for the waitlist control group), and three-month follow-up (T3 for the experimental group, T4 for the waitlist control group). Time point was entered as the within-subject variable. Statistical significance was determined at<emph> p</emph> < 0.05. The false discovery rate approach (FDR) was utilized to adjust for multiple comparisons (Benjamini & Hochberg, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref55">2</reflink>]). The adjusted <emph>p</emph>-values were calculated using the following formula: adjusted p<subs><emph>i</emph></subs> = p<subs><emph>i</emph></subs> N/<emph>i.</emph> The<emph> p</emph><subs><emph>i</emph></subs> represents the <emph>i</emph><sups>th</sups> smallest <emph>p</emph>-value among the <emph>N</emph> total <emph>p</emph>-values included. A regular <emph>p</emph>-value of 0.05 implies that 5% of all tests would result in false positives, whereas an FDR-adjusted <emph>p</emph>-value of 0.05 suggests that 5% of the significant tests would yield false positives.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-14">Results</hd> <p>There were no significant differences in key demographic variables between the experimental group and the waitlist control group at T1 (<emph>p</emph>s > 0.05). Therefore, we did not include any of the demographic variables as covariates in subsequent analyses for model simplicity. Baseline comparisons of outcome variables at T1 also showed no significant differences between the two groups in all measures except for parental distress. The waitlist control group reported higher parental distress than the experimental group at T1.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-15">Immediate Intervention Effects</hd> <p>Significant interaction effects between time and experimental condition were observed on three outcome variables (Table 1): parent–child dysfunctional interaction (<emph>F</emph> = 4.57, <emph>p</emph> = 0.037, adjusted <emph>p</emph> = 0.148, <emph>η</emph><subs><emph>p</emph></subs><sups><emph>2</emph></sups> = 0.071), punitive reactions (<emph>F</emph> = 8.89, <emph>p</emph> = 0.004, adjusted <emph>p</emph> = 0.024, <emph>η</emph><subs><emph>p</emph></subs><sups><emph>2</emph></sups> = 0.129), and minimization reactions (<emph>F</emph> = 10.49, <emph>p</emph> = 0.002, adjusted <emph>p</emph> = 0.024, <emph>η</emph><subs><emph>p</emph></subs><sups><emph>2</emph></sups> = 0.149). At T1, no significant differences were found between the experimental group and the waitlist control group across the three outcomes. However, at T2, the experimental group showed a significant reduction in these dimensions, resulting in significant interaction effects. Medium effect sizes were obtained (i.e., <emph>η</emph><subs><emph>p</emph></subs><sups><emph>2</emph></sups> values of 0.06 and above represent medium effects; Cohen, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref56">9</reflink>]). However, after applying the FDR adjustment approach, the effect on parent–child dysfunctional interaction was no longer significant.</p> <p>Table 1 Baseline Comparisons of the Outcome Variables at T1 and the Interaction Effects Between the Experimental Condition and Time at T2</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="3"><p>Variable</p></th><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Experimental (<italic>n</italic> = 32)</p></th><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Waitlist control (<italic>n</italic> = 30)</p></th><th align="left"><p>Baseline</p></th><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Interaction effects</p></th></tr><tr><th align="left" colspan="2"><p>Time 1</p></th><th align="left" colspan="2"><p>Time 2</p></th><th align="left" colspan="2"><p>Time 1</p></th><th align="left" colspan="2"><p>Time 2</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>p</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>F</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>p</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>Adjusted</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msubsup xmlns=""><mi mathvariant="normal">η</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi></mrow><mn>2</mn></msubsup></math><inline-graphic mime-subtype="GIF" href="11121_2025_1780_Article_IEq1.gif" /></p></th></tr><tr><th align="left"><p>Mean</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SD</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>Mean</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SD</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>Mean</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SD</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>Mean</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SD</italic></p></th><th align="left" /><th align="left" /><th align="left" /><th align="left"><p><italic>p</italic></p></th><th align="left" /></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" colspan="14"><p>Maternal Emotion Style Questionnaire</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Emotion dismissing</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.69</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.37</p></td><td align="left"><p>.11</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.63</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.49</p></td><td align="left"><p>.11</p></td><td align="left"><p>.708</p></td><td align="left"><p>.88</p></td><td align="left"><p>.351</p></td><td align="left"><p>.602</p></td><td align="left"><p>.015</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Emotion coaching</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.92</p></td><td align="left"><p>.11</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4.09</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.81</p></td><td align="left"><p>.12</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.97</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td align="left"><p>.511</p></td><td align="left"><p>.01</p></td><td align="left"><p>.940</p></td><td align="left"><p>.953</p></td><td align="left"><p>.000</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="14"><p>Coping with Children's Negative Emotions Scale</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Distress reactions</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.94</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.83</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.88</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.86</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td align="left"><p>.644</p></td><td align="left"><p>.41</p></td><td align="left"><p>.527</p></td><td align="left"><p>.757</p></td><td align="left"><p>.007</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Punitive reactions</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.36</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.13</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.25</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.35</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td align="left"><p>.380</p></td><td align="left"><p>8.89<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.004</p></td><td align="left"><p>.024</p></td><td align="left"><p>.129</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Expressive encouragement</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.60</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.80</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.74</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.83</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td align="left"><p>.247</p></td><td align="left"><p>.96</p></td><td align="left"><p>.331</p></td><td align="left"><p>.602</p></td><td align="left"><p>.016</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Emotion-focused reactions</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4.16</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4.07</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4.26</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4.24</p></td><td align="left"><p>.93</p></td><td align="left"><p>.395</p></td><td align="left"><p>.33</p></td><td align="left"><p>.568</p></td><td align="left"><p>.757</p></td><td align="left"><p>.005</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Problem-focused reactions</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.87</p></td><td align="left"><p>.07</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.86</p></td><td align="left"><p>.07</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.90</p></td><td align="left"><p>.07</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4.03</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td align="left"><p>.726</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.70</p></td><td align="left"><p>.197</p></td><td align="left"><p>.497</p></td><td align="left"><p>.028</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Minimization reactions</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.11</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.81</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.96</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.05</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td align="left"><p>.244</p></td><td align="left"><p>10.49<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.002</p></td><td align="left"><p>.024</p></td><td align="left"><p>.149</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="14"><p>Parenting Stress Index</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Parental distress</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.07</p></td><td align="left"><p>.11</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.08</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.42</p></td><td align="left"><p>.12</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.44</p></td><td align="left"><p>.11</p></td><td align="left"><p>.037</p></td><td align="left"><p>.004</p></td><td align="left"><p>.953</p></td><td align="left"><p>.953</p></td><td align="left"><p>.000</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Parent–child dysfunctional interaction</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.01</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.86</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.82</p></td><td align="left"><p>.10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.91</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td align="left"><p>.180</p></td><td align="left"><p>4.57<sup>*</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.037</p></td><td align="left"><p>.148</p></td><td align="left"><p>.071</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Difficult child</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.19</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.12</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.06</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.12</p></td><td align="left"><p>.09</p></td><td align="left"><p>.306</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.63</p></td><td align="left"><p>.207</p></td><td align="left"><p>.497</p></td><td align="left"><p>.026</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <sups>*</sups> <emph>p</emph> <.05; <sups>**</sups><emph>p</emph> <.01; <sups>***</sups><emph>p</emph> <.001</p> <p>Next, we tested the immediate intervention effect for the waitlist control group using repeated measures ANOVAs. This set of analyses was to determine whether the significant intervention effects would be replicated for the waitlist control group. For this group, two waves of baseline data were collected (i.e., T1 and T2). We used T2 as the pre-intervention time point, as T2 data was collected right before parents in the waitlist control group started the program. We used T3 data that were collected immediately after program completion as post-intervention data. As shown in Appendix B, significant intervention effects were found at post-intervention on parent–child dysfunctional interaction (<emph>F</emph> = 5.74, <emph>p</emph> = 0.023), punitive reactions (<emph>F</emph> = 6.43, <emph>p</emph> = 0.017), and minimization reactions (<emph>F</emph> = 9.84, <emph>p</emph> = 0.004). However, only the effect for minimization reactions remained significant after FDR adjustment.</p> <p>Both sets of analyses revealed no immediate intervention effects on emotion dismissing, emotion coaching, distress reactions, expressive encouragement, emotion-focused reactions, parental distress, or perceptions of the child's difficulty level.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-16">Maintenance Effects and Delayed Intervention Effects</hd> <p>Data from the experimental and waitlist control groups (<emph>n</emph> = 57, excluding 5 parents with incomplete data) were combined for repeated measures ANOVAs to examine maintenance and delayed intervention effects from pre-intervention to follow-up. Table 2 presents the main effects of time, along with post-hoc pairwise comparisons based on the Bonferroni correction across time.</p> <p>Table 2 Main Effects, Maintenance Effects, and Delayed Effects of the Emotion Coaching Parenting Program</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="2"><p>Variable</p></th><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Main effect</p></th><th align="left" colspan="3"><p>Post – Pre</p></th><th align="left" colspan="3"><p>Follow-up – Post</p></th><th align="left" colspan="3"><p>Follow-up – Pre</p></th></tr><tr><th align="left"><p><italic>F</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>p</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>Adjusted p</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msubsup xmlns=""><mi mathvariant="normal">η</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi></mrow><mn>2</mn></msubsup></math><inline-graphic mime-subtype="GIF" href="11121_2025_1780_Article_IEq2.gif" /></p></th><th align="left"><p>Mean</p><p>Diff</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SE</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>p</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>Mean</p><p>Diff</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SE</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>p</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>Mean</p><p>Diff</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SE</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>p</italic></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" colspan="14"><p>MESQ</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> ED</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>7.839<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.002</p></td><td align="left"><p>.123</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.15</p></td><td align="left"><p>.096</p></td><td align="left"><p>.365</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.221<sup>*</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.080</p></td><td align="left"><p>.023</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.371<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.105</p></td><td align="left"><p>.003</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> EC</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0.369</p></td><td align="left"><p>.689</p></td><td align="left"><p>.751</p></td><td align="left"><p>.007</p></td><td align="left"><p>.063</p></td><td align="left"><p>.086</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td><td align="left"><p>.008</p></td><td align="left"><p>.095</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td><td align="left"><p>.070</p></td><td align="left"><p>.088</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="14"><p>CCNES</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> DR</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0.243</p></td><td align="left"><p>.751</p></td><td align="left"><p>.751</p></td><td align="left"><p>.004</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.045</p></td><td align="left"><p>.062</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td><td align="left"><p>.031</p></td><td align="left"><p>.057</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.015</p></td><td align="left"><p>.078</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> PR</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4.259<sup>*</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.019</p></td><td align="left"><p>.026</p></td><td align="left"><p>.071</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.169<sup>*</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.056</p></td><td align="left"><p>.012</p></td><td align="left"><p>.163</p></td><td align="left"><p>.067</p></td><td align="left"><p>.053</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.006</p></td><td align="left"><p>.073</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> EE</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>8.963<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.138</p></td><td align="left"><p>.181<sup>*</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.061</p></td><td align="left"><p>.014</p></td><td align="left"><p>.075</p></td><td align="left"><p>.054</p></td><td align="left"><p>.525</p></td><td align="left"><p>.256<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.070</p></td><td align="left"><p>.002</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> EFR</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1.004</p></td><td align="left"><p>.365</p></td><td align="left"><p>.446</p></td><td align="left"><p>.018</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.079</p></td><td align="left"><p>.068</p></td><td align="left"><p>.752</p></td><td align="left"><p>.076</p></td><td align="left"><p>.054</p></td><td align="left"><p>.497</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.003</p></td><td align="left"><p>.066</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> PFR</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>16.792<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.231</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.064</p></td><td align="left"><p>.056</p></td><td align="left"><p>.757</p></td><td align="left"><p>.326<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.056</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.262<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.006</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> MR</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>10.235<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.155</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.277<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.067</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.181<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.055</p></td><td align="left"><p>.005</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.096</p></td><td align="left"><p>.064</p></td><td align="left"><p>.415</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="14"><p>PSI-4-SF</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> PD</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>8.464<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.131</p></td><td align="left"><p>.000</p></td><td align="left"><p>.075</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.000</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.269<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.074</p></td><td align="left"><p>.002</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.269<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.074</p></td><td align="left"><p>.002</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> PCDI</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>10.448<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.157</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.127</p></td><td align="left"><p>.055</p></td><td align="left"><p>.076</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.151<sup>*</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.055</p></td><td align="left"><p>.026</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.278<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.070</p></td><td align="left"><p> <.001</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> DC</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>7.233<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.001</p></td><td align="left"><p>.002</p></td><td align="left"><p>.114</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.098</p></td><td align="left"><p>.062</p></td><td align="left"><p>.366</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.152<sup>*</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.061</p></td><td align="left"><p>.047</p></td><td align="left"><p>–.25<sup>**</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>.075</p></td><td align="left"><p>.004</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <sups>*</sups> <emph>p</emph> <.05; <sups>**</sups><emph>p</emph> <.01; <sups>***</sups><emph>p</emph> <.001; <emph>N</emph> = 57; <emph>MESQ</emph>, Maternal Emotion Style Questionnaire; <emph>ED</emph>, Emotion Dismissing; <emph>EC</emph>, Emotion Coaching; <emph>CCNES</emph>, Coping with Children's Negative Emotions Scale; <emph>DR</emph>, Distress Reactions; <emph>PR</emph>, Punitive Reactions; <emph>EE</emph>, Expressive Encouragement; <emph>EFR</emph>, Emotion-Focused Reactions; <emph>MR</emph>, Minimization Reactions; <emph>PSI-4-SF</emph>, Parenting Stress Index-Fourth Edition-Short Form; <emph>PD</emph>, Parental Distress; <emph>PCDI</emph>, Parent–Child Dysfunctional Interaction; <emph>DC</emph>, Difficult Child; <emph>Pre</emph>, Pre-intervention; <emph>Post</emph>, Post-intervention; <emph>Follow-up</emph>, three months post intervention</p> <p>Significant main effects of time were found for various outcome variables, including emotion dismissing (<emph>F</emph> = 7.84, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), punitive reactions (<emph>F</emph> = 4.26, <emph>p</emph> = 0.019), expressive encouragement (<emph>F</emph> = 8.96, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), problem-focused reactions (<emph>F</emph> = 16.79, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), minimization reactions (<emph>F</emph> = 10.24, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), parental distress (<emph>F</emph> = 8.46, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), parent–child dysfunctional interaction (<emph>F</emph> = 10.45, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001), and difficult child (<emph>F</emph> = 7.23, <emph>p</emph> = 0.001). All of these effects remained significant after the FDR adjustment. Post-hoc comparisons revealed significant decreases in punitive reactions (<emph>p</emph> = 0.012), minimization reactions (<emph>p</emph> < 0.001), and an increase in expressive encouragement (<emph>p</emph> = 0.014) after the program. Specifically, the effect on expressive encouragement was maintained at the three-month follow-up, with a notable increase from pre-intervention to follow-up (<emph>p</emph> = 0.002), but no significant difference was observed between post-intervention and follow-up, indicating a maintenance effect for expressive encouragement. Conversely, the effects on the other two dimensions diminished within three months after completing the program.</p> <p>Delayed intervention effects were evident in several dimensions. Significant decreases were observed in emotion dismissing (<emph>p</emph> = 0.003), problem-focused reactions (<emph>p</emph> < 0.001), and all three subscales of the PSI-4-SF (parental distress:<emph> p</emph> = 0.002; parent–child dysfunctional interaction: <emph>p</emph> < 0.001; difficult child:<emph> p</emph> = 0.004) at follow-up, but there were no significant changes observed immediately after the intervention in these measures. These effects were called delayed intervention effects, as substantial improvements in these outcomes were noted during the three-month follow-up period rather than immediately after the intervention.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-17">Parental Satisfaction</hd> <p>Upon completion of the program, parents reported high satisfaction with and perceived effects of the program. On a 5-point Likert scale, mean scores were 4.77 for overall satisfaction with the program, 4.52 for perceived effects of the program, and 4.42 for satisfaction with the provided picture books in the program.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-18">Discussion</hd> <p>To address the lack of emotion-focused parenting programs in China, we developed an emotion coaching program for Chinese parents of preschoolers and examined its feasibility and effects. Parents showed reduced punitive and minimization reactions to child's negative emotions and an improvement in expressive encouragement upon program completion. The effect on expressive encouragement was maintained at follow-up. Delayed effects of the program were found on parents' emotion dismissing beliefs, problem-focused reactions, and multiple aspects of parenting stress. These results demonstrate the effects of the program and offer valuable insights for future program development.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-19">Program's Effects on Parents' Emotion-Related Parenting Beliefs</hd> <p>No immediate changes were found in parents' emotion-related parenting beliefs after the program, with only a reduction in emotion dismissing beliefs discovered at the three-month follow-up. This contrasts with some similar studies (e.g., Havighurst et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref57">22</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref58">23</reflink>]). Nonetheless, our results aligned with those of Wilson et al. ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref59">39</reflink>]) and Burkhardt et al. ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref60">4</reflink>]), who also reported no significant changes in parents' emotion coaching beliefs. These existing studies, including ours, all used the MESQ to measure emotion-related beliefs. In the MESQ, problem-solving is classified under the Emotion Coaching subscale, though it can be viewed as emotionally dismissive if a parent does not first address the child's emotions (Gottman & Declaire, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref61">19</reflink>]). However, the MESQ does not specify the way in which problem-solving is enacted by parents. During our program, we observed that parents often prioritized problem-solving over addressing their children's emotions. To tackle this issue, we deliberately instructed parents to first attend to their children's emotions, following the steps of emotion coaching. While parents might have exhibited similar levels of problem-solving at pre- and post-intervention assessments, the MESQ was unable to detect potential changes in parents' specific approaches to problem-solving. Regarding the delayed effect on emotion dismissing beliefs, according to Burkhardt et al. ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref62">4</reflink>]), unlearning dismissive behaviors could be the easiest aspect for parents as they gain new insights. Once recognizing the importance of emotions and emotion coaching, parents' initial shift in childrearing practices could involve ceasing to neglect their children's emotional experiences.</p> <p>Another possible reason for the limited program impact on parents' emotion-related parenting beliefs might be the inherent challenge in changing these beliefs. Although many parenting programs aim to change parents' beliefs to enhance practices, some findings suggest that improvements in practices often precede changes in beliefs (Jeong et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref63">26</reflink>]). In line with this idea, our findings also revealed immediate changes in parents' responses to children's emotions but not their emotion-related beliefs. Nevertheless, a notable reduction in emotion dismissing beliefs was observed three months post-program, indicating that changes in emotion-related beliefs might require more time to emerge.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-20">Program's Effects on Parents' Emotion-Related Parenting Practices</hd> <p>In both the experimental and waitlist control groups, parents showed an immediate decrease in punitive and minimization reactions to their child's negative emotions post-program. This contrasts with two prior studies with Chinese parents of preschoolers using the TIK program, which reported no such changes (Chan et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref64">7</reflink>]; Qiu & Shum, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref65">30</reflink>]). This discrepancy may stem from our targeted approach to address the specific challenges Chinese parents face in learning emotion coaching, influenced by cultural views and the socialization process of emotions. Specifically, in Chinese culture, emphasis on social harmony and collective interests often renders "ego-focused" emotions (e.g., anger, pride, and disgust) as disruptive to social bonds (Wang, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref66">37</reflink>]). Chinese parenting typically fosters "other-focused" emotions such as sympathy and shame (Chan et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref67">6</reflink>]), cultivating children's emotional restraint and sensitivity to others (Chen, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref68">8</reflink>]). This cultural context may predispose Chinese parents to adopt non-supportive strategies, such as punitive and minimization reactions, in managing their children's emotions (Doan & Song, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref69">11</reflink>]). To address these cultural challenges, we provided comprehensive introductions to emotion concepts, emotion coaching, and emotion-related parenting through lecture-based training in parent group sessions. We also emphasized the value of emotions, especially negative ones, and educated parents on differentiating between emotions and the resultant behaviors. As a result, parents likely realized the value of acknowledging and coaching their children's emotions, leading to a decline in non-supportive responses to negative emotions.</p> <p>However, the effects on parents' punitive and minimization reactions did not remain significant at follow-up. As mentioned previously, the expression of negative emotions is often frowned upon in Chinese culture (Wang, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref70">37</reflink>]), which may pose a challenge for parents to continuously respond in a sensitive and positive manner to their child's negative emotions without ongoing support. Therefore, when developing future emotion-focused parenting programs for the Chinese context, additional strategies should be incorporated to help parents become more attuned to their own and their children's emotions.</p> <p>Upon pooling data from both the experimental and waitlist control groups for analysis, parents showed an immediate improvement in encouraging their children to express emotions after the program, and this effect persisted at follow-up. Our findings aligned with previous studies on emotion-focused parenting programs in Western contexts (e.g., Bjørk et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref71">3</reflink>]; Wilson et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref72">40</reflink>]) as well as in China (Chan et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref73">7</reflink>]; Qiu & Shum, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref74">30</reflink>]). In our program, we underscored the importance of emotional expression. Specifically, we dedicated the entire second parent group session to introducing the significance of emotional expression and practicing techniques to help children express their emotions. We also provided parents with picture books featuring various emotions, along with a detailed reading guide for each book. Given that parent–child shared reading is common in urban Chinese families (Zheng & Mei, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref75">43</reflink>]), it provided ongoing opportunities for emotional conversations, reinforcing parents' encouragement of their child's emotional expression beyond the program.</p> <p>Our study showed a delayed effect on parents' problem-focused reactions to their child's negative emotions. However, previous studies rarely reported changes in this dimension (e.g., Bjørk et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref76">3</reflink>]; Burkhardt et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref77">4</reflink>]; Chan et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref78">7</reflink>]). Some researchers argue that, like the issue with the MESQ discussed above, the Problem-Focused subscale in the CCNES does not capture whether parents address children's emotions before engaging in problem-solving (Wilson et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref79">40</reflink>]). Despite this issue, our findings revealed a notable delayed effect on parents' problem-focused reactions. A plausible reason for this is that specific steps of problem-solving were taught in the last parent group session and further reinforced through detailed instructions in our handouts, providing parents with a structured problem-solving framework to utilize beyond the program's duration.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-21">Program's Effects on Parenting Stress</hd> <p>Our program effectively reduced parenting stress, with both the experimental and waitlist control groups showing immediate decreases in parent–child dysfunctional interactions post-program. The impact on parenting stress continued to amplify over the following three months, with all the PSI-4-SF dimensions showing significant improvements at follow-up. Similar effects on parenting stress have been reported in other emotion-focused parenting programs (Havighurst et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref80">24</reflink>]). Chan et al. ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref81">7</reflink>]) also found that the TIK program significantly reduced Hong Kong parents' perceptions of their child's difficulty level. These programs, including ours, all included components of parental self-care and emotional regulation. Techniques like progressive muscle relaxation were introduced to parents in our last parent group session. These elements were recognized as beneficial for reducing parenting stress (Gouveia et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref82">20</reflink>]; Tehrani et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref83">34</reflink>]).</p> <p>However, compared to previous studies, our program had fewer immediate effects on parenting stress, and the effects gradually emerged post-intervention. Parental emotion regulation and self-care were addressed in our final parent group session, and parents might have needed additional time to fully assimilate and apply these strategies. Furthermore, due to the short timeframe, our program mainly focused on emotion coaching, whereas previous programs with a longer duration usually further incorporated additional elements such as mindfulness, positive parenting, and behavior management that can help lessen parenting stress (see review by Havighurst et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref84">24</reflink>]). Therefore, although emotion coaching programs could alleviate parenting stress, it might be necessary to incorporate additional components for more immediate effects of these programs on reducing parenting stress.</p> <p>Nonetheless, our program's consistent effects on all aspects of parenting stress, albeit delayed, might also be linked to the inclusion of parent–child shared reading activities. Shared reading has been shown to have positive effects on reducing parents' stress and enhancing the parent–child relationship over time (Canfield et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref85">5</reflink>]). As shared reading is becoming a common practice in many urban Chinese families (Zheng & Mei, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref86">43</reflink>]), parents were likely to continue this activity even after the program. Ongoing parent–child shared reading might lead to sustained enhancements in parent–child relationships, further reducing parenting stress. However, the lack of a control group during the follow-up phase limits our ability to confirm that the delayed effects were solely due to the program. Future studies could address this by improving the study design to verify the program's effects during the follow-up phase.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-22">Limitations, Future Directions, and Implications</hd> <p>The study has several limitations. First, reliance on parents' self-reports could have introduced potential biases in their perceptions of their own beliefs and behaviors. Relying solely on questionnaire data also makes it difficult to rule out training effects as a potential explanation for the observed effects. Future studies should include data of other forms, such as observational data on parent–child interactions. Second, to keep the survey at a reasonable length, we chose to concentrate on parents' outcomes and not include measures of child outcomes, which should be further investigated. Future studies could also integrate other parenting intervention elements, like behavior management, to better target specific child outcomes. Third, we did not collect feedback from parents who withdrew. Understanding the reasons for dropout could provide insights for improving the program. Fourth, the sample of this study was relatively small and mostly comprised of well-educated, middle-class parents. Future research may examine our program's effects among more socioeconomically diverse families in China. To better support economically disadvantaged families, future iterations of our program could incorporate training on effective shared reading techniques and provide access to affordable picture books. Additionally, other home-based activities, such as parent–child games, can be explored to facilitate parents' emotion coaching skills. Finally, we used a randomized waitlist control design to ensure equal opportunities for all participants and collect sufficient data. Thus, there was no control group to compare with during the follow-up phase. Future studies could incorporate a pure control group to more accurately assess the program's potential maintenance or delayed effects at follow-up.</p> <p>This pilot study provides directions for our future research. Further program revisions are needed, such as incorporating elements targeting specific child outcomes. A detailed program manual and fidelity check process are also necessary for scaling up. Comprehensive evaluation studies are required for further empirical evidence. This study is also valuable for broader research on emotion-focused parenting programs in non-Western contexts. Firstly, our findings highlight the feasibility and value of emotion-focused parenting programs within the Chinese culture. Emotion coaching can serve as an effective pathway to enhance parenting in Chinese families. Secondly, given the hectic life of families today, shorter, fewer-session programs may be more practical. Our program incorporated home-based shared reading to reinforce the impact of parent group sessions. Future research could explore other strategies to maximize the program effects within limited timeframes. Additionally, well-designed supplementary materials, such as detailed handouts and reading guides used in our program, can be crucial for enhancing the effects of short-term parenting programs. Finally, the program design and delivery should align with the learning preferences and cultural norms of the target audience. Our program combined lecture-based instruction with interactive activities (e.g., role play). In line with Havighurst et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref87">25</reflink>]) recommendation, our study highlights the importance of deliberately explaining Western-based parenting concepts when used among Chinese parents. Future research should continue to identify and refine training approaches that are culturally appropriate and effective.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-23">Authors' Contribution</hd> <p>Suping Liu designed the program materials, facilitated training sessions, collected and analyzed data, and wrote the manuscript. Lixin Ren adjusted the materials, co-facilitated training sessions, supervised the study, and revised the manuscript.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-24">Funding</hd> <p>This study was funded by iREAD Foundation in China and the Research Development Fund of Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (RDF-22–02-024).</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-25">Data Availability</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are not publicly available. However, they can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-26">Declarations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0183578852-27">Ethics Approval</hd> <p>This study was approved by Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University's ethics committee and conducted in line with the Declaration of Helsinki standards.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-28">Consent to Participate</hd> <p>Consent and assent were obtained from all participants in the study.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-29">Conflict of Interest</hd> <p>The authors declare no conflict of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-30">Supplementary Information</hd> <p>Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.</p> <p>Graph: Supplementary file1 (DOCX 966 KB)</p> <hd id="AN0183578852-31">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0183578852-32"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref29" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abidin, R. R, Guarino, A, & Al, E. (2016). PSI-4: Parenting stress index-fourth edition: Manuale. Giunti O.S.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref34" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological). 1995; 57; 1: 289-300. 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref12" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bjørk, R. F, Bølstad, E, Pons, F, & Havighurst, S. S. (2022). Testing TIK (tuning in to kids) with TEC (test of emotion comprehension): Does enhanced emotion socialization improve child emotion understanding? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 78, Article 101368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2021.101368</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref36" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Burkhardt, S. C. A, Röösli, P, & Müller, X. (2024). The tuning in to kids parenting program delivered online improves emotion socialization and child behavior in a first randomized controlled trial. Scientific Reports, 14(1), Article 4979. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-55689-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref20" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Canfield CF, Miller EB, Shaw DS, Morris P, Alonso A, Mendelsohn AL. Beyond language: Impacts of shared reading on parenting stress and early parent–child relational health. Developmental Psychology. 2020; 56; 7: 1305-1315. 10.1037/dev0000940. 32352828. 7319866</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref50" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Chan SM, Bowes J, Wyver S. Parenting style as a context for emotion socialization. Early Education & Development. 2009; 20; 4: 631-656. 10.1080/10409280802541973</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref14" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Chan RF-Y, Qiu C, Shum KK. Tuning in to kids: A randomized controlled trial of an emotion coaching parenting program for Chinese parents in Hong Kong. Developmental Psychology. 2021; 57; 11: 1796-1809. 10.1037/dev0001258. 34914446</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref68" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Chen XComunion H, Gielen V. Growing up in a collectivist culture: Socialization and socioemotional development in Chinese children. International perspectives on human development. 2000; Cadam Publishers: 331-353</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref56" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Denham, S. A. (2019). Emotional competence during childhood and adolescence. In LoBue, V, Pérez-Edgar, K, Buss, K. A. (eds) Handbook of emotional development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17332-6_20</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Doan SN, Song Q. Culture, emotion socialization and children's inhibitory control. Journal of Cognition and Development. 2022; 23; 5: 1-17. 10.1080/15248372.2022.2072847</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Edrissi F, Havighurst SS, Aghebati A, Habibi M, Arani AM. A pilot study of the tuning in to kids parenting program in Iran for reducing preschool children's anxiety. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2019; 28; 6: 1695-1702. 10.1007/s10826-019-01400-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eisenberg N. Findings, issues, and new directions for research on emotion socialization. Developmental Psychology. 2020; 56; 3: 664-670. 10.1037/dev0000906. 32077732. 7041962</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> England-Mason, G, Andrews, K, Atkinson, L, & Gonzalez, A. (2023). Emotion socialization parenting interventions targeting emotional competence in young children: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clinical Psychology Review, 100, Article 102252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102252</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> England-Mason G, Gonzalez A. Intervening to shape children's emotion regulation: A review of emotion socialization parenting programs for young children. Emotion. 2020; 20; 1: 98-104. 10.1037/emo0000638. 31961186</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fabes RA, Poulin RE, Eisenberg N, Madden-Derdich DA. The coping with children's negative emotions scale (CCNES): Psychometric properties and relations with children's emotional competence. Marriage & Family Review. 2002; 34; 3–4: 285-310. 10.1300/j002v34n03_05</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garner PW, Parker TS. Young children's picture-books as a forum for the socialization of emotion. Journal of Early Childhood Research. 2018; 16; 3: 291-304. 10.1177/1476718x18775760</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gilbert, L, Gus, L, & Rose, J. (2021). Emotion coaching with children and young people in schools: Promoting positive behaviour, wellbeing and resilience. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gottman, J. M, & Declaire, J. (1997). The heart of parenting: How to raise an emotionally intelligent child. Simon & Schuster.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gouveia MJ, Carona C, Canavarro MC, Moreira H. Self-Compassion and dispositional mindfulness are associated with parenting styles and parenting stress: The mediating role of mindful parenting. Mindfulness. 2016; 7; 3: 700-712. 10.1007/s12671-016-0507-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grant LW, Stronge JH, Xu X. A cross-cultural comparative study of teacher effectiveness: Analyses of award-winning teachers in the United States and China. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. 2013; 25; 3: 251-276. 10.1007/s11092-013-9170-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Havighurst SS, Wilson KR, Harley AE, Prior MR, Kehoe C. Tuning in to Kids: Improving emotion socialization practices in parents of preschool children–findings from a community trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines. 2010; 51; 12: 1342-1350. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02303.x. 20735794</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Havighurst SS, Wilson KR, Harley AE, Kehoe CE. Dads tuning in to kids: A randomized controlled trial of an emotion socialization parenting program for fathers. Social Development. 2019; 28; 4: 979-997. 10.1111/sode.12375</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Havighurst SS, Radovini A, Hao B, Kehoe CE. Emotion-focused parenting interventions for prevention and treatment of child and adolescent mental health problems: A review of recent literature. Current Opinion in Psychiatry. 2020; 33; 6: 586-601. 10.1097/yco.0000000000000647. 32858599</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Havighurst SS, Choy R, Ulker A, Otterpohl N, Meybodi FA, Edrissi F, Qiu C, Shum KK, Radovini A, Hosn DA, Kehoe CE. A preliminary evaluation of the cultural appropriateness of the tuning in to kids parenting program in Germany, Turkey, Iran and China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19; 16: 10321-10321. 10.3390/ijerph191610321. 36011956. 9407904</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jeong J, Franchett EE, Ramos de Oliveira CV, Rehmani K, Yousafzai AK. Parenting interventions to promote early child development in the first three years of life: A global systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS Medicine. 2021; 18; 5: 1-51. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003602</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lagace-Seguin DG, Coplan RJ. Maternal emotional styles and child social adjustment: Assessment, correlates, outcomes and goodness of fit in early childhood. Social Development. 2005; 14; 4: 613-636. 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2005.00320.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, S. Y. (2013). Effects of an intervention to promote parents' emotion coaching skills and their children's emotional competence [Master's Thesis, Colorado State University]. Mountain Scholar. <ulink href="http://hdl.handle.net/10217/79100">http://hdl.handle.net/10217/79100</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liang Z-B, Zhang G-Z, Chen H-C, Zhang P. Relations among parental meta-emotion philosophy, parental emotion expressivity, and children's social competence. Acta Psychologica Sinica. 2012; 44; 2: 199-210. 10.3724/sp.j.1041.2012.00199</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Qiu C, Shum KK. Emotion coaching intervention for Chinese mothers of preschoolers: A randomized controlled trial. Child Psychiatry & Human Development. 2022; 53; 1: 61-57. 10.1007/s10578-020-01101-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ren L, Edwards CP. Contemporary Chinese parents' socialization priorities for preschoolers: A mixed methods study. Early Child Development and Care. 2016; 186; 11: 1779-1791. 10.1080/03004430.2015.1132418</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renkl, A, & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Interactive learning environments: Contemporary issues and trends. An introduction to the special issue. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 235–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9052-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Soucie K, Scott SA, Partridge T, Hakim-Larson J, Babb KA, Voelker S. Meta-Emotion and emotion socialization by mothers of preschoolers during storytelling tasks. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2023; 33; 5: 1618-1631. 10.1007/s10826-023-02736-4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tehrani HD, Yamini S, Vazsonyi AT. Effects of parenting program components on parental stress: A systematic review and component network meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology. 2023; 38; 2: 320-322. 10.1037/fam0001161. 37956059</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Terry, M. (2011). Exploring the Additive Benefit of Parental Nurturance Training on Parent and Child Shared Reading Outcomes: A Pilot Intervention Study (Publication No. 3486140) [Doctoral Dissertation, Texas A&M University]. ProQuest Dissertation & Theses</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tully LA, Hunt C. A randomized controlled trial of a brief versus standard group parenting program for toddler aggression. Aggressive Behavior. 2017; 43; 3: 291-303. 10.1002/ab.21689. 27859353</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wang Q. Emotion situation knowledge in American and Chinese preschool children and adults. Cognition & Emotion. 2003; 17; 5: 725-746. 10.1080/02699930302285</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wei Y, Keown LJ, Franke N, Sanders MR. Parenting practices and parenting program preferences of Chinese immigrant parents in New Zealand. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2024; 33; 1: 63-74. 10.1007/s10826-023-02730-w</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilson KR, Havighurst SS, Harley AE. Tuning in to Kids: An effectiveness trial of a parenting program targeting emotion socialization of preschoolers. Journal of Family Psychology. 2012; 26; 1: 56-65. 10.1037/a0026480. 22182335</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilson KR, Havighurst SS, Kehoe C, Harley AE. Dads tuning in to kids: Preliminary evaluation of a fathers' parenting program. Family Relations. 2016; 65; 4: 535-549. 10.1111/fare.12216</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhang X, Han ZR, Gatzke-Kopp LM. A biopsychosocial approach to emotion-related parenting: Physiological responses to child frustration among urban Chinese parents. Journal of Family Psychology. 2021; 35; 5: 639-648. 10.1037/fam0000824. 33705175</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhao M, You Y, Chen S, Li L, Du X, Wang Y. Effects of a web-based parent–child physical activity program on mental health in parents of children with ASD. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18; 24: 12913. 10.3390/ijerph182412913. 34948523. 8700830</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zheng Y, Mei Z. Two worlds in one city: A sociopolitical perspective on Chinese urban families' language planning. Current Issues in Language Planning. 2020; 22; 4: 1-25. 10.1080/14664208.2020.1751491</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhu D, Dunsmore JC. Family functioning and emotion socialization in Chinese two-parent households: A person-centered approach. Social Development. 2022; 32; 2: 463-480. 10.1111/sode.12605</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0183578852-33"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> For readability, the term "parents" was used in this article to represent caregivers who participated in the study, including mothers, fathers, and grandmothers.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Suping Liu and Lixin Ren</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref83"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1461766
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: A Pilot Study to Examine the Effects of an Emotion Coaching Parenting Program for Chinese Parents of Preschoolers
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Suping+Liu%22">Suping Liu</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lixin+Ren%22">Lixin Ren</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9176-3825">0000-0002-9176-3825</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Prevention+Science%22"><i>Prevention Science</i></searchLink>. 2025 26(2):222-233.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 12
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Adult+Education%22">Adult Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preschool+Children%22">Preschool Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parents%22">Parents</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Child+Relationship%22">Parent Child Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Education%22">Parent Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Participation%22">Parent Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Development%22">Child Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Emotional+Development%22">Emotional Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parenting+Styles%22">Parenting Styles</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Positive+Reinforcement%22">Positive Reinforcement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Workshops%22">Parent Workshops</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Effectiveness%22">Program Effectiveness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Development%22">Program Development</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22China%22">China</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s11121-025-01780-4
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1389-4986<br />1573-6695
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Parental emotion socialization is crucial to children's development, yet emotion-focused parenting programs are scarce in non-Western contexts. In this study, we developed a four-week emotion-focused parenting program based on the principles of emotion coaching for Chinese families with preschool-aged children. This program integrated parent group sessions with home-based parent--child shared reading. A total of 73 parents of preschoolers were recruited and randomly assigned to experimental and waitlist control groups. Three waves of data on parents' emotion-related parenting beliefs and practices and parenting stress were collected at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and three-month follow-up. Significant reductions in parents' punitive reactions, minimization reactions, and parent-child dysfunctional interactions were found in both the experimental and the waitlist control groups immediately after completion of the program. When combining data from both groups, a significant improvement in parents' expressive encouragement was observed at post-intervention and follow-up. Additionally, delayed effects of the program were found on parents' emotion-dismissing beliefs, problem-focused reactions, and overall parenting stress. This study was one of the first in China to develop an emotion-focused parenting program and rigorously examine its feasibility and effects, offering insights into the development of similar parenting programs in China.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1461766
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1461766
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s11121-025-01780-4
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 222
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Preschool Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parents
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Child Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Emotional Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parenting Styles
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Positive Reinforcement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Workshops
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Effectiveness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: China
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: A Pilot Study to Examine the Effects of an Emotion Coaching Parenting Program for Chinese Parents of Preschoolers
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Suping Liu
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lixin Ren
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 02
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1389-4986
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1573-6695
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 26
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Prevention Science
              Type: main
ResultId 1