Co-regulation in dyadic parent–child relationships: a video analysis of well-functioning interactions

References

• Aarts, M. (2000). Marte Meo: Basic manual. Harderwijk: Aarts Productions.
   Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: Infant care and the growth of love. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, M. D. S., Bell, S. M., & Stayton, D. J. (1974). Infant–mother attachment and social development. In M. P. M. Richards (Ed.), The integration of a child into a social world (pp. 99–136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. L., & Brookhart, S. M. (2020). Classroom assessment as the co-regulation of learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(4), 350–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1571992
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aronsson, K., & Cekaite, A. (2011). Activity contracts and directives in everyday family politics. Discourse and Society, 22(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926510392124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axberg, U., Hansson, K., Broberg, A. G., & Wirtberg, I. (2006). The development of a systemic school-based intervention: Marte Meo and coordination meetings. Family Process, 45(3), 375–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2006.00177.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bai, S., Repetti, R. L., & Sperlin, J. B. (2016). Children’s expressions of positive emotion are sustained by smiling, touching, and playing with parents and siblings: A naturalistic observational study of family life. Developmential Psychology, 54(1), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039854
   Google Scholar
• Beebe, B. (2017). My journey in infant research and psychoanalysis: Microanalysis, a social microscope. In S. Lord (Ed.), Moments of meeting in psychoanalysis: Interaction and change in the therapeutic encounter (pp. 13–44). London: Routledge / Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Bowlby, J. (1958). The nature of the child’s tie to his mother. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 39, 350–373. Retrieved from http://www.psychology.sunysb.edu/attachment/online/nature%20of%20the%20childs%20tie%20bowlby.pdf.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss. Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Breckler, S. (1985). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1191–1205. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.47.6.1191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calkins, S. D. (2011). Caregiving as coregulation: Psychobiological processes and child functioning. In A. Booth, S. M. McHale, & N. S. Landale (Eds.), Biosocial foundations of family processes (pp. 49–60). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cassidy, J. (2016). The nature of the child’s ties. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (3rd ed., pp. 3–24). New York: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K., & Henwood, K. (2017). Grounded theory methods for qualitative psychology. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology (2nd ed., pp. 238–256). London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K., Thornberg, R., & Keane, E. (2018). Evolving grounded theory and social justice inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 411–443). London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Clemensen, N. (2020). Managing freedom: Family discourse on children’s urban autonomy in a Copenhagen housing cooperative. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 51(4), 477–495. https://doi.org/10.1111/aeq.12353
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole, P. M., Teti, L. O., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2003). Mutual emotion regulation and the stability of conduct problems between preschool and early school age. Development and Psychopathology, 15, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579403000014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Bosten: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Erdmann, K. A., & Hertel, S. (2019). Self-regulation and co-regulation in early childhood: Development, assessment and supporting factors. Metacognition and Learning, 14, 229–238. https://doi.org/10.10007/s11409-019-09211-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, R. (2007a). Parent–infant synchrony and the construction of shared timing: Physiological precursors, developmental outcomes, and risk conditions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48(3–4), 221–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01701.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, R. (2007b). Parent–infant synchrony: Biological foundations and developmental outcomes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(6), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00532.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flamant, N., Haerens, L., Mabbe, E., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2020). How do adolescents deal with intrusive parenting? The role of coping with psychologically controlling parenting in internalizing and externalizing problems. Journal of Adolescence, 84, 200–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.09.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fogel, A. (1993). Two principles of communication: Co-regulation and framing. In K. Nadel & L. Camaioni (Eds.), New perspectives in early communicative development (pp. 9–23). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gärtner, K. A., Vetter, V. C., Schäferling, M., Reuner, G., & Hertel, S. (2018). Inhibitory control in toddlerhood: The role of parental co-regulation and self-efficacy beliefs. Metacognition and Learning, 13, 241–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-018-9184-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill, E. H., Thorød, A. B., & Vik, K. (2019). Marte Meo as a port of entry to parental sensitivity: A three-case study. BMC Psychiatry, 19(5), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1959-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Golds, L., Gillespie-Smith, K., Nimbley, E., & MacBeth, A. (2022). What factors influence dyadic synchrony? A systematic review of the literature on predictors of mother–infant dyadic processes of shared behavior and affect. Infant Mental Health Journal, 43(5), 677–830. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.22011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo, Y., Spieker, S. J., & Borelli, J. L. (2021). Emotion co-regulation among mother–preschooler dyads completing the strange situation: Relations to internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 30, 699–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01812-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2017). Self-regulation, co-regulation and shared regulation in collaborative learning environments. In D. Schunk & J. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 83–106). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Harreveld, F. v., Nohlen, H. U., & Schneider, I. K. (2015). Chapter five – the ABC of ambivalence: Affective, behavioral, and cognitive consequences of attitudinal conflict. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 285–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2004). Imagined interaction conflict-linkage theory: Explaining the persistence and resolution of interpersonal conflict in everyday life. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 23(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.2190/240J-1VPK-K86D-1JL8
   Google Scholar
• King, B. J. (2008). Creating family love: An evolutionary perspective. In S. Stuart, B. J. King, & A. Fogel (Eds.), Human development in the twenty-first century: Visionary ideas from systems scientists (pp. 81–88). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kurki, K., Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., & Mykkänen, A. (2016). How teachers co-regulate children’s emotions and behaviour in socio-emotionally challenging situations in day-care settings. International Journal of Educational Research, 76, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavelli, M., Carra, C., Rossi, G., & Keller, H. (2019). Culture-specific development of early mother–infant emotional co-regulation: Italian, Cameroonian, and West African immigrant dyads. Developmental Psychology, 55(9), 1850–1867. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000696
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lougheed, J. P., Hollenstein, T., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A., & Granic, I. (2015). Maternal regulation of child affect in externalizing and typically-developing children. Journal of Family Psychology, 29(1), https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038429
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunkenheimer, E., Hamby, C. M., Lobo, F. M., Cole, P. M., & Olson, S. L. (2020). The role of dynamic, dyadic parent–child processes in parental socialization of emotion. Developmental Psychology, 56(3), 556–577. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunkenheimer, E., Kemp, C. J., Lucas-Thompson, R. G., Cole, P. M., & Albrecht, E. C. (2017). Assessing biobehavioural self-regulation and coregulation in early childhood: The parent–child challenge task. Infant Child Development, 26, 1. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.1965
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunkenheimer, E., & Lobo, F. M. (2020). Understanding the parent–child coregulation patterns shaping child self-regulation. Developmental Psychology, 56(6), 1121–1134. http://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000926
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunkenheimer, E. S., Olson, S. L., Hollenstein, T., Sameroff, A. J., & Winter, C. (2011). Dyadic flexibility and positive affect in parent–child coregulation and the development of child behavior problems. Development and Psychopathology, 23(2), 577–591. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095457941100006X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mermelshtine, R. (2017). Parent–child learning interactions: A review of the literature on scaffolding. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12147
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreira, H., & Canavarro, M. C. (2020). Mindful parenting is associated with adolescents’ difficulties in emotion regulation through adolescents’ psychological inflexibility and self-compassion. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49, 192–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01133-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreno, J., Sanabria, L., & López, O. (2016). Theoretical and conceptual approaches to co-regulation: A theoretical review. Psychology, 7(13), https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2016.713153
   Google Scholar
• Morris, A. S., Cui, L., Criss, M. M., & Simmons, W. K. (2018). Emotion regulation dynamics during parent–child interactions. In P. M. Cole & T. Hollenstein (Eds.), Emotion regulation: A matter of time (pp. 70–90). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, D. W., Rosanbalm, K., Christopoulos, C., & Hamoudi, A. (2015). Self-regulation and toxic stress: Foundations for understanding self-regulation from an applied developmental perspective. OPRE Report #2015-21. Retrieved from https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_1_foundations_paper_final_012715_submitted_508_0.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Nunnally, A. D., Sterrett, K., Gulsrud, A., & Kasari, C. (2021). What are the odds? Predicting the likelihood of a negative episode in a sample of toddlers with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 25, 8. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211015001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppenheim, D., & Koren-Karie, N. (2014). Parental insightfulness and child–parent emotion dialogues: Their importance for children’s development. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Mechanisms of social connection: From brain to group (pp. 205–220). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Osterman, G., Möller, A., & Wirtberg, E. (2010). The Marte Meo method as a means of supporting new adoptive parents. Adopting & Fostering, 34(2), 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/030857591003400207
   Google Scholar
• Pauen, S. (2016). Understanding early development of self-regulation and co-regulation: EDOS and PROSECO. Journal of Self-Regulation and Regulation, 2, 3–16. https://doi.org/10.11588/josar.2016.2.34350
   Google Scholar
• Randall, A. K., Tao, C., Leon, G., & Duran, N. D. (2021). Couples’ co-regulation dynamics as a function of perceived partner dyadic coping. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 32(6), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2021.1912740
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, W., Zeman, J., Poon, J., & Miller, R. (2013). Child regulation of negative emotions and depressive symptoms: The moderating role of parental emotion socialization. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 402–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-013-9850-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons, N. (2017). Acial coding. In M. Allen (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods (pp. 80–82). London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Skinner, E. A., Edge, K., Altman, J., & Sherwood, H. (2003). Searching for the structure of coping: A review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychological Bulletin, 129(2), 216–269. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.216
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sroufe, L. A. (2005). Attachment and development: A prospective, longitudinal study from birth to adulthood. Attachment and Human Development, 7, 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616730500365928
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern, D. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant: A view from psychoanalysis and developmental psychology. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stern, J. A., Kelsey, C. M., Krol, K. M., & Grossmann, T. (2022). Maternal recognition of positive emotion predicts sensitive parenting in infancy. Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001125
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. California: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Vik, K., & Rohde, R. (2014). Tiny moments of great importance: The Marte Meo method applied in the context of early mother–infant interaction and postnatal depression. Utilizing Daniel Stern’s theory of ‘schemas of being with’ in understanding empirical findings and developing a stringent Marte Meo methodology. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 19(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359104512468286
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, N. J., Propper, C., Gueron-Sela, N., & Mills-Koonce, W. R. (2016). Dimensions of maternal parenting and infants’ autonomic functioning interactively predict early internalizing behavior problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 44, 459–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0039-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whipple, N., Bernier, A., & Mageau, G. (2011). Broadening the study of infant security of attachment: Maternal autonomy-support in the context of infant exploration. Social Development, 20, 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2010.00574.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zachariou, A., & Whitebread, D. (2019). Developmental differences in young children’s self-regulation. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 62, 282–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zampini, L., & Zanchi, P. (2020). Mother–child dyadic co-regulation in children with intellectual disability: A comparison among dyads with children with chromosome 14 aberrations, Down syndrome and typical development. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 45(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.3109/13668250.2019.1577641
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar