Marital Relationship Quality, Parenting, and Differentiated Self-Regulation: Understanding the Whole Picture
Self-regulation has been defined in a variety of ways. Some researchers label it as a dimension of temperament, a skill such as social competence, or a personality trait such as impulsivity (Calkins, 2004; Novak & Clayton, 2001; Smith & Hart, 2002). However, this study approaches self-regulation from a motivational perspective, emphasizing the importance of self-determination and initiation of choice. Grolnick and Farkas (2002) explain that self-regulation is manifest when children “monitor, plan, guide, and control their behavior” in the process of goal attainment (p. 90). The pursuit of personally relevant goals—in response to personal and environmental circumstances, cues, and feedback—appears to be salient in the majority of self-regulation definitions (Bandura, 1991; Demetriou, 2000; Novak & Clayton, 2001).
The delineation of self-regulation is further complicated by the existence of multiple constructs within self-regulation as a whole. As a multidimensional construct, self-regulation includes cognitive, behavioral, and affective elements that are interrelated, but distinct (Grolnick & Farkas, 2002; Moilanen, 2007), and clearly differentiated across the realms of child functioning (Bandura, 1997). Behavioral regulation refers to the child’s ability to control hyperactivity, aggression, and fidgeting; emotional regulation abilities include controlling extreme affect; and cognitive regulation includes resisting impulses, demonstrating attention to tasks, planning, and avoiding distractions (see Garnefski, Kraaij, & van Etten, 2005; Moilanen, 2007). However, despite evidence suggesting multidimensionality in self-regulation, researchers habitually explore only a single dimension without mention or regard of the other two. This is an unfortunate oversight given that these three constructs are interconnected and child strategies employed to regulate in one realm may foster further development of the others (Kopp, 1982; Moilanen, 2007). While underlying mechanisms for the three types of regulation are the same, more research is requisite to determine how inclusive representations of self-regulation are differentially promoted by socialization influences than are single dimensions. In this paper, I will evaluate how all three types of child self-regulation are influenced by mothering, fathering, and the quality of the marital relationship. (more…)
