cumulative parenting stress across the preschool period: relations to maternal parenting and child...

Infant and Child DevelopmentInf. Child Dev. 14: 117–132 (2005)

Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/icd.384

Cumulative Parenting Stress Acrossthe Preschool Period: Relations toMaternal Parenting and ChildBehaviour at Age 5

Keith A. Crnic*, Catherine Gaze and Casey HoffmanDepartment of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park,PA, USA

Despite increasing interest in the effects of parenting stress onchildren and families, many questions remain regarding thenature of parenting stress and the mechanism through whichstress exerts its influence across time. In this study, cumulativeparenting stress was assessed across the preschool period in asample of 125 typically developing children and their mothers.Indices of parenting stress included both major life events stress-assessed annually from age 3 to 5, and parenting daily hasslesassessed every 6 months across the same period. Naturalistichome observations were conducted when children were age 5,during which measures of parent and child interactive behaviouras well as dyadic pleasure and dyadic conflict were obtained.Mothers also completed the CBCL to assess children’s behaviourproblems. Results indicated that parenting daily hassles andmajor life stress are relatively stable across the preschool period.Both cumulative stress indices also proved to be importantpredictors of parent and child behaviour and dyadic interaction,although the predictions were somewhat differential. Despitemeaningful relations between the stress factors and child wellbeing, no evidence was found to support the premise that parentbehaviour mediates the association between parenting stress andchild outcomes. Results are discussed within a developmentalframework to understand the stability and complexity ofcumulative stress associations to early parent–child relation-ships. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Key words: parenting stress; parent–child interactions; child beha-viour problems

��

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received 6 July 2003Accepted 10 May 2004

*Correspondence to: Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University,University Park, PA 16802, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

INTRODUCTION

Relations between stress and parenting have long been of interest within the fieldof child development. Recent reviews of the parenting stress literature (Crnic andLow, 2002; Deater-Deckard, 1998) have provided compelling views of thedeterminants and effects of stressed parenting, and identified a number ofdirections for future research. Among the major issues to be addressed is theeffect of chronic parenting stress on parents and children across the develop-mental period. Concurrent links between parenting stress and poor childfunctioning have been reasonably well established (Crnic and Low, 2002),although it has been often hypothesized that parenting behaviours likely mediatethe relation between stress and child functioning. Nonetheless, few studies haveemployed longitudinal designs capable of testing mediational processes. Also ofinterest is differentiation among types of stresses that might affect parenting andfamily processes (Deater-Deckard, 1998), specifying the unique contribution ofwithin-family events from more general life events on parenting behaviour andchild outcomes.

Historically, parenting stress has been conceptualized in multiple ways.Major life event approaches have proven useful in distinguishing families atrisk for problematic outcome (Crnic et al., 1983; Crnic and Greenberg, 1990),however, major life events are by nature low frequency events and not specific towithin-family processes. More specific to parenting and family processes,Abidin’s (1983, 1990) parenting stress model has focused on addressing parentaldistress and child difficulties. A wealth of research that utilizes the parentingstress index (PSI; Abidin, 1995) has recently emerged establishing the validityof addressing problematic situations within the family as stressful circumstance,although differentiating the stress and outcome indices can sometimesbe challenging. Finally, Crnic and Greenberg (1990) presented a model ofparenting daily hassles in which parenting stress was conceptualized within aminor event perspective that addresses the potential everyday frustrations andirritations that accompany childrearing and children’s typical, but oftenchallenging behaviour. In their initial study, parenting daily hassles proved tobe related to parent’s satisfaction with parenting as well as child behaviourproblems, although the study involved data from only a single time point andwas correlational in nature. Nonetheless, the findings offered initial support forthe notion that parental experiences of minor daily hassles of parenting mightaffect children’s development, and were a more salient source of influence thanwere indices of life event stress that mothers concurrently experienced.Subsequent research in the area of parenting daily hassles has further supportedthe validity of parenting daily hassles as a meaningful stress context for familiesand child development (Belsky et al., 1996a; Creasey and Reese, 1996; Crnic andBooth, 1991). Despite the encouraging results of these studies, there has beensurprisingly little research further investigating the relations between minorparenting daily hassles, parenting behaviour and child outcomes (Crnic and Low,2002).

Typically, studies of parenting stress have focused either on factors that predictparenting stress or address the behavioural and psychological consequences ofparenting stress. Although much of the research presumes that parentingbehaviour is the indirect link between parenting stress and child adjustment, fewstudies have directly tested this mediation process (Deater-Deckard, 1998).Whether indirect or not, a multitude of adverse outcomes have been found to beassociated with parenting stress, including increased child behaviour problems

K.A. Crnic, C. Gaze and C. Hoffman118

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Inf. Child Dev. 14: 117–132 (2005)

and more negative or less involved parenting (Crnic and Low, 2002; Deater-Deckard and Scarr, 1996; Patterson, 1983; Repetti and Wood, 1997).

Parenting Stress and Parenting Behaviour

Diverse approaches to understanding parenting stress have shown multipleassociations with negative parenting attitudes and parental well-being, as well asnegative parenting behaviour (Crnic and Low, 2002; Deater-Deckard and Scarr,1996; Hauser-Cram et al., 2001; Roach et al., 1999; Smith et al., 2001; Thompsonet al., 1993). Parents reporting greater levels of parenting stress have been foundto be more authoritarian in their parenting styles, more negative in theirinteractions with their children, and less involved (Belsky et al., 1996b; Bolgeret al., 1989; Deater-Deckard and Scarr, 1996; McBride and Mills, 1994). Crnic andGreenberg (1990), however, failed to find relations between hassles and actualparenting behaviours, but attributed this to the fact that the observation ofparenting involved highly structured laboratory-based observational contexts.They speculated that relations between daily hassles of parenting and child orparent behaviour would be more likely to be seen in naturalistic observations inthe home in which child behaviour was less constrained. Indeed, findings byBelsky and his colleagues (1996b) offer some initial confirmation of suchspeculation, as parenting daily hassles contributed to those factors that wereassociated with troubled family interactions across the toddlerhood period.

Although there are clear indications that parenting stress has pervasivedetrimental implications for parents’ own reports of their parenting and generalwell-being, the degree to which such stress affects actual parent behaviour andthe quality of the parent–child relationship remains in question. It is critical toestablish links to actual independently observed behaviour to avoid the methodconfound in self-reported stress with self-reported outcomes.

Further, it is important to address the issue of cumulative parenting stressacross time, and whether parenting stress is stable across short and longer termperiods. Certainly, chronic stress presents greater risk than stress which may bepresent at one period but not another. Stability of parenting stress is anassumption that seems to underlie much of the research within the field,although the dearth of longitudinal research suggests that stability has not beenestablished to any reliable extent. Indeed, by its nature, parenting stress shouldbe variable across time as children develop, contexts for child developmentchange, and tasks of parenting vary. Despite these inherent changes however,there is some evidence for the stability of individual differences in parentingstress (Deater-Deckard, 1998), but further evidence is needed. To date, no studieson the stability of parenting daily hassles across the preschool period have beenreported.

Parenting Stress and Child Outcomes

Much as is the case with apparent effects on parenting, parenting stress has beenfound to be associated with a range of negative outcomes for children includinginsecure attachment and behaviour problems (Crnic and Low, 2002; Cummingset al., 2000; Jarvis and Creasy, 1991; Pett et al., 1994; Thompson et al., 1993). Ascritics have pointed out, however, much of the research in the relation betweenstress and child behaviour problems is based on maternal report. Again, it maybe that mothers who are more stressed perceive their children’s behaviour as

Cumulative Parenting Stress Across the Preschool Period 119


more negative, or that mothers with more difficult children experience morestress. Certainly, there is reason to be cautious in interpreting concurrent relationsbetween parenting stress and reported child outcomes. Although more long-itudinal studies are needed to investigate the relations between parenting stressand child behaviour across time, at least one study suggests support for the ideathat parenting stress may play a causal role in the emergence of problematic childbehaviour. Across child ages 2–3 years, Belsky et al. (1996b) found that maternalhassles were an important correlate distinguishing troubled families within theirsamples. More direct evidence that includes independent observations of childbehaviour with longitudinal stress assessments would provide more a compel-ling case for such causal speculations.

Although the evidence is strong for an association between parenting stressand problematic child development, a major issue involves whether the effect isdirect or indirect. Indeed, as Deater-Deckard (1998) has indicated, an assumptionof research in this field is that parenting behaviour mediates the effect ofparenting stressors on children’s functioning. While intuitively sensible, fewstudies have addressed this question. Deater-Deckard and Scarr (1996) foundrelatively weak but suggestive evidence that parental authoritarian disciplinemediated the relations between parent stress and child behaviour problems. Still,an understanding of the mechanism that underlies the association betweenparenting stress and child functioning remains a key issue to be addressed(Deater-Deckard, 1998).

Present Study

Overall, despite a consensus that stress is associated with adverse outcomes forparents and children, many questions remain with respect to cumulative orchronic stress conditions, the exact nature of the parent and child factors that areat specific risk to be affected, and the processes through which stress exerts itsinfluence. To this end, the current study addresses cumulative stress across twodomains: life events and parenting daily hassles. These stress domains areassessed across a 2 year period from child age 3 years to child age 5. Derivedcumulative stress factors explore prediction to various indices of observedmaternal behaviour, child behaviour, and mother–child relationship quality innaturalistic home observations, as well as to mother and father reports of childbehaviour problems. Finally, this study explores whether the association betweenparenting stress and child functioning is mediated by specific parenting ordyadic interaction factors.

METHOD

Participants

The original sample consisted of 141 families of typically developing 3-year-oldchildren and their families (71 girls, 70 boys). Ninety-per cent of the childrenlived in two-parent families. Sixty per cent of the children were Caucasian, 12%were African–American, 9% were Hispanic, 5% were Asian and 15% werebiracial. Sixty-one per cent of the mothers were employed. Maternal educationranged from 10th grade through graduate work, with a mean of 15.7 years ofschool. Participants in this study were part of a larger longitudinal study ofchildren and their families, and data were collected from 1998 to 2002. One-third



of the families were from a rural/suburban community in Central Penn-sylvania; two-thirds were from the Los Angeles Area. Participants in bothareas were recruited from preschools, day care centres, community agencies andby fliers posted in the community. Families from the two geographic siteswere similar across most of the demographic factors, except the Los Angelesarea families reported significantly higher income and were more diverse.Families in the larger study who were missing data from any of the fivetime points between ages 3 and 5 were excluded from the present study. Attritionwas minimal across the 2 year period of study (8%), and no differencesbetween those families who remained and those who dropped from the studywere found.

Procedures

Once identified as potential participants, families were contacted and a homevisit was set up. At this time, the mother and father were each given a booklet ofquestionnaires to complete, which they returned by mail. Parents were asked tocomplete the questionnaires independently and not to share their answers. Afterthis initial appointment, separate home observation and laboratory sessions werescheduled. Home observations were conducted every 6 months between thechild’s third and fifth birthdays. Booklets and laboratory sessions werecompleted at the child’s third, fourth and fifth birthdays. The present studyincludes data collected at each of the five home observations and from the threequestionnaire sets.

The home observations were scheduled at a time when the entire familywould be present, most often in the evening around dinnertime. Familiesreceived remuneration for each home observation. A trained observer wentinto the home to observe the behaviour of the focal child, the behaviour of themother and father in relation to the child, and the dyadic interactions betweenthe three family members. At the beginning of the visit, each parent rated his orher daily hassles (see Measures). Once these were completed the naturalisticobservation began. The family was asked to behave as if the observer was notthere and to act as they normally would. When the child moved aroundthe home, the observer followed, finding an unobtrusive place to stand ineach location. If a child tried to interact with the observer, the observer wouldnot respond and would non-verbally re-direct the child. Across the homevisit, observational ratings were made 4 times. The child and family wereobserved for 10 min, then the observer would take 5 min to rate familyinteractions. Observers were trained by watching videotaped home observationsand attending live home observations with an experienced coder until reliabilitywas established, defined as reaching a criterion over 70% exact agreement and95% agreement within one scale point with the criterion coder. Once an observerreached reliability, individual observers conducted home observations. Tomaintain cross-site reliability (Los Angeles, Central Pennsylvania), a criterioncoder was designated at each site. Reliability was collected regularly within siteand across site to ensure that reliability was maintained. This inter-site reliabilitywas based on videotaped home observations, and within-site reliability wasassessed using the same videotapes, and on live home observations whenpossible. Kappa for within-site reliability at the two sites was 0.61 and 0.59,respectively, and 0.64 for across-site reliability, levels that are consideredacceptable (Fleiss et al., 1969).



Measures

StressAt the beginning of each home observation, each parent indepen-

dently completed the measure of parenting daily hassles (Crnic and Greenberg,1990). The measure consists of 20 items related to child and family hassles,for which the parent was asked to rate on five-point scales how often theitem happened and how much of a hassle each item was perceived tobe. Examples of items include: being nagged, whined at, complained to; thekid’s schedules (e.g. preschool, school, naps, other activities) interferewith meeting your own or household needs; having to change your plansbecause of an unpredicted child need; the kids are hard to manage in public(grocery store, shopping centre, restaurant). Two summary scores are createdfrom this measure: the frequency of parenting hassles, and the perceivedintensity of parenting hassles. The intensity score offers an index of appraisedstressfulness, whereas the frequency score more reflects the presence of stressors.Individual cognitive appraisal of the significance of events for one’s well being isthe primary factor predicting the impact of a stressor (Lazarus et al., 1985), andtherefore the present study used only the perceived intensity scores of parentinghassles for mothers. Alpha reliabilities for this index have been consistently high,averaging approximately 0.90 across studies (Belsky et al., 1995; Crnic andGreenberg, 1990).

A parenting hassles composite was created to reflect the cumulative nature orchronicity of parenting stress for mothers across the preschool period. Scores onthe Intensity Scale of the PDH at each of the five data collection periods were splitat the 70th/30th percentile. Mothers scoring in the lower 70% of the sample at anindividual period received a score of ‘0’ and were identified as ‘low stress’ forthat period. Mothers in the highest 30% received a score of ‘1’ and weredesignated as ‘high stress’ for that period. Scores were then summed across thefive periods, resulting in a score that ranged from 0 to 5, indicating the chronicityof parenting daily hassles across this study period.

In addition to the measures administered at the home observation, eachparent completed a set of questionnaires to assess overall family functioning,parental attitudes and beliefs, and the parent–child relationship. Parentscompleted these questionnaires when their children were ages 3, 4 and 5 years.Included in these questionnaire measures was the life experiences survey(LES; Sarason et al., 1978), a 46-item measure on which mothers were askedto rate whether or not each item on the list occurred within the past 6 months,and if it did occur, to rate whether the event was positive or negative and howmuch of an effect it had on a four-point scale. Examples of items found onthe measure include: death of a spouse; loss of job; getting married; birth of achild, assuming a mortgage. Four scores were then created: the number ofpositive events, the number of negative events, the sum of the effects of thepositive events and the sum of the effects of the negative events. For the presentstudy, only the sum of the effects of the negative events was used, as this scorereflects the mothers’ cognitive appraisal of stress and is consistent with previousresearch (e.g. Crnic and Greenberg, 1990). A composite life stress score wascreated in a fashion similar to that for the PDH measure. Data from each of thethree periods in which the LES was obtained were split at the 70th/30thpercentile, and mothers scored as 0 or 1 for each period, with scores of 1 reflectinghigh stress for that period. These three scores were then summed to create anindex of the chronicity of high life stress.



Parent–Child InteractionObservational data of parent–child interactions were taken from the 60-month

home observation. Observers rated parent–child interaction using the homeobservation coding system (Belsky et al., 1995). As described above, ratings ofindividual and dyadic behaviour were made after each of four 10-minobservation periods. Ratings consisted of 26 items, which were rated on a five-point scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high). The current study focused on maternalnegativity, maternal positivity, child negativity, child positivity, and dyadicpleasure and conflict expressed between the mother and child. Positivity andnegativity were rated independently based on frequency and intensity, for bothmothers and children. Parental positivity was defined as spontaneous smiles orlaughter specifically addressed toward the target child, while parental negativitywas defined as expressions of negative affect, such as comments or yelling,toward the target child. Child positivity was defined as behaviour ranging frombrief smiles to laughter, while child negativity was defined as behaviour rangingfrom pouting to physical expressions of anger or yelling. Dyadic pleasure wasdefined as mutual enjoyment evidenced by both the parent and child duringtheir interactions. Dyadic conflict was defined as observable conflict or negativityexpressed by both parent and child towards one another.

Child Behaviour ProblemsChild behaviour problems was assessed at child age 60 months with the child

behaviour checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 2000), a well known and extensivelyvalidated measure. Both mothers and fathers completed this checklist thatconsists of 99 items describing problematic behaviours that parents rate on3-point scales from not true to very true or often true of their child. Scores may betotalled to provide summary indices of internalizing, externalizing, and totalproblems. For this study, only the total raw score was used for analysis, reflectingthe sum of all items scored. Total alphas for the present sample were 0.94 formothers and fathers.

RESULTS

Stability and Cumulative Stress

Means and standard deviations for all variables are presented in Table 1. Stressscores listed are the cumulative stress scores for the PDH and LES. Stabilitycoefficients of the two stress indices were computed across each period in whichthe factors were assessed, and these results are presented in Table 2. For the PDH,mothers’ reports of parenting hassles were highly stable across the 6 monthsmeasurement periods from ages 3 to 5, and only slightly less so for periodsspanning 12 or 24 months. Mothers’ reported life stress was moderately stableacross the 12 month measurement periods as well as across the 24 month periodfrom 36 to 60 months.

Table 3 shows the number of mothers who are stably high, stably low, orrelatively mixed in experienced stress across the measurement periods. Thirteenper cent of mothers reported high daily hassles in either four of fivemeasurements or in every measurement across the preschool period (stablyhigh). In contrast, 66% of mothers reported high daily hassles only once or never(stably low). Only in 22% of cases did daily parenting stress appear to fluctuateacross the preschool period (reported at two or three periods). For life stress,



measured annually rather than at 6 month intervals, results were similar. About28% of mothers reported high life stress at two of the three measurement periods(stably high), and 72% reported high stress once or not at any period (stably low).Although both stress factors are moderately to strongly stable across the two yearperiod of study, the correlation between the cumulative life stress and parentingdaily hassle factors was 0.13, indicating that the two factors were predominantlyindependent.

Predictions to Maternal Behaviour and Parent–Child Relationship Quality

A series of hierarchical multiple regressions were run to address cumulativestress predictions to mothers’ behaviour and the quality of mother–child dyadicinteraction when the children were 5 years of age. In keeping with previousresearch in which both life stress and parenting daily hassles were included inpredictive analyses (Crnic and Greenberg, 1990), life stress was entered first in allregression equations. Although the correlation between life stress and parentingdaily hassles was relatively small, and collinearity was not problematic overall,entering life stress first provides the most robust test of the influence of parentingdaily hassles as an independent contributor to the dependent measures ofinterest.

The first set of regressions assessed the contribution of the stress factors tomaternal positivity and negativity during interactions with their children.Regression results are reported in Table 4. With respect to positivity, life stressaccounted for a significant proportion of the variance (5.6%), while parentingdaily hassles added an additional 4.5%, indicating a significant independentcontribution. In both cases, greater cumulative stress was associated with lesspositive affect at 60 months. In contrast, neither cumulative stress factorpredicted maternal negativity at 60 months.

Similar regressions addressed predictions to the quality of mother–childdyadic interaction in naturalistic interactions at 60 months (see Table 5).Regression results for mother–child dyadic pleasure indicated that life stressmade no significant contribution, but parenting daily hassles significantlypredicted dyadic pleasure, accounting for nearly 6.6% of the variance. The effectwas in the expected direction, such that greater cumulative stress was associatedwith lower dyadic pleasure. In contrast, regression predictions to dyadic conflictshowed something of an inverse pattern. Mothers’ reported life stress accounted

Table 1. Mean and standard deviations for composite maternal stress scores, mother andchild behaviour ratings, and mothers report of child behaviour problems

Variable M (S.D.) N

Cumulative high PDH index 1.30 (1.55) 137Cumulative high LES index 0.94 (0.96) 133Maternal negativity at 60 months 1.40 (0.57) 125Maternal positivity at 60 months 2.27 (0.75) 125Child negativity at 60 months 1.31 (0.35) 125Child positivity at 60 months 2.81 (0.71) 125Dyadic pleasure 1.57 (0.50) 125Dyadic conflict 1.12 (0.34) 125CBCL total raw score (mother) 27.82 (19.46) 124CBCL total raw score (father) 28.48 (22.71) 108



Tab

le2.

Co

rrel

atio

ns

amo

ng

mat

ern

alst

ress

mea

sure

sac

ross

tim

ean

dm

oth

eran

dch

ild

rati

ng

sat

60m

on

ths

Co

nst

ruct

asse

ssed

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

14

1.P

DH

36m

on

ths

}2.

PD

H42

mo

nth

s0.

74**

}3.

PD

H48

mo

nth

s0.

58**

0.69

**}

4.P

DH

54m

on

ths

0.60

**0.

64**

0.73

**}

5.P

DH

60m

on

ths

0.58

**0.

63**

0.73

**0.

75**

}6.

LE

S36

mo

nth

s0.

090.

110.

010.

060.

06}

7.L

ES

48m

on

ths

0.21

*0.

170.

160.

130.

14�

0.54

**}

8.L

ES

60m

on

ths

0.03

0.10

0.11

0.03

0.08

0.43

**0.

44**

}9.

Mo

ther

neg

ativ

ity

�0.

12�

0.05

�0.

05�

0.06

�0.

070.

31**

0.18

*0.

18*

}10

.M

oth

erp

osi

tiv

ity

�0.

15�

0.18

*�

0.19

*�

0.19

*�

0.24

**�

0.10

�0.

17�

0.29

**�

0.16

}11

.C

hil

dn

egat

ivit

y0.

150.

170.

24**

0.21

*0.

19*

0.13

0.12

0.25

**0.

31**�

0.11

}12

.C

hil

dp

osi

tiv

ity

�0.

07�

0.08

�0.

20*�

0.06

0.01

�0.

01�

0.06

�0.

20*

0.09

0.23

*�

0.11

}13

.C

hil

dB

ehp

rob

lem

s0.

35**

0.35

**0.

30**

0.32

**0.

37**

0.27

**0.

24*

0.21

*0.

11�

0.13

0.31

**�

0.11

}14

.M

oth

er–c

hil

dp

leas

ure�

0.18

*�

0.19

*�

0.24

**�

0.30

**�

0.29

**�

0.02

�0.

11�

0.12

�0.

090.

68**�

0.16

0.06

�0.

11}

15.

Mo

ther

–ch

ild

con

flic

t�

0.00

0.05

�0.

000.

050.

020.

26**

0.17

0.31

**0.

46**�

0.06

0.49

**0.

33*

0.35

**0.

07}

*p5

0.05

.**

p5

0.01

.



for 2.6% of the variance in dyadic conflict (again in the expected direction), anamount that approached significance, whereas parenting hassles added almostnothing meaningful to this equation.

Table 3. Chronicity of stress as indexed by the number of periods in which mothers werein the highest 30th percentile of reported daily hassle and life stress

Number of high stress periods PDH (n ¼ 137) LES (n ¼ 133)

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

None 62 45.3 55 41.41 period 27 19.7 41 30.82 periods 18 13.1 27 20.33 periods 12 8.8 10 7.54 periods 11 8.0 } }5 periods 7 5.1 } }

Table 4. Hierarchical regressions results for maternal stress predictions to maternalaffective behaviour at 60 months

R R2 b FD p

Predictors of maternal positivityStep 1

Life events stress 0.236 0.056 �0.214 7.211 0.008Step 2*

Parenting hassles 0.318 0.101 �0.214 6.080 0.015

Predictors of maternal negativityStep 1

Life events stress 0.123 0.015 0.133 1.886 0.172Step 2**


*Feqn=6.796, p50.002.**Feqn=1.401, p=0.250.

Table 5. Hierarchical regressions results for maternal stress predictions to mother–childdyadic interactions at 60 months

R R2 b FD p

Predictors of dyadic pleasureStep 1



Predictors of dyadic conflictStep 1



*Feqn =4.46, p = 0.014.**Feqn=1.69, p = 0.189.



Predictions to Child Functioning at Age 5

The relationship of maternal stress to children’s behavioural functioning at age 5was assessed with regressions similar to those described above. Child positivityand negativity in naturalistic settings, as well as maternal reported behaviourproblems were the criterion factors. Results indicated that the stress factors wereimportant contributors to child functioning (see Table 6). Although neithercumulative stress factor contributed meaningfully to child positivity duringnaturalistic home observations, both significantly predicted child negativity andmother reported behaviour problems in the expected direction. Greatercumulative life stress accounted for 3.3% of the variance in child negativity atage 5, and greater cumulative parenting hassles made a significant independentcontribution, accounting for an additional 4.2%. With respect to mother reportedbehaviour problems, the two stress factors in total accounted for nearly 15% ofthe variance, with life stress contributing 6.0% and parenting hassles anadditional 8.8% again in the expected direction. When father reported behaviourproblems were used as the criterion, cumulative maternal stress accounted for atotal of 5% of the variance, with the full equation narrowly missing significance(p=0.067).

Mediational Analyses

A major question was whether the observed effects of stress on children’functioning would be indirect; that is, mediated by parenting interactions, asmothers’ behaviour is more proximal to the child’s experience than is maternalcognitive appraisal of stressful circumstance. To address this issue, the relationsamong the key variables were assessed to determine whether the data metcriteria to test for mediation (Baron and Kenny, 1986; MacKinnon et al., 2002).

Table 6. Hierarchical regressions results for maternal stress predictions to child affect andbehaviour problems at 60 months

R R2 b FD p

Predictors of child positivityStep 1



Predictors of child negativityStep 1


Parenting hassles 0.275 0.075 0.208 5.583 0.020

Predictors of child behaviour problems (mother report)Step 1

Life events stress 0.244 0.060 0.201 7.744 0.006Step 2***

Parenting hassles 0.385 0.148 0.301 12.586 0.001

*Feqn=1.88, p=0.16.**Feqn=4.93, p=0.009.***Feqn=10.53, p 5 0.001.



Relations among the independent (cumulative stress factors), mediator (observedparenting and dyadic factors at age 5), and dependent variables of interest (childfunctioning) were evaluated from the regression results. Additional regressionswere run to assess effects among the mediator and dependent variable sets.However, no set of relationships was found that fully met the conditions set forthfor testing mediation.

DISCUSSION

Stress in the family context, especially when that stress is chronic and presentearly in development, has detrimental effects on the well being of parents,children, and parent–child relationships. Major life events and the specific minordaily hassles of parenting, although basically independent sources of stress onfamilies, are both influential but also somewhat differentially affect parentingand the quality of early parent–child interaction.

Parenting stress has been conceptualized in multiple ways over the pastdecade or so (Abidin, 1990; Crnic and Greenberg, 1990; Deater-Deckard, 1998;Crnic and Low, 2002). Such conceptualizations include notions in which stressfulevents may reflect experience that does not include the immediate family, butinfluences parental functioning, such as general life events (Conger et al., 1995).More typically, parenting stress involves situations in which parents and orchildren create difficult or challenging circumstances through their behaviour,expectations, or needs. A full understanding of the nature of parenting stressrequires attention across all aspects of the construct. Findings from the currentstudy are exemplary, as mothers’ cumulative life stress and specific parentinghassles contributed both independently to parent and child measures, andsomewhat differentially to parent–child dyadic interaction in the homeenvironment.

Both life stress and parenting daily hassles appear to be stable across thepreschool period, suggesting that stressed parents tend to remain stressed, andcumulative stress may build across developmental periods to create increasedrisk for parenting and child functioning. The shorter the time period betweenassessments of parent stress, the greater the stability of parenting stress as a rule.Certainly, this would be expected, but even across the full 2 years, stressedparents at child age 3 were likely to report higher stress at child age 5. Findingsdemonstrating the number of times that mothers’ reported high stress across thefive measurement periods also suggest fair stability, and most mothers reportedfew occasions of high stress across the preschool period. A small, but importantsubgroup of mothers reported consistently high parenting stress across thisperiod, whereas variability in stress reports was apparent in only about 20% ofthe sample.

Stability was somewhat greater for parenting hassles than life stresses, which issensible given that daily hassles are meant to reflect the kinds of events that occuron a daily basis whereas major life events are not. Yet it is surprising thatparenting daily hassles show the stability they do across the preschool ages, asthere is relatively rapid change and growth in child capabilities and demandsduring these years. Likewise, parenting tasks change and become more complexas children move from preschool to school age. Perhaps the greater stability ofparenting daily hassles partly reflects a contribution of relatively stable maternalpersonality characteristics to the stress appraisal process, as has been shown byBelsky et al. (1995). Yet, it is also likely the case that across ages, the types of



challenges and parenting tasks involved may change, but are no less stressful toexperience. At this point, it is unclear whether particular aspects of parent stresschange across time or developmental period. Regardless, mother’s appraisal ofthe degree of stressfulness remains similar over time, corresponding withfindings from related studies (Deater-Deckard et al., 1996; Dyson, 1993).

The results of this study provide ample support for the notion that cumulativeparenting stress affects parenting behaviour and the quality of dyadicparent–child interactions in naturalistic settings. It had been previouslysuggested that naturalistic settings would offer the most robust contexts inwhich to assess such relations (Crnic and Greenberg, 1990), and that indeedappears to be the case. Findings also support the growing body of workindicating that parenting stress affects the ways in which parents actually parenttheir children (Crnic and Low, 2002; Deater-Deckard, 1998). Critically, this studydoes so by showing cumulative stress relations to independently observedparenting behaviour and dyadic interactions and thereby avoids the often-chronicled method confound in studies whose findings rely entirely on maternalreports of stress and any dependent measure of interest. The indices of dyadicinteraction and those of mother (and child) behaviour were taken from the sameepisodes however, and so they are not entirely independent as the correlationsamong them generally suggest.

To some extent, differential predictability of life stress and parenting dailyhassles to aspects mother–child dyadic interaction was found. Parenting hassleswere associated with less dyadic pleasure, whereas major life event stress wassomewhat more associated with dyadic conflict. The failure to find associationsbetween parenting hassles and the more negative parent and dyadic indices runssomewhat counter to previous research which has shown that parenting stress isassociated with indices of negative parenting (Abidin, 1990; Belsky et al., 1996a;Deater-Deckard and Scarr, 1996; Rodgers, 1993). However, most previousresearch relied on measurements of parenting stress that incorporated moredifficult and problematic circumstances as well as the presence of distress in theparent (e.g. the PSI). The parenting daily hassles approach, however, focusesmore on those minor everyday occurrences that may irritate and annoy, andcumulatively affect the quality of the parent–child relationship. This is a keydifferentiation among the stress measurement approaches, as the daily hasslesapproach reflects more normative, non-pathological events to which parentsrespond. The fact that the events to which parents respond are more normative ortypical, and are less expressly pathological, may explain their effect to depresspositivity and enjoyment between the parent and child rather than to createhostility and conflict. Although there is a substantial literature that addresses theimplications of increased negativity and hostility between parent and child(Cummings et al., 2000), it is much less clear at this point what the long-termramifications of decreased positivity and pleasure in the mother–child relation-ship might be.

Certainly, children are at risk under conditions in which families are stressed,regardless of the source of that stress (Morgan et al., 2002). Results from thecurrent study again confirm the strength of this association, across both indices ofobserved behaviour and reported behaviour problems. In contrast to the effectson parenting, both parenting hassles and life stress made meaningful contribu-tions to children’s observed negativity as well as reported behaviour problems.This is sensible, as more negative child behaviour reflects one aspect of whyparents view child behaviour as a hassle, and rate it so. It is important to note,however, that when child negativity is controlled, the relationship between



parenting hassles and child behaviour problems remains intact. Mothers’parenting stress maintains an independent contribution, indicating that amother’s subjective appraisal of her child’s behaviour is important above andbeyond the child’s behaviour itself.

That idea that stress in the family context has adverse effects on children’swell being is well established (Crnic and Low, 2002). Less well understood,however, is the mechanism through which children are affected. It has beenassumed, as Deater-Deckard (1998) has suggested, that parenting behaviour is alikely mediator of more distal stress effects on children’s development. Thisindirect influence hypothesis is key in understanding the role of stress as a riskfactor for children, although precious few studies have had the ability to addressthis indirect influence mechanism. Two previous studies have offered someevidence, albeit relatively weak, that parenting could serve as the mechanism ofeffect through which stress effects influence child well being (Deater-Deckardand Scarr, 1996; Conger et al., 1995). Data from the present study however,indicate that stress effects are more direct and additive. To date, researchevidence has not emerged to make a convincing case for mediation in thiscontext.

Whereas it is far too soon to conclude that parenting behaviour is truly not amediator of parent stress effects, it does appear as though a strong case can bemade for direct effects of parenting stress on child functioning. Children’sexposure to chronic irritation and less positive behaviour from their parent, evenwhen parent behaviour is not specifically directed at the child, may havedysregulating effects, and such effects are associated with emerging behaviourproblems (Cole et al., 1994). Patterson (1983) has reported that mothers showmore irritability on days when they report greater parenting stress, and a wealthof research by Cummings and his colleagues on children’s responses to adultanger (Cummings, 1998; Cummings and Cummings, 1988; Cummings andDavies, 1996; Cummings and El-Sheikh, 1991) is illustrative of the ways in whichchildren exposed to adult distress, frustration or anger can directly influencechildren’s behavioural distress and emotional security. Research on maternaldepression offers another perspective on direct influence, in which data suggestthat exposure to maternal depression can directly impact children by increasingtheir stress levels as well as their own depressive symptoms (Hammen et al.,1991). It might be noted as well that data supporting a direct effect are alsoconsistent with theories of passive genetic transmission. Deater-Deckard (1998)has suggested that the measurement of both subjective distress in the mother andchild adjustment or negativity may well tap similar underlying behavioural andaffective problems that are, in part, genetically transmitted. Studies on parentingstress that address gene-environment relations could prove useful.

In summary, parenting stress is a multidimensional construct with divergentbut important implications for parenting, parent–child relationships, andchildren’s well being. Parenting daily hassles reflect a particularly salient, andstable aspect of parenting stress whose unique contribution may be more tolessen positivity in mother–child interactions and relationships, than tocontribute to increased negativity and conflict. Further, cumulative stress fromboth the major life event and parenting daily hassle approach contribute directlyand additively to negative aspects of child functioning at age 5. However, despitesuggestions that parenting likely mediates the association between parentingstress and child well-being, evidence for such a mechanism of effect was notapparent. The logic of the indirect hypothesis remains compelling nonetheless,and mediation may well be dependent upon the particular parent and child



behaviours under investigation. Such understandings of the complexity of thesedevelopmental processes remain for future research.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research described in this article was supported in full with a grant fromNational Institutes of Health, NICHD (# HD34879), Keith Crnic, PrincipalInvestigator; Bruce Baker, Jan Blacher, and Craig Edelbrock, co-investigators.

REFERENCES

Abidin RR. 1983. The Parenting Stress Index. Pediatric Psychology Press: Charlottesville, VA.Abidin RR. 1990. Introduction to the special issue: the stresses of parenting. Journal of

Clinical Child Psychology 19: 298–301.Abidin RR. 1995. Parenting Stress Index. Psychological Assessment Resources: Odessa, FL.Achenbach TM. 2000. Manual for the Child Behaviour Checklist 11/2-5. Department of

Psychiatry, University of Vermost, Burlington, VT.Baron R, Kenny D. 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social

psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology 51: 1173–1182.

Belsky J, Crnic K, Woodworth S. 1995. Personality and parenting: exploring the mediatingrole of transient mood and daily hassles. Journal of Personality 63: 905–929.

Belsky J, Woodworth S, Crnic K. 1996a. Trouble in the second year: three questions aboutfamily interaction. Child Development 67: 556–578.

Belsky J, Woodworth S, Crnic K. 1996b. Troubled family interaction during childhood.Development and Psychopathology 8: 477–495.

Bolger N, DeLongis A, Kessler RC, Schilling EA. 1989. Effects of daily stress on negativemood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57: 808–818.

Cole PM, Michel M, Teti L. 1994. The development of emotion regulation anddysregulation: a clinical perspective. In The Development of Emotion Regulation: Biologicaland Behavioural Considerations, Fox N (ed.), Monographs of the Society for Research in ChildDevelopment (2–3, Serial No. 240), 73–102.

Conger R, Patterson GR, Ge X. 1995. It takes two to replicate: a mediational model for theimpact of parents stress on adolescent adjustment. Child Development 66: 80–97.

Creasey G, Reese M. 1996. Mothers and fathers perceptions of parenting hassles:associations with psychological symptoms, non-parenting hassles and child behaviourproblems. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 17: 393–406.

Crnic K, Booth C. 1991. Mothers and fathers perceptions of daily hassles of parentingacross early childhood. Journal of Marriage and the Family 53: 1042–1050.

Crnic K, Greenberg M. 1990. Minor parenting stresses with young children. ChildDevelopment 61: 1628–1637.

Crnic KA, Greenberg MT, Ragozin AS, Robinson NM, Basham RB. 1983. The effects ofstress and social support on mothers of premature and full-term infants. ChildDevelopment 45: 209–217.

Crnic K, Low C. 2002. Everyday stresses and parenting. In Handbook of Parenting: PracticalIssues in Parenting (2nd edn), Bornstein M (ed.), vol. 5. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates:Mahwah, NJ; 243–267.

Cummings EM. 1998. Children exposed to marital conflict and violence: conceptual andtheoretical directions. In Children Exposed to Marital Violence: Theory, Research, and AppliedIssues, Holden G, Geffner B, Jouriles E (eds). American Psychological Association:Washington DC; 55–94.

Cummings EM, Cummings JS. 1988. A process oriented approach to children’s copingwith adults angry behaviour. Developmental Review 3: 296–321.

Cummings EM, Davies PT. 1996. Emotional security as a regulatory process in normaldevelopment and the development of psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology8: 123–139.



Cummings E, Davies P, Campbell S. 2000. Developmental Psychopathology and Family Process:Theory, Research and Clinical Implications. Guilford Press: New York, NY.

Cummings EM, El-Sheikh M. 1991. Children’s coping with angry environments: a processoriented approach. In Life-span Developmental Psychology: Perspectives on Stress andCoping, Cummings EM, Greene A, Karraker K (eds). Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ; 131–150.

Deater-Deckard K. 1998. Parenting stress and child adjustment: some old hypotheses andnew questions. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 5: 314–332.

Deater-Deckard K, Pinkerton R, Scarr S. 1996. Child care quality and children’sbehavioural adjustment: a four year longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psychology andPsychiatry 37: 937–948.

Deater-Deckard K, Scarr S. 1996. Parenting stress among dual-earner mothers and fathers:are there gender differences? Journal of Family Psychology 10: 45–59.

Dyson L. 1993. Response to the presence of a child with disabilities: parental stress andfamily functioning over time. American Journal on Mental Retardation 98: 207–218.

Fleiss J, Cohen J, Everitt B. 1969. Large sample standard errors of kappa and weightedkappa. Psychological Bulletin 72: 323–327.

Hammen C, Burge B, Adrian C. 1991. Timing of mother and child depression in alongitudinal study of children at risk. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 59:341–345.

Hauser-Cram P, Warfield M, Shonkoff J, Krauss M. 2001. Children with disabilities.Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 66: 1–114 (3 Serial No. 266).

Jarvis PA, Creasy GL. 1991. Parental stress, coping, and attachment in families with an 18month old infant. Infant Behaviour and Development 14: 383–395.

Lazarus RS, DeLongis A, Folkman S, Gruen R. 1985. Stress and adaptational Outcomes: theproblem od confounded measures. American Psychologist 40: 70–779.

MacKinnon D, Lockwood C, Hoffman J, West S, Sheets V. 2002. A comparison of methodsto test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods 7: 83–104.

McBride BB, Mill G. 1994. A comparison of mother and father involvement with theirpreschool age children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 8: 457–477.

Morgan J, Robinson D, Aldridge J. 2002. Parenting stress and externalizing childbehaviour. Child and Family Social Work 7: 219–225.

Patterson GR. 1983. Stress: a change agent for family process. In Stress, Coping, andDevelopment in Children, Garmezy N, Rutter M (eds). McGraw-Hill: New York; 235–264.

Pett MA, Vaughncole B, Wampold BE. 1994. Maternal employment and perceived stress:their impact on children’s adjustment and mother–child interaction in young divorcedand married families. Family Relations 43: 151–158.

Repetti R, Wood J. 1997. Effects of daily stress at work on mothers’ interactions withpreschoolers. Journal of Family Psychology 11: 90–108.

Roach M, Orsmond G, Barratt M. 1999. Mothers and fathers of children with downsyndrome: parental stress and involvement in childcare. American Journal on MentalRetardation 104: 422–436.

Rodgers AY. 1993. The assessment of variables related to the parenting behaviour ofmothers of young children. Children and Youth Services Review 15: 385–402.

Sarason I, Johnson J, Siegel J. 1978. Assessing the impact of life changes: development ofthe life experiences survey. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 46: 932–946.

Smith T, Oliver M, Innocenti M. 2001. Parenting stress in families of children withdisabilities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 71: 257–261.

Thompson RJ, Merritt KA, Keith BR, Bennett L, Johndrown DA. 1993. The role of maternalstress and family functioning in maternal distress and mother-reported psychologicaladjustment of non-referred children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 22: 78–84.



cumulative parenting stress across the preschool period: relations to maternal parenting and child...

Documents