Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Res Child Adolesc Psychopathol. 2021 Feb 13;50(2):163–176. doi: 10.1007/s10802-021-00779-z

When is Parental Suppression of Black Children’s Negative Emotions Adaptive? The Role of Preparation for Racial Bias and Children’s Resting Cardiac Vagal Tone

Angel S Dunbar 1, Selin Zeytinoglu 2, Esther M Leerkes 3
PMCID: PMC8361870  NIHMSID: NIHMS1687796  PMID: 33582944

Abstract

Research demonstrates that Black parents attempt to suppress children’s expressions of negative emotions (e.g., anger, fear), in part, to protect them from experiencing racial bias from authority figures. The goal of this study was to examine whether the effectiveness of parental suppression strategies in reducing behavior problems depends on whether parents talk to children about the potential of experiencing racism (i.e., preparation for bias) and children’s resting cardiac vagal tone as indexed by baseline respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA). Ninety-four parents (97% mothers) who identified their child as Black (56% girls) completed questionnaires about their punitive and minimizing responses to their child’s negative emotions and their child’s internalizing and externalizing problems at ages 5 and 6. Children’s baseline RSA was assessed at age 5. Results indicated that parents’ suppression of children’s negative emotions predicted decreased externalizing behaviors (e.g., acting out) only when parents talked to their children about racism. When parents did not contextualize their restrictions on children’s emotional expressions with discussions about race, children with higher baseline RSA demonstrated increased externalizing behaviors, whereas those with lower baseline RSA were unaffected. Parental suppression strategies led to increased internalizing symptoms (e.g., anxiety, withdrawal) among children with higher baseline RSA regardless of whether parents discussed racism. Black parents face a conundrum in which suppressing their children’s negative emotions, in hopes of subverting racism, may reduce their children’s externalizing problems under some circumstances, but may increase the risk of their children developing internalizing problems. Implications for systemic policy change to combat racism are discussed.

Keywords: emotion socialization, racial socialization, respiratory sinus arrhythmia, vagal tone, internalizing and externalizing problems

Black children’s normative expressions of negative emotions can have disproportionate negative social consequences given that their behaviors and sometimes mere presence are perceived with racial bias. Research indicates that teachers are more likely to vigilantly monitor Black children’s normal play for signs of misbehavior (Gilliam et al., 2016) and perceive their misbehavior as more hostile and threatening than White children’s (Halberstadt et al., 2018). Likewise, by age 10, police officers view Black boys as less innocent than their White counterparts (Goff et al., 2014). These perceptions can have profound consequences on Black children’s academic and life trajectories, such as lower graduation rates and a higher likelihood of involvement in the criminal justice system (Okonofua, & Eberhardt, 2015).

With such high stakes, it is unsurprising that some studies find that Black parents encourage their children to restrain expressions of anger or exuberance by responding to such emotional expressions in more punitive and minimizing ways (i.e., suppression responses) than White parents (Dunbar et al., 2017). However, it is unclear whether these strategies are adaptive for Black children, leading to reductions in behavioral problems, or counterproductive, contributing to the development of behavior problems (Labella, 2018). Further, little is known regarding how the broader parenting context and child characteristics might impact the effects of parental suppression strategies for Black children. Thus, the goal of the present study was to elucidate the circumstances under which attempts to suppress children’s negative emotions are adaptive or maladaptive. Specifically, we examined whether the impact of suppression on children’s externalizing and internalizing problems depends on whether parents contextualize these responses by talking to their children about racial bias (i.e., preparation for bias), and children’s baseline cardiac vagal tone, indexed by baseline respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA). Researchers propose that baseline RSA reflects children’s differential susceptibility to caregiving experiences during early childhood (Blandon et al., 2008; Conradt, 2013; Eisenberg et al., 2012).

Emotion Socialization

How parents evaluate and respond to their children’s displays of negative emotions is a core aspect of emotion socialization and influences how children evaluate and modulate their own emotions (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Gottman et al., 1997). Early theory and research suggests that parental supportive responses to children’s negative emotions—encouraging children to understand and express their emotions, problem-solving, comforting and redirecting—provide children with opportunities to learn about and practice various ways of coping with their emotions (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Gottman et al., 1997). Conversely, when parents discourage children from expressing themselves by punishing or minimizing negative emotions (i.e., non-supportive or suppression responses), children miss opportunities to learn to understand and regulate their negative emotions and may become restricted in their range of self-regulation strategies; relying on maladaptive strategies such as withdrawal or physical aggression (Fabes et al., 2002; Propper & Moore, 2006).

Recent research suggests a more complex picture with the consideration of developmental and social-cultural factors. Research has consistently linked supportive responses to children’s negative emotions in early childhood to better social-emotional adjustment and suppression responses to maladjustment (Morris et al., 2007). However, some studies suggest a developmental shift around age 5 or 6 whereby supportive responses become more detrimental, and suppression responses become more beneficial in promoting adjustment. For example, in a majority White sample, Mirabile et al., (2018) found that at ages 3 and 4, supportive responses predicted children’s greater emotion regulation and lowered internalizing and externalizing problems; however, from ages 5 to 6, these effects were attenuated or reversed. Similarly, in a sample of ethnically diverse children, Nelson and Boyer (2018) found that suppression responses predicted increased externalizing behaviors at age 5 but decreased externalizing behaviors at age 7. Mechanisms for this developmental shift may include parents’ increased expectations for children to exercise more autonomy in their management of emotions (Mirabile et al., 2018) and children’s entry into formal schooling, a context that often calls for the ability to control emotions. Still, evidence from studies of children above age 5 are mixed with several studies finding support for the traditional conceptualization of supportive responses as adaptive and suppression responses as maladaptive (Labella, 2018).

Social-cultural context is another important factor when considering the adaptiveness of supportive and suppression strategies, especially as children increase interactions with the public sphere. Studies indicate that although Black parents value and support their children’s expressions of all emotions (Parker et al., 2012), they also believe that there are adverse social consequences for their children’s expressions of negative emotions (Nelson et al., 2012), and raise concerns about teachers’ biased perceptions and stereotypes interfering with their children’s academic outcomes (Williams et al., 2017). Consistent with parents’ concerns, research finds that Black children’s expressions of emotions, play, and normative misbehaviors are perceived as more hostile and threatening and punished more harshly by teachers and other adults when compared to the behaviors of their White peers (Côté-Lussier, 2013; Goff et al., 2014; Okonofua & Eberhardt, 2015). These findings hold even in experimental studies using vignettes or child actors in which behaviors presented are the same, and only the child’s race differs (Gilliam et al., 2016; Halberstadt et al., 2018). For example, a study examining anger bias found that preservice teachers were more likely to misinterpret non-angry facial expressions (e.g., neutral, sad, afraid) as angry for Black male and female faces compared to White faces (Halberstadt et al., 2018). Accordingly, evidence suggests that compared to White parents, Black parents are more likely to respond in punitive and minimizing ways to their children’s negative emotions (Labella, 2018). Several qualitative studies find that Black parents encourage children to control negative emotions, particularly in public settings and when they are around authority figures like teachers and police officers (Coard et al., 2004; Thomas & Blackmon, 2015).

However, few studies have examined whether suppression responses predict better adjustment for Black children, and the scant literature is mixed. Some evidence suggests that suppression is adaptive. Black parents’ suppression responses have been linked to less teacher-reported aggression (Smith & Walden, 2001). However, retrospective studies have linked high use of parental suppression with greater trait anger and depression among Black adults (Dunbar et al., 2015; Leerkes et al., 2015). More research is needed to understand the circumstances under which suppression is adaptive for Black children.

Racial and Emotion Socialization

Dunbar and colleagues’ (2017) integrative model of racial and emotion socialization proposes that parents’ suppression of their Black children’s negative emotions constitutes one aspect of a comprehensive strategy known as racial socialization to protect children against the harmful effects of racial bias. Specifically, racial socialization includes the verbal and non-verbal messages that parents relay to children about what it means to be Black in a racist society (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). Preparation for bias, that is, parents’ messages warning children that they may experience unfair treatment due to their race and ways to cope, is one of the most studied dimensions of racial socialization.

The integrative model of racial and emotion socialization (Dunbar et al., 2017) suggests that when parents suppress children’s negative emotions in moderation and in the context of racial socialization, suppression can be adaptive. When parents use suppression in moderation, children still get opportunities to express themselves and learn flexible emotion regulation strategies. Further, when children understand that their parents restrict their negative emotional expression not because such emotions are invalid but to protect them from racial bias, children may interpret such strategies positively, making them less harmful.

Research and theory support that parenting practices impact youth outcomes in part because of the meaning children place on those practices (Leerkes et al., 2015). Further, whether a parenting practice is adaptive or maladaptive depends on the child’s environmental context (Boykin & Toms, 1985). A few retrospective studies found that Black young adults, compared to White young adults, felt less hurt and ashamed in response to their parents’ suppression of their negative emotions; however, parental suppression still positively predicted their trait-level anger (Leerkes et al., 2015; Leerkes et al., 2014). More within-race studies examining the effects of emotion socialization are needed to assess the heterogeneity among Black families; particularly, the nuanced circumstances under which emotion socialization strategies are effective.

To our knowledge, only one study has explicitly examined the racialized context of suppression strategies (Dunbar et al., 2015). Relying on Black young adults’ retrospective accounts and a person-centered approach, Dunbar et al. found that a balance of supportive and suppression responses in tandem with racial socialization (i.e., preparation for bias and emphasis on cultural pride) was associated with lower depressive symptoms. However, retrospective accounts introduce bias such that more psychologically well-adjusted adults may remember their parents’ strategies more positively.

Utilizing prospective methodology, we posit that in the context of explicit discussions about the potential to experience racial bias, parents’ suppression of their Black children’s negative emotions is likely effective in reducing problem behaviors. First, discussions about bias may allow children to perceive their parents’ strategies as protective. Second, parents who discuss race might be more intentional in their use of suppression strategies. Otherwise, suppression might be more indicative of parents’ dysregulation or inability to support children’s ability to understand and regulate their emotions.

Biological Sensitivity to Parental Suppression of Negative Emotions

Dunbar and colleagues’ (2017) integrative model also emphasizes that the effectiveness of parents’ emotion socialization strategies and preparation for bias in promoting adjustment may depend on child characteristics such as temperament as it may impact children’s reactions to parental behaviors. Consistent with this notion, both the differential susceptibility and biological sensitivity to context theories (Belsky & Pluess, 2009; Boyce & Ellis, 2005) suggest that some children may be affected by the environment in a “for better or worse” fashion. Specifically, they may show better outcomes (i.e., lower adjustment problems) in more nurturing and supportive environments, but worse outcomes (i.e., greater adjustment problems) in more stressful environments. On the other hand, other children may be less affected by variations in the environment (Belsky & Pluess, 2009; Boyce & Ellis, 2005; Obradović et al., 2016).

Although multiple biological systems may contribute to children’s biological sensitivity to context, the parasympathetic autonomic nervous system, and in particular the myelinated vagal system, has been proposed as an important one (Boyce & Ellis, 2005). The vagal system works in conjunction with other neurophysiological and neuroanatomical processes via afferent and efferent pathways to regulate individuals’ behavioral responses (Porges, 2011). In particular, via its efferent pathways connected to the heart, the vagal system produces changes in cardiac activity that allow individuals to switch between servicing its metabolic needs (i.e., growth, restoration) and responding to external challenges (Porges, 2011). A well-established index of the vagal system’s functioning or vagal tone is respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA): a high-frequency heart rate variability (HRV) measure reflecting the oscillation in the beat-to-beat heart rate activity that occurs at the frequency of spontaneous breathing (Denver et al., 2007). Although RSA can also be measured during stressful situations (e.g., Zeytinoglu et al., 2020), baseline RSA, which is measured when individuals are in a relaxed state, indexes the tonic influence of the vagal system on the heart and reflects individuals’ typical levels of arousal and ability to maintain homeostasis, and capacity to engage with the environment and respond to external challenges (Calkins, 1997; Porges, 2011).

Children with higher baseline RSA show better attentional capacity and cognitive efficiency when processing environmental stimuli (Marcovitch et al., 2010; Staton et al., 2009). This greater engagement with the environment can manifest itself as greater emotional expressivity in contexts that call for such responses (Beauchaine, 2001). For example, children with higher baseline RSA have demonstrated greater physiological and emotional reactivity (RSA withdrawal) towards emotional challenges such as frustrating tasks (Calkins et al., 2002; Stifter & Fox, 1990), and being left alone with a stranger (Stifter & Fox, 1990). Consistent with evidence linking baseline RSA with emotional expressivity and engagement with the environment, baseline RSA has also been theorized to index sensitivity to context during early childhood. In support of this proposition, children with higher baseline RSA showed more adjustment problems in more stressful contexts but better adjustment in less stressful and more supportive contexts (e.g., Blandon et al., 2008; Conradt et al., 2013; Eisenberg et al., 2002).

There is evidence showing that children with higher baseline RSA are differentially influenced by the caregiving context’s positive and negative aspects. For example, a longitudinal study that followed children from age 4 to 7 found that children with higher baseline RSA showed decrements in emotion regulation if their mothers had higher depression symptoms, but showed improvements in emotion regulation if their mothers had lower depression symptoms (Blandon et al., 2008). Conversely, children with lower baseline RSA showed stable emotion regulation trajectories if their mothers had higher depression symptoms (Blandon et al., 2008). In another study, baseline RSA at 18 months moderated the effect of environmental quality (parental education, family income, and marital adjustment) on aggression trajectories from 18 months to 5 years. In the context of high environmental quality, children with higher baseline RSA showed lower aggression than those with lower RSA, suggesting that they were more susceptible to the positive aspects of the environment (Eisenberg et al., 2012). These studies suggest that children with higher baseline RSA are more susceptible to parenting, demonstrating better adjustment in more supportive contexts, and poorer adjustment in less supportive contexts.

Current Study

Although some evidence suggests that parental suppression of negative emotions is less detrimental for Black compared to White children (Smith & Walden, 2001; Nelson & Boyer, 2018), research has also shown its adverse effects for Black children (Labella, 2018). Emerging theory suggests that parental suppression of Black children’s negative emotions can be adaptive, especially when contextualized by explicit discussions about race; these parental emotion strategies also depend on children’s physiological disposition (Dunbar et al., 2017). Yet, to our knowledge, no study has empirically tested this theory. To address this gap, we examined whether the interaction of parental emotion socialization, racial socialization, and children’s baseline RSA when children were 5 years old predicted their internalizing and externalizing problems at age 6 in a sample of 94 Black children and their primary caregivers. Given that parents must prepare Black children to navigate a racist society, we posit that parental suppression of Black children’s negative emotions (i.e., punitive and minimizing responses), when couched in discussions about racism, may be a supportive parenting strategy, while suppression without racial context may be non-supportive. Further, we examined children’s baseline RSA as a possible indicator of children’s sensitivity to the caregiving context. We expected that children with higher baseline RSA would show the greatest improvements in social-emotional adjustment when parents combined suppression with preparation for bias and the worse detriments to social-emotional adjustment when parents practiced suppression alone.

Specifically, we hypothesized that 1) parental suppression of Black children’s negative emotions would predict increased internalizing and externalizing problems at low levels of preparation for bias and decreased internalizing and externalizing problems at higher levels of preparation for bias, and 2) children’s baseline RSA would moderate this 2-way interaction (creating a 3-way interaction). Specifically, children with higher baseline RSA, when compared to those with lower baseline RSA, would experience higher adjustment when parents combined suppression with preparation for bias, and lower adjustment when parents practiced suppression without preparation for bias.

Methods

Participants

Participants were 94 5-year-old children (56% female) and their primary caregivers (97% mothers) who identified their children as Black or multiracial, including Black. Most parents also self-identified as Black or multiracial, including Black (n = 79, 84%), 13 parents (14%) identified as White, 1 (1%) identified as Asian, and 1 (1%) identified as other (wrote in West Indian). Based on 2016 census data, the approximate racial distribution of the southeastern county where the study was conducted was 57% White alone, 33% Black alone, 4% Asian alone, 4% other races alone, and 2% two or more races. Participants in the current study were part of a larger study (N = 278) examining the link between learning engagement and school success across 3 waves: age 4, 5, and 6. The current study only utilizes data from two waves: age 5 and 6 for which the measure of racial socialization was collected. Parents ranged in age from 20 to 53 years old (M = 34, SD = 7.2). Eleven parents (11.7%) had a high school degree/GED or less, 43 (45.7%) had some college, and 39 (41.5%) had a 4-year college degree or beyond. Thirty-six parents (38.3%) were married and living with their spouse, and 55 (58.5%) were single, cohabiting but not married, divorced, separated, or widowed. Three participants did not respond to this question. Participants’ mean reported family earning was approximately $30k per year. Based on 2016 census data, the per capita income in the study county was approximately $28k, and the median household income was ~$46k (the mean was ~$68k). The median household income of this county is approximately 15% lower than the national median.

Procedures

This study was approved by the University of North Carolina Greensboro Institutional Review Board, protocol #12–0144. Four-year-old children and their primary caregivers were recruited from daycare centers, libraries, recreation centers, and local parks, and through newspaper advertisements and referrals from other participants in a mid-sized city in the Southeastern United States. Upon arrival to the laboratory, parents provided informed written consent and were debriefed about the study’s procedure. Regarding the purpose of the study, parents were told, “During this visit, we are interested in getting information on how your child performs certain problem solving and emotional tasks. While your child is doing many of these activities, we will ask you to provide us with information about your child’s development and about the home, family, and peer environment in which he or she lives. You are free to choose not to participate in the study now, or stop the procedures at any point, by simply letting the researcher know that you do not wish to continue. You will be compensated $100 for your participation today, regardless of whether or not you complete the entire assessment.” Children were told, “ Today, we’re going to play a lot of fun games together. We are going to play some games with puppets and pictures, and some games on the computer. Also today, we get to go on a space/princess adventure (children were allowed to choose their preferred sticker chart which was used to reward children for the completion of tasks)! You will get to wear a really cool space/princess hat that listens to what your brain has to say and wear some stickers on your tummy and back that listen to your heartbeat! Are you ready?” Upon completion of the laboratory visit and questionnaires, caregivers were compensated $100 each for the 5-year and 6-year assessments and children were given a toy. More details regarding procedures can be found in online supplemental materials.

Measures

Further validity information on measures can be found in online supplemental materials.

Suppression Responses.

The Coping with Children’s Negative Emotions Scale (CCNES; Fabes et al., 2002) was used at age 5 to measure the degree to which parents suppress their child’s negative emotions in distressing situations. Parent participants were asked to rate on a 7-point scale from 1 (very unlikely) to 7 (very likely) how likely they are to respond in various ways to 12 hypothetical scenarios in which their child is upset. Given our focus on parents’ suppression of children’s negative emotions, we used the following two subscales: punitive responses (e.g., “send my child to his/her room to cool off”) and minimization (e.g., “tell my child that he/she is being a baby”). These two scales were highly correlated (r = .81, p < .001) and thus were averaged to create a composite. Internal reliability was high (α = .90).

Preparation for Bias.

Preparation for racial bias was measured at age 5 using the preparation for bias subscale of the Parents’ Messages about Race scale (PMR; Hughes & Chen, 1997). The preparation for bias subscale included 7 items (e.g., “Talked with your child about the possibility that some people might treat him/her badly or unfairly because of his/her ethnicity/race.”). Parent participants were asked to indicate on a 6-point scale from 0 (never) to 5 (8 times or more) how often they engaged in specific behaviors with their target child in the past 12 months. Internal reliability was high (α = .90).

Baseline RSA.

Cardiac data were collected at age 5, approximately 20–25 min after children arrived in the lab to allow children time to adjust to the lab setting. After familiarizing the participant with the equipment, the experimenter applied seven pre-gelled disposable spot electrodes to the child’s skin and directed the child to sit on a chair in front of a computer monitor placed on a table (Zeytinoglu et al., 2020). Baseline RSA was measured during two tasks: the fish and statue tasks. During the fish task (2 minutes), children watched a video of colorful fish swimming. Before the task, children were told that they should stay in their seat and watch quietly as not to scare the fish. During the statue task (1 minute), children watched numbers decreasing gradually from 60 to 0 at the center of the computer screen. Before the task, children were told to sit still and quietly until the number on the screen gets to zero.

The Mindware BioNex 8-slot chassis was used to record both ECG and impedance cardiogram (ICG) signals simultaneously at the sampling rate of 1000Hz. Mindware Technologies HRV 3.0 analysis software was used to calculate RSA. RSA was estimated as the natural logarithm of the variance of heart period within the respiratory frequency range of 0.24–1.04 Hz. Impedance waveform (Z0) was selected as the respiration signal to be used to validate the RSA frequency band. Epoch durations were specified as 30-seconds. Trained researchers visually inspected each epoch to correct misidentified beats and check for data quality. Scores derived from the epochs were averaged to create mean RSA scores for the two baseline tasks, and task scores were retained if there was a minimum of 2 artifact-free epochs for each task (Zeytinoglu et al., 2020). RSA scores from the baseline tasks were strongly correlated (r = .83, p < .001), and they were averaged to create an overall baseline RSA score. Higher scores indicated greater baseline RSA or vagal tone.

Internalizing and Externalizing Problems.

The Child Behavior Checklist 4–18 years (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991) includes 113 items that assess a broad range of child behavioral/emotional problems and was collected at age 5 and 6. Parent participants were asked to indicate how well each item described the child currently or within the last six months using a scale of 0 = Not True, 1 = Somewhat or Sometimes True, and 2 = Very True or Often True. The Internalizing (e.g., “feels worthless or inferior”) and Externalizing (e.g., “cruelty, bullying, or meanness to others”) total scores were used.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Missing data.

Less than 10% of data were missing overall, and the data were missing completely at random (MCAR) based on Little’s test, χ2 (73) = 47.8, p = .99.

Descriptive statistics.

Descriptive statistics and correlations among study variables are presented in Table 1. We discuss the spread of key variables here to give context to the results and discussion. On a scale from 1 to 7, the mean score for parents’ likelihood to respond to children’s negative emotions in punitive and minimizing ways was 2.4: a score squarely between 1 (very unlikely) and 4 (moderate likelihood). Further, the highest score in the sample was 5.38, indicating that participants in this sample engaged in low to moderate levels of emotion suppression. Regarding preparation for bias, 28% of the sample (33% of non-Black parents and 27% of Black parents) had not engaged in preparation for bias messages in the past year. However, 72% of the sample (67% of non-Black parents and 73% of Black parents) engaged in some preparation for bias (i.e., had a score higher than 0-never) at age 5. On a scale from 0 (never) to 5 (8 times or more in the past year), the mean was .9, meaning that on average, parents engaged in various indicators of preparation for bias about once per year. T-tests indicated that Black and non-Black parents did not differ in their use of suppression, t = −.01 (df = 92), p = .99, but Black parents reported significantly more use of preparation for bias (M = .98) than non-Black parents (M = .41), t = −3.11 (df = 48.9), p < .01. Bivariate correlations indicated that emotion suppression was positively correlated with age 5 internalizing and externalizing problems. The problem behavior scores were correlated at each year. No other bivariate correlations were present. Most of the sample exhibited non-clinical levels of internalizing and externalizing problems, although clinical levels increased from age 5 to 6 with 6.7% and 9% in the clinical range for internalizing and externalizing symptoms, respectively. See supplemental materials for all normal, borderline, and clinical percentages.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Correlations among all Study Variables (N = 94)

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Parental Suppression
Responses – Age 5		 --
2. Parental Preparation
for Bias – Age 5		 .03 --
3. Child Baseline Respiratory
Sinus Arrhythmia – Age 5		 −.10 −.00 --
4. Child Internalizing
Problems – Age 5		 .23* −.07 −.04 --
5. Child Internalizing
Problems – Age 6		 .02 −.04 .11 .55*** --
6. Child Externalizing
Problems – Age 5		 .21* −.04 −.06 .66*** .39*** --
7. Child Externalizing
Problems – Age 6		 .12 −.11 .06 .51*** .65*** .70*** --
Minimum - Maximum 1.11–5.38 0–5 4.07–9.50 0–13 0–29 0–21 0–32
Mean 2.43 .89 7.58 3.11 4.89 6.48 8.43
Standard Deviation .87 1.09 1.01 2.81 4.81 4.67 6.58
Open in a new tab

Note.

*

p < .05,

***

p < .001

Regression Analyses

Plan of analyses.

We examined the study hypotheses using Mplus version 8.2 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2018) and Bayesian estimation. Bayesian estimation, compared to frequentist analyses such as maximum likelihood, is advantageous for models with small sample sizes and non-normal parameters such as interaction terms (Van de Schoot et al., 2014). Further, the credibility interval (CI) using the Bayesian approach is intuitive; it reflects a 95% probability that the parameter falls between the lower and upper limits in the population. The Bayesian approach treats missing data values as parameters to be estimated. We ran two separate models for age 6 externalizing problems and age 6 internalizing problems, controlling for age 5 problems.

All variables were specified as manifest, and all independent variables were standardized before inclusion in the models. If the three-way interaction was significant, we did not interpret the significant two-way interactions. However, if the three-way interaction was not significant, we interpreted any significant two-way interactions. Rather than using the arbitrary +/− 1 SD high and low values for our continuous moderators, we used the Johnson-Neyman regions of significance technique to determine the specific values (or regions) of the moderator for which x significantly predicted y (Hayes & Matthes, 2009). In the case of a 3-way interaction, the Johnson-Neyman technique determines regions of significance for the 2-way interaction predicting y at values of the 2nd moderator. The Johnson-Neyman technique can be implemented to probe significant interactions using the MODEL CONSTRAINT and PLOT commands in Mplus. We ran initial models with demographic variables (i.e., parent age, income, education, and marital status); however, their inclusion did not change the pattern or significance of results and were omitted in final analyses.

Externalizing problem results.

Results of the regression analyses are presented in Table 2. Results indicated that age 5 externalizing problems was the strongest predictor of age 6 externalizing problems, explaining 47% of the total variance. There were no significant main effects. As predicted, there was a significant 2-way interaction between suppression responses to children’s negative emotions and preparation for bias, b = −2.35, 95% CI [−3.87, −1.18], that was conditional upon levels of children’s baseline RSA. The two-way interaction was significant at −.9 SDs below the mean or higher for baseline RSA, and the magnitude of the interaction increased as RSA increased. Thus, we plotted the two-way interaction at −1 SD below the mean of RSA (at which the interaction was not significant) and 1 SD above the mean of RSA.

Table 2.

Multiple regression of parental suppression responses to children’s negative emotions, preparation for bias, and children’s baseline respiratory sinus arrhythmia predicting children’s externalizing and internalizing problems (N = 94)

Externalizing Problems – Age 6 Internalizing Problems – Age 6
Age 5 Variables b (β) Posterior SD 95% CI b (β) Posterior SD 95% CI
Lower Upper Lower Upper
R2 = .47 R2 = .29
Problem Behaviors 4.82 (.72)*** .49 3.85 5.76 2.79 (.58)*** .45 1.91 3.64
R2 = .50 R2 = .34
Suppression Responses 0.27 (.04) .59 −0.92 1.37 0.12 (.03) .53 −0.90 1.12
Preparation for Bias −0.60 (−.09) .51 −1.56 0.36 0.05 (.01) .45 −0.78 0.93
Baseline RSA 0.73 (.11) .54 −0.49 1.71 0.67 (.14) .47 −0.26 1.63
R2 = .58 R2 = .42
Suppression*Preparation −2.35 (−.39)*** .66 −3.87 −1.18 0.06 (.01) .60 −1.01 1.26
Suppression*Baseline RSA 1.00 (.17)* .50 0.04 1.98 1.20 (.28)* .47 0.32 2.12
Preparation*Baseline RSA −0.32 (−.05) .51 −1.40 0.62 −0.04 (−.01) .48 −1.02 0.91
R2 = .62 R2 = .43
Suppression*Preparation*Baseline RSA −1.49 (−.31)*** .60 −2.78 −0.37 −0.12 (−.03) .53 −1.22 0.96
Open in a new tab

Note. Two-tailed p value displayed:

*

p < .05,

**

p < .01,

***

p < .001

Unstandardized coefficient and posterior standard deviation displayed. Standardized beta provided in parentheses.

The table displays separate regression models for externalizing and internalizing problems

Externalizing model fit: Posterior Predictive P-value = .286, 95% CI {−18.384, 34.696], Potential Scale Reduction Factor = 1.02

Internalizing model fit: Posterior Predictive P-value = .173, 95% CI {−7.011, 34.836], Potential Scale Reduction Factor = 1.01

As seen in Figure 1, and consistent with hypotheses, children with higher baseline RSA (see black lines) benefited when parents’ suppression of their negative emotions were paired with preparation for bias, and uniquely suffered if suppression was practiced without preparation for bias. Specifically, for children with higher baseline RSA, parental suppression responses to their negative emotions predicted greater externalizing problems from age 5 to 6 when preparation for bias was low (−.8 SDs or lower), b = 4.34, 95% CI [2.24, 6.66], and reduced externalizing problems when preparation for bias was higher (1.2 SDs or higher), b = −3.39, 95% CI [−7.00, −.23]. For children with lower baseline RSA (lower than −.9 SDs below the mean; see gray lines), preparation for bias did not significantly moderate the link between suppression and children’s externalizing problems. However, to note, while the slopes for lower baseline RSA did not significantly differ from one another, the simple slope for high preparation for bias and low RSA was significant and negative. Thus, suppression paired with higher preparation for bias predicted lower externalizing problems both for children with higher (+1 SD) and lower RSA (−1 SD). However, suppression in the context of low preparation for bias predicted higher externalizing problems for children with higher RSA while children with lower RSA were unaffected. The full model explained 62% of the variance in age 6 externalizing problems.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Interaction between parental suppression responses to children’s negative emotions, preparation for bias (PFB), and children’s baseline respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) predicting age 6 externalizing problems, adjusting for age 5 externalizing problems.

Internalizing problems results.

Results indicated that age 5 internalizing problems was the strongest predictor of age 6 internalizing problems, explaining 29% of the total variance. There were no significant main effects. However, there was a significant 2-way interaction between suppression responses to children’s negative emotions and children’s baseline RSA. As seen in Figure 2, for children with lower baseline RSA (−1.1 SD below the mean and lower), suppression responses to their negative emotions predicted lower internalizing problems from age 5 to 6, b = −1.24, 95% CI [−2.36, −.03]. For children with higher baseline RSA (1.7 SDs above the mean and higher), suppression responses predicted higher internalizing problems from age 5 to 6, b = 2.13, 95% CI [.01, 4.24]. Suppression had no impact on internalizing problems when baseline RSA was between −1.1 and 1.7 SDs. The conditional 2-way interaction (or 3-way interaction) was not significant, b = −.12, 95% CI [−1.22, .96]. The full model explained 43% of the variance in age 6 internalizing problems.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Interaction between parental suppression responses to children’s negative emotions and children’s baseline respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) predicting age 6 internalizing problems, adjusting for age 5 internalizing problems.

Supplemental analyses.

We ran power analysis and supplemental analyses with alternative model specifications. Power analysis using Monte Carlo simulation in Mplus indicated that our sample provided sufficient power to detect standardized coefficients of about .2 and higher as significant (details and output can be found in online supplemental materials). Because the CCNES includes a higher number of vignettes that ask parents about their responses to children’s sadness/anxiety than about anger/frustration, we ran separate models for sadness/anxiety and anger/frustration vignettes to test for replication. Results indicated that the 3-way interaction from the externalizing model and the 2-way interaction from the internalizing model remained significant with both types of CCNES vignette. Although beyond the scope of this paper, we explored whether the effect of the interaction between parental suppression and preparation for bias was further moderated by child gender. The link between suppression and externalizing problems was moderated by preparation for bias, b = −3.55, p = .03; but this two-way interaction was not conditional upon child gender, b = 2.12, p = .19. There was a significant 2-way interaction between parental suppression responses and child gender, b = 3.97, p = .000, such that parental suppression of negative emotions predicted lower externalizing problems in boys, b = −2.68, p = .002, but predicted greater externalizing problems in girls, b = 1.27, p = .01. In the internalizing problems model, there was a significant 3-way interaction, b = 2.75, p = .04. Specifically, when preparation for bias was low, suppression had no impact on internalizing problems for either boys, b =.15, p = .44, or girls, b = .09, p = .44. When preparation for bias was higher, suppression predicted boys’ lower internalizing problems, b = −5.97, p = .000, but had no impact for girls, b = −.58, p = .20. Overall, results indicated that suppression and preparation for bias may be especially effective in reducing boys’ problem behaviors. Given that our main analyses revealed that children with higher baseline RSA uniquely suffered when parents suppressed their negative emotions in the context of low preparation for bias, these supplementary results should be interpreted with caution, keeping in mind that we did not have the power to simultaneously test the role of both child RSA and gender.

Discussion

Dunbar and colleagues’ integrative model of racial and emotion socialization (2017) proposed that Black parents’ suppression of their children’s negative emotional expressions, in an effort to subvert racial bias, might be most effective at reducing behavior problems when parents explicitly discuss the potential risk for experiencing racism and ways to cope. Dunbar et al. further emphasized the importance of considering children’s temperament regarding the effectiveness of these strategies. Based on previous work suggesting that children’s baseline RSA may reflect biological sensitivity to context (e.g., Conradt et al., 2013; Eisenberg et al., 2012), we examined whether children’s baseline RSA moderated the effects of parental suppression of Black children’s negative emotions and parents’ preparation for bias on changes in internalizing and externalizing problems from age 5 to 6.

Given contested theories around the potential harm of punishing and minimizing children’s negative emotions, the novel contribution of this study was the finding that parental suppression of Black children’s negative emotional expressions in the context of preparation for bias predicted children’s decreased externalizing problems. However, when parents suppressed children’s negative emotions without conversations about racial bias, children with higher baseline RSA (reflecting greater sensitivity to context) uniquely suffered, demonstrating increased externalizing problems. Children with higher baseline RSA also uniquely demonstrated increased internalizing problems when their parents suppressed their negative emotions regardless of preparation for bias. Results were generally consistent with Dunbar and colleagues’ theory and with findings showing that children with higher baseline RSA are disproportionately affected by less emotionally supportive caregiving compared to those with lower baseline RSA (Blandon et al., 2008; Conradt et al., 2013).

Nuances by Child Outcome

Supportive caregiving is considered one of the most important predictors of childhood social-emotional well-being (Gottman et al., 1997). Regarding parental emotion socialization, specifically, how parents respond to children’s negative emotions, there is increasing discourse around whether sanctions to restrict children’s emotional expressions are a supportive practice as children enter primary school when controlling emotions becomes more important, and particularly for Black children for whom emotional expressions are often met with harsher punishments (Okonofua et al., 2015). Studies with children at and above age 5 find mixed support for the adaptiveness of parental suppression (Labella, 2018). Our findings suggest that parents’ suppression responses, when contextualized by preparation for bias, can promote Black primary school-aged children’s social and emotional adjustment. However, suppression without preparation for bias may be detrimental for children with higher baseline RSA who may be prone to developing externalizing problems without this context.

Qualitative studies demonstrate that Black parents prepare children for racism often in reaction to current events such as the Trayvon Martin case (the shooting of an unarmed Black teenager) or children’s personal encounters; advising children to use emotion control techniques like deep breathing to stay calm around authority (Thomas & Blackmon, 2015). Thus, parents who suppress emotions in the context of preparation for bias may focus on restricting outward expressions in public contexts, making suppression effective in reducing externalizing problems. Parents who discouraged children’s emotional expressions without preparation for bias may suppress children’s emotions across home and public contexts. Constant suppression like this would not allow children opportunities to learn and practice healthy ways to express their negative emotions, resulting in greater aggression and dysregulation in subsequent emotionally evocative situations (Propper & Moore, 2006). Further, preparation for bias may provide children the cognitive framing necessary to understand that their parents’ punitive and minimizing practices have an intention of protection. Thus, parents’ constant suppression of children’s negative emotions across contexts and without the framing of preparation for bias may be counterproductive, leading to the very behaviors that parents attempt to suppress. Consistent with the theory that baseline RSA reflects children’s sensitivity to context (Calkins et al., 2002), children with higher baseline RSA were particularly affected by the context in which parents suppressed their emotions.

Regarding internalizing problems, preparation for bias did not influence whether suppressing children’s negative emotions was adaptive or maladaptive; instead, children were differentially impacted depending on level of baseline RSA. Although suppressing children’s expressions of negative emotions when framed by messages that prepare children for racial bias was effective at reducing children’s externalizing behaviors like acting out, results suggest that discouraging children’s emotional expressions may increase the depression, anxiety, and withdrawal symptoms of children with higher baseline RSA regardless of preparation for bias framing. The protective role of preparation for bias regarding externalizing problems may not be relevant for internalizing problems because preparation for bias focuses heavily on minimizing outward behaviors that could exacerbate others’ racist perceptions. Children with lower baseline RSA were not impacted by suppression absent of preparation for bias regarding externalizing problems and demonstrated decreased internalizing problems regardless of preparation for bias, indicating they were less sensitive to the potentially harmful effects of suppression strategies.

Notably, there is also evidence suggesting that higher baseline RSA and HRV are at least modestly associated with better self-regulation outcomes (Holzman & Bridgett, 2017) and lower psychopathology symptoms (Beauchaine & Thayer, 2015). Thus, if considered as a direct marker of better self-regulation and mental health, one may expect higher baseline RSA to protect children from negative emotion socialization experiences. However, consistent with other findings (e.g., Blandon et al., 2008; Conradt et al., 2013), our findings suggest that higher baseline RSA may reflect children’s susceptibility to caregiving influences in a for better or worse fashion.

The Importance of Parental Suppression in Context

While informative, previous comparative studies that have found suppression to be more adaptive for Black children than White children (Labella, 2018) assumed, without explicit measurement, that a racialized parenting and environmental context explained the adaptivity of suppression. Comparative studies further mask heterogeneity within Black families, failing to capture the circumstances under which suppression may be maladaptive even for Black children. The present study is the first to our knowledge to examine parents’ discussions about racial bias and children’s physiological disposition as factors that qualify whether suppressing children’s negative emotions is effective or detrimental.

Our results are consistent with recent findings that parental suppression may promote social-emotional adjustment for primary school-age children (Nelson & Boyer, 2018), and contributes to the literature by elucidating the circumstances under which suppression is counterproductive. One other study to our knowledge examined the combined effect of parental emotion and racial socialization but relied on retrospective accounts of Black young adults and did not consider the role of children’s physiology (Dunbar et al. 2015). Our prospective results are consistent with findings by Dunbar et al. (2015) that moderate suppression and preparation for bias were adaptive. Our focus on the physiological disposition of the child further elucidated for whom suppression was adaptive.

Preparation for Bias

The present results should be interpreted keeping the characteristics of the sample in mind. Few studies examine preparation for bias among young children and those that have found adverse effects at high levels (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). However, despite conventional wisdom that parents of young children do not relay preparation for bias messages, we found that 72% of parents in our sample were discussing race and discrimination at age 5, a percentage comparable to samples with children in middle childhood and adolescence (Hughes et al., 2006). However, on a scale from 0 (never) to 5 (8 times or more in the past year), the mean was .89, meaning that on average, parents engaged in various indicators of preparation for bias infrequently, about once per year. Therefore, “low” preparation for bias (.8 SDs below the mean) substantively meant no preparation for bias, whereas “high” or “higher” preparation for bias (1.2 SDs above the mean) substantively meant that various preparation for bias messages were relayed about 2–3 times in the past year. Therefore, it was detrimental for parents not to engage in any preparation for bias, but moderate levels were protective in reducing children’s externalizing problems. Because studies have found both positive and negative effects of preparation for bias (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020), studies have examined the effect of preparation for bias by frequency and in the context of developmental stage, gender, neighborhood risk, and parent-child factors such as relationship quality. Our findings suggest that child characteristics, such as baseline parasympathetic activity, should also be considered.

Strengths, Limitations, and Future Directions

The strengths of this study include a prospective and within-group methodology to understand the heterogeneity of experiences within Black families. The measurement of racial socialization and children’s baseline RSA as moderators of parental suppression responses is a novel contribution to both the emotion and racial socialization literatures. However, the study did have limitations. First, suppression responses were assessed separately from preparation for bias. Qualitative research indicates that these processes are often integrated in Black families (Thomas & Blackmon, 2015). Future research should examine whether suppression is more effective when immediately contextualized by conversations about bias vs. when practiced separately. Next, although we had sufficient power to test our hypotheses, a larger sample would improve generalizability and the ability to better examine the role of child gender. Further, this community sample was from a mid-sized metropolitan city; most parents were college-educated whose children exhibited subclinical problem behaviors. Future studies should test whether parents from more at-risk neighborhoods endorse higher levels of suppression and preparation for bias and the subsequent impact on child outcomes. Finally, all variables aside from RSA were parent-report, thus, effect sizes could be inflated due to shared method variance. Future research may consider incorporating parental observations and teacher-reports of child-behavior.

Implications and Conclusion

Learning to control negative emotions helps facilitate positive social interactions, which is particularly important once children begin formal schooling (Nelson & Boyer, 2018). Black children face the additional burden of their normative behaviors being more heavily scrutinized (Gilliam et al., 2016). Parenting interventions focused on promoting supportive emotion socialization practices should keep in mind that what qualifies as “supportive” depends on various developmental and socio-cultural factors. Parental restrictions on children’s negative emotional expressions can be adaptive if children understand the reasons behind these sanctions and are given opportunities to express their emotions in healthy ways. The Engaging, Managing, and Bonding through Race (EMBRace) program (Anderson et al., 2019), is an emerging intervention aimed at helping Black parents understand how racial trauma contributes to their racial socialization strategies, and helping Black parents and youth competently appraise, resolve and cope with racial encounters together. Although EMBRace is a targeted racial socialization intervention, elements can be incorporated into emotion socialization focused parenting interventions involving Black families. For example, interventions can explore the role of Black parents’ own racial trauma and negative emotions (particularly fear) when they see their Black children express negative emotions in public. Interventions that help parents identify the reasons why they engage in restrictive emotion socialization practices could facilitate the use of such strategies in moderation while bolstering parents’ ability to model and communicate effective emotion regulation strategies to deal with racism-related distress.

Research suggests that Black children’s emotional expressions like sadness, fear, and even neutral facial expressions are more likely to be misperceived as anger than the expressions of their White counterparts (Halberstadt et al., 2018). Thus, Black parents’ suppression and preparation for bias strategies may prove successful at reducing externalizing problems, but may not subvert racial bias and its consequences. The racial stratification of schools and communities are placing parents of Black children in a predicament in which their efforts at avoiding long-term consequences like school push-out and encounters with the justice system may have deleterious consequences on internalizing mental health problems. Internalizing problems like depression and anxiety in childhood increase risks of psychopathology and suicide ideology in adolescence and adulthood (Lindsey et al., 2019), and thus pose a significant public health problem. As Black children continue to get pushed out of schools and into prisons at disproportionate rates and as suicide rates among Black youth is on the rise (Lindsey et al., 2019), it is increasingly urgent for institutions to address systemic causes of these detrimental outcomes. Policies that require police, teachers, and other authority figures to confront their biases and face consequences for discrimination should be implemented to combat the harmful effects of racism on Black families.

Supplementary Material

1687796_Supp_info

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by award number 5R01HD071957 and award supplement number R01HD071957-03 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development. The content is solely the authors’ responsibility and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development or the National Institutes of Health.

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This Author Accepted Manuscript is a PDF file of an unedited peer-reviewed manuscript that has been accepted for publication but has not been copyedited or corrected. The official version of record that is published in the journal is kept up to date and so may therefore differ from this version.

References

  1. Anderson RE, McKenny MC, & Stevenson HC (2019). EMBRace: Developing a Racial Socialization Intervention to Reduce Racial Stress and Enhance Racial Coping among Black Parents and Adolescents. Family Process, 58(1), 53–67. https://doi-org.proxy-um.researchport.umd.edu/10.1111/famp.12412 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Achenbach TM (1991). Manual for Child Behavior Checklist/4–18 and 1991 Profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry. [Google Scholar]
  3. Beauchaine TP, & Thayer JF (2015). Heart rate variability as a transdiagnostic biomarker of psychopathology. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 98(2), 338–350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Beauchaine T (2001). Vagal tone, development, and Gray’s motivational theory: Toward an integrated model of autonomic nervous system functioning in psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 13(2), 183–214. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Belsky J, & Pluess M (2009). Beyond diathesis stress: differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Psychological Bulletin, 135(6), 885–908. 10.1037/a0017376 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Blandon AY, Calkins SD, Keane SP, & O’Brien M (2008). Individual differences in trajectories of emotion regulation processes: the effects of maternal depressive symptomatology and children’s physiological regulation. Developmental Psychology, 44(4), 1110–1123. 10.1037/0012-1649.44.4.1110 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Boyce WT, & Ellis BJ (2005). Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary–developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Development and Psychopathology, 17(02), 271–301. 10.1017/S0954579405050145 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Boykin AW, & Toms FD (1985). Black child socialization: A conceptual framework. In McAdoo HP & McAdoo JL (Eds.), Black children: Social, educational, and parental environments (Sage focus, pp. 33–51). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  9. Calkins SD. (1997). Cardiac vagal tone indices of temperamental reactivity and behavioral regulation in young children. Developmental Psychobiology, 31(2), 125–135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Calkins Susan D., Dedmon SE, Gill KL, Lomax LE, & Johnson LM (2002). Frustration in infancy: Implications for emotion regulation, physiological processes, and temperament. Infancy, 3(2), 175–197. 10.1207/S15327078IN0302_4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Coard SI, Wallace SA, Stevenson HC, & Brotman LM (2004). Towards culturally relevant preventive interventions: The consideration of racial socialization in parent training with African American families. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 13(3), 277–293. 10.1023/B:JCFS.0000022035.07171.f8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Conradt E, Measelle J, & Ablow JC (2013). Poverty, problem behavior, and promise: differential susceptibility among infants reared in poverty. Psychological Science, 24(January), 235–242. 10.1177/0956797612457381 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Côté-Lussier C (2013). Fight fire with fire: The effect of perceived anger on punitive intuitions. Emotion, 13(6), 999–1003. 10.1037/a0034308 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Denver JW, Reed SF, & Porges SW (2007). Methodological issues in the quantification of respiratory sinus arrhythmia. Biological Psychology, 74(2), 286–294. 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2005.09.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Dunbar AS, Leerkes EM, Coard SI, Supple AJ, & Calkins S (2017). An Integrative Conceptual Model of Parental Racial/Ethnic and Emotion Socialization and Links to Children’s Social-Emotional Development Among African American Families. Child Development Perspectives, 11(1), 16–22. 10.1111/cdep.12218 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Dunbar AS, Perry NB, Cavanaugh AM, & Leerkes EM (2015). African American parents’ racial and emotion socialization profiles and young adults’ emotional adaptation. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(3), 409–419. 10.1037/a0037546 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Eisenberg N, Cumberland A, & Spinrad TL (1998). Parental Socialization of Emotion. In Psychological Inquiry (Vol. 9, Issue 4, pp. 241–273). 10.1207/s15327965pli0904_1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Eisenberg N, Sulik MJ, Spinrad TL, Edwards A, Eggum ND, Liew J, Sallquist J, Popp TK, Smith CL, & Hart D (2012). Differential susceptibility and the early development of aggression: Interactive effects of respiratory sinus arrhythmia and environmental quality. Developmental Psychology, 48(3), 755–768. 10.1037/a0026518 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Fabes R, Poulin R, Eisenberg N, & Madden-Derdich DA (2002). The Coping with Children’s Negative Emotions Scale (CCNES): Psychometric properties and relations with children’s emotional competence. Marriage & Family Review, 32, 285–310. 10.1300/J002v34n03 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Gilliam WS, Maupin AN, & Reyes CR (2016). Early educators’ implicit biases regarding sex and race relate to behavior expectations and recommendations of preschool expulsions and suspensions? Yale Child Study Center, 991–1013. [Google Scholar]
  21. Goff PA, Jackson MC, & Leone B. Di. (2014). The essence of innocence: Consequences of dehumanizing Black children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(4), 526–545. 10.1037/a0035663 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Gottman JM, Katz LF, & Hooven C (1997). Meta-emotion: How families communicate emotionally (Gottman JM, Katz LF, & Hooven C (eds.)). Psychology Press. [Google Scholar]
  23. Halberstadt AG, Castro VL, Chu Q, Lozada FT, & Sims CM (2018). Preservice teachers’ racialized emotion recognition, anger bias, and hostility attributions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54, 125–138. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hayes AF, & Matthes J (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior research methods, 41(3), 924–936. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Holzman JB, & Bridgett DJ (2017). Heart rate variability indices as bio-markers of top-down self-regulatory mechanisms: A meta-analytic review. Neuroscience & biobehavioral reviews, 74, 233–255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Hughes D, & Chen L (1997). When and What Parents Tell Children About Race: An Examination of Race-Related Socialization Among African American Families. Applied Developmental Science, 1(4), 200–214. 10.1207/s1532480xads0104_4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Hughes D, Rodriguez J, Smith EP, Johnson DJ, Stevenson HC, & Spicer P (2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: a review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 747–770. 10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Labella MH (2018). The sociocultural context of emotion socialization in African American families. In Clinical Psychology Review (Vol. 59, pp. 1–15). Elsevier Inc. 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.10.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Leerkes EM, Supple AJ, Su J, & Cavanaugh AM (2015). Links Between Remembered Childhood Emotion Socialization and Adult Adjustment: Similarities and Differences Between European American and African American Women. Journal of Family Issues, 36(13), 1854–1877. 10.1177/0192513X13505567 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Leerkes Esther M, Supple AJ, & Gudmunson JA (2014). Ethnic Differences in Women’s Emotional Reactions to Parental Non-Supportive Emotion Socialization. Marriage & Family Review, 50(5), 435–446. 10.1080/01494929.2014.897671 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Lindsey MA, Sheftall AH, Xiao Y, & Joe S (2019). Trends of Suicidal Behaviors Among High School Students in the United States: 1991–2017. Pediatrics, 144(5). 10.1542/peds.2019-1187 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Marcovitch S, Leigh J, Calkins SD, Leerks EM, O’Brien M, & Blankson AN (2010). Moderate vagal withdrawal in 3.5-year-old children is associated with optimal performance on executive function tasks. Developmental Psychobiology, 52(6), 603–608. 10.1002/dev.20462 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Mirabile SP, Oertwig D, & Halberstadt AG (2018). Parent emotion socialization and children’s socioemotional adjustment: when is supportiveness no longer supportive?. Social Development, 27(3), 466–481. 10.1111/sode.12226 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Morris AS, Silk JS, Steinberg L, Myers SS, & Robinson LR (2007). The role of the family context in the development of emotion regulation. Social Development, 16(2), 361–388. 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00389.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Muthén LK, & Muthén B (2018). Mplus. The comprehensive modeling program for applied researchers: user’s guide, 8.2
  36. Nelson JA, & Boyer BP (2018). Maternal responses to negative emotions and child externalizing behavior: Different relations for 5-, 6-, and 7-year-olds. Social Development, 27(3), 482–494. 10.1111/sode.12296 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Nelson JA, Leerkes EM, O’Brien M, Calkins SD, & Marcovitch S (2012). African American and European American mothers’ beliefs about negative emotions and emotion socialization practices. Parenting: Science and Practice, 12(1), 22–41. 10.1080/15295192.2012.638871 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Obradović J, Portilla XA, & Ballard PJ (2016). Biological sensitivity to family income: Differential effects on early executive functioning. Child Development, 87(2), 374–384. 10.1111/cdev.12475 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Okonofua JA, & Eberhardt JL (2015). Two strikes: race and the disciplining of young students. Psychological Science, 26(5), 617–624. 10.1177/0956797615570365 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Parker AE, Halberstadt AG, Dunsmore JC, Townley G, Bryant A, Thompson JA, & Beale KS (2012). Emotions are a window into one’s heart”: a qualitative analysis of parental beliefs about children’s emotions across three ethnic groups. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 77(3), 1–136. 10.1111/j.1540-5834.2012.00676.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Porges SW (2011). The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological foundations of emotions, attachment, communication, and self-regulation (Norton Series on Interpersonal Neurobiology). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. [Google Scholar]
  42. Propper C, & Moore G. a. (2006). The influence of parenting on infant emotionality: A multi-level psychobiological perspective. Developmental Review, 26, 427–460. 10.1016/j.dr.2006.06.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Van de Schoot R, Kaplan D, Denissen J, Asendorpf JB, Neyer FJ, & Van Aken MA (2014). A gentle introduction to Bayesian analysis: Applications to developmental research. Child Development, 85(3), 842–860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Smith M, & Walden T (2001). An exploration of African American preschool-aged children’s behavioral regulation in emotionally arousing situations. Child Study Journal, 31(1), 13–45. [Google Scholar]
  45. Staton L, El-Sheikh M, & Buckhalt JA (2009). Respiratory sinus arrhythmia and cognitive functioning in children. Developmental Psychobiology, 51, 249–258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Stifter C. a., & Fox N. a. (1990). Infant reactivity: Physiological correlates of newborn and 5-month temperament. Developmental Psychology, 26(4), 582–588. [Google Scholar]
  47. Thomas AJ, & Blackmon SM (2015). The Influence of the Trayvon Martin Shooting on Racial Socialization Practices of African American Parents. Journal of Black Psychology, 41(1), 75–89. 10.1177/0095798414563610 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Umaña-Taylor AJ, & Hill NE (2020). Ethnic–Racial Socialization in the Family: A Decade’s Advance on Precursors and Outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 244–271. 10.1111/jomf.12622 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Williams AD, Banerjee M, Lozada-Smith F, Lambouths III D, & Rowley SJ (2017). Black mothers’ perceptions of the role of race in children’s education. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79(4), 932–946. 10.1111/jomf.12410 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Zeytinoglu S, Calkins SD, & Leerkes EM (2020). Autonomic nervous system functioning in early childhood: Responses to cognitive and negatively valenced emotional challenges. Developmental Psychobiology, 62(5), 657–673. 10.1002/dev.21926 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

1687796_Supp_info
NIHMS1687796-supplement-1687796_Supp_info.doc (1.2MB, doc)

RESOURCES