Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb 6:11:37.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00037. eCollection 2020.

Perception of Caregiving During Childhood is Related to Later Executive Functions and Antisocial Behavior in At-Risk Boys

Anna Harwood-Gross  1 , Bar Lambez  1 , Ruth Feldman  2 , Yuri Rassovsky  1   3   4
Affiliations

Perception of Caregiving During Childhood is Related to Later Executive Functions and Antisocial Behavior in At-Risk Boys

Anna Harwood-Gross et al. Front Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Executive functions are considered essential for effective navigation in the social world. Parental responsiveness is a critical ingredient for normative social development and, as such, may be connected with the development of executive functions. Disruption of this development may, in turn, lead to maladaptive and antisocial behaviors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nature of the connections among perceived patterns of caregiving experienced in childhood, executive functions, and antisocial behaviors in at-risk adolescents. Seventy-one adolescent boys were recruited from two high-schools for adolescents who were not deemed suitable for regular schooling due to behavioral and emotional issues. Executive functions were tested using a computer-administered neuropsychological battery (CANTAB), and maternal parenting experiences and antisocial behaviors were assessed using retrospective and current questionnaires. Structural equation modeling (SEM) approach was employed to examine whether executive functions mediated the relationship between children's perceived patterns of maternal care and subsequent development of antisocial behaviors. Although maternal care had a significant direct effect on executive function (standardized coefficient = .49, p = .03) and antisocial behavior (standardized coefficient = .53, p = .05), SEM demonstrated no mediating relationships among these variables. Instead, maternal care predicted unique variance in both executive functions (standardized coefficient = .61, p = .02) and antisocial behavior (standardized coefficient = .51, p = .05). This study suggests a link between the experience of childhood caregiving and adolescent executive functions and delinquency and highlights the importance of early parenting interventions to aid executive function development. Such early interventions could potentially enhance long-term pro-social behavior.

Keywords: adolescence; antisocial behavior; attachment; executive function; mothering.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic representation of the predicted mediation model. Solid arrows represent direct effects, and dashed arrow represents indirect effect.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Structural equation model demonstrating relationship between perceived maternal care and executive functions. Circles represent latent variables, and rectangles represent measured variables. Values are standardized path coefficients. χ2 (8, N = 71) = 9.30, p = .32, CFI = .97, RMSEA = .05. p < .05 for all coefficients.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Structural equation model demonstrating relationship between perceived maternal care and antisocial behavior. Circles represent latent variables, and rectangles represent measured variables. Values are standardized path coefficients. χ2 (1, N = 71) = .002, p = .97, CFI = .99, RMSEA = .001. p < .01 for all coefficients.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Structural equation model testing the effect of perceived maternal care on executive function and antisocial behavior. Circles represent latent variables, and rectangles represent measured variables. Values are standardized path coefficients. χ2 (18, N = 71) = 23.47, p = .17, CFI = .91, RMSEA = .07. p < .05 for all coefficients.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sanders J, Munford R, Boden J. Improving educational outcomes for at-risk students. Br Educ Res J (2018) 44(5):763–80. 10.1002/berj.3462 - DOI
    1. Jaggers JW, Robison SB, Rhodes JLF, Guan X, Church WT. Predicting adult criminality among louisiana's urban youth: poverty, academic risk, and delinquency. J Soc Soc Work Res (2016) 7(1):89–116. 10.1086/685089 - DOI
    1. Toglia J, Berg C. Performance-based measure of executive function: comparison of community and at-risk youth. Am J Occup Ther (2013) 67:515–23. 10.5014/ajot.2013.008482 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pinsonneault M, Parent S, Castellanos-Ryan N, Séguin JR. Low intelligence and poor executive function as vulnerabilities to externalizing behavior. In: Beauchaine TP, Hinshaw SP, editors. The Oxford H andbook of Externalizing Spectrum Disorders. (Oxford University Press; ). (2015). p. 375–400. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199324675.013.14 - DOI
    1. Roth R, Isquith P, Gioia GA. Assessment of executive functioning using the behavior rating inventory of executive function (BRIEF). In: Goldstein S, Naglieri JA, editors. H andbook of Executive Functioning. New York: Springer; (2014). p. 301–31. 10.1007/978-1-4614-8106-5_18 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources