Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

An investigation of maternal personality, parenting styles, and subjective well-being

Julie Desjardins a, John M. Zelenski
a b

b,*

, Robert J. Coplan

University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Department of Psychology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 5B6 Received 18 October 2006; received in revised form 31 July 2007; accepted 21 September 2007 Available online 5 November 2007

Abstract The goal of the present study was to explore how parental BIS/BAS relates to parenting styles, and to investigate if subjective well-being (SWB) moderates these associations. Mothers (n = 95) were asked to complete measures of personality, parenting styles, and life satisfaction (SWB). Results revealed that mothers who reported high BAS were signicantly more likely to report being nurturing and were either more likely to be authoritative (high nurture and high control) or neglectful (low nurture and low control). Subsequent analyses revealed that mothers high in both BAS and SWB were signicantly more likely to be authoritative, whereas mothers high in BAS and low in SWB were signicantly more likely to be neglectful. Results suggest the value of considering personality in parenting research. 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Parenting styles; Personality; Subjective well-being; BIS; BAS; Life satisfaction

1. Introduction Parenting is an essential component in child development and is often associated with important child outcomes such as cognitive and social competencies (Lambourn, Mounts, Steinberg, &
*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 613 520 2600x1609; fax: +1 613 520 3667. E-mail address: john_zelenski@carleton.ca (J.M. Zelenski).

0191-8869/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.020

588

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

Dornbusch, 1991). Understanding what contributes to parenting allows us to better predict outcomes, which may in turn aid in the development of more eective preventive measures, or in identifying people likely to have parenting diculties. In conceptual models of the determinants of parenting, personality is considered a crucial element (e.g., Belsky, 1984). Although there has been some empirical research exploring links between parenting and the Five Factor Model of personality (e.g., Metsa pelto & Pulkkinen, 2003), there have been no attempts to directly investigate parenting and Grays (1981) behavioural motivation systems. As pervasive individual dierences, approach and avoidance motivational orientations may help explain why people parent the way they do. Moreover, the relations between personality and parenting may not always be linear. In this paper we test the ideas that personality may predispose parents to particular parenting styles and that subjective well-being (SWB) may moderate these relations. 1.1. Grays approach to personality Gray (1981, 1982) proposed three independent motivational systems that explain variations in human personality: the Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS), the Behavioural Activation System (BAS), and the Fight/Flight System (FFS), though most work has focused on BIS and BAS. According to Gray (1982), dierences in the strength of these two systems lead to two personality dimensions (termed anxiety and impulsivity) that t in the conceptual two-dimensional space of neuroticism and extraversion. In Grays original conception, the BIS is activated by conditioned cues to punishment, and produces behavioural avoidance. At a dispositional level, the BIS is associated with trait anxiety, negative aect, and neuroticism (more than extraversion; Pickering, Corr, & Gray, 1999). Conversely, the BAS is activated by conditioned signals of reward and non-punishment, and creates approach and active avoidance behaviour (Gray, 1981). People with a strong BAS are more likely to be impulsive, experience more positive aect, and score higher on extraversion (Pickering et al., 1999). The FFS was not as clearly linked with a particular personality dimension, but was thought to respond to unconditioned punishment stimuli. More recently, Gray modied his theory, altering the proposed functions of the BIS, BAS, and FFS (Gray & McNaughton, 2000). The functions of BAS remain similar, but now also include responding to unconditioned signals of reward. The BIS and FFS functions changed more significantly. The FFS (renamed the Fight, Flight, and Freezing system or FFFS) now includes functions previously assigned to the BIS. That is, the FFFS has become the main punishment system, responding to conditioned and unconditioned punishment cues, and mediating avoidance behaviour and fear. The BIS is now viewed as a conict monitor. It receives input from the BAS and FFFS, and detects the conict created by activation of both (e.g., in situations with mixed reward and punishment cues). The output of the BIS is still anxiety, but the source of this anxiety is conict rather than punishment cues per se. Finally, Grays revision emphasizes interactions among the three motivational systems such that behaviour will typically reect the combined output or relative strengths of the BAS and FFFS as compared by the BIS. Although Gray made these modications years ago, assessment instruments still rely on the original theory. For example, Carver and Whites (1994) widely used questionnaire assesses BIS as punishment sensitivity, and we are not aware of valid self-report measures of the new FFFS. Assessment instruments drawing on the old theory are still useful in that they were designed to measure individual dierences in the strength of a reward system (the BAS) and a punishment

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

589

system (formerly the BIS, now the FFFS). Although they likely confound some specic functions of the new BIS and FFFS (see Smillie, Pickering, & Jackson, 2006), they have been useful in capturing broad approach and avoidance motivational orientations (Carver, Sutton, & Scheier, 2000). Consistent with past research and Grays original theory, we refer to the punishment system as BIS throughout this introduction. However, in the updated theory, the FFFS is responsible for most of these BIS functions. Grays constructs have also been measured with scales imported from other taxonomies, typically Eysencks (1967) PEN model. Therefore, it is not entirely clear how previous personality ndings t into Grays model. Zelenski and Larsen (1999) compared measures of Grays and Eysencks constructs and found that traits associated with negative aect such as neuroticism and BIS loaded on a single factor. Traits associated with positive aect such as extraversion and BAS formed an independent factor. These ndings suggest that results associated with aect found in previous studies using Eysencks (1967) PEN theory (and similar ve-factor model traits) can also be applied to Grays (1982) model (see also Caseras, Avila, & Torrubia, 2003; Elliot & Thrash, 2002). Convergence among measures (i.e., extraversion & BAS and neuroticism & BIS) suggests some degree of equivalence, but more studies utilizing independent measures of Grays constructs are clearly desirable. This is the approach we take here. 1.2. Parenting styles Parenting styles can be dened as a constellation of attitudes toward the child that are communicated to the child and that, taken together, create an emotional climate in which the parents behaviours are expressed (Darling & Steinberg, 1993, p. 488). Parenting styles are patterns of childrearing made up of parents standard practices and responses to child behaviours (Coplan, Hastings, Lagace-Seguin, & Moulton, 2002). Baumrind (1989) outlined two independent dimensions of parenting that predict child outcomes. The rst dimension, responsiveness, refers to the degree of parental nurturance, warmth, emotional expression, and positive reinforcement associated with their childs articulation of opinions. The second dimension, demandingness, refers to disciplinary practices, control, and level of demands and expectations. These dimensions are often combined to yield four parenting styles that are dened by the degree of parental responsiveness and demandingness: authoritative (high on both), authoritarian (high demandingness, low responsiveness), permissive (low demandingness, high responsiveness), and neglectful (low on both). Each type of parenting is believed to dierentially inuence child outcomes, with children of authoritative parents generally believed to have the best socio-emotional and academic outcomes (for a recent review, see Bugental & Grusec, 2006). 1.3. Linking personality and parenting There are at least two mechanisms that could link personality and parenting. First, parenting may be an expression of personality in a specic domain. For example, parents with a strong BIS may be overprotective with their children because they fear something negative will happen. If their children want to play on a play structure or engage in similar activities, parents with strong BIS may object because of their tendency to focus on potential risks (Zelenski & Larsen, 2002). In this case, parents may be parenting less to suit their childs needs and instead acting more from

590

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

their disposition. Thus, parental personality can have a direct impact on parenting styles by inuencing parental behaviours when interacting with children. A second process linking personality and parenting suggests that a childs temperament might inuence parenting behaviours, with parents responding to dierent children with dierent kinds of parenting styles. That is, the way in which parents behave towards their children may be in part due to their childs biological make-up or temperament (Eysenck, 1967). Even highly anxious parents might be warm and overprotective because their (anxious) child requires such aection to feel secure. In other words, child characteristics (partially inherited from parents and thus related to parental personality traits) may evoke specic parental behaviours and responses, and these behaviours could dier from trait-typical behaviours. Such eects could actually reduce the correlations between parents personality and parenting styles. 1.3.1. Empirical links The few studies exploring links between personality and parenting have used either the FiveFactor Model or Eysencks PEN model. For example, Metsa pelto and Pulkkinen (2003) examined whether measures of the FFM would predict parenting styles in mothers and fathers assessed three years later. They found that openness to experience, low neuroticism, and extraversion were related to parental nurturance, openness to experience was associated with restrictiveness, and low neuroticism was associated with little knowledge of their childs activities. In another study, Metsa pelto and Pulkkinen (2005) found that mothers who reported being nurturing and extraverted were more child-centered; whereas fathers who reported being nurturing and introverted were more child-centered. Belsky, Crnic, and Woodworth (1995) also measured neuroticism, extraversion, and agreeableness in mothers and fathers and found that parents high in neuroticism were less likely to be sensitive, stimulating, and showed less positive aect than those who were not. Conversely, parents who scored high in extraversion and agreeableness demonstrated more positive, authoritative parenting styles. Other studies have also demonstrated that parents high in neuroticism are less competent and show little warmth and responsiveness (Clark, Kochanska, & Ready, 2000; Kendler, Sham, & MacLean, 1997), whereas parents high on extraversion and agreeableness were more sensitive, caring, and warm with their children (Belsky et al., 1995). Although many have argued that extraversion is associated with positive outcomes, there has also been some suggestion that extraversion is associated with negative parenting styles. For example, Clark et al. (2000) found that mothers who were either high in neuroticism or extraversion used a forceful disciplinary style (high in control and low in responsiveness). Clark et al. (2000) speculate that the association between extraversion and power assertion may be due to extravert characteristics such as dominance and assertiveness. These conicting results suggest that there may potentially be a third variable moderating the relation between parental personality and parenting. We suggest parents SWB as a potentially important moderator. Previous studies have found that dierent forms of SWB are associated with positive parenting. For example, in a review of the literature, Coiro and Emery (1998) found that in intact families, marital satisfaction was consistently linked to the most advantageous parenting. Ben-Zur (2003) also linked SWB in parents with SWB in their children. Such ndings are consistent with the idea that SWB predicts good parenting. In this study, we extend this work by combining SWB and personality (i.e., BIS and BAS) which together may inuence childrens well-being. Considering

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

591

SWB may help explain why extraversion (similar to BAS) predicts both positive and negative parenting outcomes. More specically, a strong BAS may predict good parenting among people with high SWB and poor parenting among people with low SWB. Although BAS and SWB are linked (i.e., BAS predicts positive aect, a component of SWB), they are also clearly separable constructs. Whereas SWB connotes happiness, BAS includes a general sensitivity to reward. This reward sensitivity could be manifest in either pro-social or dysfunctional ways. For example, the high-BAS person who fails to resist the appeal of risky sex, illicit drugs, gambling, or even slightly less pernicious short-term rewards, will likely be both unhappy (in the long-term) and a poor parent. Conversely, the high-BAS person who channels their pursuits towards more meaningful, long-term rewards likely displays both high SWB and good parenting. In fact, good parenting itself could be considered rewarding by some high-BAS parents. High-BAS parents with high SWB may focus more on parenting as a potentially rewarding goal because they have met other life goals (i.e., this success is reected in their high SWB). 1.4. The present study The primary goals of the present study were to investigate how parental BIS/BAS relates to parenting styles, and to investigate whether SWB (i.e., life satisfaction) moderates this relation. We hypothesised that strong BAS parents would be more likely to be authoritative and strong BIS parents would be more likely to be authoritarian. Because strong BAS parents seek rewards, we predicted that they would be better parents if they had high SWB.

2. Methods 2.1. Participants The participants for this study were mothers of 95 children (46 females, 49 males, Mage = 9.60 years, SD = 1.90 years) ranging in ages from 6 to 14 years, attending local day camps and after school programs in the Ottawa, Canada region. Mothers were recruited through a package of information, consent letters, and questionnaires sent home with their children. The day camps and after school programs were selected based on their locations to ensure diversity. Seventy-three percent of mothers were Caucasian, 9% Asian, 2% Black, 7% Hispanic, 2% Aboriginal, and 7% identied other. In terms of education, 43% of mothers graduated from university, 30% graduated from college, 26% had graduated from high school, and 1% completed elementary school. Sixty-four percent of all mothers were married or common law. 2.2. Procedure Packages were sent home with the children and mothers completed a series of self-report questionnaires. Once completed, questionnaires were sent back to the community centre where they were placed in a locked box.

592

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

2.3. Measures 2.3.1. Demographics Mothers were asked to complete a background questionnaire, which included information about parental education, parental marital status, parental ethnicity, and childs age. 2.3.2. Personality The BIS/BAS Scales (Carver & White, 1994) assessed maternal personality. Participants were asked to rate how much they agreed or disagreed with a number of items on a 4-point Likert scale of agreement. The BAS subscale items assessed orientation towards drive, reward, and fun, and the BIS subscale items assessed orientation towards punishment. The BIS/BAS Scales have been shown to have good psychometric properties (Carver & White, 1994). In the current study, Cronbachs alpha for BIS was .67, and for BAS it was .82. 2.3.3. Subjective well-being Subjective well-being was assessed via The Satisfaction With Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Grin, 1985). This is a 5-item scale to assess life satisfaction (i.e., the more cognitive component of SWB), where our participants rated items on a 5-point Likert scale of agreement. The SWLS is one of the most widely used measures of happiness. Cronbachs alpha for this scale was .89. 2.3.4. Parenting Parenting styles were assessed via the Child Rearing Practices Report Questionnaire (Rickel & Biasatti, 1982). This instrument is a questionnaire version of the Child Rearing Practices Report (CRPR, Block, 1981), a well-known and frequently used measure (e.g., Rubin, Nelson, Hastings, & Asendorpf, 1999). Items are rated on a 6-point Likert scale of agreement, and assess child rearing attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours. The questionnaire contains two major scales: nurturance (or responsiveness) and restrictiveness (or demandingness). In the current sample, Cronbachs alpha was .81 for the nurturance scale and .64 for the restrictiveness scale.

3. Results 3.1. Preliminary analysis Correlations were performed to investigate the relations among BIS/BAS, parenting, and SWB (see Table 1). The only signicant relation between personality and parenting was with BAS and nurturance (r = .24, p < .05). SWB was not signicantly related to parenting, but was negatively correlated with BIS (r = .33, p < .001). 3.1.1. Parenting styles groups To further explore the relation between parenting styles and BIS/BAS, the two parenting scales (nurturance and restrictiveness) were dichotomized into high and low categories in order to create groups of mothers reecting dierent parenting styles. Mothers high in

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597 Table 1 Correlation matrix of BIS/BAS, Parenting, and SWB Variable 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
* **

593

2 .04

3 .24* .13

4 .01 .18 .04

5 .10 .33** .11 .03

BAS BIS Nurturance Restrictiveness SWB

p < .05. p < .01.

nurturance (i.e., above the median) and high in restrictiveness were labelled authoritative (n = 27); the combination of high nurturance and low restrictiveness was labelled permissive (n = 27); low nurturance and high restrictiveness was labelled authoritarian (n = 22); and low nurturance and low restrictiveness was labelled neglectful (n = 19). A series of one-way ANOVAs were conducted to explore possible group dierences in maternal personality (BIS/BAS; see Table 2). Results indicate a main eect of parenting style only for BAS, F(3, 94) = 5.19, p < .01. Specically, follow-up post hoc tests (LSD) revealed that mothers who were high in BAS were signicantly more likely to be either authoritative or neglectful, and nearly identical results were obtained when controlling for demographic variables. Means are displayed in Table 2. To examine the potential moderating role of SWB in the BAS-parenting link, cross-tabulations were created between groups of high versus low BAS (median split) and positive versus negative SWB (median split) mothers. This resulted in four groups (1) high BAS and positive SWB, (2) high BAS and negative SWB, (3) low BAS and positive SWB, and (4) low BAS and negative SWB. Results from v2 analysis revealed signicant dierences in the distribution among parenting groups [v2 (9, N = 95) = 22.32, p = .008]. Examination of standardized residuals revealed that mothers high in BAS and SWB were signicantly more likely to be authoritative (z = 2.0, p < .05) and less likely to be authoritarian (z = 2.4, p < .05), whereas mothers high in BAS and low in SWB were signicantly more likely to be neglectful (z = 2.8, p < .05). In addition, mothers low in BAS and SWB were more likely to be authoritarian (z = 3.2, p < .01) and less likely to be neglectful (z = 2.2, p < .05). Observed and expected values are displayed in Table 3. In sum, the relation between BAS and parenting was dierent depending on mothers levels of SWB.
Table 2 Means (standard deviations) of parental personality as a function of parenting style group Dependent variable BIS BAS Parenting style group Neglectful 2.85 (.43) 3.16a (.38) Authoritarian 3.05 (.47) 2.78b (.43) Permissive 2.95 (.48) 2.90b (.45) Authoritative 3.13 (.45) 3.17a (.37) F-value 1.49 5.19**

Means with dierent subscripts dier at the .05 level. ** p < .01.

594

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

Table 3 Parenting styles as a function of BAS and SWB group Parenting style Neglectful Authoritarian Permissive Authoritative High BAS Low SWB 9 3 6 4 (4.4) (6.3) (6.3) (5.1) High BAS High SWB 6 3 8 10 (5.4) (7.7) (7.7) (6.3) Low BAS Low SWB 1 13 6 4 (4.8) (6.8) (6.8) (5.6) Low BAS High SWB 3 8 7 4 (4.4) (6.3) (6.3) (5.0)

Note: Expected values in parentheses.

4. Discussion The goal of this study was to investigate the associations between maternal personality and maternal parenting styles, and SWB as a possible moderator of this relationship. The results add to the existing body of empirical evidence suggesting that parental personality is related to parenting styles (Belsky et al., 1995; Clark et al., 2000; Metsa pelto & Pulkkinen, 2003), and extend this line of inquiry to include independent measures of BIS and BAS. We hypothesised that maternal personality (behavioural motivation systems) would predict parenting styles. This prediction was partially supported as mothers who reported high BAS were signicantly more likely to report being nurturing. When a child experiences a crisis, the situation can be perceived as challenging. Because mothers with strong BAS should be more likely to approach situations, they may be more inclined to come close to their children and nurture them. In contrast, mothers low in BAS might be more hesitant to approach and nurture their children in a time of need because they perceive the situation as taxing and dicult or perceive fewer potential rewards. With Grays updated theory in mind, the new BISs conict resolution function may play an important role in resolving these mixed situations. In other words, the potential rewards of nurturance may lead to self-gratication in a mother with a strong BAS. On the other hand, mothers low in BAS are not as motivated by seeking rewards and, therefore, might not interpret dicult or ambiguous situations the same way (Rusting, 1999). In addition, results revealed that mothers who were high in BAS were either more likely to be authoritative (high nurture and high control) or neglectful (low nurture and low control). Past studies have suggested that children of authoritative parents are more likely to have high cognitive and social competences. They are cheerful, responsible, self-reliant, achievement oriented and cooperative with adults and peers (Lambourn et al., 1991). On the other hand, children of neglectful parents are generally more aggressive and display more externalizing behaviours (Miller, Cowan, Cowan, Hetherington, & Clingempeel, 1993). They also are more likely to become hostile, selsh, rebellious, and are more likely to commit antisocial acts (Weiss & Schwarz, 1996). This is an interesting nding because it suggests that a mother high in BAS has the potential to become either the optimal kind of parent (authoritative), or the worst kind of parent (neglectful). Because mothers who have a strong BAS are more likely to approach situations and seek rewards, they may be drawn towards situations that will allow them the opportunity to accomplish their life goals. If a mother feels satised with what she has accomplished in life, she might be more inclined to focus her attention on her children and encourage them to pursue their own goals. In contrast, if she is not satised with her life, she might be more likely to focus on her own (non-maternal) goals rather than her childrens. Therefore, we speculated that mothers

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

595

who are high in BAS and SWB would be more likely to be authoritative; whereas mothers who are high in BAS but have a poor SWB were more likely to be neglectful. Results revealed that mothers high in BAS and SWB were signicantly more likely to be authoritative, whereas mothers high in BAS and low in SWB were signicantly more likely to be neglectful. This is consistent with the idea that a happy mother with a strong BAS would be more attentive to her children. Alternatively, some mothers might express their BAS in more (or less) adaptive ways. For example, some high-BAS mothers might choose to vigorously pursue short-term rewards like drugs or risky sex, whereas others might choose more long-term rewards like professional accomplishment. It may be that some mothers are happier and better parents because they are more responsible. We also found that mothers low in BAS and SWB displayed sub-optimal parenting, but significantly more authoritarian than neglectful. Grays revised theory emphasizes interactions among the motivational systems, and, with this in mind, mothers with a weak BAS may respond more to threats because the punishment system (the new FFFS) is likely to be relatively stronger in mixed situations. That is, low BAS mothers may be particularly sensitive to threats, and attempt to shield their children with authoritarian (punishing) parenting practices. This explanation is speculative, and begs the question of why the BIS scale was unrelated to maternal control. It is also unclear why low SWB appeared as an additional factor in predicting the dierences between neglectful and authoritarian parenting among low BAS mothers, but it is worth noting that all low BAS mothers displayed a similar pattern (more authoritarian than neglectful), just not statistically signicantly dierent in the case of high SWB mothers. This study provided some of the rst empirical data investigating behavioural motivation systems with parenting styles. Although the results oer insights, several caveats must be considered. We relied on self-report measures of personality and parenting, and results may reect biased judgments in addition to actual behaviour. Additionally, parenting styles were assessed at a global level, likely capturing beliefs and average behaviour tendencies rather than the day-to-day dynamics of parenting. Future research might utilize behavioural observation or examine peer reports (e.g., from fathers) to extend this work. In addition, our results did not indicate links between BIS and the parenting dimensions of control and nurturance. However, BIS may be more important in other samples, or may play an important role in other aspects of parenting. Future research might assess variables such as externalizing behaviours and academic outcomes. Furthermore, this research focused on maternal personality. Although historically mothers have been the primary caregivers, roles and responsibilities have changed and fathers now contribute a great deal to the psychological development and well-being of their children. Originally, both mothers and fathers were asked to participate in this study; however, only 40 fathers participated and were, therefore, excluded. Future research might examine the interaction between mothers personality and fathers personality and how it relates to their childrens well-being, but such attempts would benet from a more strategic approach to the recruitment of fathers. Finally, results from this study are correlational and are, therefore, limited in addressing the direction of causality and potential third variables. We speculated that BAS could cause more nurturing behaviour (i.e., it would result from a broader predisposition), but it is also possible that the experience of a nurturing approach mothering would lead a person to self-report more BASlike characteristics. Longitudinal research would oer a better understanding of the true nature of the association between parental personality and parenting styles.

596

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

Despite such limitations, this study is a rst step towards a better understanding of the relationship between maternal behavioural motivation systems and parenting styles. Results suggest that personality and parenting depend on a complex set of inter-associations (e.g., interactions with SWB). By beginning to understand these complexities, such research has the potential to oer insight into how individual dierences travel through generations.

References
Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In W. Damon (Ed.), Child development today and tomorrow (pp. 349378). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: A process model. Child Development, 55, 8396. Belsky, J., Crnic, K., & Woodworth, S. (1995). Personality and parenting: Exploring the mediational role of transient mood and daily hassles. Journal of Personality, 63, 905931. Ben-Zur, H. (2003). Happy adolescents: The link between subjective well-being, internal resources and parental factors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32, 6779. Block, J. H. (1981). The Child Rearing Practices Report (CRPR). A set of Q items for the description of parental socialization attitudes and values. Berkley: University of California, Institute of Human Development. Bugental, D. B., & Grusec, J. E. (2006). Socialization processes. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds. In chief) & N. Eisenberg, (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, Emotional and Personality Development (6th ed., pp. 366428). New York: John Wiley and Sons. Carver, C. S., Sutton, S. K., & Scheier, M. F. (2000). Action, emotion, and personality: Emerging conceptual integration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 741751. Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and aective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319333. Caseras, X., Avila, C., & Torrubia, R. (2003). The measurement of individual dierences in behavioural inhibition and behavioural activation systems: A comparison of personality scales. Personality and Individual Dierences, 34(6), 9991013. Clark, L. A., Kochanska, G., & Ready, R. E. (2000). Mothers personality and its interaction with child temperament as predictors of parenting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 274285. Coiro, M. J., & Emery, R. E. (1998). Do marriage problems aect fathering more than mothering? A quantitative and qualitative review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 10, 2340. Coplan, R. J., Hastings, P. D., Lagace-Seguin, D. G., & Moulton, C. E. (2002). Authoritative and authoritarian mothers parenting goals, attributions, and emotions across dierent childrearing contexts. Parenting: Science and Practice, 2, 126. Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 487496. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Grin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 7175. Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2002). Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: Approach and avoidance temperaments and goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), 804818. Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springeld IL: C.C. Thomas. Gray, J. A. (1981). A critique of Eysencks theory of personality. In H. J. Eysenck (Ed.), A model of personality (pp. 246276). New York: Springer. Gray, J. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry in the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kendler, K. S., Sham, P. C., & MacLean, C. J. (1997). The determinants of parenting: An epidemiological, multiinformant, retrospective study. Psychological Medicine, 27, 549563.

J. Desjardins et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 587597

597

Lambourn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62, 10491065. Metsa pelto, R. L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2003). Personality traits and parenting: Neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experience as discriminative factors. European Journal of Personality, 17, 5978. Metsa pelto, R. L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2005). The moderating eect of extraversion on the relation between self-reported and observed parenting. Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 371384. Miller, N. B., Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., Hetherington, E. M., & Clingempeel, W. G. (1993). Externalizing in preschoolers and early adolescents: A cross-study replication of a family model. Developmental Psychology, 29, 318. Pickering, A. D., Corr, P. J., & Gray, J. A. (1999). Interactions and reinforcement sensitivity theory: A theoretical analysis of Rusting and Larsen (1997). Personality and Individual Dierences, 26, 357365. Rickel, A. U., & Biasatti, L. L. (1982). Modication of the Block child rearing practice report. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 129134. Rubin, K. H., Nelson, L. J., Hastings, P., & Asendorpf, J. (1999). The transaction between parents perceptions of their childrens shyness and their parenting styles. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 23, 937957. Rusting, C. L. (1999). Interactive eects of personality and mood on emotion-congruent memory and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(5), 10731086. Smillie, L. D., Pickering, A. D., & Jackson, C. J. (2006). The new reinforcement sensitivity theory: Implications for personality measurement. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 320335. Weiss, L. H., & Schwarz, J. C. (1996). The relationship between parenting types and older adolescents personality, academic achievement, adjustment, and substance use. Child Development, 67(5), 21012114. Zelenski, J. M., & Larsen, R. J. (1999). Susceptibility to aect: A comparison of three personality taxonomies. Journal of Personality, 67, 761791. Zelenski, J. M., & Larsen, R. J. (2002). Predicting the future: How aect-related personality traits inuence likelihood judgments of future events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(7), 10001010.