父子关系是幼儿伤害风险行为的预测因素

Daniel Paquette, Julio Macario de Medeiros, Marc Bigras, Fabien Bacro, Sophie Couture, Jean-Pascal Lemelin, Chantal Cyr, Karine Dubois-Comtois
{"title":"父子关系是幼儿伤害风险行为的预测因素","authors":"Daniel Paquette,&nbsp;Julio Macario de Medeiros,&nbsp;Marc Bigras,&nbsp;Fabien Bacro,&nbsp;Sophie Couture,&nbsp;Jean-Pascal Lemelin,&nbsp;Chantal Cyr,&nbsp;Karine Dubois-Comtois","doi":"10.1007/s42844-022-00068-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h2>Abstract\n</h2><div><p>To date, few researchers have focused on the role that the parent–child relationship can play in children’s risk-taking, and none has done so while taking into account the father-child relationship. This paper examines two types of parent–child relationships, the attachment relationship and the activation relationship, both of which are theoretically connected to children’s exploration of their physical and social environment. The first objective of this study was to verify the prediction that the parent–child activation relationship in infancy as assessed with the risky situation procedure (RS) would be associated with toddlers’ risk-taking behaviors, and that parent–child attachment relationship as assessed with the strange situation procedure (SSP) would not. The second objective was to verify the prediction that the mean risk-taking scores of children in overactivated dyads would be significantly higher than those of children in activated and underactivated dyads. The third objective was to test the prediction that father-child overactivation would have a greater effect on children’s risk-taking than mother–child overactivation would, especially for boys. One hundred eighty-two father-child and mother–child dyads underwent the RS and the SSP between the ages of 12 and 18 months, and both parents filled out the Injury Behavior Checklist to assess risk-taking behaviors at 24–30 months old. As expected, the results show that parent–child attachment is not associated with risk-taking and confirm the positive association between both mother–child and father-child overactivation and children’s risk-taking. Only father-child overactivation significantly predicted child risk-taking when both father-child overactivation and mother–child overactivation were included in the same model. Finally, the higher the mother–child overactivation score, the more boys take risks that can lead to injury. This could mean that boys are more sensitive than girls to lack of maternal supervision, at least at this young age.</p></div></div>","PeriodicalId":72113,"journal":{"name":"Adversity and resilience science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s42844-022-00068-8.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Father-Child and Mother–Child Relationships as Predictors of Injury-Risk Behaviors in Toddlers\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Paquette,&nbsp;Julio Macario de Medeiros,&nbsp;Marc Bigras,&nbsp;Fabien Bacro,&nbsp;Sophie Couture,&nbsp;Jean-Pascal Lemelin,&nbsp;Chantal Cyr,&nbsp;Karine Dubois-Comtois\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s42844-022-00068-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h2>Abstract\\n</h2><div><p>To date, few researchers have focused on the role that the parent–child relationship can play in children’s risk-taking, and none has done so while taking into account the father-child relationship. This paper examines two types of parent–child relationships, the attachment relationship and the activation relationship, both of which are theoretically connected to children’s exploration of their physical and social environment. The first objective of this study was to verify the prediction that the parent–child activation relationship in infancy as assessed with the risky situation procedure (RS) would be associated with toddlers’ risk-taking behaviors, and that parent–child attachment relationship as assessed with the strange situation procedure (SSP) would not. The second objective was to verify the prediction that the mean risk-taking scores of children in overactivated dyads would be significantly higher than those of children in activated and underactivated dyads. The third objective was to test the prediction that father-child overactivation would have a greater effect on children’s risk-taking than mother–child overactivation would, especially for boys. One hundred eighty-two father-child and mother–child dyads underwent the RS and the SSP between the ages of 12 and 18 months, and both parents filled out the Injury Behavior Checklist to assess risk-taking behaviors at 24–30 months old. As expected, the results show that parent–child attachment is not associated with risk-taking and confirm the positive association between both mother–child and father-child overactivation and children’s risk-taking. Only father-child overactivation significantly predicted child risk-taking when both father-child overactivation and mother–child overactivation were included in the same model. Finally, the higher the mother–child overactivation score, the more boys take risks that can lead to injury. This could mean that boys are more sensitive than girls to lack of maternal supervision, at least at this young age.</p></div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72113,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Adversity and resilience science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s42844-022-00068-8.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Adversity and resilience science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42844-022-00068-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adversity and resilience science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42844-022-00068-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要到目前为止,很少有研究人员关注亲子关系在儿童冒险行为中所起的作用,也没有人在考虑父子关系的情况下这样做。本文考察了两种类型的亲子关系,依恋关系和激活关系,这两种关系在理论上都与儿童对其物理和社会环境的探索有关。本研究的第一个目的是验证风险情境程序(RS)评估的婴儿期亲子激活关系将与幼儿的冒险行为相关的预测,而奇怪情境程序(SSP)评估的亲子依恋关系则不会。第二个目标是验证过度激活二元组儿童的平均冒险得分将显著高于激活和激活不足二元组的儿童的预测。第三个目标是检验父亲-孩子过度活动对儿童冒险行为的影响比母亲-孩子过度激活对儿童冒险风险的影响更大的预测,尤其是对男孩。182名父子和母子在12个月至18个月大之间接受了RS和SSP,父母双方填写了伤害行为清单,以评估24-30个月大时的冒险行为。正如预期的那样,研究结果表明,父母-孩子依恋与冒险行为无关,并证实了母亲-孩子和父亲-孩子过度活跃与儿童冒险行为之间的正相关关系。当父子过度激活和母子过度激活都包含在同一模型中时,只有父子过度激活才能显著预测儿童的冒险行为。最后,母亲和孩子过度活跃的分数越高,男孩承担的风险就越多,这可能会导致伤害。这可能意味着男孩比女孩更容易受到缺乏母亲监督的影响,至少在这么小的时候是这样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Father-Child and Mother–Child Relationships as Predictors of Injury-Risk Behaviors in Toddlers

Abstract

To date, few researchers have focused on the role that the parent–child relationship can play in children’s risk-taking, and none has done so while taking into account the father-child relationship. This paper examines two types of parent–child relationships, the attachment relationship and the activation relationship, both of which are theoretically connected to children’s exploration of their physical and social environment. The first objective of this study was to verify the prediction that the parent–child activation relationship in infancy as assessed with the risky situation procedure (RS) would be associated with toddlers’ risk-taking behaviors, and that parent–child attachment relationship as assessed with the strange situation procedure (SSP) would not. The second objective was to verify the prediction that the mean risk-taking scores of children in overactivated dyads would be significantly higher than those of children in activated and underactivated dyads. The third objective was to test the prediction that father-child overactivation would have a greater effect on children’s risk-taking than mother–child overactivation would, especially for boys. One hundred eighty-two father-child and mother–child dyads underwent the RS and the SSP between the ages of 12 and 18 months, and both parents filled out the Injury Behavior Checklist to assess risk-taking behaviors at 24–30 months old. As expected, the results show that parent–child attachment is not associated with risk-taking and confirm the positive association between both mother–child and father-child overactivation and children’s risk-taking. Only father-child overactivation significantly predicted child risk-taking when both father-child overactivation and mother–child overactivation were included in the same model. Finally, the higher the mother–child overactivation score, the more boys take risks that can lead to injury. This could mean that boys are more sensitive than girls to lack of maternal supervision, at least at this young age.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Finding Silver Linings: Benefit-Finding, Stress, and Depressive Symptoms During the COVID-19 Pandemic Psychological Resilience Mediates the Relationship Between BCE’s and Life Satisfaction: Examining Turkish Students Intersection of Adverse Childhood Experiences, Subjective Well-Being and Social Anxiety among Sojourners in China The Interplay Between Female Caregiver Proactive Coping, Stress, and Adaptive Caregiver Personality on Early Adolescent Internalizing Symptoms During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Moderated-Mediation Model Self-Care Mediates Current Adverse Experiences and Depressive Symptoms Among Emerging Adults
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1