Developmental differences in children’s interpersonal emotion regulation

Belén López-Pérez*, Ellie L. Wilson, Giulia Dellaria, Michaela Gummerum

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Previous research on interpersonal emotion regulation (ER) in childhood has been rather unsystematic, focusing mainly on children’s prosocial behaviour, and has been conducted in the absence of an integrative emotion theoretical framework. The present research relied on the interpersonal affect classification proposed by Niven et al. (Emotion, 9:498–509, 2009) to investigate children’s use of different interpersonal ER strategies. The study drew on two samples: 180 parents of children aged between 3 and 8 years reported about a situation where their child was able to change what another person was feeling in order to make them feel better. In addition, 126 children between 3- and 8-years old answered two questions about how they could improve others’ mood. Results from both samples showed age differences in children’s use of interpersonal ER strategies. As expected, ‘affective engagement’ (i.e., focusing on the person or the problem) and ‘cognitive engagement’ (i.e., appraising the situation from a different perspective) were mainly used by 7–8 years-old, whereas ‘attention’ (i.e., distracting and valuing) was most used by 3–4 and 5–6 years-old. ‘Humor’ (i.e., laughing with the target) remained stable across the different age groups. The present research provides more information about the developmental patterns for each specific interpersonal emotion regulation strategy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)767-780
Number of pages14
JournalMotivation and Emotion
Volume40
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 Jul 2016

Keywords

  • Childhood
  • Interpersonal emotion regulation
  • Regulation strategies

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Developmental differences in children’s interpersonal emotion regulation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this