Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Experimental Child

Psychology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jecp

The associations among maternal negative

control, childrens social information processing
patterns, and teachers perceptions of childrens
behavior in preschool
Yair Ziv a,, Haggai Kupermintz b, Ora Aviezer c
a
Department of Counseling and Human Development, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel
b
Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel
c
Oranim Academic College of Education, Tivon 36006, Israel

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The links between social information processing (SIP) and social
Received 24 December 2014 behavior in preschool are well documented. However, the antece-
Revised 20 August 2015 dents of SIP in that age group are less clear. A number of influential
Available online 22 October 2015
theoretical models suggest that a major contributor to SIP is the
quality of the childs relationships with the parent. Therefore, we
Keywords:
examined the links among quality of the motherchild relation-
Social information processing
Preschool
ships (measured via direct observations of dyadic play interac-
Maternal negative control tions), the childs SIP patterns (measured via direct interview
Disruptive behavior with the child), and the childs perceived behavior in preschool
Social skills (measured via teacher reports) in a sample of 218 preschool and
Kindergarten kindergarten children and their mothers. Applying structural equa-
Motherchild relationships tion modeling, we found support for our theoretical model with a
specific emphasis on the negative nature of this association.
Specifically, we found a strong indirect path from maternal
negative control to the teachers negative perception of the childs
behavior in preschool and kindergarten via less competent SIP
patterns. This empirical path remained intact after controlling for
various variables such as the family income, the mothers educa-
tion level, and the childs expressive language abilities, thereby
providing further support for the robustness of this association.
2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yziv@edu.haifa.ac.il (Y. Ziv).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.09.004
0022-0965/ 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 19

Introduction

Preschool children exhibiting negatively biased social information processing (SIP) patterns are at
greater risk for developing more maladaptive behavior patterns in school compared with children
showing competent SIP (e.g., Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1990; Hart, DeWolf, & Burts, 1992; Katsurada &
Sugawara, 1998; Runions & Keating, 2007; Ziv, 2012, 2013; Ziv & Sorongon, 2011). Many times, these
negative SIP biases are the result of early antecedents such as exposure to violence and risk at the
sociodemographic level (e.g., Camras, Sachs-Alter, & Ribordy, 1996; Chen, Langer, Raphaelson, &
Matthews, 2004; Dodge et al., 1990; Dodge, Pettit, Bates, & Valente, 1995; Schultz & Shaw, 2003;
Ziv, 2012; Ziv & Sorongon, 2011) and, in particular, harsh and abusive parental behavior (e.g.,
Camras et al., 1996; Dodge et al., 1995).
Indeed, from the perspective of the social information processing model (Crick & Dodge, 1994;
Dodge, 1986, 2006), as well as theories focusing on the effects of early social relationships such as
attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969/1982, 1973), the quality of the dyadic relationships formed
between parents and children is expected to play a major role in the formation of childrens social
perceptions and behaviors. However, with the exception of one study examining the associations
of parental controlling behaviors to childrens SIP patterns and problem behaviors (Runions &
Keating, 2007), the rather complex association among parenting behaviors, SIP, and social behavior
is understudied in preschool children. Given the above-mentioned solid theoretical models pre-
dicting links among the quality of parenting behaviors, SIP, and positive and negative social behav-
iors in educational settings and the rarity of empirical investigations of such links in preschool, the
goal of the current study was to examine whether parenting behaviors observed in motherchild
play sessions are associated with childrens SIP patterns and their behavior in preschool as per-
ceived by their teachers.

Theoretical framework

In their formative article presenting the reformulated social information processing model guiding
many current studies of SIP, Crick and Dodge (1994) specifically proposed a theoretical path by which
the quality of early relationships affects childrens social behavior through their SIP patterns. The
authors maintained that early relationships create internal mental structures that form a database
of social knowledge that informs the enactment of a social response. This database includes childrens
real-world experiences in close social relationships that in young preschool children are mostly
grounded within the familial environment. Thus, the expectation of strong indirect links between
the quality of the parentchild relationship and the childs social behavior with others via SIP is the-
oretically grounded in the social information processing model.
This perspective is very similar to that of attachment theory. Bowlby (1973, 1982) maintained that
the child forms internal working models (IWMs) of relationships based on his or her relationships
with the attachment figure, and these schemata shape the childs thought processes and social behav-
iors. He characterized internal working models of attachment as mental representations constructed
from interaction patterns between individuals and their principal attachment figures. Based on expe-
riences with these figures, representations of the self and others emerge, reflecting the degree to
which the individual feels worthy of care and affection from others (model of self) and the degree
to which the individual perceives others to be generally available, accepting, and responsive (model
of others). In this scenario, sensitive parentingwhich, in attachment theorys terms, provides to
the child both a secure base from which to explore the world and a safe haven during times of dis-
tressis an essential element. Thus, sensitive parenting is associated with secure attachment and
the emergence of positive models of self and others, whereas its absence is associated with insecure
attachment and the emergence of negative models of self and others. Furthermore, secure attachment
is reflected in childrens thought processes, which are open, flexible, and non-defensive, whereas inse-
cure attachment is reflected in non-open, distorted, rigid, and defensive processes (Bretherton, 1990).
IWMs have been described as structured processes serving to obtain or limit access to information
20 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

about social relationships (Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985), thereby connecting the IWM construct
directly to information processing models.
In a comprehensive review of social information processing from the perspective of attachment
theory, Dykas and Cassidy (2011) proposed that attachment theory provides a useful framework to
understand the mechanisms by which early attachment relationships guide future SIP patterns. They
maintained that the parent, by providing (or not providing) a secure base and safe haven, lays the
foundation for the childs future processing of information that is manifested in interpretations and
assessments of an array of social relationships. Based on the actual relationship that the child forms
with the attachment figure, the child comes to form expectations for new social interactions that,
at least in part, are grounded in past experiences with the attachment figure. In that sense, these
interpretations and assessments are no longer objective but rather a reflection of the childs internal
models of self, others, and self within social relationships.

Parenting behaviors and childrens behavioral and perceptual outcomes

Numerous studies have reported links between parenting behaviors and childrens problem behav-
ior. For example, an authoritarian parenting style has been frequently linked to higher levels of chil-
drens aggressive and withdrawn behaviors in school (e.g., Rubin, Hastings, Chen, Stewart, & McNichol,
1998; Shaw, Owens, Giovannelli, & Winslow, 2001), whereas sensitive parenting has been consistently
linked to childrens positive social skills and lack of behavior problems (e.g., Maccoby & Martin, 1983;
Raikes & Thompson, 2008; Rohner, Bourque, & Elordi, 1996). In a recent study using the NICHD Study
of Early Child Care dataset (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network [ECCRN], 2001, 2005), Fraley,
Roisman, and Haltigan (2013) demonstrated that maternal sensitivity assessed in infancy, in pre-
school, and at multiple points during the school years is an enduring and relatively constant predictor
of childrens social competence measured at multiple time points from infancy to age 15 years. In
another study using the same dataset, early maternal sensitivity was found to be predictive of early
school childrens social problem solving skills (Raikes & Thompson, 2008). More specifically, Raikes
and Thompson (2008) reported that children who experienced sensitive parenting early in their lives
were more competent problem solvers when presented with social scenarios and had shown less
aggressive tendencies during the school years.
Few studies have examined the effects of both positive and negative parental behaviors on
childrens adjustment to school. In a recent multinational longitudinal study with children aged 7
to 10 years (Lansford et al., 2014), negative maternal behaviors (corporal punishment) predicted more
aggression in school, whereas positive maternal behaviors (warmth) predicted less aggressive behav-
ior in school. Furthermore, in some (but not all) of the countries, maternal warmth moderated the link
between corporal punishment and childrens higher aggressive behavior in school, suggesting that a
cultural component might be involved in that set of links as well.
A number of studies have examined the links between various parenting behaviors and childrens
SIP patterns. Overall, negative parental behaviors, such as negative emotionality, criticism, and covert
and overt hostility, predicted childrens hostile attribution biases and aggressive tendencies in school
(e.g., Dodge et al., 1990; Gulley, Oppenheimer, & Hankin, 2014; McDonald, Baden, & Lochman, 2013;
Nix et al., 1999). Within this conceptual framework, only two studies examined the connection
between observed parenting behavior and childrens SIP patterns as well as childrens behavior in pre-
school or school (McElwain, Booth-LaForce, Lansford, Wu, & Dyer, 2008; Runions & Keating, 2007).
Both studies used the NICHD ECCRN dataset. McElwain and colleagues (2008) found a direct link
between motherchild affective mutuality in kindergarten and fewer hostile attributions and greater
peer competence in first grade. In Runions and Keatings (2007) study, observed parental negative
control was only weakly predictive of childrens problem behaviors in school and was not predictive
of SIP in either preschool or school.

Social information processing and social behavior

The social information processing model (Crick & Dodge, 1994; Dodge, 1986) emphasizes the cov-
ert mental mechanisms mediating an overt social stimulus and an overt social response. It describes a
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 21

circular process in which five mental steps are activated in response to an external social cue and
deactivated on the individuals enactment of a behavioral response. The five mental steps are (a)
encoding a social cue, (b) interpreting the cue, (c) clarifying goals, (d) constructing a response, and
(e) making a decision on the response (Crick & Dodge, 1994). These five mental steps are then followed
by the enactment of behavioral response.
Although there are intriguing complementary SIP models (e.g., Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000; Ostrov &
Godleski, 2010), Crick and Dodges model is still the most influential and frequently cited model in the
current SIP literature, especially in studies examining links between childrens SIP patterns and their
(maladjusted) behavior in school. For example, aggressive children have been found to be less accurate
in their interpretation of peers social intentions (e.g., Dodge, Murphy, & Buchsbaum, 1984; Dodge &
Price, 1994; Lansford et al., 2006; Orobio de Castro, Merk, Koops, Veerman, & Bosch, 2005), more likely
to construct aggressive or inept responses (Orobio de Castro et al., 2005; Schultz & Shaw, 2003;
Webster-Stratton & Lindsay, 1999), and more likely to expect positive instrumental and interpersonal
outcomes for an aggressive response (Crick & Ladd, 1990; Orobio de Castro et al., 2005). Other studies
have found significant associations between SIP and other maladjusted social behaviors in school.
Burgess and colleagues reported that shy/withdrawn children are more likely to attribute hostile
intentions to unfamiliar peers than to familiar peers (Burgess, Wojslawowicz, Rubin, Rose-Krasnor,
& Booth-LaForce, 2006). Other researchers found that children characterized as victims tend to avoid
challenging social situations while expecting others to be purposefully hostile or ignoring (Camodeca
& Goossens, 2005; Ziv, Leibovitz, & Shechtman, 2013). In contrast, prosocial school children exhibit
highly competent social information processing patterns during all stages of the process (e.g.,
Mayeux & Cillessen, 2003; Nelson & Crick, 1999).
A relatively small number of studies guided by Crick and Dodges model have conducted SIP
research with preschool children. Katsurada and Sugawara (1998) showed that hostile/aggressive
preschoolers are more likely than their less aggressive peers to attribute hostile intent to another per-
sons actions. Their results also indicated that preschoolers are capable of distinguishing between
intentional and unintentional actions when the stimulus materials are concrete and familiar to them.
Hart and colleagues (1992) showed that preschoolers engaging in more antisocial/disruptive behavior
expect more positive instrumental outcomes for hostile means of conflict resolution than their less
disruptive peers. In relation to the links between parental behavior and SIP, Pettit, Harrist, Bates,
and Dodge (1991) found that preschoolers expectations with regard to the outcomes of aggressive
and competent responses are associated with the quality of their relationship with their parents.
Specifically, parent intrusiveness was positively related to childrens ease of responding aggressively,
whereas parental proactive involvement was negatively related to childrens perceptions of difficulty
in responding competently.
More recently, Runions and Keating (2007) showed that hostile attribution measured during the
preschool years is a better predictor of problem behavior in first grade than hostile attribution mea-
sured concurrently. In addition, Denham and colleagues linked preschoolers SIP patterns to early
social adjustment in school (Denham, Way, Kalb, Warren-Khot, & Bassett, 2013), and more SIP distor-
tions were found among children labeled by their teacher as disruptive, specifically in response con-
struction and decision (Schultz et al., 2010). Finally, in a series of studies, Ziv and colleagues showed
that distorted SIP patterns in preschool are positively related to problem behaviors (Ziv, 2012; Ziv &
Sorongon, 2011) and negatively related to social competence (Ziv, 2013).

The current study

The current study was guided by Crick and Dodges social information processing model and
attachment theory. Both approaches emphasize the importance of the indirect developmental path
from parental behavior to the childs social behavior via the childs mental representations. Our
research paradigm and measurements are also grounded in these two traditions. First, to evaluate
the quality of parent and child dyadic interaction, we observed the motherchild dyad in free- and
structured-play sessions videotaped in the childrens homes and coded based on the Emotional Avail-
ability Scales (EAS; Biringen, Robinson, & Emde, 1998). The EAS measure is a strongly validated one
that is well grounded in attachment theorys measurement approach. Extensive evidence now shows
22 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

that maternal emotional availability (EA) is associated with secure infantmother attachment and
with autonomous attachment in mothers (e.g., Aviezer, Sagi, Joels, & Ziv, 1999; Biringen et al., 2000,
2005; Ziv, Aviezer, Gini, Sagi, & Koren-Karie, 2000). Importantly, these scales measure both positive
(e.g., sensitivity) and negative (e.g., intrusiveness) parental behaviors and does not assume that these
behaviors are mutually exclusive (i.e., that the existence of one side necessary means the absence of
the other side). Empirically, this measure allows us to investigate the links between both positive and
negative parental behaviors and childrens outcomes. Second, to assess social information processing
patterns, we use a measure that is well grounded in Crick and Dodges model. This measure, the Social
Information Processing InterviewPreschool version (SIPI-P; Ziv & Sorongon, 2011), was used in a
number of recent studies examining SIP in preschool and is based on the original SIPI measure
constructed by Dodge and Price (1994) for older children. Finally, for measuring childrens social
behavior, we used a battery of validated teacher-report measures assessing childrens behavior in
school. Thus, our research design was based on three different sources of informationhome observa-
tions for parentchild relationship, child interviews for social information processing, and teacher
reports for behavioral outcome measuresthereby eliminating potential threats to validity due to
single-source information.
Based on the above review, we hypothesized the following. First, the quality of the parentchild
relationship will be associated with the childs SIP patterns such that higher quality will be associated
with more competent SIP and lower quality will be associated with distorted SIP. Second, the childs
SIP will be associated with his or her behavior in school such that more competent SIP will be asso-
ciated with competent school behavior and distorted SIP will be associated with disruptive school
behavior. Third, and consequently, an indirect path will be found between the quality of the
motherchild relationship and social behavior in school through SIP such that higher quality will be
associated with more competent school behavior via more competent SIP and lower quality will be
associated with more disruptive school behavior via distorted SIP. The general conceptual model
guiding this study is presented in Fig. 1.

Method

Participants and procedures

Participants were 218 Israeli children (109 girls) in pre-kindergarten and kindergarten classes, aged
46 to 70 months (M = 60 months, SD = 9), and their mothers. Participants were recruited in early edu-
cation centers by means of flyers distributed in mailboxes. Based on parents reports, the families
median monthly household income was $3000 (available for 177 families), a figure compatible with
the national median of $3036 (as reported on the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics website). Approx-
imately 46% of the parents held a higher education degree, a rate equal to the national figure
(Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], 2012). Thus, this was a normative
sample in terms of sociodemographic indicators.
Data were collected during 2012 and 2013. All parents signed their consent for the childrens partic-
ipation in the study, and all children gave their verbal assent prior to data collection. Families and teach-
ers received gift cards for their participation. Data collection obeyed the following timeline. Initially, all
motherchild dyads were observed in a 15-min free-play session and a 15-min structured-play session
in their homes. These sessions were videotaped and later coded for emotional availability scores. The

Fig. 1. Conceptual model connecting the quality of the parentchild relationships to childrens behavior in preschool via social
information processing. PCRQ, parentchild relationship quality; SIP, social information processing; CB, child behavior in
preschool.
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 23

next data collection step, which took place 2 to 4 weeks after the recorded motherchild interaction,
involved the childrens interview. All children were interviewed at their school settings about their
social information processing patterns and expressive vocabulary. Finally, 2 to 4 weeks after the chil-
drens interview, teachers completed questionnaires about the participating childrens social and learn-
ing behaviors. The study strictly followed the European Unions ethical standards and was approved by
the ethical committees of the university and the Israeli Ministry of Education.

Measures

Dyadic emotional availability

The Emotional Availability Scales (third edition; Biringen et al., 1998) were used to assess dyadic
EA based on the videotaped motherchild play sessions. These six globally rated scales have good
psychometric properties and have been used with various ages, from infancy to middle childhood,
and in different social and cultural settings, including Israel (e.g., Biringen et al., 2000; Biringen &
Easterbrooks, 2012; Easterbrooks, Biesecker, & Lyons-Ruth, 2000; Oyen, Landy, & Hilburn-Cobb,
2000; Sagi, Koren-Karie, Gini, Ziv, & Joels, 2002; Swanson, Beckwith, & Howard, 2000; Ziv et al.,
2000). This assessment is made of six scales/dimensions of motherchild emotional communication
and interaction, with a higher score reflecting higher quality, and all of them were used in the current
study. Four scales assess maternal behavior (possible ranges in parentheses): sensitivity (19), struc-
turing (15), non-intrusiveness (15), and non-hostility (15). Two scales capture the childs behavior:
responsiveness (17) and involvement with mother (17). To better represent the theoretical assump-
tions of the current study that negative parental behavior is associated with distorted SIP and more
disruptive behavior, the non-intrusiveness and non-hostility scales were reversed to reflect parental
intrusiveness and hostility. Retest reliability for the scales has been found to be quite strong at .59
to .67 over 5 months, with dyadic EA mean levels stable in motherchild normative dyads over
1- and 2-week intervals across contexts (Bornstein et al., 2006, 2008). In the current study, 20% of
the interactions were independently coded by two highly trained coders. Percentage agreement
(within 1 scale point) was very high, ranging from 94% to 100% for the six scales. Kappa coefficients
were fair based on Fleisss (1981) guidelines, ranging from .53 to .64.

Social information processing

Children were interviewed using the Social Information Processing InterviewPreschool version (Ziv
& Sorongon, 2011). This 20-min structured interview is based on a storybook easel depicting a series of
vignettes in which a protagonist is either being excluded by two peers (the peer exclusion vignette) or
being provoked by another peer (the peer provocation vignette). The peers intent is portrayed as either
ambiguous or non-hostile/(never intentionally hostile). Each type of vignette is combined with each
type of peer intent to generate four stories: (a) a non-hostile exclusion story (the protagonist asks
two other children if he or she can join their game, but the children deny the request by saying that
the teacher does not allow more than two children to play that game), (b) an ambiguous exclusion story
(similar to the previous one, but this time the other children do not respond to the protagonists
request), (c) an accidental provocation story (a child accidentally spills the protagonists cup of milk),
and (d) an ambiguous provocation story (the protagonist is watching television when another child
takes the remote control and changes the channel without asking or saying anything).
The illustrations in the storybook are of cartoon characters (bears instead of human children; see
Fig. 2 and Table 1). There are parallel picture books for boys and girls. As the child hears the story, the
interviewer stops at scripted points and poses questions addressing the hypothesized information
processing steps. Eight main scores are initially derived from the SIPI-P. These scores correspond to
four of the five social information processing mental steps: encoding, interpretation of cues, response
construction, and response decision (see Table 2 for the SIPI-P questions and scores as they apply to
the social information processing steps).
The efficient encoding score is the sum across the four stories of the level of details the child recalls
about the story (responding to the question, What happened in the story, from the beginning to the
end?). Internal consistency reliability across the four stories, as measured by Cronbachs alpha, was
.84. The hostile attribution score is a frequency count of the number of times the child describes the
24 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

Fig. 2. Peer entry example: Story 1Non-hostile exclusion. The boys version is on the left, and the girls version is on the right.
In the original measure, each picture appears on a separate page. Order of pictures: left to right, top to bottom. See Table 1 for
text accompanying the pictures.

other child/children as being mean across the four stories divided by the number of stories. The range
for this score is 0 to 4, with higher scores representing the higher levels of hostile attribution bias.
Internal consistency reliability was .69.
Three response construction scores are derived from the childs responses to the open-ended ques-
tion, What would you say or do if this happened to you? The answers are used to create three mutu-
ally exclusive flag variables (coded as 0 or 1) for each story: competent flag, aggressive flag, and
avoidant flag. For example, if the childs response is coded as competent, the child is given 1 for
the competent flag, 0 for the aggressive flag, and 0 for the avoidant flag. The values for the three
respective flags are combined across the four stories to create three scales ranging from 0 to 4: com-
petence, aggressiveness, and avoidance. Based on 20% of the interviews, agreement for the decision
about the quality of the response (i.e., competent, aggressive, or avoidant) was 98%.
Finally, three response evaluation scores are constructed from a combination of the 12 response
decision questions (four stories  three questions per presented response; see Table 2) for each type
of portrayed response (competent/aggressive/inept). Internal consistency reliability values (Cron-
bachs alphas) for the competent, aggressive, and inept scores were .87, .80, and .86, respectively.

Teacher ratings of childrens behavior in school

Preschool teachers were asked to rate three different types of social behaviors: (a) positive social
skills, (b) externalizing behavior, and (c) learning behavior.
Positive social skills were assessed using the competent social behavior scale (Administration on
Children, Youth, and Families [ACYF], 2005, 2006). The competent social behavior scale was created
as part of the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES; ACYF, 2006) and has been used
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 25

Table 1
Text and questions accompanying stimuli presented in Fig. 2.

Picture Text
1 In this story, these children are playing with blocks
POINT TO CHILD CLOSER TO MICHAEL/LISA. This child says, These blocks are fun!
POINT TO CHILD FARTHEST FROM MICHAEL/LISA. This child says, Yes. You know, Michael/Lisa also wanted to
play with me in the block area
POINT TO MICHAEL/LISA. Michael/Lisa is watching the other children playing
2 POINT TO MICHAEL/LISA. Michael/Lisa walks up to the other children and asks them, Can I play with you?
POINT TO CHILD FARTHEST FROM MICHAEL/LISA. This child says, Sorry. The teacher said only two can play in
the block area
E1. Tell me what happened in the story, from the beginning to the end
E2. POINT TO THE OTHER CHILDREN AND SAY, Do you think the other children who didnt let Michael/Lisa play
are mean or not mean?
E3. Pretend that you ask your friends if you can play with them and they say that only two can play in the block
area. What would you do?
IF CHILD DOES NOT RESPOND, SAY, What would you do if it happened to you?
Now, let me show you some different things that Michael could do
3 POINT TO MICHAEL/LISA. Michael/Lisa could say, Then can I play next?
E4. Is this a good thing or a bad thing for Michael/Lisa to say?
E5. If you did that, do you think the other children would like you?
E6. Do you think the other children would let you play if you did that?
Now, Ill show you something else that Michael/Lisa could do
4 POINT TO MICHAEL/LISA. Michael/Lisa could kick apart the blocks and say to the other children, If I cant play,
then you cant play either?
E4. Is this a good thing or a bad thing for Michael/Lisa to say?
E5. If you did that, do you think the other children would like you?
E6. Do you think the other children would let you play if you did that?
Now, Ill show you something else that Michael could do
5 POINT TO MICHAEL/LISA. Michael/Lisa could cry and say, Its not fair
E4. Is this a good thing or a bad thing for Michael/Lisa to say?
E5. If you did that, do you think the other children would like you?
E6. Do you think the other children would let you play if you did that?

Note. Words in uppercase letters represent instructions to the interviewers. Words in lowercase letters represent the script read
to the child. In the actual interview, the words boy(s) and girl(s) are used instead of child(ren) in the boys and girls versions,
respectively.

Table 2
SIPI-P questions, composite scores, and range of scores as a function of the social information processing steps.

SIP step Question Composite score

Encoding
Interpretation
Response construction
Response decision (based on
set responses provided by
the interviewer)
What happened in the story, Efficiency of encoding
from the beginning to the
end?
Were the other kids mean or Hostile attribution
not mean?
What would you say or do if Three variables: Competent, Aggressive, and Avoidant
this happened to you? response generation
1. Was it a good thing or a Three variables: Positive evaluation of competent
bad thing to say (do)? response, Positive evaluation of aggressive response,
2. If you did that, do you and Positive evaluation of inept response
think the other children
would like you?
3. Do you think the other
children would let you play
if you did that?

Note. The question was presented in general form (language was adapted based on the content of each story). The range of
scores was calculated after combining the four stories. The three response evaluation questions were asked separately for each
type of response (competent, aggressive, and inept).
26 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

extensively ever since, including in all cohorts of FACES (2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009). There are 12
items in this measure dealing with helpful and compliant behaviors, such as follows the teachers
directions, as well as items dealing with the childs maturity and skill when interacting with other
children, such as invites others to join in activities. All items are scored on a 3-point frequency scale
ranging from never (coded as 0) to very often (coded as 2). In the current study, we used a mean score;
thus, the possible range is 0 to 2. The internal consistency score (Cronbachs alpha) for this measure
was .90.
Externalizing behavior was also created as part of FACES (ACYF, 2005, 2006) and was used in all of its
cohorts and in many other studies (e.g., Ziv, 2012, 2013; Ziv, Alva, & Zill, 2010). Teachers were asked to
rate how often children exhibited various externalizing behaviors: never (0), sometimes (1), or very
often (2). The scale consists of 12 items (e.g., hits or fights with others). The internal consistency
score (Cronbachs alpha) for this scale was .83.
Learning behaviors were assessed with the Preschool Learning Behavior Scale (PLBS; McDermott,
Leigh, & Perry, 2002). The PLBS is a 29-item teacher rating scale of learning behaviors within the class-
room; each item is rated on a 3-point scale: most often applies, sometimes applies, or doesnt apply. Three
scales are derived from the PLBS: competence motivation, attention/persistence, and attitude toward
learning. The competence motivation scale assesses childrens willingness to take on tasks and their
determination for completing them successfully (e.g., reluctant to tackle a new activity). The atten-
tion/persistence dimension measures the degree to which children pay attention and are able to persist
with difficult tasks (e.g., tries hard, but concentration soon fades and performance deteriorates). The
attitude toward learning dimension focuses on concepts such as childrens willingness to be helped,
desire to please the teacher, and ability to cope when frustrated (e.g., doesnt achieve anything con-
structive when in a sulky mood). The internal consistency scores (Cronbachs alphas) for competence
motivation, attention/persistence, and attitude toward learning scales in this study were .90, .89, and
.87, respectively. Like the two other behavioral scales, the range of scores was 0 to 2. In the current
study, the three subscales were highly correlated (rs = .62.74) and, thus, were combined into a single
learning problems scale. The internal consistency score for the combined scale was .90.

Control variables
Parents provided information on household income, parental education, marital status, and other
sociodemographic characteristics. In addition, children were administered the expressive vocabulary
subtest of the second edition of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (KABC-II; Kaufman &
Kaufman, 2004). This subtest measures the childs ability to say the correct names of objects and illus-
trations. The reliability and validity of this test with various ethnic groups have been found to be high
(Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004).

Results

Data reduction and preliminary analyses

Our initial dataset consisted of 17 different constructs: six EA scores, eight SIP scores, and three
teacher-reported behavior scores. However, given our sample size and the type of our analysis
approach (structural equation modeling), we first needed to take a number of steps to reduce the
number of variables in our model. First, a factor analysis of the six dyadic emotional availability scales
indicated two underlying factors: one positive and the other negative; the positive factor comprised
maternal sensitivity and childs involvement and responsiveness, and the negative factor comprised
maternal intrusiveness, hostility, and structuring (negatively loaded). We found no correlations
between scores on the positive factor and the SIP measures, but the negative factor was related to a
number of SIP variables. We named this factor maternal negative control because the scales that com-
prise it assess behaviors that are thought to represent less optimal controlling parenting behaviors
such as overstimulating, physical control, manhandling, negative affect, and overt and covert hostility.
Second, a factor analysis of the three teacher-reported behavior scores (positive social skills, external-
izing behavior, and learning behavior) revealed one factor on which all reported behaviors loaded very
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 27

highly (all > .80). We named this factor teacher negative perception of childs behavior. Finally, of the
eight SIP variables, two were significantly related to the teacher-reported variables. SIP aggressive
response evaluation was negatively correlated with positive social skills, r(218) = .30, p < .001, and
positively correlated with externalizing behavior, r(218) = .15, p < .05, and learning problems, r
(218) = .23, p < .001. SIP competent response evaluation was positively correlated with positive social
skills, r(218) = .26, p < .001, and negatively correlated with externalizing behavior, r(218) = .19,
p < .01, and learning problems, r(218) = .26, p < .001. Other SIP variables were not significantly
related to any of the reported behavior variables. Thus, these two SIP variables were included in
our final model and comprised our third latent variable to be included in the final model: SIP maladap-
tive response evaluation. Bivariate correlations among all study variables are presented in Table 3.
Based on these initial data reduction steps, the final empirical model assessing the links among
maternal interactive behavior with child, SIP, and behavior in school (see our theoretical model por-
trayed in Fig. 1) was composed of the above-mentioned three factors or latent variables: maternal
negative control, measured by the following three EA indicators: maternal intrusiveness, hostility,
and structuring (negatively loaded); SIP maladaptive response evaluation, measured by two SIP indi-
cators (competent response evaluation [negatively loaded] and aggressive response evaluation); and
teacher negative perception of childs behavior, measured by three teacher report indicators (positive
social skills [negatively loaded], externalizing behavior, and learning problems). Table 4 presents
descriptive statistics for the observed variables alongside gender comparisons via t-tests. We found
no gender differences in any of the EA and SIP variables. There were, however, gender differences
in the behavioral indicators reported by the teachers, with boys exhibiting significantly less positive
social skills and more externalizing and learning problems than girls (see Table 4).
Further analyses probed the correlations of study measures with background variables. Findings
(shown in Table 5) suggested that higher parent socioeconomic status (SES; higher levels of education
and income) was associated with more structuring and less intrusive maternal relationships and chil-
drens less maladaptive perceptions and behaviors. Specifically, children scoring higher on the Kauf-
man test had less intrusive mothers and exhibited more adaptive perceptions and behaviors. Lastly,
younger children tended to exhibit more maladaptive SIP response evaluations, yet age was not
associated with maternal behavior or with teacher reports on childs behavior.

Testing the theoretical model

A latent variables structural equations model (see Bollen, 1989) was fitted with the three latent
variables included: maternal negative control, SIP maladaptive response evaluation, and teacher neg-
ative perception of childs behavior. Standardized parameter estimates for the model are presented in
Fig. 3. Indicator loadings suggested adequate measurement models for the latent variables, and overall
fit indices for the model showed a good fit of the model: comparative fit index (CFI) = .95; normed fit

Table 3
Intercorrelations among study variables.

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. INTRUS 1.00
2. HOSTIL 0.55*** 1.00
3. STRUCT 0.52*** 0.42*** 1.00
4. COMP 0.22** 0.05 0.14 1.00
5. AGGR 0.37*** 0.14 0.20** 0.18** 1.00
6. POSOC 0.19** 0.11 0.12 0.26*** 0.30*** 1.00
7. EXT 0.16* 0.03 0.18** 0.19** 0.15* 0.63*** 1.00
8. LP 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.26*** 0.23** 0.73*** 0.81***

Note. INTRUS, maternal intrusiveness; HOSTIL, maternal hostility; STRUCT, maternal structuring; COMP, evaluation of com-
petent response; AGGR, evaluation of aggressive response; POSOC, positive social skills; EXT, externalizing behavior; LP,
learning problems.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.
28 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

Table 4
Descriptive statistics and gender differences.

Variable Gender Total Observed t- Cohens

range value d
Boys Girls
(n = 109) (n = 109)
Intrusiveness M 1.57 1.43 1.50 14 1.38
SD 0.76 0.64 0.70
Hostility M 1.34 1.29 1.32 13.5 0.60
SD 0.59 0.54 0.56
Structuring M 4.05 4.09 4.07 25 0.42
SD 0.72 0.66 0.69
SIP: Competent response M 3.48 3.39 3.43 04 0.77
evaluation SD 0.90 0.87 0.88
SIP: Aggressive response M 0.35 0.28 0.31 03 0.83
evaluation SD 0.69 0.55 0.62
Positive social skills M 1.37 1.56 1.47 02 3.36** 0.47
SD 0.44 0.37 0.41
**
Externalizing behavior M 0.44 0.27 0.35 02 3.07 0.41
SD 0.45 0.37 0.42
*
Learning problems M 0.46 0.37 0.41 02 2.15 0.29
SD 0.32 0.30 0.31

Note. Cohens d is calculated for significant group differences only. The three reported behavior scores are mean scores. All other
scores are total scores.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

Table 5
Correlations between study variables and control variables.

Variable P-EDU Income ExpV Age

INSTRUS .22*** .12 .28*** .02
HOSTIL .01 .08 .01 .09
STRUCT .21** .21** .18 .07
COMP .21** .16* .34*** .18*
AGGR .23** .19** .28*** .21**
POSOC .31*** .24*** .36*** .09
EXT .26*** .16* .21** .04
LP .32*** .18** .26*** .02

Note. P-EDU, parental education; ExpV, Kaufmanns expressive vocabulary score; INTRUS, maternal intrusiveness; HOSTIL,
maternal hostility; STRUCT, maternal structuring; COMP, evaluation of competent response; AGGR, evaluation of aggressive
response; POSOC, positive social skills; EXT, externalizing behavior; LP, learning problems.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

index (NFI) = .92; root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .09; standardized root mean
square residual (SRMR) = .06; v2/df = 2.76.
Model estimates provided empirical support for our hypotheses. A strong path coefficient (b = .59,
p < .001) indicated that the maladaptive response evaluation component in childrens information
processing can be predicted (R2 = 35%) from maternal negative control. These maladaptive interpreta-
tions, in turn, were associated with greater behavioral and learning problems, as reported by teachers
(b = .42, p < .001, R2 = 18%). Taken together, the two effects amount to a considerable indirect effect,
linking maternal negative control to teacher-reported behavior problems through SIP (b = .25,
p < .01); statistical significance was evaluated via a bootstrap procedure (see Shrout & Bolger,
2002). A direct path from maternal negative control to maladaptive behavior resulted in an ill-
estimated model (a model failing to produce reliable estimates), and a model without SIP indicated
only a small direct effect (b = .16, p = .05).
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 29

Fig. 3. Structural equation model: Standardized coefficient estimates. Latent variables: MNC, maternal negative control; MRE,
maladaptive response evaluation; TNPCB, teacher negative perception of childs behavior. Observed variables: INTRUS, maternal
intrusiveness; HOSTIL, maternal hostility; STRUCT, maternal structuring; COMP, evaluation of competent response; AGGR,
evaluation of aggressive response; POSOC, positive social skills; EXT, externalizing behavior; LP, learning problems.

We also examined separate models for boys and girls but found no meaningful gender differences
in the pattern of associations among the variables in the model. Lastly, we added to the model the
three potential covariates (as indicated by the correlations presented in Table 5): parents education,
parents income, and childs expressive vocabulary score. The only effect of including the covariates
was a slight reduction in the magnitude of the indirect path from maternal negative control to teacher
evaluations (from b = .25, p < .01 to b = .21, p < .05), thereby supporting the robustness of the overall
patterns revealed by the model.

Discussion

Our empirical model (Fig. 3) clearly supports our theoretical model (Fig. 1). In our hypothesized
model, the quality of the parentchild relationship is associated with the childs mental representa-
tions of the social world (SIP patterns), which is associated with the childs exhibited behaviors in
school. Our findings highlight more specific components of this hypothesized path: maternal negative
control, distorted response evaluations, and disruptive behaviors in preschool as reported by the tea-
cher. On the other hand, significant links between more positive maternal behaviors and more com-
petent childs perceptions and behaviors were not found in this study. It is especially notable that the
links reported in this study were found while using data from multiple independent sources repre-
senting different measurement approaches. Information on maternal behavior was obtained by means
of direct observations of the motherchild dyad, information on SIP was obtained by means of direct
interview with the child, and information on the childs behavior at school was obtained from teach-
ers reports. This multimethod approach constitutes a major strength of the current study and under-
scores the validity of its findings.
Notably, the links we found were all within the negative realm of mothers and childs behaviors
and perceptions; maternal negative control (more intrusiveness and hostility and less structuring
behavior) was linked to the childs less adaptive social perceptions (more positive evaluation of
aggressive behavior and less positive evaluation of competent behaviors). These, in turn, were linked
to negative teachers reports of childrens behaviors in school (more externalizing behaviors, less pos-
itive social skills, and less positive learning behaviors). Hence, our findings contribute significantly and
uniquely to the limited available information about the associations between negative parental
behaviors and childrens negative perceptions and behaviors (Dodge et al., 1990; Gulley et al., 2014;
McDonald et al., 2013; Nix et al., 1999; Rubin et al., 1998; Runions & Keating, 2007; Shaw et al.,
2001). In showing that parental negative behaviors within a relaxed and non-threatening interactive
play session are linked to less competent and more disruptive childrens perceptions and behaviors in
other contexts such as preschool, we were able to extend the previous literature that mainly focused
on harsh and abusive parental behavior in at-risk populations. Our findings show that a parentchild
play interaction, which could be used by the parent as an opportunity to provide the child with a more
secure and structured base to explore his or her environment, could also be linked to the childs
30 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

negative perceptions and behaviors if the parent fails to provide the child with a more nurturing
environment within this context.
Conversely, it is interesting that maternal sensitivity was not related to the childs more competent
SIP patterns and better social functioning in school. Attachment theory focuses on parental sensitivity
as the most significant parental behavior to shape secure attachment (see, e.g., Cassidy & Shaver, 2008;
De Wolff & van IJzendoorn, 1997). However, it appears that parental sensitivity, as commonly mea-
sured based on Ainsworth (1969) original characterizations and in this study by the EAS (Biringen
et al., 1998), might not be the most appropriate parental behavior to predict preschool childrens
incompetent perceptions and behaviors. In other words, a mother might not be sensitive enough to
her childs needs (i.e., may fail to constantly provide a nurturing environment), but such parental
behavior does not necessarily result in the childs maladaptive perceptions and behaviors. However,
it would be unwarranted to conclude, based on these findings, that insensitive parental behavior
has no negative implications, such as childrens lower self-esteem and perceptions of others as
emotionally unavailable, because such attributes were not examined in the current study. It is also
important to note that a lack of parental negative behaviors might not necessarily imply a presence
of parental positive behaviors.
It should also be noted that, considering findings from a recent multinational longitudinal study
where both negative and positive maternal behaviors were related to childrens aggression
(Lansford et al., 2014), our interpretation about sensitive and insensitive parenting may be viewed
with caution. It should be noted, however, that there were important methodological differences
between this multinational study and the current investigation. In the former, information about par-
ental behavior was obtained through interviews with parents, whereas we used direct observations of
the motherchild interaction. Moreover, information about childrens disruptive perceptions and
behaviors was obtained in the former research through self-reports and parental reports, whereas
in the current research information about childrens disruptive behavior in preschool was collected
from preschool teachers reports. Finally, our study targeted preschool children, whereas Lansford
and colleagues study targeted school-age children. Still, even though it is hard to compare the two
studies, the findings of Lansford and colleagues suggest that maternal warmth and sensitivity, as man-
ifested in parental representations, play a role in reducing the risk of childrens problem behavior.
Parenting style was not assessed directly in this research; nonetheless, the types of maternal
behaviors found to be associated with childrens social perceptions and behaviors suggest that our
observations may have captured what is typically described in the literature as authoritarian parent-
ing style (Baumrind, 1966, p. 890), in particular maternal negative control, which includes overt neg-
ative behaviors such as intrusiveness and hostility. Interestingly, low maternal structuring also loaded
quite strongly on the latent construct termed maternal negative control. Although maternal intrusive-
ness and hostility can be viewed as negative parental behaviors, maternal low structuring can be per-
ceived as more of a lack of positive behavior than a negative behavior per se and is more in line with
Baumrinds (1966) permissive parenting style). In that respect, it is noteworthy that in previous ver-
sions of the EAS (Biringen, Robinson, & Emde, 1993), the two separate scales, maternal structuring and
maternal non-intrusiveness, were part of a single scale: structuring/intrusiveness. The rationale for
separating the two constructs stemmed from the conceptual thinking that high structuring and high
intrusiveness are not opposite ends of a continuous construct but rather two separate linear con-
structs. Our data did not support this line of thinking, and further research is needed to determine
whether this theoretical thinking can be supported by empirical data.
As in previous studies with preschool children (e.g., Ziv, 2012, 2013; Ziv & Sorongon, 2011), SIP
variables related to the childs evaluation of responses were found to be related to reported childs
maladaptive behavior, and the same SIP variables were also those associated with the mothers behav-
ior. On the other hand, some SIP variables that have been previously linked to maladaptive social
behavior, in particular hostile attribution of intent, were not significantly linked to mothers or childs
behavior in the current study. These findings may be explained by this studys focus on preschool
children. Our experience, and that of other researchers (e.g., Denham et al., 2013; Schultz et al.,
2010), suggests that measuring SIP in preschool is challenging. Preschool children are at a develop-
mental stage where they are only starting to understand the complexities of the social world; thus,
for these children, SIP variables that may become significant in revealing individual differences during
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 31

the early school years might not be sufficiently distinguishable because of normative aspects of devel-
opment. Hostile attribution of intent, for example, can meaningfully distinguish between children
based on their earlier experiences only if they are at a developmental stage where they understand
that intent is not judged by the outcome of an action. If children are at an earlier developmental stage,
they will tend to attribute hostile intent to others on the basis of the negative outcome of the action
(e.g., the childs inability to join the others game, the spilled milk cup) irrespective of their early
experiences.
The same may be true for encoding. The ability to correctly encode information is heavily depen-
dent on the childs working memory capacity, and this capacity in preschool is still significantly lower
than during the early elementary years (Diamond, 2002), making it difficult to exemplify encoding dif-
ferences during the preschool years that are the result of individual differences because of inherent
normal developmental limitations. Indeed, in the current study, as in previous ones, age played a sig-
nificant role in SIP, with younger children showing less competent patterns than older children.
Finally, the findings connecting the studys main variables to a number of background variables are
notable. Similar to previous studies (e.g., Chen et al., 2004; Dodge et al., 1995; Ziv & Sorongon, 2011),
aspects related to SES were related to SIP, with higher levels of such indicators being related to more
competent SIP patterns. Moreover, the same SES indicators (maternal education and income) were
positively related to the mothers structuring and the childs positive social skills and negatively
related to the childs externalizing and learning problems. Parental education was also negatively
related to maternal intrusiveness. Notably, these significant findings did not affect our main model.
Thus, whereas there is no question that SES, especially parental education, is an important predictor
of both the parents and childs behaviors, our findings reinforce Bronfenbrenners (1979) ecological
systems approach; whereas variables at the exosystem (e.g., SES) are important for a complete under-
standing of child development, their effect on the childs behavior is mediated by variables closer to
the child at the microsystem (e.g., the parents direct behavior with the child).

Clinical implications

Our findings may have implications for intervention aiming to curb childrens early maladaptive
behavior. Because childrens social adjustment is an important indicator of difficulties in later life
(Parker & Asher, 1987), the investigation of the cognitive processes facilitating social behavior during
childhood should support efforts to prevent childrens maladaptive behavior. Moreover, because the
social information processing model describes specific processes that can be taught to children
through practice and demonstration, these processes could be targeted in interventions with socially
maladjusted children. Such initiatives already exist with elementary school-age children (e.g., Conduct
Problems Prevention Research Group, 1992, 1999; Fraser et al., 2005) but are less common in
preschool.
Our findings on the association between response evaluation and less adaptive social and learning
behaviors in preschool suggest that this particular social information processing step could be explic-
itly targeted in interventions with preschool children. For example, preschool teachers could create
role-play activities in which children are asked to evaluate the outcomes of specific behaviors. Teach-
ers could provide feedback, correcting misguided/non-competent evaluations and encouraging evalu-
ations that suggest common social knowledge. Certain programs, such as Making Choices: Social
Problem Solving Skills for Children (MC; Fraser et al., 2005), offer specific intervention goals such as
the identification of relational goals and the design and selection of prosocial goals. These steps could
be adapted for preschool children; they seem particularly relevant to the correction of biases in the
ability to identify the outcomes of competent and non-competent social actions.

Limitations and future directions

Although our design represents many methodological merits, some methodological limitations
should be noted. First, our design is not longitudinal given that data were collected within a relatively
short time span of a couple of months. Therefore, we cannot provide an empirical confirmation for the
theoretically justified causal model that maternal negative control predicts negative SIP patterns,
32 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

which in turn predict maladaptive behavior. Because our findings do not support causal conclusions,
we cannot rule out a different direction of effect where, for example, the childs more disruptive men-
tal representations and behaviors lead to the mother being more controlling in her interaction with
the child. Thus, future research should employ a longitudinal design in which the theoretical model
underlying this study will be evaluated.
Second, our assessment battery was short of measures of important constructs that may shed fur-
ther light on our findings. For example, measures of parental attitudes and style seem particularly
important to more clearly understand the antecedents of parental behavior, childs SIP, and maladap-
tive behavior. In addition, measures of a childs psychological outcomes, such as self-esteem, and SIP
variables that are not so heavily connected to overt maladaptive behavior, are crucial if we are to have
a better understanding of the types of perceptions and behaviors that could be predicted from more
positive parental behaviors such as parental sensitivity.
Third, using the teacher as the sole reporter of the childs behavior may be restrictive; as our find-
ings clearly show, the teacher-reported behaviors were highly correlated with each other, perhaps
representing a halo effect whereby the teacher does not fully discriminate between the different types
of behaviors on which he or she is asked to report but rather shows an overall perception of the child
that is not informative enough in terms of the ability to discriminate between types of behaviors. For
example, externalizing behaviors and positive social skills are theoretically different behaviors but
were highly and negatively correlated in this study. Future studies could use other measures of childs
behaviors such as direct observations or parental reports in conjunction with teacher reports. Finally,
our SIP measure included stories tapping both relational and instrumental provocations. Whereas we
did not find differences between these scenarios in the current study, it is possible that this is due to
the fact that the measure includes only four stories. Future studies should find ways in which to
extend SIP measures for preschoolers to include appropriate reference to both types of scenarios. As
such, the theoretically expected differences between relational and instrumental provocations could
be empirically examined.

Summary and conclusions

As the two developmental theories introduced at the beginning of this article suggest, there is a
strong link between the quality of the parentchild relationship and the childs social behavior in
school via social information processing. In particular, we identified a concrete link among the
mothers negative controlling behaviors, the childs less competent and more aggressively biased
response evaluations, and the childs maladaptive behavior in preschool as perceived by his or her tea-
cher. The implications of these findings are both theoretical and clinical. From a theoretical standpoint,
they show the utility of a social information processing approach to establish a more complete and
succinct understanding of the links between a mothers behavior with her child and the way in which
the child behaves in a different social setting. From a clinical point of view, the findings support
intervention approaches that seek to influence childrens thought processes as an effective means
to change their behaviors.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all families and teachers participating in this study and the
research assistants who helped with data collection. The study was supported in part by a Marie Curie
FP-7 fellowship grant number IRG 247877 to the first author.

References

Administration on Children, Youth, and Families (2005). Head Start impact study: First year findings. Washington, DC:
Department of Health and Human Services.
Administration on Children, Youth, and Families (2006). Head start performance measures center family and child experiences
survey (FACES 2000). Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1969). Maternal Sensitivity Scales. Retrieved from <http://www.psychology.sunysb.edu/attachment/
measures/content/ainsworth_scales.html>.
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 33

Aviezer, O., Sagi, A., Joels, T., & Ziv, Y. (1999). Dyadic emotional availability and attachment representations in Kibbutz infants
and their mothers. Developmental Psychology, 35, 811821.
Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 37, 887907.
Biringen, Z., Brown, D., Donaldson, L., Green, S., Krcmarik, S., & Lovas, G. (2000). Adult Attachment Interview: Linkages with
dimensions of emotional availability for mothers and their pre-kindergarteners. Attachment & Human Development, 2,
188202.
Biringen, Z., Damon, J., Grigg, W., Mone, J., Pipp-Siegel, S., Skillern, S., et al (2005). Emotional availability: Differential predictions
to infant attachment and kindergarten adjustment based on observation time and context. Infant Mental Health Journal, 26,
295308.
Biringen, Z., & Easterbrooks, M. (2012). Emotional availability: Concept, research, and window on developmental
psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 18.
Biringen, Z., Robinson, J., & Emde, R. N. (1993). The Emotional Availability Scales (2nd ed.). Unpublished manuscript, Department
of Human Development and Family Studies, Colorado State University.
Biringen, Z., Robinson, J., & Emde, R. N. (1998). The Emotional Availability Scales (3rd ed.), unpublished manuscript, Department
of Human Development and Family Studies, Colorado State University.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
Bornstein, M. H., Gini, M., Putnick, D. L., Haynes, O. M., Painter, K. M., & Suwalsky, A. J. T. (2006). Short-term reliability and
continuity of emotional availability in motherchild dyads across contexts of observation. Infancy, 10, 116.
Bornstein, M. H., Putnick, D. L., Heslington, M., Gini, M., Suwalsky, J. T., Venuti, P., et al (2008). Motherchild emotional
availability in ecological perspective: Three countries, two regions, two genders. Developmental Psychology, 44, 666680.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss, Vol. 2: Separation, anxiety, and anger. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-
Analysis.
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1969).
Bretherton, I. (1990). Open communication and internal working models: Their role in attachment relationships. In R.
Thompson (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation. Socioemotional development (Vol. 36, pp. 57113). Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Burgess, K. B., Wojslawowicz, J. C., Rubin, K. H., Rose-Krasnor, L., & Booth-LaForce, C. (2006). Social information processing and
coping strategies of shy/withdrawn and aggressive children: Does friendship matter? Child Development, 77, 371383.
Camodeca, M., & Goossens, F. A. (2005). Aggression, social cognition, anger, and sadness in bullies and victims. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 186197.
Camras, L., Sachs-Alter, E., & Ribordy, S. (1996). Emotion understanding in maltreated children: Recognition of facial expressions
and integration with other emotion cues. In M. Lewis & M. Sullivan (Eds.), Emotional development in atypical children
(pp. 203225). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed.. New York:
Guilford.
Chen, E., Langer, D. A., Raphaelson, Y. E., & Matthews, K. A. (2004). Socioeconomic status and health in adolescents: The role of
stress interpretations. Child Development, 75, 10391052.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (1992). A developmental and clinical model for the prevention of conduct
disorders. Development and Psychopathology, 4, 509527.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (1999). Initial impact for the Fast Track prevention trial for conduct disorder: I.
The high-risk sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 631647.
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in childrens social
adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74101.
Crick, N. R., & Ladd, G. W. (1990). Childrens perceptions of the outcomes of aggressive strategies: Do the ends justify being
mean? Developmental Psychology, 26, 612620.
De Wolff, M., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1997). Sensitivity and attachment: A meta-analysis on parental antecedents of infant
attachment. Child Development, 68, 571591.
Denham, S. A., Way, E., Kalb, S. C., Warren-Khot, H. K., & Bassett, H. H. (2013). Preschoolers social information processing and
early school success: The challenging situations task. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31, 180197.
Diamond, A. (2002). Normal development of prefrontal cortex from birth to young adulthood: Cognitive functions, anatomy,
and biochemistry. In D. Stuss & R. Knight (Eds.), Principles of frontal lobe function (pp. 466503). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Dodge, K. A. (2006). Transitional science in action: Hostile attributional style and the development of aggressive behavior
problems. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 791814.
Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Pettit, G. S. (1990). Mechanisms in the cycle of violence. Science, 250, 16781683.
Dodge, K. A., Murphy, R. M., & Buchsbaum, K. (1984). The assessment of intention-cue detection skills in children: Implications
for developmental psychopathology. Child Development, 55, 163173.
Dodge, K. A. (1986). A social information processing model of social competence in children. In M. Perlmutter (Ed.), Minnesota
symposium on child psychology (pp. 77125). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & Valente, E. (1995). Social information-processing patterns partially mediate the effect of
early physical abuse on later conduct problems. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 632643.
Dodge, K. A., & Price, J. M. (1994). On the relation between social information processing and socially competent behavior in
early school-aged children. Child Development, 65, 13851397.
Dykas, M. J., & Cassidy, J. (2011). Attachment and the processing of social information across the lifespan: Theory and evidence.
Psychological Bulletin, 137, 1946.
Easterbrooks, M., Biesecker, G., & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2000). Infancy predictors of emotional availability in middle childhood: The
roles of attachment security and maternal depressive symptomatology. Attachment & Human Development, 2, 170187.
Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
34 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835

Fraley, R. C., Roisman, G. I., & Haltigan, J. D. (2013). The legacy of early experiences in development: Formalizing alternative
models of how early experiences are carried forward over time. Developmental Psychology, 49, 109126.
Fraser, M. W., Galinsky, M. J., Smokowski, P. R., Day, S. H., Terzian, M. A., Rose, R. A., et al (2005). Social information-processing
skills training to promote social competence and prevent aggressive behavior in the third grade. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 73, 10451055.
Gulley, L. D., Oppenheimer, C. W., & Hankin, B. L. (2014). Associations among negative parenting, attention bias to anger, and
social anxiety among youth. Developmental Psychology, 50, 577585.
Hart, C. H., DeWolf, D. M., & Burts, D. C. (1992). Linkages among preschoolers playground behavior, outcome expectations, and
parental disciplinary strategies. Early Education and Development, 3, 265283.
Katsurada, E., & Sugawara, A. I. (1998). The relationship between hostile attributional bias and aggressive behavior in
preschoolers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13, 623636.
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004). Kaufman assessment battery for children (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance
Service.
Lansford, J. E., Malone, P. S., Dodge, K. A., Crozier, J. C., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (2006). A 12-year prospective study of patterns of
social information processing problems and externalizing behaviors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 715724.
Lansford, J. E., Sharma, C., Malone, P. S., Woodlief, D., Dodge, K. A., Oburu, P., et al (2014). Corporal punishment, maternal
warmth, and child adjustment: A longitudinal study in eight countries. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 43,
670685.
Lemerise, E. A., & Arsenio, W. F. (2000). An integrated model of emotion processes and cognition in social information
processing. Child Development, 71, 107118.
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parentchild interaction. In P. H. Mussen & E. M.
Hetherington (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology. Socialization, personality, and social development (Vol. 4, pp. 1101). New
York: John Wiley.
Main, M., Kaplan, N., & Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, childhood, and adulthood: A move to the level of representation.
Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50(12), 66106.
Mayeux, L., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2003). Development of social problem solving in early childhood: Stability, change, and
associations with social competence. Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 164,
153173.
McDermott, P. A., Leigh, N. M., & Perry, M. A. (2002). Development and validation of the Preschool Learning Behaviors Scale.
Psychology in the Schools, 39, 353365.
McDonald, K. L., Baden, R. E., & Lochman, J. E. (2013). Parenting influences on the social goals of aggressive children. Applied
Developmental Science, 17, 2938.
McElwain, N. L., Booth-LaForce, C., Lansford, J. E., Wu, X., & Dyer, W. J. (2008). A process model of attachmentfriend linkages:
Hostile attribution biases, language ability, and motherchild affective mutuality as intervening mechanisms. Child
Development, 79, 18911906.
Nelson, D. A., & Crick, N. R. (1999). Rose-colored glasses: Examining the social information-processing of prosocial young
adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 19, 1738.
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (2001). Child-care and family predictors of preschool attachment and stability from
infancy. Developmental Psychology, 37, 847862.
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (Ed.). (2005). Child care and child development. New York: Guilford.
Nix, R. L., Pinderhughes, E. E., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., & McFadyen-Ketchum, S. A. (1999). The relation between
mothers hostile attribution tendencies and childrens externalizing behavior problems: The mediating role of mothers
harsh discipline practices. Child Development, 70, 896909.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2012). Education at a glance 2012: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD
Publishing.
Orobio de Castro, B., Merk, W., Koops, W., Veerman, J. W., & Bosch, J. D. (2005). Emotions in social information processing and
their relations with reactive and proactive aggression in referred aggressive boys. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent
Psychology, 34, 105116.
Ostrov, J. M., & Godleski, S. A. (2010). Toward an integrated gender-linked model of aggression subtypes in early and middle
childhood. Psychological Review, 117, 233242.
Oyen, A. S., Landy, S., & Hilburn-Cobb, C. (2000). Maternal attachment and sensitivity in an at-risk sample. Attachment & Human
Development, 2, 203217.
Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. R. (1987). Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are low-accepted children at risk? Psychological
Bulletin, 102, 357389.
Pettit, G. S., Harrist, A. W., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (1991). Family interaction, social cognition, and childrens subsequent
relations with peers at kindergarten. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8, 383402.
Raikes, H. A., & Thompson, R. A. (2008). Attachment security and parenting quality predict childrens problem-solving,
attributions, and loneliness with peers. Attachment & Human Development, 10, 126.
Rohner, R. P., Bourque, S. L., & Elordi, C. A. (1996). Childrens perceptions of corporal punishment, caretaker acceptance, and
psychological adjustment in a poor, biracial southern community. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 842852.
Rubin, K. H., Hastings, P. D., Chen, X., Stewart, S. L., & McNichol, K. (1998). Intrapersonal and maternal correlates of aggression,
conflict, and externalizing problems in toddlers. Child Development, 69, 16141629.
Runions, K. C., & Keating, D. P. (2007). Young childrens social information processing: Family antecedents and behavioral
correlates. Developmental Psychology, 43, 838849.
Sagi, A., Koren-Karie, N., Gini, M., Ziv, Y., & Joels, T. (2002). Shedding further light on the effects of various types and quality of
early child care on infantmother attachment relationship: The Haifa Study of Early Child Care. Child Development, 73,
11661186.
Schultz, D., Logie, S., Ambike, A., Bohner, K., Stapleton, L., Vanderwalde, H., ... Betkowski, J. A. (2010). The development and
validation of a video-based assessment of young childrens social information processing. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 38, 601613.
 Y. Ziv et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142 (2016) 1835 35

Schultz, D., & Shaw, D. S. (2003). Boys maladaptive social information processing, family emotional climate, and pathways to
early conduct problems. Social Development, 12, 440460.
Shaw, D. S., Owens, E. B., Giovannelli, J., & Winslow, E. B. (2001). Infant and toddler pathways leading to early externalizing
disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 3643.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and
recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422445.
Swanson, K., Beckwith, L., & Howard, J. (2000). Intrusive caregiving and quality of attachment in prenatally drug-exposed
toddlers and their primary caregivers. Attachment & Human Development, 2, 130148.
Webster-Stratton, S. C., & Lindsay, D. W. (1999). Social competence and conduct problems in young children: Issues in
assessment. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 28, 2543.
Ziv, Y. (2012). Exposure to violence, social information processing, and problem behavior in preschool children. Aggressive
Behavior, 38, 429441.
Ziv, Y. (2013). Social information processing patterns, social skills, and school readiness in preschool children. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 114, 306320.
Ziv, Y., Alva, S., & Zill, N. (2010). Understanding Head Start children problem behaviors in the context of arrest or incarceration of
a household member. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 396408.
Ziv, Y., Aviezer, O., Gini, M., Sagi, A., & Koren-Karie, N. (2000). Emotional availability in the motherinfant dyad as related to the
quality of infantmother attachment relationship. Attachment & Human Development, 2, 149169.
Ziv, Y., Leibovitz, I., & Shechtman, T. (2013). Bullying and victimization in early adolescence: Relations to social information
processing patterns. Aggressive Behavior, 39, 482492.
Ziv, Y., & Sorongon, A. (2011). Social information processing in preschool children: Relations to sociodemographic risk and
problem behavior. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109, 412429.