Table 3.

Substantive models predicting mother-reported internalizing symptomatology and inhibitory control

Fixed Effects	Internalizing		Inhibitory Control
	b	t	b	t
Intercepta	0.20		4.17
Sex	0.06	1.45	0.15	0.74
Val158Met	0.03	0.75	0.38	2.16*
Parenting Quality	0.05	1.56	−0.01	−0.08
Sex ×Val158Met	−0.10	−2.12*	−0.48	−2.08*
Sex ×Parenting Quality	−0.14	−3.25**	0.53	2.56*
Val158Met ×Parenting Quality	−0.07	−1.98*	0.27	1.58
Sex×Val158Met×Parenting Quality	0.14	2.94**	−0.66	−2.75**
Linear slope	0.05	3.11**	0.36	7.73***
Quadratic slope	−0.02	−2.37*	−0.04	−3.34**
Random Effectsa,b	σ	z	σ	z
Intercept variance	0.013	5.28***	0.325	6.48***
Linear slope variance	0.002	2.80**	0.016	3.36***
Covariance: intercept/linear slope	−0.001	−0.67	−0.010	−0.87
Residual variance	0.010	13.78***	0.136	11.46***
Pseudo r2	9.2%		26.7%

Note: Val, Valine; Met, methionine; sex was dummy coded: 0 = female, 1 = male. Val¹⁵⁸Met was coded dominantly: 0 = Met-Met, 1 = Met-Val/Val-Val. Parenting quality is standardized (M = 0, SD = 1).

^aTime is centered at 24 months for internalizing symptomatology and at 42 months for effortful control.

^bThe random effects differ as a function of time.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^***p < .001.