Differential Susceptibility to Parenting in Middle Childhood: Do Impulsivity,Effortful Control and Negative Emotionality Indicate Susceptibility or Vulnerability?

In this longitudinal study, we examined whether children differ in their susceptibility to harsh and responsive parenting as reflected in their externalizing and prosocial behaviour two years later. We focused on three potential susceptibility markers assessed during middle childhood: Negative emotionality, impulsivity, and effortful control. Participants were 120 Dutch children (6–11 years old; 54% girls). Parenting was assessed using both observations and self‐report questionnaires. Parental responsiveness predicted decreased externalizing behaviour two years later among children high on impulsivity (in case of observed responsiveness) or low on effortful control (in case of observed and self‐reported responsiveness) but not among children low on impulsivity or high on effortful control. Observed harsh parenting predicted decreased prosocial behaviour, especially among children with average or high negative emotionality. The findings support a diathesis–stress model more than they do a differential susceptibility model. High impulsivity seemed to be a vulnerability factor, predicting increased externalizing behaviour when parents lacked responsiveness. Also, high negative emotionality served as a vulnerability factor, predicting decreased prosocial behaviour when parents were harsh, while low negative emotionality served as a protective factor, buffering against decreased prosocial behaviour. Finally, low effortful control might operate as a vantage‐sensitivity factor, predicting decreased externalizing behaviour when parents were responsive. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Twins and the study of rater (dis)agreement

Genetically informative data can be used to address fundamental questions concerning the measurement of behavior in children. The authors illustrate this with longitudinal multiple-rater data on internalizing problems in twins. Valid information on the behavior of a child is obtained for behavior that multiple raters agree upon and for rater-specific perception of the child's behavior. Rater-disagreement variance varsigma2(rd) accounted for 35% of the individual differences in internalizing behavior. Up to 17% of this varsigma2(rd) was accounted for by rater-specific additive genetic variance varsigma2(Au). Thus, the disagreement should not be considered only to be bias/error but also as representing the unique feature of the relationships between that parent and the child. The longitudinal extension of this model helps to make a distinction between measurement error and the raters' unique perception of the child's behavior. For internalizing behavior, the results show large stability across time, which is accounted for by common additive genetic and common shared environmental factors. Rater-specific shared environmental factors show substantial influence on stability. This could mean that rater bias may be persistent and affect longitudinal studies.     

When a Man Thinks He Has Female Traits Constructing Femininity and Masculinity: Methodological Potentials and Limitations

In everyday life, people are confronted with common beliefs about how women and men differ from each other. These beliefs make them wonder about their personal femininity and masculinity. But what hides behind these constructs? In this article, we will discuss the potential and limitations of different definitions. We will focus on methodological issues which can trigger new discussions about the social implications of gender differences—which are not part of this paper. One of the major questions here is whether it is methodologically justifiable (legitimate) to make individual predictions based on group differences. An issue that is not only relevant in regards to femininity and masculinity. In general, all definitions of masculinity and femininity show more limitations than potentials. They are either neglecting certain sub-groups or are based on stereotypes (either displaying common beliefs or exaggerated group differences). Individual predictions derived from these constructs are questionable due to oversimplification/reductionism (e.g., when forming groups). By pointing out that constructs like femininity and masculinity can in fact limit an individual’s development, it is suggested to clearly differentiate between different types of differences and to clearly state what can and cannot be said when “measuring” an individual’s masculinity and femininity. Since femininity and masculinity can be seen as example constructs, and generalizations are part of many research processes, general implications beyond these concepts are being discussed.     

Hemisphere-dependent holistic processing of familiar faces

In two behavioral experiments involving lateralized stimulus presentation, we tested whether one of the most commonly used measures of holistic face processing—the composite face effect—would be more pronounced for stimuli presented to the right as compared to the left hemisphere. In experiment 1, we investigated the composite face effect in a verbal identification task, similar to its original report (Young, Hellawell, & Hay, 1987). Aligning top and bottom halves of composite face stimuli led to performance decreases irrespective of hemifield, indicating holistic processing of comparable magnitude for inputs provided separately to either hemisphere. However, when matching of the same top parts was required in experiment 2, an alignment-dependent performance decrease was found for stimuli presented in the left, but not right visual field. These observations suggest that the right hemisphere dominates in early stages of holistic processing, as indexed by the composite face effect, but that later processes such as face identification and naming are based on unified representations that are independent of input lateralization. Moreover, the composite face effect may not rely on the exact same representation(s) when measured in matching and identification tasks.     

Personality Traits as Potential Susceptibility Markers: Differential Susceptibility to Support Among Parents

In this study, we examined whether parents are differentially susceptible to support from their spouse and adolescent child depending on their personality traits, and whether differences in susceptibility to support among parents, in turn, are linked to the quality of support parents give to their children. Participants in this three‐wave longitudinal study were 288 two‐parent Dutch families with an adolescent child. Fathers were on average 43.9 years old (SD = 3.7 years), mothers were 41.7 years old (SD = 3.3 years), and adolescents (50% girls) were 14.5 years old (SD = 0.8 years). We found that the association between support from children toward their parents and subsequent support from parents toward their children was more pronounced for parents high on Openness, for better and for worse. Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability did not emerge as markers of differences in susceptibility. Also, parents did not differ in their susceptibility to support from their spouse, nor were differences in susceptibility found a year later when using data from a third wave. We found very modest support for differential susceptibility, only for Openness, and depending on the source of perceived support and on the timing of measurement.     

Familiarity matters: A review on prioritized processing of personally familiar faces

In this review, we synthesize the existing literature investigating personally familiar face processing and highlight the remarkable, enhanced processing efficiency resulting from real-life experience. Highly learned identity-specific visual and semantic information associated with personally familiar face representations facilitates detection, recognition of identity and social cues, and activation of person knowledge. These optimizations afford qualitatively different processing of personally familiar as compared to unfamiliar faces, which manifests on both the behavioural and neural level.     

On the plasticity of the survival processing effect

Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) discovered a strong and rather general memory advantage for word material processed in a survival-related context. One possible explanation of this effect conceives survival processing as a special form of encoding: Nature specifically "tuned" our memory systems to process and remember fitness-relevant information. We tested this explanation by studying whether the survival processing effect is robust against encoding manipulations that do not affect the fitness relevance of information. Three experiments replicated a strong survival processing effect under standard conditions but showed that the mnemonic benefit of survival processing diminishes or even vanishes when participants focus on a single problem (Experiments 1 and 2) or technique (Experiment 3) of survival. We argue that it is not survival processing per se that facilitates recall but the richness and distinctiveness with which information is encoded.     

All new kids on the block? Impaired holistic processing of personally familiar faces in a kindergarten teacher with acquired prosopagnosia

Acquired prosopagnosia is primarily defined as a defect in recognizing familiar faces. Nonetheless, for practical and methodological reasons, studies of such rare patients typically use pictures of unfamiliar faces. Here, we report an extensive investigation (17 behavioural tasks grouped in nine experiments) with a homogenous set of personally familiar faces in patient PS (Rossion et al., 2003 Rossion, B., Caldara, R., Seghier, M., Schuller, A.-M., Lazeyras, F., &; Mayer, E. (2003). A network of occipito-temporal face-sensitive areas besides the right middle fusiform gyrus is necessary for normal face processing. Brain, 126, 2381–2395. doi: 10.1093/brain/awg241[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]. A network of occipito-temporal face-sensitive areas besides the right middle fusiform gyrus is necessary for normal face processing.), a well-documented case of acquired prosopagnosia with intact object recognition. PS’s recognition of the face pictures of 3–4-year-old children of her kindergarten is severely impaired—both in terms of accuracy and speed of recognition—and differs qualitatively from her colleagues’ performance. Relative to these typical individuals, PS relies more on external features, colour and local details of faces. She is also specifically impaired at processing the eye region in two-alternative face matching tasks, as well as in a familiar face recognition task performed both with pre-defined isolated parts and with randomly placed apertures revealing selective parts (“Bubbles”, >20.000 trials) of the personally familiar faces. These observations indicate that the same impairment observed previously with unfamiliar faces for PS and other cases of acquired prosopagnosia is associated with a deficient long-term representation of the eye region. Various manipulations that differentially affect the processing of the eye region suggest that this impairment is a consequence of the inability to represent the multiple parts of the eye region, and of the whole familiar face, as a single unit. This impairment in holistic processing is further evidenced here across different paradigms with composite faces, wholes and parts, and configurally distorted faces, mirroring and strengthening previous observations made with unfamiliar faces in PS and other cases of acquired prosopagnosia. Altogether, these observations suggest that prosopagnosia following brain damage affects unfamiliar and familiar face processing in a qualitatively similar way.