Table 1.

Summary of Study Hypotheses, Tests, and Results

Hypotheses by Approach	Results
Conventional approach
Group-level (correlation)
36m PR & EP within-person average levels are inversely correlated	r = −.66, p < .001
Between-person (multiple regression)
30m EC & 36m EP within-person average levels are positively associated	B = 0.842 (SE = 0.446), p = .062
30m EC & 36m PR within-person average levels are negatively associated	B = −0.110 (SE = 0.187), p > .250
30m NA & 36m EP within-person average levels are negatively associated	B = 0.724 (SE = 0.479), p = .133
30m NA & 36m PR within-person average levels are positively associated	B = −0.154 (SE = 0.200), p > .250
36m EXT & 36m EP within-person average levels are negatively associated	B = −0.011 (SE = 0.032), p > .250
36m EXT & 36m PR within-person average levels are positively associated	B = 0.003 (SE = 0.013), p > .250
Dynamic approach
Group-level (ODE model)
36m olds would self-initiate EP when needed most	γ1,EP= −0.077 (SE = 0.004), p < .001
36m olds’ EP engagement would delay PR resurgence	γ2,PR = 0.063 (SE = 0.003), p < .001
36m olds would display effective self-regulation	γ3,PR0= 0.026 (SE = 0.026), p > .250
Between-person (ODE model)
30m EC & 36m EP baseline levels are positively associated	bEP2 = 0.925 (SE = 0.430), p = .032a
30m EC & 36m PR baseline levels are negatively associated	bPR2 = −0.031 (SE = 0.184), p > .250
30m NA & 36m EP baseline levels are negatively associated	bEP3 = 0.761 (SE = 0.461), p = .099
30m NA & 36m PR baseline levels are positively associated	bPR3 = −0.027 (SE = 0.198), p > .250
36m EXT & 36m EP baseline levels are negatively associated	bEP4 = −0.009 (SE = 0.031), p > .250
36m EXT & 36m PR baseline levels are positively associated	bPR4 = 0.002 (SE = 0.013), p > .250
30m EC & 36m effective self-regulation are positively associated	γ3,PR2 = 0.045 (SE = 0.052), p > .250
30m NA & 36m regulatory inefficiency are positively associated	γ3,PR3 = 0.113 (SE = 0.057), p = .046a
30m NA & 36m regulatory interference are positively associated	γ3,EP3= 0.013 (SE = 0.041), p > .250
36m EXT & 36m regulatory inefficiency are positively associated	γ3,PR4= −0.002 (SE = 0.004), p > .250
36m EXT & 36m regulatory interference are positively associated	γ3,EP4= −0.007 (SE = 0.003), p = .011

Note. PR = Prepotent Response; EP = Executive Process; EC = Effortful Control; NA = Negative Affectivity; EXT = Externalizing Behavior Problems.

^ap-values rose above conventional thresholds (α = .05) following Benjamini-Hochberg correction.