Running head: RELATIONAL NEGATIVITY

Relational Negativity as a Determinant of Long-Term Social Outcomes

Kelly A. DeCoste
University of Calgary

RELATIONAL NEGATIVITY

In their study, Early Teacher-Child Relationships and the Trajectory of Childrens School
Outcomes through Eighth Grade, Hamre & Pianta (2001) examined the effect of kindergarten
teachers perceptions of the teacher-child relationship on a variety of academic and behavioural
school outcomes in lower and upper elementary, and middle school. They sought to expand on
current research by designing a longitudinal study in which Relational Negativity the degree
to which the teacher-child relationship was characterized by conflict and dependency was used
to examine the effects on academic grades, standardized test scores, discipline records and workhabit ratings over a longer time period than had been explored in previous research. To add
further credence to their study, these researchers explored possible moderators (e.g., gender,
ethnicity, verbal abilities, early behavioural problems) to the relationship between early social
adjustment and later outcomes as studies (e.g., Tramontana et al., 1988, as cited in Hamre &
Pianta, 2001) have been found to play a role in increasing a childs risk for problems in school
(Hamre & Pianta, 2001, p. 635).
Hamre & Pianta included a lengthy literature review in their article, summarizing existing
empirical knowledge and setting their research in the context of attachment theory. They began
by stating the importance of early social adjustment (e.g., engagement, school liking, peer
competence and emotional regulation) on school success (e.g., Birch & Ladd, 1997), and
combined it with the influence of the teacher-child relationship on social adjustment in the
primary grades (e.g., Pianta, 1999). In drawing attention to the wealth of literature on the effects
of the teacher-child relationship in the primary grades as compared to outcomes in later grades,
they identified a need for a study such as theirs to provide additional insights into the long-term
effects of the teacher-child relationship on child development. As in other, related, studies (e.g.,
Howes & Matheson, 1992, as cited in Birch & Ladd, 1998), these researchers based their study

RELATIONAL NEGATIVITY

in the context of attachment theory. Previous studies have found that interpersonal relationships
experienced at school led to personal and social growth, similar to responsive and nurturing
relationships at home (Eccles & Midgley, 1989, as cited in Wentzel & Looney, 2006), and thus it
seems a valid theory to draw on. The researchers provided further support (e.g., Bowlby, 1982;
Main, Kaplan & Cassidy, 1985) for this decision as they discussed the contribution of
interactions with adult caregivers in help[ing] shape early development and influence childrens
school experiences (Hamre & Pianta, 2001, p. 625). In making connections between early social
adjustment and the teacher-child relationship in the context of attachment theory, Hamre &
Pianta highlight the potential significance of this relationship for long-term outcomes the
results of this study could have important implications for the identification of at-risk students
for intervention. That is, negative early teacher-child relationships could be used to identify
students who may benefit from intervention to promote more favourable academic and social
outcomes.
Hamre & Pianta are clear in defending their choice to measure the teacher-child
relationship on three dimensions (dependency, closeness and conflict), based on previous
research supporting the stability of these factors in the primary grades (Birch & Ladd, 1997),
their consistency across socioeconomic status, age and ethnicity (Saft & Pianta, 2000), and their
match with child reports of teacher relationships (Lynch & Cicchetti, 1992). In making a
selection that has been supported empirically, they add further credibility to their study.
They are also clear in defending their choice of instrument selection, including the
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test-Revised, Fourth Edition (SB-FE; Thorndike, Hagen & Sattler,
1986), the Teacher-Child Rating Scale (TCRS; Hightower, Work, Cowen, Lotyczewski, Spinnell,
Guare, & Rohrbeck, 1986) and the Student-Teacher Relationship Scale (STRS; Pianta, 1992b).

RELATIONAL NEGATIVITY

They provide statistics on reliability and validity, as well as citing related studies that have used
these measures, in support of these choices.
Hamre & Pianta hypothesized that qualities of the teacher-child relationship, even early
in a childs school career, [could] forecast later problems and successes (p. 625). If one is to
extend attachment theory to apply to adults outside of the home, these researchers hypothesis
seems valid. Their second hypothesis takes into account the high level of stability in childrens
academic and behavioral performance (p. 627), in that they hypothesized that associations
would be mediated by childrens performance in lower elementary school. As behavioural
outcomes, like teacher ratings of the teacher-child relationship, are subjectively rated, it was
predicted that their findings would also indicate that the quality of teacher-child relationships
[would be] a stronger predictor of behavioural than of academic outcomes (p. 634).
These researchers stated that their findings are in line with previous studies (e.g., Birch &
Ladd, 1997; Pianta & Nimetz, 1991) in that teacher-child relationships characterized by overdependency and conflict significantly predicted later behavioural outcomes, when controlling for
other indicators such as behaviour in the classroom and cognitive functioning. Specifically, this
study found that kindergarten teachers Relational Negativity uniquely predicted student grades,
standardized test scores, and work habits through lower elementary school, with Relational
Negativity in kindergarten and later disciplinary problems strongest for those children with
the most behavior problems in kindergarten (p. 633). Unique to this study, results also suggested
that this rating continued to predict behavioural outcomes in upper elementary and middle
school; particularly for those with behavioural problems in kindergarten, and more so for boys.
The current findings also suggested a gender effect for the importance of the three dimensions of
the teacher-child relationship (conflict, dependency and closeness). Specifically, boys may have

RELATIONAL NEGATIVITY

more favourable outcomes when their early teacher-child relationships are characterized by low
levels of dependency and conflict, while girls had less behavioural incidents in later grades when
their early relationship was rated higher in closeness. Finally, students with increased
behavioural problems in kindergarten had more favourable outcomes when they had a more
positive relationship with their kindergarten teacher (that is, lower ratings of conflict and
dependency), than when their relationship was characterized as negative. This finding provides
support for the teacher-child relationship as a protective factor for at-risk students, and that
intervention programs focusing on improving early teacher-child relationships may hold positive
effects for later student outcomes.
Hamre & Pianta discuss several limitations to their study, and it is especially important to
note that they concede that the results of their study are correlational, and thus, cause and effect
cannot be established. However, they do state that, it is clear that the processes related to the
development and influences of teacher child relationships are important components of
childrens success in school (p. 636). In addition, they acknowledge that their finding that fewer
behavioural incidents of students with more a positive teacher-child relationship may be the
result of teachers overlook[ing] the occasional behavioural incident as a result of their closer
bond (p. 627). This study also only included students who remained in the district for the
duration of the experiment (kindergarten through grade eight). As such, one must consider
whether the subsample that was included differed qualitatively from that which was excluded.
They did explore this possibility and found that their sample included a higher percentage of
African American students (40% compared to 28%). As only two of the twenty-six teachers in
this study were African American (the remaining were Caucasian), future studies must consider
whether this had an effect on the resulting teacher-child relationships. Another limitation

RELATIONAL NEGATIVITY

acknowledged by Hamre & Pianta was that the teacher-child relationship was only measured in
kindergarten, and only from the perspective of the teacher. Future studies would benefit from
examining this relationship in each grade, from the perspective of both the teacher and student.
Though these researchers openly discuss these limitations of their study, others were not
included in their discussion and must be reflected upon. Specifically, considering the subjectivity
of reporting on work habits, the researchers should have commented on inter-rater consistency to
ensure there was a similarity in recording. It is also possible that the quality of relationships was
perceived, and thus reported, differently by different teachers, and given the range of years of
teaching experience (0-20 years), it would have been beneficial to compare the Relational
Negativity scores between newer teachers and those with more years of experience to ensure that
there was not an effect of length of teaching career on ratings. Lastly, the gender of teachers was
not reported (though in the results section, a singular teacher is referred to as her. It is unclear
if this is for the sole purpose of being grammatically correct or whether all of the teachers were,
in fact, female). The effect of teacher gender may also have played a role in the current findings.
The limitations discussed above provide direction for future studies. In addition, the
effect of early teacher-child relationships would be more fully understood with studies using a
more diverse population, exploring possible effects of family characteristics (e.g., socioeconomic
status) and classroom effects (e.g., classroom management, teacher- vs. student-centered
learning, class size, specific characteristics of student population). Overall, Hamre & Pianta
provide a clear and well thought-out presentation of their work, highlighting the importance of
their current findings as well as continued research in this area to gain a better understanding of
the effects of early teacher-child relationships to enhance student outcomes.

RELATIONAL NEGATIVITY

7
References

Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1998). Childrens Interpersonal Behaviors and the Teacher-Child
Relationship. Developmental Psychology, 34, 934-946.
Hamre, B. K. & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early Teacher-Child Relationships and the Trajectory of
Childrens School Outcomes through Eighth Grade. Child Development, 72, 625-638.
Wentzel, K. R. & Looney, L. (2006). Socialization in the family: The roles of parents. In J.

E. Grusec and P. D. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and

research (pp. 382-403). New York, NY: Guilford Press.