, 33L.
“5! .21 p .

"1 :k" 35.3
at, am
Ar
2... ﬁn ...
imiisaaiﬁ 3.1....
.. s 3...

{:‘l
! 1.1:...u11 .1
[12,...
. .315. w .
$3.5:
. .1

.iv

115.1133.
.

I»

,4

“fem
3.

33.1....
343... .1...
iii?!

.2...

“1:2; :2 .I
x. .5}: 0...... 2..
5... 5:7...
. .511. I.
{It

.
L333... .3. .
. 5"“. Q I!
32......43 3%.
it!
a . 1.. 30...”.
2. 3|!
”Dd-$1.5
7
12...: s
. :J-IHWJWI

 

4i -

iﬁﬁﬁﬁmﬁw .

ﬁéﬁgﬁgﬁgg .

 

ThiiSiS

40°

 

URPARY I
Micrwa diam;
University I

 

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled
Socioeconomic, Family, and Maternal Influences on
Behavior and Verbal Ability in Young Jamaican Children

presented by

Elizabeth Ansel Kirsch

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for

 

 

Ph . D . degree in PhilOSODhl

 

Major professor

DMe December 31, 2001

 

MS U i: an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.

TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

JUN 2 7 2005

 

 

'JUL—TI—ZUUS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:/CIRClDateDue.p65~p. 15

SOCIOECONOMIC, FAMILY, AND MATERNAL INFLUENCES ON
BEHAVIOR AND VERBAL ABILITY IN YOUNG JAMAICAN CHILDREN

By

Elizabeth Ansel Kirsch

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to

Michigan State University
In partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
For the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Psychology

2001

ABSTRACT

SOCIOECONOMIC, MATERNAL, AND FAMILY INFLUENCES ON
BEHAVIOR AND VERBAL ABILITY IN YOUNG JAMAICAN CHILDREN

By
Elizabeth Ansel Kirsch

For young children, self-regulation and the ability to use language for
communication are known to make critical contributions to school
success. It is also known that SES, maternal psychopathology, and family
cohesion influence the development of these capacities. Virtually all
evidence about these relationships, however, comes from research in
Western developed countries. Parents and teachers in developing
countries, of course, also want to improve early childhood education, but
for economic and cultural reasons, there are limits in the extent to which
this evidence can be generalized to developing countries. The goal of the
current study, therefore, was to determine whether these contributors to
child development are similar for Jamaica, a developing country. Jamaica
is experiencing serious educational and economic problems but little is
known about the development and functioning of its children and families.
The current study begins to address this deficit in the knowledge base by
focusing on 151 3- to 6-year-olds and their mothers. Based on the Mothers’
answers to the Brief Symptom Inventory and the Family Adaptability and
cohesion Scale, each mother was rated on information on

psychopaﬂrology, and each family was rated on family cohesion. Each

mother also provided information on her family’s economic resources as
well as information about her child’s behavior problems for her answers to
the Connors Parent Rating Scale. Finally, each child’s verbal ability and
puzzle-solving skill were assessed by the McCarthy Scales of Children’s
Abilities, a measure of intelligence that includes subscales such as verbal
ability and puzzle-solving. Path analysis revealed that maternal
psychopathology was positively related, and family cohesion negatively
related, to behavior problems. The analysis also indicated that SES was
positively related to puzzle-solving, and negatively related to
psychopaﬂrology and behavior problems. Although the results showed
that Jamaica and developed countries have some paths to child behavior
problems, verbal ability, and puzzle-solving in common, they also revealed
several differences, thus supporting both the culture-general and culture-
speciﬁc perspectives. The results thus suggest that any attempt to
ameliorate child behavior problems in school or at home must take the
relation between family cohesion, maternal psychopathology, and child

behavior into consideration.

DEDICATION

This dissertation is lovingly dedicated to
Jean and lrwin Becker,
whose loving support throughout this process was given unconditionally
and with a belief that, when finished, despite the obstacles that occurred, I
would never regret

any of the effort I put into my education.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the help of my committee Dr. H. E.
Fitzgerald, Dr. Ellen Strommen, Dr. Ellen Whipple, and my chair, Dr. Michael
C. Lambert for guiding me through the dissertation process. I would also
like to thank Dr. Strommen and Dr. Whipple for discussing the diverse roles
of children and their families from cross-cultural and within-in culture
perspectives. To my chair, Dr. Michael C. Lambert, I would especially like
to acknowledge how his excitement, interest, and commitment to children
and their families from a global perspective have inﬂuenced my own work
and interests.

I would, in addition, like to thank Dr. Lauren J. Harris, who, while not
ofﬁcially on my committee, offered counsel, guidance, and support during

the writing process.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES

INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical Perspectives
Socialization and Developmental Tasks: Early Childhood

Socialization and Developmental Tasks: A Jamaican
Perspective

Influences on Socialization Practices

Family Functioning

Parent-Child Interaction

GOALS
Questions of Interest

METHOD
Participants
Demographic Information
Family Measures

Maternal Measures
Child Measures

RESULTS
Results for Models 1 and 2: Dysthymia Models
Results for Models 3 and 4: Major Depression with
Psychotic Feature Models

DISCUSSION
SES, Maternal Psychopathology and Family Cohesion
Implications and Future Directions

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Frequency Tables for Variables in Analyzed and
Archival Models
Appendix B: Frequency Distributions for Variables in Analyzed
and Archival Models
Appendix C: Archival Models

REFERENCES

vi

vii

ix

17
20
25
29

38
38

41

41
42

49

57
63
69
69
74
78
79

96
111

114

Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table
Table
Table
Table

Table
Table

Table

935999.“?

10:

11:
12:
13:

14:

15:
16:

17:

LIST OF TABLES

Descriptive Statistics

Faces-II Dimensions

BSI Dimensions for Depression

Conners Factors

Blvariate Correlations for all Variables in Models

Frequency Table of Puzzle-Solving Scores from
the McCarthy Scales of Child Development

Frequency Table of Visual Factor Scores from the
McCarthy Scales of Child Development

Frequency Table of Conceptual Grouping Scores
From the McCarthy Scales of Child Development

Frequency Table of Verbal Factor Scores from the
McCarthy Scales of Child Development

Frequency Table of Mothers’ Educational
Attainment

Frequency Table of Parents’ Relationship
Frequency Distribution of Mothers’ Age
Frequency Table of Child IQ Scores

Frequency Table of Study Children In Slx Basic
Schools

Frequency Table of Age of Study Children

Frequency Table of Total Socioeconomic Status
of Families of Study Children

Frequency Table of lmmaturity Scores from the
Conners Behavioral Scales

vii

42
47

52

80

81

82

83

87

91

Table

Table

Table

Table

18:

19:

20:

21:

LIST OF TABLES (continued)

Frequency Table of Hyperactivity Scale from the
Conners Behavioral Scale

Frequency Table of Family Cohesion Factor on
the Faces

Frequency Table of the Dysthymia Scores on the
Brief Symptom Inventory

Frequency Table of Psychotic Scores on the Brief
Symptom Inventory

viii

92

93

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure
Figure
Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Flgure

399939

10:

11:

12:

13:

14:

15:

LIST OF FIGURES

Conceptual Relations Among Variables

Model 1: Inﬂuence of SES, Maternal Dysthymia,
and Family Cohesion on Child Outcome

Model 2: Inﬂuence of SES, Maternal Dysthymia,
and Family Cohesion on Child Outcome

Model 3: Inﬂuence of SES, Major Depression
with Psychotic Features, and Family Cohesion
on Child Outcome

Model 4: Inﬂuence of SES, Major Depression
with Psychotic Features, and Family Cohesion
on Child Outcome

Frequency Distribution of Mothers’ Age
Frequency Distribution of Parents’ Relationship
Frequency Distribution of Mothers’ Education

Frequency Distribution of Verbal Factor Scores
from the McCarthy Scales of Child Development

Frequency Distribution of Visual Factor Scores
from the McCarthy Scales of Child Development

Frequency Disb'ibution of Conceptual Grouping
Scores from the McCarthy Scales of Child
Development

Frequency Distribution of Study Children at
Basic Schools

Frequency Distribution of Age of Study Children

Frequency Distribution of Total Socioeconomic
Status of Families of Study Children

Frequency Distribution of Immaturity Scores
from the Connors Behavioral Scale

ix

65
97
98

100

101

102

103
104

105

108

Figure 16:

Figure 17:

Figure 18:

Figure 19:

Figure 20:

Figure 21:

LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)

Frequency Distribution of Hyperactivity Factor
Scores from the Connors Behavioral Scale

Frequency Distribution of Family Cohesion Factor
Scores on the FACES

Frequency Distribution of Dysthymia Factor Scores
on the Brief Symptom Inventory

Frequency Distribution of Psychotic Factor Scores
on the Brief Symptom Inventory

Archival Model: Inﬂuence of SES, Maternal
Psychotic Behavior, and Family Cohesion on Child
Outcome

Archival Model: Inﬂuence of SES, Matamal
Dysthymia, and Family Cohesion on Child Outcome

107

108

109

110

112

113

INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Psychologists, educators, clinicians, and policy makers recognize
the importance of early childhood (i.e., ages 3—8) as a time for encouraging,
building, and strengthening the competencies needed for the child’s
successful transition from home to school (Pianta, 1999; Stipek, 2001;
White, 1995). The ability to regulate one’s own behavior, either alone or
with the support of others, and the ability to use language to communicate
with others are two of the most important cont-ibutors to a successful
school experience for young children.

Competencies in the developmental areas discussed above help
scaffold the child’s successful integration into the social world (Richards,
1974; Vygotsky, 1930/1978). Failure, however, to master these skills early
in life may be associated with serious behavioral, emotional, and Ieaming
difﬁculties at all stages of life - early childhood, middle and later
childhood, adolescence, and adulthood (Committee on Early Childhood
Pedagogy, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education,
8 National Research Council, 2001). Three of the factors already generally
known to play important roles in the process were chosen for study:
socioeconomic status (Keating and Hertzman 1999; Stipek, 2001), maternal
psychopathology (Campbell, 1987; Campbell 8 Ewing, 1990), and family
functioning; Campbell 8 Pierce, 1996; Campbell, Pierce, March 8 Ewing,
1991, 1994).

Although most research studies on behavior regulation and
language ability have been conducted in industrialized nations (Durbrow,
1999) interest in early childhood education extends as well to developing
countries (Morrison 8 Milner, 1995). Indeed, the Committee on Early
Childhood Pedagogy and collaborators (2001) has posited that universal
early childhood education will be a reality in the not-too-distant future, thus
making research in early childhood and its implications for education a
topic for universal study.

Jamaica is one example of a developing country that has seen very
few empirical studies on children (Lambert, Weisz, 8 Knight, 1989a). As a
result, educators, physicians, psychologists, and others who work with
young children rely on research conducted in developed and more
economically stable countries (Lambert et al., 1989a). There are limits,
however, to the extent to which we can generalize from one country to
another, especially from developed to developing countries (Geertz, 1973).
The vast differences in economic circumstances exert a powerful effect,
both directly and indirectly, on the material, social, educational, and
medical resources that are available to the child, and thus have immediate
as well as Iong-tenn effects on the child’s development (Keating and
Hertzman 1999). For another example, there are cultural differences in
many practices and beliefs that affect the socialization process, including
the development and expression of emotion and behavior regulation

(Lambert et al., 1989a; Valsiner 1989). Such differences also extend to

rules guiding when and how to express strong feelings (Lambert, Knight,
Taylor, 8 Achenbach, 1994; Ekman 8 Davidson, 1994), rules governing
parent-child interaction (Bronfenbrenner 1986; Durbrow 1999), beliefs
about what is most important in the socialization process (Bronfenbrenner
1986; Durbrow 1999), and how to teach children new skills (Rogoff, Mistry,
Goncu, 8 Mosier, 1993).

In Jamaica, there Is a serious need for better information. In 1996,
for example, the Jamaican Teachers Association asked the Chief Education
Ofﬁcer of the Ministry of Education to help them understand and manage
the severe behavior problems that they were experiencing with children in
all Jamaican schools (Morrison, Ipsa, 8 Milner, 1998). On previous
occasions the Basic School [non-governmental schools for preschoolers
(ages 3-6)] teachers voiced a concern about their children’s lack of
curiosity and their reluctance to participate in new activities (Morrison et
al., 1998). These are especially worrisome inasmuch as curiosity and
readiness to participate are normally characteristic of young children and
indicate an interest in Ieaming (Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy et
al., 2001).

The current study, therefore, has a two-fold goal. The ﬁrst goal is to
assess the contribution of socioeconomic status, maternal
psychopathology, and family functioning to behavior regulation and
language ability in young Jamaican children. The second goal is to

determine whether the relation among these potential contributors to child

outcome is the same as that reported in the United States, Canada, and
Europe.

The second goal is important for two reasons. First, even though the
current study will not measure the effect of culmre directly, the result
can provide insight about the patterns of socioeconomic status, maternal
psychopathology, and family functioning on child outcome. The current
study, therefore, can contribute to the scientific dialogue on universal
versus context-speciﬁc aspect of behavior in relation to these particular
maternal, family, and socioeconomic variables. Second, by enhancing our
understanding of how these inﬂuences work in Jamaica, we can begin to
build a foundation of knowledge for Jamaican clinicians, educators, and
policy makers to draw on as they grapple with the complex social issues in
their country and as they plan programs for early childhood education.

The literature review to follow begins with a presentation of
theoretical perspectives for the current study. It then reviews theory and
research on the inﬂuence of culture in psychological research. After that, it
examines developmental tasks of early childhood, followed by a discussion
of the socialization process and those factors that inﬂuence it outcome -
socioeconomic status, maternal psychopathology, and family functioning.
Special attention is given to a discussion of Jamaican culture and it
inﬂuence on the expectations, beliefs, values, and practices within the

family. Figure 1 present a model of the relations to be considered.

 

  

Child Behavior
Regulation

 

 
 
  

Maternal
Psychopathology

 

 

Socioeconomic Status
(SES)

 

 

F Child Verbal Ability

 

 

 

I Family Functioning

 

 

 

   

Child Puzzle-Solving
Skill

 

Figure 1: Conceptual Relations Among Variables

Theoretical Persge_<_:tives

Socioeconomic Psychosocial Int_egration
The overall perspective that guides this research is called

Socioeconomic Psychosocial Intgration, or SEP. SEP is not itelf a theory
of human development. Rather, it is a call for a new way to study and
interpret inﬂuences on a call for a new way to study and interpret
inﬂuences on developmental outcome. It posit that a successful theory
must integrate knowledge across many disciplines. For psychology, some
of the most important disciplines to integrate include education, sociology,
social work, epidemiology, cultural anthropology, neurobiology, and
neuroscience. SEP also sees conventional variables such as
socioeconomic status to stand for much more than, for example, material
resources, and instead to be a marker for highly complex processes that
begin before birth and continue across the life-course. These include such
identiﬁable social circumstances as attitudes and ballet about education
and the safety of one’s neighborhood and that integrate neurobiological
factors with experience [see Keating 8 Hertzman (1999) for a full
discussion].

SEP also incorporates the concept of the “social gradient” to
indicate the complex relation between socioeconomic status as it is
conventionally understood and the relation between socioeconomic status
and it multiple inﬂuences on psychosocial functioning [e.g., Case, Grifﬁn,
8 Kelly (1999, 2001) and Tremblay (1999) for a full discussion]. Countries

or communities may have sharp social gradient indicating extremes of
wealth and poverty, such as are found in Jamaica, or smoother gradient
indicating less extreme differences. These different gradient can have
very different effect on such psychosocial outcomes as maternal
psychopathology, family cohesion (e.g., the ability of the family to function
harmoniously), and child behavior problems. As statistical indicators, the
gradient operate on the population level and not on the individual level so
that psychosocial outcomes like those listed above will not necessarily be
true for individuals, even though they may describe the population (Keating
8 Hartman, 1999).

Social gradient, ﬂierefore, affect families at the populaﬁon level and
families are embedded in cultural beliefs and practices that may or may not
be inﬂuenced by socioeconomic factors (Keating and Hartman 1999), the
next section will discuss theoretical perspectives concerning families and
culture.

Culture, Context, and Families

Acknowledging the inﬂuence of culture and traditions on family,
children, and schooling is important in understanding the relationships and
expectancies among parent, family, and children (Durbrow, 1999; Geert,
1973; Lambert, Knight, Taylor, 8 Newell, 1993; Rogoff et al., 1993). One
theoretical stance taken toward the inclusion of cultural similarities and

differences and their inﬂuence on child or family outcomes is cultural-

contextual theory (Cole, 1999), a theory that acknowledges the inﬂuence
and interplay among culture, context, and developmental outcome.

In addition, scholars of the family (Bronfenbrenner 1986) generally
acknowledge that families are organized to perform speciﬁc tasks and
functions as prescribed by cultural and societal norms. One such task is
to help integrate the child into the social world (Richards, 1974).

Scholars and researchers also acknowledge the waiter of inﬂuences
on the quality of family functioning and, in particular, childrearing. One of
the approaches acknowledging these complexities is family systems
theory. There are many such theories. All of them acknowledge the
varieties of ways that families may organize, accommodate to it members,
and inﬂuence child outcome.

According to the structural family systems theory (Minuchin 1992),
for the family to fulﬁll it many obligations, it must form subsystems, each
one with it specific role within the overall family organization. The
parental subsystem generally assumes the major responsibility for child
rearing, including teaching and shaping social behavior. Much of the
extant research on child outcome focuses on parent-child interaction, often
from the perspective of the nuclear family, found most often in the United
States, Canada, and Europe. Families in Jamaica, however, often do not
have the same organizational pattern as families in industrialized countries
(Durbrow, 1999; GopauI-McNicol, 1998, 1999), and therefore, may inﬂuence

children differently.

Culture and the Research Process

As previously stated, the importance of cultural inﬂuences on
development is now acknowledged in much psychological research. Often,
however, the intellectual stance toward the characteristics of culture and
their inﬂuence on the developmental process is not addressed directly
(Durbrow, 1999; GopauI-McNicoI, 1999). Acknowledged in word, but not in
content or approach to the research question, the use of culture as a
variable can easily become a cliche, while the research process, including
questions asked and the interpretation of result continues unchanged or
unquestioned (Rogler, 1999).

There are at least two ways that consideration of culture affect die
research process. The ﬁrst addresses the culture-general and culture-
speciﬁc nature of the research question (Lambert et al., 1989a)(e.g., Do
parent in all cultures have the same goals for the socialization of their
children?). There is convincing evidence that socialization goals are
strongly inﬂuenced by cultural values and beliefs. For example, Gonzalez-
Ramos, Zayas, and Cohen (1998) found that American mothers placed high
value on creativity and independence in the socialization of their preschool
children, whereas for Puerto Rican mothers, what was important was
loyalty to family and respect for oﬂ‘lers. From a culture-general
perspective, both Puerto Rican and American mothers accepted
responsibility for the socialization of their young children, but from a

culture-speciﬁc perspective, their goals were different and, most likely,

would result in different types of guidance and interaction with their
children.

Views about the similarity or differences among cultures also
inﬂuence the research process itelf. One model of cultural inﬂuences on
the research process posit three ways to conceptualize the inﬂuence of
culture on development (Bukowski 8 Sippola, 1998; Geert, 1973). The ﬁrst
way is the details model, which states that cultures differ only in small
details, so that instrument standardized for one culture may be used
without modiﬁcation across cultures and not diminish outcome validity.
Much early work in psychology implicitly accepted this stance about
cultural inﬂuences (Durbrow 1999) and, therefore, made broad
generalizations of psychological ﬁndings across cultures. This approach
can be seen as a 100% culture-general stance.

A second approach, on the other end of the continuum, takes an
essentialist perspective. This approach assumes that there are no
similarities across cultures, so that assessment instrument cannot be
modiﬁed in any way but must be created speciﬁcally for the population
under study. This perspective, if taken to an extreme, does not permit
cross-cultural research because nothing from one culture can be
generalized to another. It is an extreme case of culture-speciﬁcity.

A third model is the local knowledge model, which acknowledges
that many commonalities across cultures but posit that local knowledge

and belief strongly inﬂuence the developmental process (e.g., parent-child

10

interaction) and, therefore, the developmental outcome. Advocates for this
model argue that for validity, information about the population being
studied should be incorporated in the assessment instrument. Prior work
by Lambert and his colleagues (Lambert at al., 1989a; Lambert et al., 1994;
Lambert, Knight, Taylor, 8 Achenbach, 1996; Lambert 8 Lyubansky, 1999)
draws from existing assessment instrument [e.g., Achenbach’s Child
Behavior Check List (CBCL)] but modiﬁes the questions based on
contributions from clinic referred Jamaican youth, their parent, teachers,
other adult who referred them for treatment, and from the contributions of
clinicians who treat Jamaican children (Lambert et al., 1989a; Lambert at
al., 1994; Lambert at al., 1996; Lambert 8 Lyubansky, 1999)

The CBCL was then modiﬁed to reﬂect the Jamaican thresholds for
problem behaviors as well as behaviors thought to be problematic. For
example, for a Jamaican adult, a child who throws stones for any reason
has a behavior problem; for an American adult, the same behaviors
displayed by a child would not ordinarily be a cause for concern. Although
United States and Jamaican parent, therefore, would agree that children
have behavior problems, they differ in what constitutes appropriate and
inappropriate behavior. The researcher who fails to take these differences
into account and generalizes across cultures runs the risk of overlooking
or misclassifying psychological difﬁculties in one culture not so identiﬁed

In another.

11

The current study assesses Jamaican children, mothers, and
families, and thus is a within-culture study. From a theoretical perspective,
however, both culture-general and culture-speciﬁc perspectives are taken
into account, although no direct cross-cultural comparisons can be made.

The literature review to follow examines research predominantly
from the United States, Canada, and Europe, and the question of whether
established culture-general result will apply equally well to Jamaica in
relation to the effect of maternal psychopaﬂrology, family functioning, and

child outcome remain to be seen.

Socialization and Developmental Tasks: Early Childhood

§oclalization
Socialization has two goals: to teach the child how to

function in the home and in the larger community, and second, to teach the
child to balance it needs with those of others, whether they are parent,
extended family, classmates, or friends. Several skills are needed to
achieve these goals, including behavior regulation, emotion regulation, and
the use of language to communicate ideas, thought, and feelings to
others, and mastering them is a complex process (Richards 1974; Rogoff
1990; White 1995). Many factors inﬂuence this process (Bronfenbrenner
1986), including, but not limited to, cultural values and beliefs that effect
adult expectations of the child’s emotion and behavior regulation (Lambert
et al., 1989a) and the quality of the parent-child interaction (Bronfenbrenner
1986; Gotbnan, Kat, 8 Hooven, 1997; Maccoby 1992).

12

In early childhood, sociallzaﬁon of behavior regulation, emotion
regulation, and language is initially acquired in the family. In the family, ﬁre
child also Ieams to use adult as resources for asking questions and
problem solving and to use language to express feelings and to
communicate ideas (Nelson 1996; Rogoff, Baker-Sennatt, Lacasa, 8
Goldsmiﬁr, 1995; White 1995). In addition, ﬁre child learns ﬁre appropriate
' ways to inhibit or express behaviors and feelings and how to use ﬁris
knowledge wlﬁr family and peers (Maccoby, 1992). Competencies in ﬁrese
areas help to scaffold ﬁre child’s transition from home to school (Plant,
1999) and are associated wiﬁr positive peer and adult relaﬁonships and
with academic success, beginning in early childhood and continuing
ﬁrrough adolescence (Plant 1999; Sﬁpek 2001). Failure to gain
competence may be associated wiﬁr serious behavioral, emotional, and
Ieaming difﬁculties at later stages in life, from middle and later childhood,
to adolescence, to adulﬁrood (Campbell, 1990; Campbell, 1995; Campbell 8
Pierce, 1996; Caspi, Mofﬁtt, Newman, 8 Silva, 1997).

Alﬁrough ﬁre skills needed for successful socialization are iniﬁally
learned and practiced in ﬁre family, and alﬁrough socialization begins in
early infancy and early childhood (Keenan and Shaw, 1994; Maccoby, 1992;
Richards, 1974) most studies of parental and environmental contributors to
child outcome have started in middle childhood [e.g., see Zucker 8
Gomberg (1986) for a review of ﬁre literature on children of alcoholics].

More recent research, however, has begun wiﬁr preschool-age children

13

(e.g., Campbell, 1995 for a review; Radke-Yarrow, 1998; Zucker 8
Fitgerald, 1991) and is providing substantial evidence that early behavior
patterns are related to later developmental outcome.

Campbell and Ewing (1990), for example, found ﬁrat children who at
age ﬁrree had difﬁculﬁes with behavior and emoﬁon regulation (e.g.,
aggressive and impulsive behavior) were signiﬁcanﬁy more likely ﬁran
children wiﬁrout ﬁrese difﬁculties to have behavior problems at ages 6 and
9. Looking even farﬁrer across the life-course, Caspi and his colleagues
(Caspi et al., 1997) found ﬁrst behavior problems in 3-year-old children
were associated wiﬁr later adult psychopaﬁrology. These studies provide
evidence ﬁrat behavior problems in early childhood may inﬂuence later
child and adult outcome, ﬁrus highlighting ﬁre importance of recognizing
and understanding speciﬁc inﬂuences on ﬁre socialization process.
Because most Ieaming occurs In a social context, ﬁre Ieaming process
involves co-particlpation of ﬁre parent and teachers as ﬁre child learns
emotion regulation, behavior regulation, and language development [for a
discussion of co-participation see Lave 8 Wenger (1991 )1.

Emotion Regulation. The ability to regulate emotions has
antecedent in infancy and toddlerhood (e.g., Field, 1995) but becomes
more critical in early childhood as ﬁre child’s interacﬁons with oﬁrers,
especially peers, increase. As previously stated, ﬁrere are cultural and
family expectations for ﬁre appropriate times and ways to express

emotions such as anger and sadness (Ekman 8 Davidson, 1994; Lambert et

14

al., 1996; Lambert, Lyubansky, 8 Achenbach, 1998; Lambert et al., 1994;
Lambert, Puig, Lyubansky, 8 Rowan, 2001a;). The socializaﬁon of emotion
regulation requires at least ﬁrree skills. The ﬁrst skill requires ﬁre
recognition and understanding of one’s own internal feelings. The second
skill is to learn socially appropriate ways to respond to ﬁre experience of
emotion (e.g., Gottrnan et al., 1997). The ﬁrird skill, which complement ﬁre
ﬁrst, is to accurately interpret ﬁre emotion responses of anoﬁrer. This is a
key component in beginning and maintaining successful peer
relationships. Children who have difﬁculty interpreting oﬁrers’ emotion
responses often misinterpret ﬁrose responses as negative or hosﬁle, and,
ﬁrerefore, are more likely to respond wiﬁr anger or distress. Studies show
ﬁrat ﬁre ability to correctly read ﬁre emotion responses of others is a key
component in initiaﬁng and maintaining successful peer relationships
(Crick 8 Dodge, 1994; Crick 8 Dodge, 1996).

Behavior Rggulaﬁon. Behavior regulaﬁon is closely related to
emotion regulation because behavior regulation often depends on ﬁre
ability to manage emotion responses in a variety of situations (e.g., at
home, at school, playing wiﬁr peers). Children who can regulate ﬁreir
behavioral responses when working andlor playing wiﬁr oﬁrers maintain
friendships and have more successful experiences within ﬁre peer group
than children who have difﬁculty wiﬁr ﬁrese same skills (Crick 8 Dodge,
1994; Crick 8 Dodge, 1996). Parent, as co-participant in ﬁre process,

help ﬁreir child gain competence in behavior regulaﬁon. In addiﬁon to

15

direct instruction (Rogoff et al., 1993), research shows ﬁrat parental
warrnﬁr, sensitivity, responsiveness, auﬁroritative child-rearing styles, and
child-centered management techniques all help ﬁre child to develop
behavior and emotion regulation (Gralinski 8 Kopp, 1993).

In one such study, Gralinskl and Kopp (1993) examined middle-class,
well-educated parent and ﬁreir children, and a developmental ﬁmetable of
parental expectations emerged. For toddlers, parental expectaﬁons
centered on safety and protection (e.g., “don’t put a fork in ﬁre electric
socket”); for preschoolers, parent formalized expectations for proper
behavior at mealtime, self-care (e.g., brushing teeﬁr), and for respecting ﬁre
person and property of oﬁrers. As ﬁre children grew older, ﬁre moﬁrers
furﬁrer elaborated rules and expectaﬁons coincided wiﬁr ﬁre child’s
entrance into school, where expectations of behavior regulaﬁon would also
come from teachers.

Language Development. The use of language marks a key transiﬁon
from toddlerhood to early childhood. Whereas toddlers often communicate
anger or displeasure wiﬁr oﬁrers by physically aggressive means, in early
childhood Ieaming to use language to communicate feelings is an
important developmental task (e.g.,Gottman et al., 1997). The child is also
Ieaming how to use language in formal (e.g., school) and Informal (e.g.,
home) situations, which helps ﬁre child modulate emoﬁons and behavior.
Difﬁculty with language and communication in young children is often
associated wiﬁr problems in behavior and emotion regulation (Beltchman,

16

Wilson, Brownlie, 8 Waters, 1996; Benasich 8 Curtiss, 1993; Carson, Klee,
Perry, Muskina, 8 Donagy, 1998). In sum, ﬁre core of self-control, deﬁned
as ﬁre ability to act according to ﬁre expectations of ﬁre caregiver, even
when ﬁre caregiver is not present (Gralinski 8 Kopp, 1993), is ﬁre ability to
inhibit Iniﬁal impulses so ﬁrat a proper form of acﬁon can be initiated
(Maccoby, 1992). Thus as children learn to regulate emotion and behavior
and to use language effectively, their ability to manage aggression,
empaﬁrize wiﬁr oﬁrers, and act appropriately in a variety of settings
increases.
Socializaﬁon and Developmental Tasks: A Jamaican Persgctive

As previously noted, much of a child’s early socialization occurs in
ﬁre family, most often between parent and child. Cultural values and
beliefs, ﬁrerefore, about ﬁre appropriate ways to socialize children affect
how parent approach ﬁris process (Durbrow 1999; Rogoff et al., 1995).
Among cultural variations identiﬁed in meeﬁng ﬁre responsibilities for child
rearing are who takes ﬁre primary role for day-to-day child-care, what is
appropriate discipline, and who disciplines ﬁre child, family attitudes
toward schooling, including what is valued and what behavior is
considered appropriate. Also, ﬁre type of family structure adopted in a
culﬁrre or subculture inﬂuences cultural variations in child rearing (Wint 8
Brown, 1987).

In Jamaica, for example, ﬁre moﬁrer takes ﬁre main responsibility for

child rearing. A grandmoﬁrer or aunt, however, will most likely become ﬁre

17

 

primary caregiver if ﬁre moﬁrer is unable to do so. Maternal ﬁgures are
also direcﬁy involved wiﬁr children regardless of maternal availability.
Socialization values for Jamaican children center around obedience,
sharing, and respect for oﬁrers (Durbrow, 1999; Gopaul-McNicol, 1999; Leo-
Rhynie, 1993; Morrison 8 Milner, 1995; Rogoff et al., 1995; Valsiner, 1989).
Beginning in early childhood, Jamaican parent, ﬁrerefore, expect ﬁreir
children to obey and follow ﬁreir directives (Gopaul-McNicol, 1999;
Morrison 8 Milner, 1995). When children are disobedient, ﬁre two most
common disciplinary meﬁrods are spanking and wiﬁrdrawal of love
(Morrison 8 Milner, 1995).

Alﬁrough spanking and love wiﬁrdrawal are commonly used,
Jamaican moﬁrers are also emotionally warm, attentive, and nurturing
toward ﬁreir children (Grant 1974, 1984). Jamaican moﬁrers believe ﬁrat it
is ﬁre combinaﬁon ﬁrat prevent ﬁre child from becoming “spoiled” and
that prepares ﬁre child for ﬁre behavior expected in school. The ﬁrst
school exposure most Jamaicans experience is ﬁre “Basic School.” This
type of education is ﬁrerefore described next.

Early Childhood Education in Jamaica Basic Schools

Jamaica has several forms of early childhood education (Johnson 8
Brown“, 1995), many of which come under ﬁre supervision of ﬁre education
ofﬁcers of ﬁre Jamaican Ministry of Early Childhood Unit. One such
program is basic school, a program for children ages 3- to 6- years old ﬁrat

is ﬁnanced from small contribuﬁons from parent and, more recenﬁy, from

18

government subsidies for accredited schools (Johnson 8 Brown, 1995).
These schools serve 82% of ﬁre total population of 4- to 6- year olds, the
majority of who are in ﬁre low-income strata of society (Johnson 8 Brown,
1995). In 1985, ﬁre Ministry of Education indorsed an eclectic child-
centered curriculum ﬁrat draws from Montessori, Froebel, Piaget, Bruner,
and Pestalozzi, ﬁre goal of which is to teach ﬁre child to work
independenﬁy and creatively (Johnson 8 Brown, 1995; Morrison et al.,
1998).

Many Basic Schools are understaffed wiﬁr child-adult ratios that
greaﬁy restrict ﬁre amount of attention given to any one child. Also, many
classrooms do not have enough space to accommodate ﬁre number of
children who attend (James, 1977; Stebbins, 1973). This also restrict ﬁre
amount of individual and small group work ﬁrat can be done (Johnson 8
Brown, 1995).

Teachers and Children in Basic School. Basic School tachers
are para-professionals wiﬁr low levels of academic preparation and wiﬁr
litﬁe or no pro-teaching training. Most of ﬁreir knowledge about children
and curriculum ﬁrerefore comes from in-service training. This lack of
academic preparation, boﬁr in curriculum and child development, may, in
part, explain ﬁre result of two evaluations, one in 1986, ﬁre oﬁrer in 1995,
ﬁrat found ﬁrat Basic School teachers had difﬁculty implementing ﬁre
curriculum endorsed by ﬁre Ministry of Education (Johnson 8 Brown,

1995). Anoﬁrer explanation may be related to ﬁre behavioral expectations

l9

 

for children. Jamaican children are expected to be obedient to auﬁrority
boﬁr at home and at school. This is a value ﬁrst boﬁr parent and teachers
hold as important (Morrison et al., 1998). In addiﬁon, Jamaican parent
place great importance on success in school and ﬁrerefore expect ﬁre child
to be obedient, respectful, and cooperative, not only wiﬁr ﬁremselves, as
already noted, but also wiﬁr ﬁre teacher and oﬁrer children. In school, for
example, children are expected to have ﬁre self-regulation necessary to
wait ﬁreir turn during ﬁre school day (Lambert at al., 1996). Jamaican
parent also endorse academic learning (i.e., reading, writing, and
arlﬁrmetic) over oﬁrer more creaﬁve aspect of ﬁre curriculum (e.g.,
painting, playing wiﬁr blocks). These subject are taught by rote Ieaming,
raﬁrer ﬁran in an experienﬁal, constructivist manner, meﬁrods endorsed by
ﬁre Ministry of Education. The curriculum, however, encourages creativity
and play in ﬁre classroom and, ﬁrerefore, conﬂict wiﬁr expectations for
obedience, self-regulation, and academic Ieaming may be difﬁcult for ﬁre
child and ﬁre teacher to resolve.
Inﬂuences on Socialization Pr_acﬁces

One inﬂuence on ﬁre context and content of setﬁngs is
socioeconomic status (Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov, Llaw, 8 Duncan, 1995;
Stipek, 2001; Stipek 8 Ryan, 1997), ﬁre next topic to be discussed.

Socioeconomic Status. As previously discussed, socioeconomic
status (SES) is often used to identify an individual’s or family’s place in ﬁre

social and economic hierarchy of a community or country (Brooks-Gunn,

20

Duncan, Britto, 1999; Duncan, Brooks-Gunn, 8 Klebanov, 1994; Duncan 8
Young, W. J., 1998). In ﬁre United States, social class is usually divided into
ﬁrree divisions (upper, middle, and lower), wiﬁr classiﬁcation based on a
combinaﬁon of education, occupation, and income. In ﬁrese respect, SES
is also a marker for a variety of associated medical, literacy, and recreaﬁon
resources and opportunities, as well as associated practices, values, and
beliefs (Leo-Rhynie 8 Hamilton 1993). Low SES also may be a signiﬁcant
indicator of difﬁculties for ﬁre child and for ﬁre family as a whole
(T amowski 8 Rohrbeck, 1993). In most countries, for example, SES is
negatively relatd to adult psychopaﬁrology and positively related to
psychological health for children and adult alike (T arnowski 8 Rohrbeck,
1993; Dohrenwend, 1990; Dohrenwend, Levav, Shrout, 8 Schwart, 1992).

ﬁioeconomic Status in Jamaica. As previously discussed, in
developing countries SES is more difﬁcult to deﬁne then it is in ﬁre
developed countries of ﬁre West (Leo-Rhynie and Hamilton, 1993), and, in
fact, may not reﬂect ﬁre same factors idenﬁﬁed as salient in ﬁre developed
world. Alﬁrough Jamaica has many natural resources, it also has serious
economic problems marked by 20% unemployment, a heavy foreign debt,
and high inﬂation. Currenﬁy, alﬁrough ﬁre economy is growing slowly,
inﬂation is increasing dramatically, ﬁrus contribuﬁng to a declining
standard of living for many.

The measurement of SES is difﬁcult in any developing country in

large part because of ﬁreso kinds of economic problems are common, not

21

only to Jamaica but also ﬁrroughout ﬁre developing world (Lambert et al.,
2001a). The measurement of SES in such countries, ﬁrerefore, should not
rely on income or professional status as proxies (McLoyd 8 Ceballo, 1998).

In Jamaica, furﬁrerrnore, ﬁre deterrninaﬁon of SES from reported
individual or family income is still more problematic because many families
receive substantial aid in ﬁre form of gift from relatives outide ﬁre
country. This aid, however, is measurable because it normally is used for
ﬁre purchase of material possessions for ﬁre home (e.g., refrigerator,
television, radio).

For ﬁrese reasons, in Jamaica, instead of using ﬁre more
convenﬁonal economic indicos of SES, a better measure is “wealﬁr,”
deﬁned as ﬁre total economic resources available to children and families.
As so deﬁned, “wealﬁr,” has been shown to be a better predictor of
emotional well-being ﬁran occupational status or income (McLoyd 8
Ceballo, 1998). Parental educaﬁon, wheﬁrer based on parent’ educaﬁon
(Amato, 2000) or only ﬁre moﬁrer’s education (Doucette-Gates, Brooks-
Gunn, 8 Chase-Lansdale, 1998), is also a predictor of well being in
children. Recent studies have begun to compare ﬁre Hollingshead SES
index (Hollingshead, 1975) wiﬁr measures of wealﬁr (e.g., money, material
possessions) as well as availability of services and adequacy of basic and
oﬁrer resources such as food and shelter (Lambert et al., 2001 a). These

studies, for example, ﬁnd ﬁrat ﬁrese altematlve measures are just as good

22

a predictor ofpsychopaﬁrology as is ﬁre Hollingshead index (1975) (e.g.,
Rose, 1998).
Socioeconomic Status and Child Outcome

For children, low SES is associated wiﬁr a higher
risk for extemallzing and internalizing behavior as well as a higher risk for
peer rejection (Raver 8 Leadbeater, 1999). When comparing preschool
children from a low and middle SES group, Ramsey (1988) used two
procedures to assess peer relationships and problem-solving skill. One
asked children to respond to social problem situations; ﬁre oﬁrer used a
sociometric assessment of friends in ﬁre classroom. The result was ﬁrat
children from ﬁre low SES group responded more aggressively when
seeking a solution to ﬁre problem situations and were also rated by ﬁreir
teachers as less socially competent. In sum, ﬁre low SES children had
more conﬂict over object, had fewer problem-solving skills, and had
more aggressive interaction styles.

In examining longitudinal data from ﬁre Infant Healﬁr and
Development Program for low birth weight babies (N = 895), Duncan, et al.,
(1994) found ﬁrat poverty status and family income were strongly related to
children’s cognitive development and behavior. Children who at age 5
lived in more afﬂuent neighborhoods functioned at higher intellectual
levels ﬁran ﬁrose children who remained at or near ﬁre poverty level.
Stipek (2001) found that poverty in early childhood is associated wiﬁr

poorer performance in adulﬁrood in literacy and oﬁrer school related skills.

23

 

In ﬁre longitudinal Mater University Study of Pregnancy, children
whose families remained poor across all ﬁrree assessment periods
(antenatal, 6 monﬁrs postnatal, and 5 years of age) had ﬁre highest number
of behavior problems. Murphy-Bennan, Levesque, and Berrnan (1996) also
found ﬁrat ﬁre caregiving of a moﬁrer who was struggling wiﬁr ﬁnancial
hardship was often like ﬁrat of a clinically depressed moﬁrer. To furﬁrer
understand ﬁre relation between SES and maternal depression, ﬁre next
secﬁon will explore ﬁre relation between SES and mental healﬁr.

Socioeconomic Status, Mental HealﬁrI and Family Funcﬁoning. A
United Nations sponsored epidemiological study found a strong
relationship between SES and mental illness (i.e., ﬁre lower ﬁre level of
SES, ﬁre higher ﬁre incidence of mental illness). This study also identiﬁed
some risk factors accompanying low SES to be chronic and acute stress,
lack of adequate social support, and restricted sense of control of one’s life
(Murphy-Barman et al., 1996). This ﬁnding lends support to Sameroff
(1975) who posit ﬁrat it is not just SES ﬁrat contributes to problematic
outcome but it is also ﬁre number of other risk factors ﬁrat accompany low
SES ﬁrat contribute to ﬁre development of mental illness, ﬁrus contributing
to problems in ﬁre individual and ﬁre family.

There is also a body of research ﬁrat suggest ﬁrat race, especially
being of minority status, contributes to poor mental healﬁr outcome. To
explore ﬁris relationship, drawing on epidemiological data from 1,648
American White and 450 Black adult, Biafora (1995) examined ﬁre relation

24

between SES, depression, and race. In ﬁre initial analysis, Blacks had
higher depression scores ﬁran did Whites; however, when SES
(occupaﬁonal status, education level, and income) was partialed out, race
was not an independent predictor of depression. SES, not race, ﬁrus
carried ﬁre predictive power for depression.

It is important, ﬁrerefore, to acknowledge ﬁre complexity of
examining ﬁre effect of SES on child or adult outcome and family
functioning. Alﬁrough ﬁre evidence often shows low SES, as deﬁned
convenﬁonally, by education, income, and occupaﬁon, to be a predictor of
child behavior problems and adult psychopaﬁrology, recent studies
suggest it is not low SES itelf but ﬁre number of associated risk factors
ﬁrat actually contribute to ﬁre problems (McLoyd 8 Ceballo, 1998;
Sameroff, 1975; Sameroff 8 Seifer, 1990, 1995; Seifer 8 Sameroff, 1987).
And, as previously discussed, Keaﬁng and Hartman (1999) emphasize ﬁre
inﬂuence of ﬁre socioeconomic psychological gradient on individual,
family, and community outcome. In sum, it is important to acknowledge
ﬁrat SES is often a marker for oﬁrer difﬁculties ﬁrat may confront ﬁre
individual or family.

Family Functioning

Families are embedded in a larger social system, evolve over time,
and vary wiﬁrin and among cultural groups. As previously mentioned, ﬁre
family provides ﬁre early socialization experiences for ﬁre child to learn

family norms, values, and behavioral expectations. Organization of ﬁrese

25

 

experiences into schemas and script helps ﬁre child to anticipate and
respond to day-to-day expectations of ﬁre family.

Because family members relate to one anoﬁrer on a close emotional
level such ﬁrat a change in one person affect ﬁre behavior of anoﬁrer,
family cohesion, conﬂict, and adaptability are related, positively or
negatively, to child and adult well-being and mental healﬁr. Family
cohesion ls deﬁned as ﬁre “emotional bonding ﬁrat family members have
toward one anoﬁrer and ﬁre degree of individual autonomy ﬁrey
experience” (Olson, Spenke, and Russell, 1979). Low levels of cohesion
thus may have deleterious effect on family members. For example,
GormanSmiﬁr, Tolan, Zelli, 8 Huesmann (1996) found ﬁrat families of
violent delinquent exhibited less family cohesion and less involvement
ﬁran parent of non-violent adolescent. I

Family adaptability as deﬁned by Olson et al. (1979) is “ﬁre ability of
ﬁre marital or family system to change it power structure, role
relationships, and relationship rules in response to situational and
developmental stress.” The hypoﬁresis is ﬁrat ﬁre more adaptable a family
is to change, wheﬁrer positive (e.g., birﬁr of a healﬁry child) or negative
(e.g., loss of substantial family income), ﬁre higher it level of functioning.
Thus, higher levels of cohesion and adaptability are related to higher levels

of positive family functioning.

26

Family Cohesion and Child Outcome

In a study of American preschool children and ﬁreir parent, Bullock
and Pennington (1988) found ﬁrat parent’ self-perceptions of family
cohesion related positively to ﬁreir child’s sense of ﬁreir own competence,
to ﬁre quality of ﬁre child’s friendships, and to ﬁre teacher’s perception of
ﬁre child’s competence. Lindahl (1998) found ﬁrat family cohesion was one
factor ﬁrat distinguished progressively among ﬁrree groups of boys (ages
7-1 1): one group wiﬁr attention deﬁcit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD),
anoﬁrer wiﬁr opposiﬁonal deﬁant disorder (ODD), and still anoﬁrer wiﬁr
ADHD and ODD. For boﬁr ODD groups, lack of family cohesiveness played
an important role in family functioning. The families of boys wiﬁr no
behavior problems (control group) and ﬁre families of boys wiﬁr ADHD had
average to above-average family cohesion. ~

Cola and Jordan (1989), however, have criticized assessment of
family cohesion and adaptability as too general, in oﬁrer words, ﬁrat some
part of ﬁre family (subsystems) may be more cohesive or adaptable ﬁran
oﬁrers. Taking a different perspective, however, Johnson, Cowan, and
Cowan (1999) have challenged ﬁre view ﬁrat evaluating subsystems (e.g.,
moﬁrer—child, faﬁrer-child, moﬁrer-faﬁrer) account for ﬁre variance in ﬁre
reporting of child behavior problems (e.g. externalizing and internalizing
behavior), and ﬁrat to fully understand child behavior problems,

understanding how ﬁre family works togeﬁrer is necessary.

27

Families in Jamaica
The population of Jamaica primarily consist of descendant of
“British-owned” slaves from ﬁre Ashanti, Yoruba, Ibo, and Fanﬁ tribes of
Africa (Brice-Baker, 1996). While eﬁrnic groups from oﬁror world regions
such as Europe, Asia, and Middle-Eastem nations are represented in ﬁre
populaﬁon, ﬁreir gene pools are often mixed wiﬁr one anoﬁrer and ﬁrose of i
African-Jamaicans. This is reﬂected in ﬁre Jamaican national motto “Out

of Many People.” Thus, ﬁre cultural customs of Jamaica, including family

 

customs primarily reﬂect African-British eﬁros (see Lambert 8 Lyubansky,
1999). For example, ﬁre patriarchical family structure where much of ﬁre
power rest in ﬁre faﬁrer is considered ideal family structure in Jamaica.
Neverﬁreless, ﬁre matrifocal structure and it emphasis on ﬁre widely
extended family wiﬁrin ﬁre context of ﬁre community ﬁrat is evident in ﬁre
tribes from which Jamaican families originate predominates Jamaican
family structure (Rutter, Yule, Morton, 8 Bagley, 1975).

The African legacy and it focus on survival of ﬁre group are similar
to ﬁrat found in African-Americans. However, it stands in contrast wiﬁr
European-based U.S. ideals where autonomy and interpersonal
competition prevails. Like many African-American families who share ﬁre
same heritage as Jamaicans (Lambert et al., 1999), ﬁris legacy promotes
cohesiveness wiﬁr Jamaican communities and especially in families (see
Hohn, 1996). Thus, individuals wiﬁrin most Jamaican family structures

strive to maintain cohesiveness and ward off threat to ﬁris ideal.

28

Extremely high family cohesiveness for which most Jamaicans strive may
be considered as enmeshed by external observers (GopauI-McNicol, 1998),
but to most Jamaicans ﬁris quality is viewed as critical to adequate and
ideal family functioning.

Support for ﬁris noﬁon is documented in research on Jamaican
immigrant where family support, an important aspect of cohesion, was
found to buffer ﬁre stress associated wiﬁr migraﬁon to, and stress
associated wiﬁr life in ﬁre United States (Adams, 1989). This ﬁnding was.
replicated In a recent study, which indicated a positive relaﬁonship
between Family Cohesion and adequate psychological functioning in
immigrant Jamaican children (Hohn, 1996). Furﬁrerrnore, a recent study on
family functioning and child psychological adjustment in Jamaica indicated
a posiﬁve relaﬁonship between cohesion and intellectual development and
a negaﬁve relaﬁonship between ﬁris predictor and child psychopaﬁrology
(Lambert, Schmitt, Samms-Vaughn, Russ, Lewis, Lancaster, 8 Orellana et
al., 2001b).

Parent-Child lnteracﬁon

There are many inﬂuences on ﬁre parent-child interaction wiﬁrin ﬁre
context of ﬁre family. One of ﬁre most important is ﬁre belief system
guiding ﬁre socialization process (Hastings 8 Rubin, 1999). As previously
noted, Jamaican parent strongly believe ﬁrat children should be obedient
and not question ﬁre authority of parent or teachers. Also, as previously

discussed, Jamaican moﬁrers believe ﬁrat ﬁrey can best guide ﬁreir

29

children’s behavior wiﬁr a combination of physical punishment and high
levels of nurturance. Physical punishment. an emphasis on obedience,
and an emphasis on not questioning auﬁrority are often associated wiﬁr an
auﬁroritarian style of parent-child interaction (Baumrind, 1971). For all
ﬁrese reasons, such children often have difﬁculty in school. They also
show externalizing behavior, which, along wlﬁr internalizing behavior, is
one of ﬁre two most common child problems discussed wiﬁrin ﬁre context
of parent-child interactions. Extemalizing behavior is also ﬁre most
frequenﬁy studied child behavior problem (Roﬁrbaum 8 Weisz, 1994) and
it presence is often associated wiﬁr ﬁre following caregiving qualiﬁes:
absence of approval, absence of guidance, absence of motivational
strategies, absence of synchrony, and presence of coercive control. These
caregiving qualiﬁes are also found in moﬁrers who are depressed
(Campbell, 1990) anoﬁrer known risk factor for troubled child outcome.
Maternal Psychogﬁrolggy

Many research studies have linked maternal psychopaﬁrology to
child behavior problems (Dodge, 1990), and ﬁre most commonly studied
form of maternal psychopaﬁrology is depression (Rutter, 1995), a mood
disorder. Depression is now acknowledged to be heterogeneous and not
homogeneous as long supposed.

In Western literature, ﬁre common use of ﬁre term depression refers
to a state of sadness, dejection, or lowering of spirit. Sadness, however,

does not necessarily correspond to a clinical diagnosis of depression.

30

Therefore, before reviewing ﬁre literature on maternal depression and child
outcome, deﬁnitions and descriptions of ﬁre types of depression
commonly studied are discussed.

%phoria. Dysphoria is commonly used to refer to sadness and
dojecﬁon and is not, according to DSM-IV (1994) criteria, clinically
diagnosable as depression but may, neverﬁreless, interfere wiﬁr normal
day-to-day functioning and social interaction (Field, 1995).

Qypﬁrymia and Major Depressive Disorder. Dysﬁrymia and Major
Depressive Disorder are differonﬁated based on severity, chronicity, and
persistence (American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Dysﬁrymia, for
example, requires ﬁre presence of a depressed mood for more days ﬁran
not over a period of two years. Major depressive disorder, however,
requires ﬁrat ﬁre depressed mood must be present almost every day for
two weeks. Differentiating between ﬁrese two types of depression is
complicated (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) because boﬁr
disorders share many symptoms. Dysﬁrymia is seen as a chronic, less
severe depression ﬁrat last over a period of years, whereas major
depression is an acute depression ﬁrat can be distinguished from a
person’s usual behavior. For a more detailed descripﬁon of symptoms and
differential diagnostic criteria for mood disorders see DSM-IV (American
Psychiatric Association, 1994) pages 341 -392.

Major Depressive Disorder wiﬁr Psychotic Symptoms. As discussed
above, major depressive disorder requires ﬁrat ﬁre depressed mood must

3]

 

be present almost every day for two weeks. In Major Depressive Disorder
wiﬁr Psychoﬁc Symptoms, ﬁre psychotic symptoms may relate to ﬁre mood
disorder. Examples of symptoms, drawn from ﬁre DSM-IV (American
Psychiatric Association, 1994, p. 337) are as follows: delusions of guilt
(e.g., feeling guilty over ﬁre illness of a loved one), delusions of deserved
punishment, delusions of world or personal destrucﬁon, somaﬁc
delusions, or delusions of poverty (e.g., being bankrupt). If ﬁrere are
accompanying hallucinations, ﬁrey are usually transient and are often of
voices beraﬁng ﬁre individual.

If ﬁre hallucinations are not associated wiﬁr ﬁre depressive mood
direcﬁy, ﬁrey may have persecutory ﬁremes, delusions of ﬁrought
insertions, delusions of ﬁrought broadcasﬁng, and delusions ﬁrat one’s
ﬁrought are not your own. Major depression wiﬁr psychoﬁc symptoms
has a poorer prognosis ﬁran eiﬁrer Dysﬁrymia or Major Depression.
Characteristics of Moﬁrors wiﬁr Clinical” Signiﬁcant Depression

According to a survey of women in ﬁre United States, 8% of moﬁrors
are clinically depressed at any given ﬁme (Weissman, Gammon, John, 8
Merikangas, 1987; Weissman 8 Warner, 1997), ﬁrus putﬁng ﬁreir children at
risk for developing behavior problems (Dodge, 1990; Downey 8 Coyne,
1990; Rutter, 1995). In her studies of depressed moﬁrers, Campbell (1995)
found ﬁrat depressed moﬁrers often show a combination of ﬁre following
qualiﬁes: anger, hosﬁle tone of voice, ﬂat or negaﬁve affect, unemoﬁonal

tone of voice, wiﬁrdrawal, apaﬁry, anxiety, displeasure, intrusiveness,

32

disapproval of children, and evidence of behavioral disturbance. Also,
Campbell (1995) described addiﬁonal characterisﬁcs of depressed moﬁrers
include negaﬁve worldview, less engagement wiﬁr oﬁrers, and difﬁculty in
engaging in difﬁcult and conﬁictual conversaﬁons. In contrast, non-
depressed moﬁrers had ﬁre following qualiﬁes: kind tone of voice, warm,
posiﬁve affect, ability to structure ﬁre environment for ﬁre child, ability to
read ﬁre child’s cues correcﬁy, ﬂexibility, and enjoyment of ﬁreir interacﬁon
wlﬁr ﬁreir child (Campbell, 1995).
lnteracﬁon Between Depressed Moﬁrers and Their Children

Dix (1991) argues convincingly ﬁrat emoﬁon is ﬁre integraﬁva force
ﬁrat unites context (Darling 8 Steinberg, 1993) and content for parent as
ﬁrey manage ﬁre responsibiliﬁes of child rearing, and ﬁrerefore, according
to Dix (1991 ), parenﬁng is primarily an affecﬁve experience. Difﬁculﬁos
wlﬁr affect, including depression, ﬁrerefore, would be expected to inﬂuence
ﬁre parent-child relaﬁonship. Studies of moﬁrer-child interacﬁons support
ﬁris hypoﬁresis.

Depressed moﬁrers, for example, often have deﬁcit in ﬁre kinds of
skills ﬁrat contribute to posiﬁve interacﬁon wiﬁr ﬁreir children (Hops, 1995).
In moﬁrer-child interacﬁons, depressed moﬁrers are less posiﬁve and more
negaﬁve (Campbell, Cohn, 8 Meyers, 1995), less sensiﬁve in understanding
and responding to ﬁreir children’s needs, and less comfortable wiﬁr ﬁreir
child (T eﬁ, Gelfand, Messinger, 8 Isabella, 1995). Also, when parﬁcipaﬁng
in a structured task wiﬁr ﬁrelr child, depressed moﬁrers do less teaching

33

and less joint problem solving ﬁran do ﬁreir non-depressed counterpart
(Goldsmiﬁr 8 Rogoff, 1995; Goldsmiﬁr 8 Rogoff, 1997). These parenﬁng
difﬁculﬁes are closely associated wiﬁr children who have troubled
behavior.
Characterisﬁg of Children of Depressed Mothers

The qualiﬁes ﬁrat depressed moﬁrers bring to ﬁreir interacﬁons wiﬁr
ﬁrelr children put ﬁreir children at signiﬁcanﬁy higher risk for developing
psychopaﬁrology compared to children of non-depressed moﬁrers. -
Billings and Moos (1983, 1986) found ﬁrat children of depressed parent
displayed more physical, psychological, and behavior problems ﬁran did
children of non-depressed parent, and ﬁre more risk factors, such as
fewer economic and social resources, ﬁre more child behavior problems.
Two such problems common for children of depressed moﬁrers are
externalizing and internalizing behavior difﬁculﬁes (Baker 8 Heller, 1996;
Campbell, 1995; Downey 8 Coyne, 1990; Goodman 8 Goﬁib, 1999;
Greenberg, Lengua, Coie, 8 Pinderhughes, 1999). The focus of ﬁris study
is on externalizing behavior problems, alﬁrough it is acknowledged ﬁrat
often children of depressed parent display boﬁr externalizing (behavior
ﬁrat is focused outward) and internalizing (behavior ﬁrat is focused inward)
behavior problems.

Extemalizing Behavior Problems. The goal of externalizing behavior
(i.e., opposiﬁonal and aggressive behavior) for ﬁre young child may be

described as ﬁre expression of emoﬁon (eiﬁrer posiﬁve or negaﬁve) andIor

34

ﬁre desire to attain social goals (i.e., obtaining a desired toy or playing wiﬁr
a speciﬁc child or children in a social setting). Before furﬁrer discussing
externalizing behavior, however, it is important to acknowledge ﬁrat young
children often display opposiﬁonality and aggression in ﬁreir behavior as a
normal funcﬁon of ﬁre developmental process (Davies, 1999). The peak of
aggressive behavior in young children occurs between ﬁre ages of 2 and 4;
after ﬁre acquisiﬁon of language, however, ﬁre physically aggressive and
opposiﬁonal behavior often seen in young children gives way to ﬁre use of
language as a more appropriate and producﬁve way to express feelings
and desires and to make request (Davies, 1999).

Extemalizing behaviors are considered dimensional, ﬁrat is ﬁrey
have more ﬁran one component, and ﬁrese component may exist on a
conﬁnuum from mild to very severe. One classiﬁcaﬁon system for
externalizing behavior as discussed by Stonnshak, Bierman, and
colleagues (1998) describes four types of externalizing behaviors in young
children. They are 1) opposiﬁonal, 2) oppositional/aggressive, 3)
hyperacﬁvelattenﬁve, and 4) hyperacﬁvelinattenﬁve and
opposiﬁonallaggressive. Each of ﬁrese types may have different eﬁologies
and different manifestaﬁons for home and school behavior. In describing
ﬁre dimensions of externalizing behavior, ﬁre trajectory from opposiﬁonal
to more aggressive behavior represent a move to more difﬁcult and more

intense behavior. This change in intensity may be associated wiﬁr more

35

problemaﬁc parent-child interacﬁons andIor more exposure to negaﬁve
circumstances and event (White, 1995).

For some young children, however, behavior ﬁrat is externalizing
conﬁnues into early childhood, and, in fact, may become a stable
component of ﬁre behavioral repertoire (Campbell, 1995; Caspi et al., 1997).
Severe behavior difﬁculﬁes in early childhood may predispose ﬁre child to
difﬁculﬁes in adapﬁng to ﬁre school environment — boﬁr academically and
socially. A child manifesﬁng externalizing behaviors in ﬁre classroom is
less likely to focus on acquisiﬁon of skills and knowledge in ﬁre classroom,
ﬁrus compromising school performance (Brigman, Lane, Switer, Lane, 8
Lawrence, 1999; Campbell, 1998; Campbell et al., 1991a, 1991 b; Campbell 8
Pierce, 1996; Coolahan, Fantuzzo, Mendez, 8 McDermott, 2000).

In addiﬁon, overly aggressive behavior in early childhood may
indicate ﬁrat ﬁre child has difﬁculﬁes engaging appropriately wiﬁr peers -
boﬁr entering groups already involved in acﬁvity, or once gaining
admission, sustaining posiﬁve and appropriate interacﬁon. These group
skills are important for developmentally appropriate parﬁcipaﬁon in
academic and peer acﬁviﬁes (Cummings, lannotﬁ, 8 Zahn-Waxler, 1989;
Eisert, Walker, Severson, 8 Block, 1988; Kalpidou, Roﬁrbaum, 8 Rosen,
1998; Lambert, Weisz, 8 Thesiger, 1998; Quiggle, Garber, Pnak, 8 Dodge,
1992; Zahn-Waxler, Cole, Richardson, Friedman, Michel, 8 Boloud, 1994).

Furﬁrerrnore, preschool measures of behavior problems and

difﬁculﬁes wiﬁr language development are among strong predictors of

36

stable and pervasive anﬁsocial behavior in late childhood and mid-
adolescence (Loeber, 1991; Loeber 8 Dishion, 1983; Loeber 8 Stouﬁramer-
Loeber, 1998; Mofﬁtt, 1990).

The importance of understanding ﬁre contributors to ﬁre
development, emergence, maintenance, and decline of externalizing
behavior is important for ﬁre future of young children who may be at risk

for it manifestaﬁon in ﬁreir lives.

37

QﬂLlé
The overall goal of ﬁre current study was to better understand how
maternal and family funcﬁoning and economic condiﬁons inﬂuence ﬁre
cogniﬁve and emoﬁonal development of young Jamaican children. The
parﬁcular maternal and family variables were maternal psychopaﬁrology,
family cohesion, and socioeconomic status; ﬁre child outcome variables

were behavior problems, verbal ability, and puzzle-solving skill.

Quesﬁons of Interest

Maternal Psychogﬁrolpgy
Maternal psychopaﬁrology (dysﬁrymia and major depression wiﬁr

psychotic features) is a known risk factor for troubled child outcome and is
often associated wiﬁr child behavior problems and delayed verbal ability.
Moﬁrers who are dysﬁrymic or have major depression wiﬁr psychoﬁc
features also have difﬁculty posiﬁvely engaging and sustaining pleasurable
interacﬁons wiﬁr ﬁreir child. Because ﬁris is ﬁre ﬁrst ﬁme ﬁre inﬂuence of
ﬁrese factors on child outcome has been examined in a Jamaican
population, no predicﬁons were made about possible differences in ﬁre
effect of ﬁrese two kinds of maternal psychopaﬁrologies.

Predicﬁon 1. For young Jamaican children, maternal dysﬁrymia and
maternal major depression wiﬁr psychoﬁc features will be associated wiﬁr
more emoﬁonal and social immaturity, less verbal ability, less puzzle-

solving skill, and less family cohesion.

38

Predicﬁon 2. For young Jamaican children, maternal
psychopaﬁrology will mediate ﬁre relaﬁon between SES and all child
outcome measures.

Family Variables

As discussed previously, ﬁre Jamaican family plays an especially
vital role in ﬁre rearing of children. It was ﬁrerefore, deemed to be
important to consider ﬁre qualiﬁes of ﬁre family and how ﬁrey inﬂuenced
child outcome and maternal psychopaﬁrology. For a well-funcﬁoning
family, one such quality is cohesion.

Based on evidence about ﬁre inﬂuence of family cohesion on child
outcome; ﬁre oﬁrer about family cohesion as a mediator for ﬁre relaﬁon
between SES and child outcome.

Predicﬁon 3. For young Jamaican children, ﬁre less family cohesion,
ﬁre worse ﬁre child outcome, ﬁrat is ﬁre greater number of behavior
problems, ﬁre less verbal ability, and less developed puzzle-solving skills.

Predicﬁon 4. For young Jamaican children, family cohesion will
mediate ﬁre effect between SES and all child outcome measures.
Socioeconomic Status

For ﬁre current smdy, ﬁre inﬂuence of SES was considered in two
ways. The ﬁrst way was to consider SES as a variable ﬁrat direcﬁy
inﬂuences all oﬁrer variables in ﬁre model (see Fig. 1). The second way

was to consider SES inﬂuencing only maternal psychopaﬁrology and ﬁren

39

to covary SES wiﬁr oﬁrer variables as suggested by the modiﬁcaﬁon
indices suggested by analysis.

Predicﬁon 5. For young Jamaican children, lower family SES will be
associated wiﬁr poorer performance on all child outcome measures, more

maternal psychopaﬁrology, and lower family cohesion.

40

METHOD

Parﬁcignt
The participant were 151 mothers between ﬁre ages of 20and 51 (M

= 30.26, SD = 7.10) and 151 children between ﬁre ages of 3 to 6 (M = 5.04,
SD = .94) who were recruited as part of a larger study (N =521 moﬁrers and
521 children) examining ﬁre effect of iron deﬁciency anemia on ﬁre
cogniﬁve and behavior development of Jamaican pro-school children
(Samms-Vaughn, 1998a, Samms-Vaughn, 1998b). Parﬁcipant were
recruited from six Basic Schools (pro-schools and kindergartens),
representaﬁve of a typical populaﬁon of urban Jamaican children. The
following ﬁrree major exclusion criteria were used: 1) children wiﬁr factors
known or suspected to be associated wiﬁr developmental delay such as
low birﬁr weight (< 2,500gms), lead poisoning, malnutriﬁon, previous
idenﬁﬁed development delay; 2) children wiﬁr laboratory ﬁndings ﬁrat will
complicate interpretaﬁons of result; and 3) eﬁrical grounds (e.g., children
whose hemoglobin count is less ﬁran 8gldl will require immediate
troatrnent).
Selecﬁon of Iron Study Sample

Parent of children from identiﬁed basic schools were interviewed to
idenﬁfy ﬁrose who do not meet study criteria on historical grounds.
Following venepuncture and laboratory invesﬁgaﬁon, ﬁrose children who
did not meet hematological criteria were idenﬁﬁed and excluded from

further study. The study children were ﬁrose who met boﬁr historical and

41

laboratory criteria. Based on a 42% prevalence of iron deﬁciency anemia in
Jamaican 2-4 year olds, twice ﬁre number of children required for ﬁre study
sample underwent laboratory invesﬁgaﬁon to idenﬁfy an appropriate

sample of study children. Table 1 displays ﬁre demographic inforrnaﬁon for

ﬁre 151 study children and ﬁreir moﬁrers.

Table 1: Descripﬁve Staﬁsﬁcs

 

N Mean SD. Minimum Maximum

 

Moﬁrer

Moﬁrer’s Age 151 30.87 6.44 19.0 51.0

Moﬁrer’s Educaﬁon 151 3.77 0.69 1.0 6.0
Child

Child’s Age 151 5.05 0.19 3.34 6.5
Family

Socioeconomic Status 151 15.92 2.53 6.0 19.0

 

Dempgraphic lnfonnaﬁon
For ﬁre sample of parﬁcipant in ﬁre larger study, ﬁre following

demographic inforrnaﬁon was available. Table 1 present demographic
characterisﬁcs of ﬁre study sample.
Household Structure

Ninety-ﬁrree percent of ﬁre children lived wiﬁr ﬁreir biological
moﬁrers. Where biological moﬁrers were absent, ﬁre moﬁrer ﬁgure was
represented by stepmoﬁrers, adopﬁve moﬁrers, or grandmoﬁrers.
Grandmoﬁrers, wheﬁrer or not ﬁrey were moﬁrer ﬁgures, lived in 23% of ﬁre

homes.

42

Faﬁrers were present in only 50% of ﬁre homes. In 15% of homes,
ﬁrere was a faﬁrer ﬁgure, who commonly was a stepfaﬁrer or grandfaﬁrer,
and, less commonly, an uncle. Faﬁrers and faﬁrer ﬁgures ﬁrus were present
in 65% of ﬁre homes. Aunt and uncles were present in as many as 41% of
ﬁre homes, wiﬁr most homes including one or ﬁre other.

Child Rearing

In keeping wiﬁr ﬁre matriarchal household structure just described,
87% of ﬁre children were reared by ﬁrelr biological moﬁrer, 13% by a
grandmoﬁrer, 3% by a stepmoﬁrer, and 3% by ﬁre biological faﬁrer.

In more ﬁran 90% of cases, ﬁre child had lived wiﬁr ﬁre current
caretaker for most or all of ﬁre child’s life. Only 6% of current caretakers
reported living Iitﬁe or never wiﬁr ﬁre child in ﬁre past.

Living Condiﬁons

Eighty-ﬁve percent of ﬁre homes had working baﬁrrooms. In 66%,
ﬁre baﬁrroom was in ﬁre home, in 19%, It was outide ﬁre home and shared
wiﬁr oﬁrer families. 15% of ﬁre homes had no modern toilet, requiring
inhabitant to use a pit Iatrine.

Ninety-ﬁve percent of families had access to running water; ﬁre rest
used different meﬁrods of water catchment from a source. Of ﬁrose wiﬁr
running water, 66% had pipes in ﬁre home, 14% had pipes in ﬁre yards, and
17% had pipes outide ﬁre yard. In ﬁre last two cases, ﬁre water supply
was shared wiﬁr oﬁrer families.

43

Ninety-ﬁve percent of ﬁre families had access to electricity; ﬁre rest
used oil lamps or candlelight at night. Ninety-four percent used gas or
electricity to cook and ﬁre rest used coal or wool (4%) or kerosene (1%).
Basic Schools

Six Basic Schools wiﬁrin the Kingston and St. Andrew region
parﬁcipated in ﬁre current study. To facilitate transportaﬁon to and from
ﬁre Dopartrnent of Child Healﬁr research center at ﬁre University of West
Indies, schools were chosen for ﬁreir proximity (wiﬁrin 2 miles) of ﬁre
center. Parﬁcipaﬁng schools were: 1) Water Commission Basic School, 2)
Providence Basic School, 3) August Town Sevenﬁr Day Advenﬁst Basic
School, 4) Mona Commons Basic School, 5) Hope Valley Experimental
Infant School, and 6) Shady Grove Basic School.

Alﬁrough all schools were classiﬁed as Basic Schools, ﬁrey had
different administraﬁve structures. Two schools (Providence and August
Town) were afﬁliated wiﬁr churches and were located on church property.
Two schools were community-based wiﬁrout church afﬁliaﬁon (Mona
Commons and Shady Grove), one school was funded by a private
organizaﬁon (Water Commission), and one school was an Infant
Department of a Primary School (Hope Valley).

Basic Schools ﬁrroughout Jamaica chieﬂy serve lower middle or
lower income families. Wiﬁrin ﬁrls range, ﬁrere are sﬁll noﬁceable
differences. August Town and Mona Commons Basic Schools are in

communiﬁes wiﬁr signiﬁcant social and economic deprivaﬁon and

primarily serve ﬁre local community. Water Commission, Providence, Hope
Valley, and Shady Grove Basic Schools serve families wiﬁr more economic
resources.

Family Measures
Socioeconomic Status

Measures of socioeconomic status (SES), such as income earned
and current occupaﬁon ﬁrat are commonly used in Norﬁr America do not
accurately measure SES in developing countries, including Jamaica (Leo-
Rhynie 8 Hamilton, 1993; Samms-Vaughn, 1998a,b). There is, however, no
accepted standard for assessing SES in developing countries.

In Jamaica, one meﬁrod ﬁrought to more accurately reﬂect SES
calculates ﬁre number of appliances and material goods in ﬁre home (e.g.,
number and quality of toilet faciliﬁes, ﬁre place where water is obtained,
quality of indoor Iighﬁng, type of stove). The higher ﬁre number and
quality of appliances and material goods, ﬁre higher ﬁre SES score. Rose
(1998) found ﬁrat SES scores computed in ﬁris way predicted severity of
psychopaﬁrology (for boﬁr men and women) as measured on ﬁre Global
Severity Index of ﬁre Brief Symptom Inventory (Dorogaﬁs, 1992; Derogaﬁs,
1993) as accurately as did oﬁrer measures of SES in oﬁrer populaﬁons,
wiﬁr lower scores being related to higher psychopaﬁrology.

Family Cohesion

To assess family cohesion, The Family Adaptability and Cohesion

Environment Scales-ll (herein called FACES)(OIson 8 Russell, 1980; Olson

45

et al., 1979) was used. The instrument present 30 descripﬁons of
behaviors and atﬁtudes about families (e.g., family does ﬁrings together;
children have a say in ﬁreir own discipline; family shares responsibiliﬁes;
family spends free ﬁme togeﬁrer), which ﬁre moﬁrers were asked to rate on
a 3-point scale as ﬁrey apply to ﬁremselves and ﬁreir own family (0 = no, 1 =
someﬁmes, 2 I always).

Conﬁnnatory factor analyses revealed ﬁrat ﬁre original scale
structure (Olson et al., 1979) did not replicate in ﬁre Jamaican sample
(Lambert, Samms-Vaughn, Lyubansky, Podolski, Hannah, McCaslin, 8
Rowan, 1999b). An exploratory factor analysis (EFA), ﬁrerefore, was
performed to determine item loadings on ﬁre Jamaican factors. An
analysis using principal axis factoring analysis was chosen because ﬁre
purpose was to ﬁnd ﬁre scale structures ﬁrat reﬂect ﬁre Jamaican
parﬁcipant’ responses (Floyd 8 Widaman, 1995). Retenﬁon of factors,
based on an eigenvalue 2 1, resulted in two factors, which ﬁren were
rotted wiﬁr an oblique promax soluﬁon. Items wiﬁr loadings of z .30 on
each factor were deemed as loading on ﬁre respecﬁve dimension. The two
factors derived from ﬁrese procedures were labeled Family Cohesion and
Adaptability (herein called Family Cohesion) and Diminished Family
Cohesion and Adaptability. Factors, factor loadings, and alphas are listed

in Table 2.

46

Table 2: Faces-ll Dimensions

 

Fa r1: Famll C h ion and Ada t ll

 

 

Item

Item Loadings
Descrlpﬁons Alpha = .7940

7 Family does ﬁrings togeﬁrer 0.633
13 Family consult about acﬁviﬁes 0.577
21 Family members go along wiﬁr oﬁrers 0.528
11 Family members know other’s close friends 0.496
14 Family members say what ﬁrey want 0.491
22 Share responsibiliﬁes 0.441
23 Spends free ﬁme togeﬁrer 0.430
30 Share hobbies 0.425
27 Family approves of oﬁrer’s friends 0.415
8 Family discusses problems 0.375
5 Family gaﬁrers togeﬁrer in same room 0.374
6 Children have say in ﬁreir discipline 0.343
20 Tries new ways of dealing wlﬁr problems 0.341
10 Shift household chores 0.332
4 Family members have input in decisions 0.327
Eigenvalue 3.821

Factor 2: Family Non-Cohesiveness and Non-Adaptbill_ty
Item Item
Descripﬁons Loadings
Alpha = .7940

15 Difﬁculty doing ﬁrings togeﬁrer 0.676
25 Family members avoid each oﬁrer at home 0.587
19 Feel closer to non-family members 0.581
29 Do ﬁrings in twos not as whole family 0.516
24 Difﬁcult to get rules changed in family 0.501
12 Hard to know rules changed in family 0.428

1 Family supporﬁve -0.399

3 Easier to tlk outide family 0.347
Eigenvalue 3.286

 

47

Maternal Measures
Matrnal Psychogﬁrology

Brief Symmm Inventory. The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) was
used to measure maternal psychopaﬁrology. The BSI, which is currenﬁy
widely used for boﬁr research and clinical assessment, is a self-report
symptom inventory wiﬁr 53 itms. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale
from 0 to 4, where 0 indicates no distress and 4 indicates extreme distress.

The BSI has a totl of nine symptom dimensions: Somaﬁcizaﬁon,
Obsessive-Compulsive, Interpersonal Sensiﬁvity, Depression, Anxiety,
Phobic Anxiety, Paranoid ldeaﬁon, Psychoﬁsm, and Hosﬁlity.

The BSI was chosen for ﬁre assessment of maternal
psychopaﬁrology for ﬁrree reasons. First, it is quick and easy to
administer, a necessary criterion for dat collecﬁon. Second, it has solid
psychometric properﬁes. The internal consistency reliability for ﬁre nine
factors has been found to range from .71 for Psychoﬁcism to .85 for
Depression in a sample of 719 psychiatric paﬁent (Derogaﬁs, 1993). Third,
it is easily understood by Jamaicans and, ﬁrerefore, could be given wiﬁrout
revision (Rose, 1998).

When Conﬁrmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed on ﬁre BSI,
ﬁre derived indices indicated ﬁrat ﬁre factor structure did not replicate for
ﬁre Jamaican sample (Lambert et al., 1999). Exploratory Factor Analysis
(principal component analysis), ﬁrerefore, was performed to idenﬁfy ﬁre

factor structure for Jamaicans. Six factors were derived: 1) Somaﬁc

48

Complaint; 2) Paranoia; 3) Hosﬁlity; 4) Mild but chronic Depression or
Dysﬁrymia; 5) Major Depression wiﬁr Psychoﬁc Features; and 6)
Agoraphobia wiﬁr Panic Disorder. (For furﬁrer detils of ﬁre item loadings,
see Lambert et al., 1999).

As noted earlier, alﬁrough depression is often considered to be a
homogeneous disorder, research on ﬁre component of maternal
psychopaﬁrology suggest ﬁrat is actually heterogeneous (Clayton, 1998).
Evidence for ﬁris heterogeneity also was revealed in ﬁre EPA for ﬁre
Jamaican sample, which discovered two disﬁnct types of depression: Mild
but Chronic Depression (herein called dysﬁrymia) (Scale 4) and Major
Depression wiﬁr Psychoﬁc Features (herein called depression)(Scale 5).
Therefore, for ﬁre current study boﬁr depression scales and Depression
were chosen for inclusion in ﬁre analyses of paﬁrs leading to child
outcome, wiﬁr a separat analysis being performed for each scale. Factor
loadings for Scales 4 and 5 are in Table 3.

Child Measures
Child Behavior

Child behavior funcﬁoning was measured by ﬁre Connors Parent
Raﬁng Scale (Goyette, Connors, 8 Ulrich, 1978). The version used in ﬁre
current study included 48 sttement (e.g., picks at ﬁrings, sassy to grown-
ups) ﬁrat ﬁre moﬁrer was instructed to rate, on a 3-point scale, for how well
ﬁrey described her own child (0 = never, 1 = a litﬁe, 2 = a whole lot).

Conﬁrmatory factor analyses revealed ﬁrat ﬁre original scale structures did

49

Table 3: BSI Dimensions for Depression

 

Dimension 4: Mild Depression or Dsﬂmia

 

Item Item
Descripﬁons Loadings
Alpha = .7892

14 Feel lonely when wiﬁr oﬁrers 0.72

15 Feeling blocked in getﬁng ﬁrings done 0.54

16 Feeling lonely 0.79

17 Feeling sad 0.79

18 No interest in ﬁrings 0.50
44 Never feeling close to oﬁrers 0.40
Eigenvalue 7.53

Dimension 5: Major Depression wlﬁr Psychoﬁc Features

 

Item Item
Doscripﬁons Loadings
Alpha = .8267
3 Idea ﬁrat oﬁrers can control ﬁrought 0.41
9 Thought of ending own life 0.56
22 Feeling inferior to oﬁrers 0.39
34 Idea ﬁrat committed sins should be
punished for 0.47
35 Hopeless about future 0.60
45 Spells of terror and panic 0.39
50 Feeling worﬁrless 0.67
52 Feelings of guilt 0.42
53 Idea ﬁrat someﬁring is wrong wiﬁr mind 0.65
Eigenvalue 8.16

 

50

not replicate in ﬁre Jamaican sample (Lambert et al., 1999). An exploratory
factor analysis (EFA), ﬁrerefore, was performed to determine item loadings
on ﬁre Jamaican factors. Again, principle factoring axis analysis was
chosen in order to ﬁnd ﬁre scale structures ﬁrat reﬂect ﬁre Jamaican
parﬁcipant’ responses (Floyd 8 Widaman, 1995). Retenﬁon of factors,
again based on an eigenvalue 2 1, resulted in ﬁrree factors. As before, ﬁre
factors were rotted wiﬁr an oblique promax soluﬁon. Items wiﬁr loadings
of > .30 on each factor were deemed as loading on ﬁre respecﬁve
dimension. The ﬁrree factors derived from ﬁris procedure were: 1) Child
Emoﬁon, and Social Immaturity 2) Somaﬁc Complaint; and 3) Moodiness.
The scale used in ﬁre current study was ﬁre Child Emoﬁon and Social
Immaturity Scale (herein called Child Behavior Problems), a mix of
behavior, emoﬁon, and social difﬁculﬁes typical of young children. For
example, young children are impulsive, cry easily, and often disobedient
(T remblay, 1999). Factor component and factor loadings for ﬁre Connors
appear in Table 4.
Verbal Ability and Puzzle-Solving

McCarﬁry Scales of Children’s Abillﬁes. The McCarﬁry Scales of
Children’s Abiliﬁes (Kaufman 8 Kaufman, 1977) are a well stndardized and
psychometrically sound measure of ﬁre cogniﬁve abiliﬁes of children from
2.5 to 8.5 years of age (Satﬁer, 1992). They are administered by examiners
to individuals, and depending on ﬁre child’s age, tko 45 to 60 minutes to

administer. According to Satﬁer (1992), ﬁre scales are appropriate for

51

Table 4: Connors Factors

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Item Item
Descriptions Loadings
Factor 1: Social Immatumy Alpha = 0.8251
14 Destrucﬁve 0.683
4 Impulsive 0.606
15 Tells lies 0.585
9 Daydreams 0.579
2 Is sassy to grown-ups 0.534
17 More trouble than oﬁrers 0.489
29 Cruel 0.451
37 Easily frustrated 0.448
38 Disturbs other children 0.446
5 Want to run things 0.437
10 Has difﬁculty Ieaming 0.419
27 Bullies others 0.373
23 Disobedient 0.352
30 Childish 0.343
16 Shy 0.337
3 Has problems wiﬁr friends 0.332
24 Worries more than others 0.331
28 Engages in repeﬁtive acﬁviﬁes 0.306
35 Fight constnﬁy 0.302
7 Crles easily 0.302
Eigenvalue 3.821
Factor 2: Somaﬁc Complaint Alpha I 0.6697
41 Stomach aches 0.627
39 Unhappy 0.479
44 Vomiting 0.475
47 Let’s self be pushed around by others 0.443
18 Speaks differenﬁy 0.400
48 Bowel problems 0.396
45 Feels cheated 0.387
43 Other aches 0.354
42 Sleep problems 0.329
Eigpnvplue 3.784
Factor 3: Moodiness Alpha = .5019
11 Squirrny 0.401
33 Mood changes often 0.387
13 Always up and on the go 0.381
21 Pout and sulks 0.370
36 Doesn’t get along with siblings 0.333
26 Feelings easily hurt 0.319
Eigenvalue 2.851

 

 

 

52

children wiﬁr Ieaming problems or oﬁrer special needs. They reveal a
general measure of intellectual funcﬁoning called ﬁre General Cogniﬁve
Index (GCI), which consist of ﬁre following Scales: Verbal, Perceptual-
Perfonnance, Quanﬁtﬁve, Memory, and Motor.

For ﬁre current study, Verbal Ability (full scale) and Puzzle-Solving (a
subtest of ﬁre Perceptual Performance Scale) were used as measures of
verbal ability and non-verbal ability, respecﬁvely. Verbal ability, which is
highly correlated wiﬁr success in scth (T remblay, 1999), assesses ﬁre
ability to understnd and process verbal infonnaﬁon and to express
drought in words. It consist of six subscales: pictorial memory, word
knowledge, verbal memory, verbal ﬂuency, and opposite analogies. The
subscales measure such capaciﬁes as short-term memory, attenﬁon,
verbal expression, verbal comprehension, logical classiﬁcaﬁon, and verbal
reasoning and is highly correlated wiﬁr success in school (T remblay, 1999).

Puzzle-solving, a skill often called upon in programs in early
childhood educaﬁon, tps ﬁre child’s abiliﬁes in visual percepﬁon, non-
verbal reasoning, visual-motor coordinaﬁon, and spaﬁal relaﬁons, among
oﬁrers.

Psychometric Progrﬁes

Stndardizaﬁon. Stndardizaﬁon of ﬁre McCarﬁry Scales involved
1,032 children between ﬁre ages of 2.5 and 8.5. The following variables
were included in straﬁﬁcaﬁon: age, sex, race, geographic region, faﬁrer’s

occupaﬁon, and urban-rural residence.

53

The McCarﬁry Scales reveal ﬁve indices ﬁrat are reported as
stndard scores, wiﬁr M = 50 and SD = 10. The overall General Cogniﬁve
Index (GCI) has a M = 100 and SD = 16 and gives an approximaﬁon of ﬁre
child’s ability to use acquired knowledge and to adapt ﬁrat knowledge to
new tsks.

Reliabiliﬁes for each of ﬁre scales are reported for ﬁre 10 different
age groups included in ﬁre stndardization sample (Satﬁer, 1992). The
average split-half reliability is for ﬁre General Cogniﬁve Index (rm, =.93)and
ranges from .79 to .88 for ﬁre oﬁrer ﬁve scales.

The McCarﬁry Scales have acceptble concurrent validity wiﬁr ﬁre
Stnford Binet—Form L-M, WISC, WISC-R, WPPSI, K-ABC, and Slosson
Intelligence Test used as criteria (Satﬁer, 1992, p. 298, alﬁrough for learning
disabled children, ﬁre concurrent validity is not as acceptble (Satﬁer,
1992,p.298L

Scores on ﬁre McCarﬁry Scales are signiﬁcanﬁy correlated wiﬁr
scores on such stndard achievement test as ﬁre Metropolitn
Achievement Test, Peabody Individual Assessment Test, and ﬁre Wide-
Range Achievement Test, indicaﬁng saﬁsfactory predlcﬁve validity (Satﬁer,

1992,p.298L

54

 

RESULTS
Dat Analygis

Only observed variables were used in ﬁre model. Paﬁr modeling is
appropriate for analyzing manifest variables because it includes ﬁre
measurement error of all endogenous variables in ﬁre analysis (Klem,
1995). Table 5 present the bivariate correlaﬁons of ﬁre variables analyzed
in ﬁre model.

Amos 4 (Arbuckle 8 Woﬁrko, 1999) was used to obtin ﬁre maximum
likelihood esﬁmates of ﬁre model coefﬁcient.

Model Fit. The adequacy of ﬁt for ﬁre paﬁr models was determined
by considering ﬁre following indices in combinaﬁon: ChiSquare (x2)
stﬁsﬁc, Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Comparaﬁve Fit Index (CPI), and
Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximaﬁon (RMSEA)(for informaﬁon about
ﬁrese indices, see Hu and Benﬁor, 1995). In general, a good-ﬁtﬁng model is
one wiﬁr a non-signiﬁcant Chi-Square, a GFI and CFI of .90 or larger, and a
RMSEA of .05 or less.

Paﬁr Analﬂis

The ﬁrst predicﬁon was ﬁrat socioeconomic sttus (herein called
SES) would direcﬁy predict child outcome including child behavior
Immaturity, emoﬁon immaturity, and social immaturity (hereafter called
“child behavior problems”), child verbal ability, and child puzzle-solving
skill. The second predicﬁon, which derived from ﬁre ﬁrst, was ﬁrat ﬁre

direct relaﬁon between SES and child outcome would be mediated by

55

 

Table 5: Bivariate Correlaﬁons for all Variables in Models

 

9'99.”

1 2

Dysthymia 1.00

Depression .618‘ 1.00

Cohesion -.223*" —

SES ~235” -.355“

Behavior —- ——
Problems

Verbal .—
Ability

Solving

1 .00
.185‘
-.223“

1 .00
—— 1.00

.203” — 1 .00

.247“ —— .419” 1.00

 

*p < .05
*‘p > .01

56

maternal psychopaﬁrology and family cohesion. SES was also expected to
be negaﬁvely related to maternal psychopaﬁrology and posiﬁvely related to
family cohesion. Psychopaﬁrology, in turn, was expected to be posiﬁvely
related to child behavior problems and negaﬁvely related to verbal ability
and puzzle-solving. As for cohesion, it was expected to be negaﬁvely
related to child behavior problems, and posiﬁvely related to verbal ability
and puzzle-solving.

Result for Models 1 and 2: Dﬂﬁrymia Models

Models 1 and 2, ﬁre ﬁrst two paﬁr models to be considered,
examined ﬁre relaﬁon of socioeconomic sttus, maternal dysﬁrymia, and
family cohesion to child outcome. The result are shown in Figures 2 and
3.

Model Fit. Boﬁr models parﬁally supported ﬁre outcome predicﬁons,
ﬁrat is, had an overall acceptble ﬁt to ﬁre dat. For Model 1 ﬁre chi-square
was not signiﬁcant [12(2), N = 151)= 2.511, p = 0.285], ﬁre GFI was 0.994, ﬁre
CFI was 0.992, and ﬁre RMSEA was .055. Because boﬁr models ﬁt ﬁre dat,
ﬁre chi-square difference test was conducted to determine wheﬁrer one
model made a better ﬁt ﬁran ﬁre oﬁrer. The result revealed ﬁrat boﬁr
models ﬁt ﬁre dat equally well [xZDelt(2) = 3.321, N.S.].

M16211

Socioeconomic Sttus. The ﬁrst predicﬁon - ﬁrat SES would predict

child behavior problems, verbal ability, and puzzle-solving skills -- was not

fully supported in Model 1. SES predicted neiﬁrer child behavior problems

57

, .06
Maternal 3'7"

"24 Dysthymia .09

    

 

”J Child
Behavior
,:\--"‘~~ Problems

 

 

 

 

 

 

’4
r
”
"
’
p

.
r.~~ \
~“
323 ..... , . 04
‘~ \ I
§‘~
~~~~ \
u‘- \\
‘7. .
\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.09
Family
Cohesion ...... '07
............ Puzzle-
“““ N Solving
Skill

 

 

P < .05*
P < .01“

"—'> Indicates signiﬁcant paﬁr
......... > Indicates non-signiﬁcant paﬁr

Figure 2. Model 1: Inﬂuence of SES, Matrnal Dysﬁrymia, and Family
Cohesion on Child Outcome

58

 

  
 

Maternal J9”
Dysﬁrymia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ 08
\“ .
‘\
\ I
\ Child
\
‘ “ Bah '
\ aVIor
\ \
\
Problems
\ ‘s
\\ \\
\ \
\
\ \
-.28** x “-
\\ ‘\\
SES \ ‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.08 t
Family L/
Cohesion ...... —i '00
............ Puzzle-
“““ 5 Solving
Skill
P < .05*
P < .01”

——§ Indicats signiﬁcant paﬁr
--------- 5 Indicates non-signiﬁcant paﬁl

Figure 3. Model 2: Inﬂuence of SES, Maternal Dysﬁrymia, and Family
Cohesion, and Child Outcome

59

nor verbal ability, meaning ﬁrat their predicted medlaﬁon by maternal
dysﬁrymia and family cohesion also was not supported. SES, however, did
predict puzzle-solving alﬁrough puzzle-solving, contrary to predicﬁon, was
not mediated by dysﬁrymia or family cohesion. The result also showed ﬁre
following direct relaﬁons to be signiﬁcant: a) negaﬁvo relaﬁon between
SES and maternal dysﬁrymia (lower levels of SES predicted higher levels of
dysﬁrymia); b) posiﬁve relaﬁon between maternal dysﬁrymia and child
behavior problems (ﬁre lower dysﬁrymia, ﬁre fewer number of problems); c)
negaﬁve relaﬁon between dysﬁrymia and family cohesion (ﬁre lower ﬁre
level of dysﬁrymia, ﬁre higher ﬁre cohesion); d) and negaﬁve relaﬁon
between family cohesion and child behavior problems (ﬁre lower ﬁre
cohesion, ﬁre higher ﬁre number of problems).

Alﬁrough SES did not direcﬁy predict child behavior problems, it was
involved in two indirect paﬁrs: a) from SES to dysﬁrymia and from
dysﬁrymia to behavior problems and b) from SES to dysﬁrymia, from
dysﬁrymia to cohesion, and from cohesion to behavior problems.

Dypﬁrymia. Matrnal dysﬁrymia was negaﬁvely and signiﬁcanﬁy
related to family cohesion (ﬁre lowerthe dysﬁrymia, ﬁre higher ﬁre
cohesion) and posiﬁvely and signiﬁcanﬁy related to child behavior
problems (ﬁre higher ﬁre dysﬁrymia, ﬁre higher ﬁre number of problems).

Famiu Cohesion. Family cohesion was direcﬁy and inversely relaﬁon
to child behavior problems (ﬁre lower ﬁre cohesion, ﬁre higher ﬁre number

of problems).

60

Mediaﬁon. As previously stted, ﬁre original mediaﬁon hypoﬁresis
was not supported. The result, however, revealed a parﬁal mediaﬁon role
for cohesion and for ﬁre relaﬁon between dysﬁlymia and child behavior
problems such ﬁrat ﬁre lower ﬁre dysﬁrymia, ﬁre higher ﬁre cohesion, and
ﬁre higher ﬁre cohesion, ﬁre lower ﬁre number of problems.

Variance. Model 1 accounted for 35% of ﬁre variance, divided as
follows: 20% for child outcome (9% for behavior problems, 4% for verbal
ability, and 7% for puzzle-solving), 6% for dysﬁrymia, and 9% for family
cohesion.

M

Socioeconomic Sttus. In Model 2, SES predicted only dysﬁrymia
and covaried wiﬁr child verbal ability and puzzle-solving skill. The
following direct paﬁrs were signiﬁcant: a) negaﬁve relaﬁon between SES
and dysﬁrymia (lower levels of SES predicted higher levels of dysﬁrymia; b)
posiﬁve relation between dysﬁrymia and child behavior problems (ﬁre
lower ﬁre dysﬁrymia, ﬁre lower ﬁre number of problems); c) negaﬁve
relaﬁon between dysﬁrymia and cohesion (ﬁre lower ﬁre level of dysﬁrymia,
ﬁre higher ﬁre cohesion); and d) negaﬁve relaﬁon between family cohesion
and child behavior problems (ﬁre lower ﬁre cohesion, ﬁre higher ﬁre
number of problems).

Again, alﬁrough SES did not direcﬁy predict child behavior

problems, it was involved in two indirect paﬁrs: a) from SES to dysﬁrymia

61

and from dysﬁrymia to behavior problems; and b) from SES to dysﬁrymia,
from dysﬁrymia to cohesion, and from cohesion to behavior problems.

Qﬁﬁrymia. Maternal dysthymia was negaﬁvely and signiﬁcanﬁy
related to family cohesion (ﬁre lower ﬁre dysﬁlymia, ﬁre higher ﬁre
cohesion) and posiﬁvely and signiﬁcanﬁy related to child behavior
problems (ﬁre higher ﬁre dysﬁrymia, ﬁre higher ﬁre number of problems).

Family Cohesion. Family cohesion was direcﬁy and inversely related
to child behavior problems (ﬁle lower ﬁre cohesion, ﬁre higher ﬁre number
of problems).

Mediaﬁon. As previously sttd, ﬁre original mediaﬁon hypoﬁresis
was not supported. The result, however, revealed parﬁal modiaﬁon,
namely, ﬁrat cohesion parﬁally mediated ﬁre relaﬁon between maternal
dysﬁrymia and child behavior problems such ﬁrat ﬁre lower ﬁre dysﬁrymia,
ﬁre higher ﬁre cohesion, and ﬁre higher ﬁre cohesion, ﬁre lower ﬁre number
of problems. This is ﬁre same parﬁal mediaﬁon process ﬁrat was revealed
in Model 1.

Variance. Model 2 accounted for 22% of ﬁre variance divided as
follows: 8% for child outcome (all for behavior problems), 8% for cohesion,
and 6% for maternal dysﬁrymia.

In sum, models 1 and 2 accounted for 26% and 22% of ﬁre variance,

respecﬁvely, leaving a substnﬁal amount unaccounted for in boﬁr models.

62

Result for Models 3 and 4:
Major Depression wiﬁr Psychoﬁc Features Models

Models 3 and 4, ﬁre Major Depression wiﬁr Psychoﬁc Features
Models (herein called ﬁre Depression Model), examined ﬁre relaﬁon of SES,
maternal depression, and family cohesion on child outcome. Result of ﬁre
paﬁr analysis for ﬁrese models are shown in Figures 4 and 5.

Model Fit. As was ﬁre case for models 1 and 2, boﬁr Models 3 and 4
parﬁally supported ﬁre outcome predicﬁons, ﬁrat is, boﬁr had an overall
acceptble ﬁt to ﬁre dat. For Model 3 ﬁre chi-square was not signiﬁcant
[x2(2), _N_ s 151) = 2.091, p = 0.352], ﬁre GFI was 0.995, ﬁre CFI was 0.999, and
ﬁre RMSEA was 0.017. Likewise, for Model 4 ﬁre chi-square was not
signiﬁcant [x2(4), N = 151) = 6.756, p = 0.116], ﬁre GFI was .985, ﬁre CFI was
.976, and ﬁre RMSEA was .048. Because boﬁr models ﬁt ﬁre dat, ﬁre chi-
square difference test was conducted to determine wheﬁrer one made a
better ﬁt ﬁran ﬁre oﬁrer. The result revealed ﬁrat boﬁr models ﬁt ﬁre dat
equally well [xZDelt(3) = 4.665, N.S.]. Result of ﬁre paﬁr analysis for ﬁrese
two models can be found in Figures 4 and 5.

M

Socioeconomic sttus. For Model 3, ﬁre ﬁrst predicﬁon was ﬁrat SES
would predict child behavior problems, verbal ability and puzzle-solving
skills. The predicﬁon was parﬁy supported. SES did not predict child
behavior problems or verbal ability, which meant ﬁrat ﬁreir predicted

mediaﬁon by maternal depression and family cohesion also was not

63

.13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Major Depression ~~~~~~~
With Psychoﬁc “““““““ 06
Features ““““““ * '
Child
-.35** : -.22** Behavior
E ,,,,,,,,,, ' Problems
1 :2? """"
I ,,,,,, \
.- —' ’ " ’ \
pppp l \
I
SE s l. ‘ ~ ~ - j ‘\‘ 08
i .......... ‘ Verbal
. . ..\ ......
\ 5 Ability
\ E -.20** 3‘“?
\ ,v " \\
\\ _ .04 ﬁ ,,,,,, \
\ , v ‘\
“ Family """" x
‘ v" .26“ \
Cohesion ...... ~07
.......... Puzzle-
“““ Solving
Skill

 

 

P < .05”
P < .01”

—'> Indicates signiﬁcant paﬁr
......... 8 Indicates non-signiﬁcant paﬁr

Figure 4. Model 3: Inﬂuence of SES, Major Depression wlﬁr Psychoﬁc
Features, and Family Cohesion on Child Outcome

 

Major Depression

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wiﬁr Psychoﬁc ‘xx "5
Symptoms “‘x- ‘
‘ ‘‘‘‘‘ Child
‘ Behavior
-.35** -.26** Problems
SES \\ ”22” ’07
Verbal
Ability
.02 ’’’’’’’’’
Family ,,,,,,, 00
Cohesion ....... .4 -
............ Puzzle-
“““ 5 Solving
Skill
P < .05*

——> Indicates signiﬁcant path
--------- § Indicates non-significant path

Figure 5. Model 4: Inﬂuence of SES, Major Depression wiﬁr Psychoﬁc
Features, and Family Cohesion on Child Outcome

65

 

supported. SES, however, did predict puzzle-solving, alﬁrough puzzle-
solving skill was not mediated by depression or family cohesion.

In Model 3, lower SES was negaﬁvely and signiﬁcanﬁy related to
levels of maternal depression (ﬁre lower ﬁre SES, ﬁre higher ﬁre
depression) and posiﬁvely and signiﬁcanﬁy related to child puzzle-solving
skills (ﬁre lower ﬁre SES, ﬁre lower ﬁre skill).

Alﬁrough SES did not direcﬁy predict child behavior problems, ﬁre
model did reveal one indirect paﬁr to child outcome: from SES to maternal
depression and from depression to verbal ability.

Depression. Maternal depression was negaﬁvely related to SES (ﬁre
higher ﬁre depression, ﬁre lower ﬁre SES) and negaﬁvely related to verbal
ability (ﬁre higher ﬁre depression, ﬁre lower ﬁre verbal ability). Contrary to
predicﬁon, depression was not related, eiﬁrer direcﬁy or indirectly, to child
behavior problems.

Family Cohesion. Family cohesion was found to be signiﬁcanﬁy
related to child behavior problems but, contrary to predicﬁon, was not
related, eiﬁrer direcﬁy or indirecﬁy, to maternal depression.

Variance in Model 3. Model 3 accounted for 38% of the variance, divided as
follows: 21% for child outcome (6% for behavior problems, 8% for verbal
ability, 7% for puzzle-solving skill, 13% for maternal depression, and 4% for

family cohesion.

66

ML!

Socioeconomic Sttus. In Model 4, SES predicted only depression
and covaried wiﬁr child verbal ability and puzzle-solving skill. Only one
direct paﬁr and one indirect paﬁr were signiﬁcant. The direct paﬁr was a
negaﬁve relaﬁon between SES and depression (lower levels of SES
predicted higher levels of depression).

The indirect paﬁr was from SES to depression and from depression
to verbal ability.

Depression. Depression was posiﬁvely related to child verbal
ability, but contrary to predicﬁon, depression was not related to family
cohesion, eiﬁrer direcﬁy or indirecﬁy. ‘

Family Cohesion. Family cohesion was direcﬁy and
inversely related to child behavior problems (ﬁre lower ﬁre cohesion, ﬁre
more ﬁre behavior problems), ﬁre same pattern as found in previous
models.

Mediaﬁon. As previously stted, ﬁre original mediaﬁon hypoﬁresis
was not supported, and ﬁrere were no oﬁrer mediaﬁon paﬁrs in ﬁris model.

Variance. Model 4 accounted for 25% of ﬁre variance divided as
follows: 12% for child outcome (5% for behavior problems, 7% for verbal

ability) and 13% for maternal depression.

67

In sum, Models 3 and 4 accounted for 38% and 25% of ﬁre variance,
respecﬁvely, leaving, as was ﬁre case for Models 1 and 2, a substnﬁal

amount unaccounted for.

68

DISCUSSION

One speciﬁc concern idenﬁﬁed by teachers of young children in
Jamaica is ﬁre emergence of serious behavior problems in ﬁre classroom.
Thus, ﬁris has also become a serious issue for ﬁre Jamaican Ministry of
Educaﬁon. This study, undertken from ﬁre perspecﬁve of ﬁre
socioeconomic gradient (Keaﬁng 8 Hartman, 1999) as a major inﬂuence
on child outcome, examined family SES, maternal psychopaﬁrology, and
family cohesion as ﬁrree of many potenﬁal contributors to child outcome:
emoﬁon and social behavior, verbal ability, and puzzle-solving skill. The
relaﬁons ﬁrat emerged proved to be complex, and, as predicted, strongly
inﬂuenced by SES.
SESI Maternal PsychopaﬁrolpgyI and Family Cohesion

In studies focusing on children from low-income families and ﬁreir
performance in school setﬁngs, SES is a salient predictor of outcome
(Brooks-Gunn at al., 1999; Sﬁpek, 2001; Sﬁpak 8 Ryan, 1997). It also
proved to be a strong contributor to child outcome in ﬁris study. Low
family SES, for example, dirocﬁy predicted low puzzle-solving skill. One
straightfonlvard explanaﬁon is economic: low SES restrict ﬁre family’s
ability to purchase puzzles and, in addiﬁon, many of ﬁre Basic Schools,
because of ﬁreir own limited resources, do not have puzzles available
elﬁrer. Thus, ﬁre child’s opportunity to pracﬁce and master ﬁrat skill is not

available. It may be, however, ﬁrat because Jamaican parent believe ﬁrat

69

school, even for young children, should focus on reading and wriﬁng ﬁrat
ﬁrey do not invest limited resources on puzzles and similar materials.

Lower SES is often associated wiﬁr higher levels of maternal
psychopaﬁrology. In ﬁris study, lower SES made a somewhat larger
contribuﬁon to major depression wiﬁr psychoﬁc features ﬁran it did to
maternal dysﬁrymia. These ﬁndings are not unique to Jamaica; in most
countries ﬁrare is an astblished inverse relaﬁon between SES and severity
of mentl illness in ﬁre populaﬁon (Keaﬁng 8 Hartman, 1999).

Moﬁrers wiﬁr low chronic levels of dysﬁrymia often have children
wlﬁr behavior problems (Campbell, 1995; Lang, Field, Pickens, 8 Marﬁnaz,
1996; Stonnont, 1998). This may be because dysﬁrymia can restrict an
individual’s desire to participate in daily acﬁviﬁes, and ﬁrus, might lower
ﬁre amount of ﬁme ﬁre moﬁrer spends wiﬁr ﬁre child, or moﬁrer-child
intracﬁon may be more diracﬁve, demanding, or controlling, maternal
factors associated wiﬁr behavior problems in young children (Campbell,
1995).

Higher levels of maternal dysﬁrymia are also reﬂected in lower levels
of family cohesion. Because ﬁre majority of Jamaican families are
matriarchal, maternal dysﬁrymia may exert an inﬂuence over general family
funcﬁoning. In ﬁris study, dysﬁrymia inﬂuenced boﬁl ﬁre family and ﬁre
child, by contribuﬁng to lower levels of funcﬁoning for boﬁr. Contrary to
predicﬁon, dysﬁrymia was not related to ﬁre verbal ability of ﬁre child, a

strong relaﬁon found in previous non-Jamaican studies, nor did it

70

contribute direcﬁy to lower puzzle-solving skills; it major inﬂuence was
behavioral only.

Alﬁrough major depression wiﬁr psychoﬁc features is a more serious
and debilitﬁng illness ﬁran is dysﬁrymia, contrary to predicﬁon, major
depression wiﬁr psychoﬁc features did not direcﬁy predict child behavior
problems, deﬁned as emoﬁon and social immaturity. At ﬁrst glance, ﬁris
seems counter-intuiﬁve. Perhaps it means ﬁrat moﬁrers wiﬁr severe
psychopaﬁrology do not frequently interact wiﬁr ﬁreir children because .
daily monitoring and care are tkan on by oﬁrer family members (Scott-
McDonald, 1997). Thus, ﬁre disturbed moﬁrer does not spend sufﬁcient
ﬁme wiﬁr ﬁre child to inﬂuence it behavior, eiﬁrar posiﬁvaly or nagaﬁvely.
High levels of major depression wiﬁr psychoﬁc features did, however,
predict lower levels of child verbal ability. Because ﬁrere is less frequent
moﬁrer-child interacﬁon, ﬁrere may be overall less conversaﬁon and
discussion wiﬁl ﬁre child, or ﬁre conversaﬁon and discussion may reﬂect
ﬁre cogniﬁve deﬁcit and distorﬁons ﬁrat are part of ﬁre illness, ﬁrus
manifesﬁng in lower verbal ability for ﬁre child.

Low family cohesion was direcﬁy related to a high number of child
behavior problems. This ﬁnding is similar to ﬁrose found in ﬁre existing
literature on family funcﬁoning and child outcome (Kupersmidt, J. B.,
Griesler, P. C., DeRosier, M. E., 8 Patterson, C. J., 1995; Maﬁrijssen, J.J. P.,
Koot, H. M., Verhulst, F. C., DaBruyn, E., 8 Oud, J. H., 1998; Sroufe, L. A. 8
Fleeson, J. 1988).

71

Thus, child behavior problems were independonﬁy inﬂuenced by ﬁre
level of family cohesion and ﬁre level of maternal dysﬁrymia, supporﬁng
ﬁre hypoﬁresis of ﬁre importnco and inﬂuence of family on child outcome
in Jamaican daily life. As also might be expected, family and maternal
funcﬁoning were also inﬂuenced by ﬁre level of available economic
resources.

The current study has some obvious limitﬁons. One such limitﬁon
focuses on sample issues and ﬁre ability to generalize from ﬁris sample to
all Jamaican children in early childhood programs. The sample, which was
a recruited and not a random sample, came from one small secﬁon of ﬁre
island (Kingston) where SES is generally wiﬁrin ﬁre same low-end range
(Grant, 1974). This raises issues of ecological validity and ﬁrus ﬁre ability
to generalize ﬁrase result across ﬁre whole island of Jamaica is limited.
Furﬁrer studies involving samples from a variety of early childhood
programs serving ﬁre full range of SES across Jamaica would need to be
conducted to daterrnine if paﬁrs to child outcome, or child outcome itelf,
remain ﬁre same. There is some lndicaﬁon ﬁrat ﬁris may not be ﬁre case;
ﬁrat outcome is related to SES and to ﬁre socializaﬁon of ﬁre children as to
parentl expactﬁons for school parforrnance (Evans, 1989).

A second Iimitﬁon concerns ﬁre source of ﬁre dat. All dat used to
assess maternal psychopaﬁrology, family cohesion, and child behavior
problems came from ﬁre moﬁlers, creaﬁng a problem wiﬁr meﬁrod variance

(Pedhazur, 1973). To avoid such problems in ﬁre future, infonnaﬁon should

72

ideally come from mulﬁple sources, including oﬁrer persons who are
integral to ﬁre household and from persons who interact wiﬁr ﬁre child
outide ﬁre home, including ﬁre child’s teacher.

A ﬁrird limitﬁon, related to ﬁre second, is ﬁrst faﬁrar or faﬁrer-
ﬁgures were not included in ﬁre study. It is known ﬁrat faﬁrers, however,
play an important role, wheﬁrer diracﬁy or indiracﬁy, in ﬁre socializaﬁon of
a child (Brown, Newland, Anderson, 8 Chevannes, 1997; DeKIyan, M.,
Biernbaum, M. A., Greenberg, M. T., 8 Spelt, M. L., 1998). This problem
could not be avoided in ﬁre current study; no faﬁrers were included in ﬁre
sample. In future studies, every attempt should be made to include faﬁrels.

While ﬁre factor structures of ﬁre measures were tested and new
factors developed, one cannot be cartin ﬁrat ﬁre measures held
appropriate content and cultural validity for Jamaicans. Research should
determine ﬁre content structure for construct addressed in ﬁre study.

Because ﬁris study was cross-secﬁonal, what is not known is ﬁre
causal direcﬁon between ﬁre variables. Lower SES may contribute to
higher levels of psychopaﬁrology; higher levels of psychopaﬁrology may
contribute to lower family and individual SES; or ﬁre ralaﬁons may be
recursive. Our need for understnding causal direcﬁon for ﬁrese factors
calls for future research to consider longitudinal designs (Campbell, 1991;
Mofﬁtt, 1990). Longitudinal design provides ﬁre only true way to answer

ﬁre quesﬁons about davelopmentl process over ﬁme. At ﬁris point, very

73

few, if any, longitudinal studies have been done wiﬁr Jamaican children
and families. This should be a goal for further research.
lmplicaﬁons and Future Direcﬁons

Jamaica has made a strong commitment to provide educaﬁon for
young children. For educators who teach young children, school
readiness is an importnt issue and is complex in it daﬁniﬁons and
attributes. As previously discussed, ﬁrrae factors, among many, idenﬁﬁed
as contribuﬁng to a posiﬁve experience in preschool are behavior -
ragulaﬁon, ﬁre ability to use language to express feelings, ideas, and to ask
quesﬁons, and puzzle-solving skills, a proxy for experience wiﬁr
manipulaﬁvas and visual problem-solving.

How do ﬁre result of ﬁris research inform ﬁre ﬁrinking of ﬁre
Ministry of Educaﬁon? As already stted, Jamaica is a developing country
wlﬁr extremes of waalﬁr and poverty, high unemployment, and high
inﬂaﬁon and, for many, a declining stndard of living (Barﬁlow, 1997). The
stressers, ﬁrerefora, on families and children are high and are likely to
remain so for ﬁre foreseeable future. In light of ﬁrese difﬁculﬁes, Jamaica’s
decision to commit itelf strongly to oducaﬁon is well-founded Inasmuch
as an educated ciﬁzenry is one of ﬁre most effecﬁve ways to support social
and economic development.

The emergence of serious behavior problems among young children,
a factor ﬁrat can seriously interfere wiﬁr ﬁreir learning, ﬁrarefore, is serious

and needs to be addressed. Two avenues of explanaﬁon, obviously

74

interrelated, are possible: contribuﬁons of ﬁre home may contribute to
eiﬁrer or hot ﬁre child’s readiness to learn or ﬁre child’s lack of readiness
to funcﬁon in ﬁre social context of school. Difﬁculﬁes wiﬁr eiﬁrer of ﬁrese
factors have been associated wiﬁr poor school adjustment (Lambert, M. C.,
Thesiger, C., Overly, K., 8 Knight, F., 1990). It may be, however, ﬁrat ﬁre
school curriculum and teachers are not suited to ﬁre needs and capabiliﬁes
of ﬁre child (Johnson 8 Brown, 1995; Morrison at al., 1998), and ﬁre
ﬂexibility and skills needed by ﬁre teachers and teacher-educators to
modify ﬁre curriculum may not be available. This may be because of
administraﬁve or parentl expactﬁons or lack of proper training and
support of teachers to meet ﬁre axpactﬁons, or a combinaﬁon of factors.
From many tachers’ parspacﬁves, problem behaviors and ﬁre skills
necessary for school success begin at home. There is, of course, much
ﬁrat is true in ﬁlls supposiﬁon (Sﬁpek, 2001), and indeed, in ﬁre United
Stts this is a common belief. At ﬁre same ﬁme, at least some of ﬁre
difﬁculties children experience at school, eiﬁrer wiﬁr Ieaming or behavior,
can eiﬁrer begin in school or be exacerbated by experience ﬁrere. To date,
ﬁris reciprocal relaﬁon is sﬁll insufﬁcienﬁy studied and understood (Sﬁpak,
2001). The understnding of what is school readiness is one ﬁrat is
currenﬁy under much discussion (Carlton 8 Winsler, 1999; Crnic 8
Lamberty, 1994; Holloway, Rambaud, Fuller, 8 Eggers-Piarola, 1995; May 8
Kundert, 1997). Alﬁrough ﬁris study did not examine teacher atﬁtudes,

ballot, or component of teacher training, ﬁre role of ﬁre teacher in

75

gr

fostering successful and producﬁve classroom experience is well
documented (Brookﬁald, 1995; Rodgers-Jenkins 8 Chapman, 1990).
Research has also heightened our awareness ﬁrat ﬁre inﬂuence adult’
implicit and tcit beliefs about ﬁre nature of ﬁre child and ﬁre purpose of
curriculum are reﬂected in ﬁre way content is presented and expectaﬁons
for children are deﬁned (Brookﬁald, 1995). Expectﬁons, for example, from
ﬁre Ministry of Educaﬁon support a craaﬁva and well-managed early
childhood program wiﬁr many opportuniﬁes for individual free-choice
acﬁviﬁes, and small and large group acﬁvities. Expectﬁons, however,
from parent stress academic achievement, rote learning, and less creaﬁve
endeavors as markers of a successful school experience, even for young
children (Johnson 8 Brown, 1995; Morrison et al., 1998). Children may
come to school wiﬁr one set of expectﬁons from ﬁrelr parent and
experience anoﬁrer set of expectﬁons from ﬁrair teachers and not know
how to negoﬁate ﬁre territory.

Parentl discipline styles may also inﬂuence how children are
prepared to handle ﬁre openness of a more construcﬁvist classroom
environment (Laﬂtowit, Huesman, Eron, 1978; Parts, Cuents, 8 Zady,
2000; Parts, Sandu, Cuents, 8 Zady, 1995). Children who have been
roared wiﬁr physical punishment as ﬁre primary means of discipline often
have difﬁculﬁes in environment where ﬁre emphasis is on choice and
cooperaﬁve learning (Brenner 8 Fox, 1998). If ﬁris is ﬁre case, and ﬁre

Ministry of Educaﬁon want to promote more construcﬁvist forms of early

76

childhood educaﬁon, teachers will have to be well-trained in ﬁre forms of
discipline and guidance ﬁrat facilitte ﬁris type of Ieaming.

To successfully ameliorate ﬁris problem, ways to support boﬁr ﬁre
family and school will have to be considered, developed, and implemented.
Result of future research can inform policies on mantl healﬁr in families
and it ralaﬁon to child outcome and suggesﬁons for needed support in
light of ﬁre many stressors found in Jamaican society. Future research can
also inform issues of teacher training so ﬁrat teachers can successfully
meet ﬁre expectﬁons of ﬁre Ministry of Educaﬁon and meet ﬁre needs of

ﬁre children ﬁray are serving.

77

 

APPENDICES

78

-"."I}|~‘3Il

 

APPENDIX A

Freguency Tables for Variables
in Anal ed and Archiva Models

79

Table 6 : quency Table of Puzzle Solving Scores from ﬁre McCarﬁry
Scales of Child Devplopment

PUZZLE SOLVING
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent

Valid 24 1 1 7.3 7.3 7.3
27 1 0 6.6 6.6 1 3.9
30 1 5 9.9 9.9 23.8
36 24 15.9 1 5.9 39.7
39 5 3.3 3.3 43.0
45 1 2 7.9 7.9 51 .0
48 7 4.6 4.6 55.6
51 9 6.0 6.0 61 .6
54 1 0 6.6 6.6 68.2
57 1 2 7.9 7.9 76.2
60 5 3.3 3.3 79.5
63 9 6.0 6.0 85.4
64 1 .7 .7 86.1
66 5 3.3 3.3 89.4
69 3 2.0 2.0 91 .4
75 3 2.0 2.0 93.4
81 3 2.0 2.0 95.4
84 1 .7 .7 96.0
90 1 .7 .7 96.7
93 1 .7 .7 97.4
96 1 .7 .7 98.0

1 02 3 2.0 2.0 100.0
Total 1 51 1 00.0 1 00.0

80

Table 7: Fgguency Table of Visual Factor Scores from ﬁre McCarﬁry
Scales of Child Development

VISUAL FACTOR
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve

Percent Percent

Valid 50-59 3 2.1 2.1 2.0
60-69 13 8.9 8.9 10.6
70-79 16 10.7 10.7 21.2
80-89 28 18.5 18.5 39.7
90-99 34 22.5 22.5 92.3
100-109 30 19.9 19.9 82.1
110-119 19 12.6 12.6 94.7 '
120-129 4 2.7 2.7 97.4
130-139 3 2.1 2.1 99.3
. 140-144 1 .7 .7 100
Totl 151 100 100

81

Table 8: Fmguency Table of Conceptual Grouping Scores from ﬁre
McCarﬁry Scales of Child Development

CONCEPTUAL GROUPING
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent

Valid 24 1 .7 .7 .7
27 1 3 8.6 8.6 9.3

33 1 5 9.9 9.9 1 9.2

36 1 2 7.9 7.9 27.2

42 9 6.0 6.0 33.1
45 14 9.3 9.3 42.4

51 1 1 7.3 7.3 49.7

57 22 14.6 14.6 64.2

66 24 1 5.9 1 5.9 80.1

75 1 1 7.3 7.3 87.4

96 1 1 7.3 7.3 94.7

1 02 8 5.3 5.3 1 00.0

Total 151 1 00.0 1 00.0

82

Table 9: Fggupncy Table of Verbal Factor Scores f_rpm ﬁre McCarﬁry

Scales of Child Development

Frequency Percent

VERBAL FACTOR
Valid 49-59 5
60-69 17
70-79 21
80-89 29
90-99 32
100-109 19
1 10-119 15
1 20-1 29 8
130-139 2
1 40-149 3
1 51

Totl

3.4
1 1 .3
1 3.8
1 9.3
21 .1
1 2.6

9.9

5.3

1.4

2.1
100

Valid
Percent

3.4
1 1 .3
1 3.8
19.3
21 .1
12.6

9.9

5.3

1 .4

2.1
100

83

Cumulative
Percent

3.3
14.6
28.5
47.7
68.9
81 .5
91 .4
96.7
98.0

100

Table 10: quency Table of Moﬁrers’ Educaﬁonal Attinment

Moﬁrers educaﬁon
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulaﬁve

Percent
Valid did not completed 1 .7 .7 .7
primarylall-age
completed primary 9 6.0 6.3 7.0
completed all-age 21 13.9 14.7 21.7
completed 105 69.5 73.4 95.1
secondarylhighltechnlcal
completed secretarial! 5 3.3 3.5 98.6
commercial college
completed university 2 1.3 1.4 100.0
Total 143 94.7 100.0
Missing 99 8 5.3
Total 151 100.0

84

prle 11: Fppguency Table of Parent’ Ralaﬁonship Sttus

Parant’ ielaﬁonship
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulaﬁve

Percent
Valid married 35 23.2 23.2 23.2
living 39 25.8 25.8 49.0
together

visiﬁng 13 8.6 8.6 57.6
separated 53 35.1 35.1 92.7
none 11 7.3 7.3 100.0

Totl 151 100.0 100.0

85

Tabjp 12: quency Distribuﬁon of Moﬁrer’s Age

Moﬁrer’s Age

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent
Valid 19 1 .7 .7 .7
20 2 1 .3 1 .3 2.0
21 4 2.6 2.6 4.6
22 4 2.6 2.6 7.3
23 10 6.6 6.6 13.9
24 4 2.6 2.6 16.6
25 3 2.0 2.0 18.5
26 18 11.9 11.9 30.5
27 11 7.3 7.3 37.7
28 6 4.0 4.0 41 .7
29 6 4.0 4.0 45.7
30 9 6.0 6.0 51 .7
31 7 4.6 4.6 56.3
32 13 8.6 8.6 64.9
33 7 4.6 4.6 69.5
34 4 2.6 2.6 72.2
35 7 4.6 4.6 78.8
36 2 1 .3 1 .3 78.1
37 3 2.0 2.0 80.1
38 3 2.0 2.0 82.1
39 9 6.0 6.0 88.1
40 6 4.0 4.0 92.1
41 3 2.0 2.0 94.0
42 4 2.6 ‘ 2.6 96.7
43 2 1 .3 1 .3 98.0
45 ‘l .7 .7 98.7
46 1 .7 .7 99.3
51 1 .7 .7 100.0

Tot 151 100.0 100.0

86

Table 13: quency Tgble of Child IQ §pores

CHILD‘S IQ.
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent
Valid 60-69 15 10.0 10.0 9.9
70-79 23 15.2 15.2 25.2
80-89 34 22.5 22.5 47.7
90-99 41 27.0 27.0 74.8
100-109 24 16.0 16.0 90.7
110-119 10 6.5 6.5 97.4
120-129 2 1.3 1.3 98.7
130-139 2 1.4 1.4 100.0
151 100 100

87

Table 14: Fgguency Table of Study Chilgren in Six Basic Schools

Schools

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Water Corn 30 19.9 19.9 19.9
Providence 31 20.5 20.5 40.4
August Twn 1 5 9.9 9.9 50.3
Mona Com 13 8.6 8.6 58.9
Hope Val 31 20.5 20.5 79.5
Shady Gr 31 20.5 20.5 100.0

Totl 151 100.0 100.0

88

Table 15: Fggupncy Iable of Agp of Study Children

Child’s Age

Valid

Totl

3.0 —
3.99

4.0 -
4.99

Frequency Percent Valid

26

41

52

32

151

Percent
17.2 17.2
27.2 27.2
34.4 34.4
21.2 21.2
100 100

89

Cum ulaﬁve
Percent

1 7.2

44.4

78.8

1 00.0

Table 16: quency Tabla pf Totl Socioeconomic Sttus of Families of
Study Children

totlses

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent
Valid 6.00 1 .7 .7 .7
9.00 2 1.3 1.3 2.0
10.00 3 2.0 2.0 4.0
11.00 4 2.6 2.6 6.6
12.00 8 5.3 5.3 11.9
13.00 8 5.3 5.3 17.2
14.00 10 6.6 6.6 23.8
15.00 15 9.9 9.9 33.8
16.00 24 15.9 15.9 49.7
17.00 25 16.6 16.6 66.2
18.00 37 24.5 24.5 90.7
19.00 14 9.3 9.3 f 100.0

Totl 151 100.0 100.0

90

 

Table 17: Fppguency Table of Immatur_l_ty' Scores from ﬁre Connors

Behavioral Scales

 

Immatrlty

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent
Valid .00 4 2.6 2.6 2.6
1.00 7 4.6 4.6 7.3
2.00 6 4.0 4.0 11.3
3.00 12 7.9 7.9 19.2
4.00 8 5.3 5.3 24.5
5.00 14 9.3 9.3 33.8
6.00 12 7.9 7.9 41.7
7.00 9 6.0 6.0 47.7
8.00 13 8.6 8.6 56.3
9.00 13 8.6 8.6 64.9
10.00 7 4.6 4.6 69.5
11.00 9 6.0 6.0 75.5
12.00 2 1.3 1.3 76.8
13.00 5 3.3 3.3 80.1
14.00 8 5.3 5.3 85.4
15.00 2 1.3 1.3 86.8
16.00 5 3.3 3.3 90.1
17.00 4 2.6 2.6 92.7
18.00 1 .7 .7 93.4
19.00 2 1.3 1.3 94.7
20.00 2 1.3 1.3 96.0
22.00 1 .7 .7 96.7
23.00 1 .7 .7 97.4
25.00 2 1.3 1.3 98.7
26.00 1 .7 .7 99.3
34.00 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 151 100.0 100.0

Table 18: quency Table of Hymracﬁvigy Scale from ﬁre Connors

Behavioral Scale

Hyperacﬁvity

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent
Valid 1 .00 2 1 .3 1 .3 1 .3
3.00 2 1.3 1 .3 2.6
4.00 3 2.0 2.0 4.6
5.00 4 2.6 2.6 7.3
6.00 1 .7 .7 7.9
7.00 9 6.0 6.0 1 3.9
8.00 4 2.6 2.6 1 6.6
9.00 14 9.3 9.3 25.8
1 0.00 6 4.0 4.0 29.8
1 1 .00 1 1 7.3 7.3 37.1
1 2.00 1 3 8.6 8.6 45.7
1 3.00 8 5.3 5.3 51 .0
1 4.00 1 1 7.3 7.3 58.3
1 5.00 5 3.3 3.3 61.6
1 6.00 1 1 7.3 7.3 68.9
1 7.00 5 3.3 3.3 72.2
1 8.00 1 0 6.6 6.6 78.8
1 9.00 2 1.3 1 .3 80.1
20.00 6 4.0 4.0 84.1
21 .00 3 2.0 2.0 86.1
22.00 4 2.6 2.6 88.7
23.00 5 3.3 3.3 92.1
24.00 4 2.6 2.6 94.7
25.00 3 2.0 2.0 96.7
26.00 3 2.0 2.0 98.7
27.00 1 .7 .7 99.3
29.00 1 .7 .7 1 00.0

Total 1 51 1 00.0 1 00.0

92

 

I11 I—-I

Table 19: quency Table of Family Cohesion Factor on ﬁre
FACES

Family Cohesion Score
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent

Valid 1 0.00 1 .7 .7 .7
1 1 .00 2 1 .3 1 .3 2.0
1 2.00 1 .7 .7 2.6
1 3.00 2 1 .3 1 .3 4.0
14.00 2 1 .3 1 .3 5.3
1 6.00 8 5.3 5.3 1 0.6
1 7.00 3 2.0 2.0 1 2.6
1 9.00 3 2.0 2.0 14.6
20.00 6 4.0 4.0 1 8.5
21 .00 6 4.0 4.0 22.5
22.00 4 2.6 2.6 25.2
23.00 5 3.3 3.3 28.5
24.00 6 4.0 4.0 32.5
25.00 8 5.3 5.3 37.7
26.00 1 6 1 0.6 1 0.6 48.3
27.00 1 0 6.6 6.6 55.0
28.00 1 3 8.6 8.6 63.6
29.00 1 3 8.6 8.6 72.2
30.00 1 0 6.6 6.6 78.8
31 .00 8 5.3 5.3 84.1
32.00 7 4.6 4.6 88.7
33.00 5 3.3 3.3 92.1
34.00 8 5.3 5.3 97.4
35.00 2 1 .3 1 .3 98.7
36.00 2 1 .3 1 .3 1 00.0
Total 1 51 100.0 100.0

93

 

Table 20: Fgguency Table of ﬁre Qﬁﬁrymia Scores on ﬁre Brief Smptom
Inventol_'y

Dysﬁrymia

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulaﬁve
Percent Percent
Valid .00 39 25.8 25.8 25.8
1.00 23 15.2 15.2 41.1
2.00 10 6.6 6.6 47.7
3.00 15 9.9 9.9 57.6
4.00 9 6.0 6.0 63.6
5.00 8 5.3 5.3 68.9
6.00 13 8.6 8.6 77.5
7.00 7 4.6 4.6 82.1
8.00 5 3.3 3.3 85.4
9.00 1 .7 .7 86.1
10.00 2 1.3 1.3 87.4
1 1 .00 4 2.6 2.6 90.1
12.00 4 2.6 2.6 92.7
13.00 3 2.0 2.0 94.7
14.00 4 2.6 2.6 97.4
15.00 1 .7 .7 98.0
16.00 1 .7 .7 98.7
17.00 2 1.3 1.3 100.0

Totl 151 100.0 100.0

94

Table 21: Freguency Table of Psychoﬁc Scores on ﬁre Brief Symptom

Inventoi_'y

Psychoﬁc

Valid

.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00

10.00
1 1 .00
12.00
15.00
18.00
19.00
22.00
Totl

Frequency Percent Valid
Percent

63
20
21
1 3

ﬁN-i-l-l-INNN-lmm-h‘l

.3
GI

41 .7
1 3.2
13.9
8.6
4.6
2.6
3.3

Jul-h .u
OUN‘INNUUGNU

.s
9
ca

95

41 .7
1 3.2
1 3.9
8.6
4.6
2.6
3.3

_ ut-b-l u
OUNNNNQQQN“

d
O
Q-l

Cumulaﬁve
Percent
41 .7
55.0
68.9
77.5
82.1
84.8
88.1
91 .4
92.1
93.4
94.7
. 96.0
96.7
97.4
98.0
98.7
100.0

_ ' 1'? '.;'§'
.- :-.'_r‘-i'

 

 

APPENDIX B

Freguency Distribuﬁons for Variables
in Analyzed and Archival Models

96

 

 

Mother's Age

 

 

 

 

3‘

5 Std. Dev = 6.44
§ Mean = 30.9
LII: N = 151.00

20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0
22.5 27.5 32.5 37.5 42.5 47.5

Mother's Age

Figure 6: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Moﬁrers’ Age

97

parents relationship
60 ‘

 

Std. Dev = 1.34
Mean = 2.8
N = 151.00

Frequency

   

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

parents relationship

Figure 7: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Parent’ Ralaﬁonship

98

Mothers education

 

120

 

 

 

g Std. Dev = .71
§. Mean = 3.8
L: N = 143.00

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 8.0

Mothers education

Figure 8: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Moﬁreis’ Educaﬁon

99

he

 

VERBAL FACTOR

 

30

 

 

 

6‘

5 Std. Dev= 19.01
3 Mean 2 91.2
g N =151.00

$30 ob-o )o-o ob-o $0 ’97 ”'00 (320 {120 ,0 {$20

VERBAL FACTOR

Figure 9: Frequency Disﬁlbuﬁon of Verbal Factor Scores
from ﬁre McCarﬁry Scales of Child Development

100

 

VISUAL FACTOR

 

 

 

 

6‘

5 Std. Dev = 17.25
§' Mean = 93.2

I: N = 151.00

0 ) ) .9 I I 7 I I I I I I
%o‘ttoeo'oqoo-oqoob-oqigbo‘i‘ooo 06‘ ’0 ’3“? ‘30‘ ‘9 ‘9‘ 700%.}

VISUAL FACTOR

Figure 10: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Visual Factor Scores
from ﬁre McCarﬁry Scales of Child Development

101

CONCEPTUAL GROUPING

 

30

 

  

5‘

5 Std. Dev = 21.50
g. Mean = 55.7

1: o N = 151.00

 

20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

 

CONCEPTUAL GROUPING

Figure 11: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Conceptual
Grouping Scores from ﬁre McCarﬁry Scales of

Child Development

102

school

 

40

Frequency

School 1
School 2
School 3
School 4
School 5
School 6

 

Std. Dev=1.88
Mean=3.5
N=151.00

Water Commission
Providence
August Township
Mona Commission
Hope Valley
Shady Grove

Figure 12: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Study Children at
Basic Schools

103

 

 

test1 age

 

 

 

 

Frequency

777663190

%%%%tsttsssts

 

test1 age

Figure 13: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Age of Sﬁldy Children

 

totalses

 

70

  
 
 
 
  

60:

50:

401

301

 

Std. Dev = 2.53
Mean = 15.9
N = 151.00

 

6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0

totlsos

Figure 14: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Totl Socioeconomic
Status of Families of Study Children

105

Immaturity

 

 

Std. Dev = 5.94
Mean = 8.7
N =151.00

 

 

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
2.5 7.5 12.5 17.5 22.5 27.5 32.5

Immaturity

Figure 15: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Immaturity Scores from ﬁre Connors
Behavioral Scales

106

Hyperactivity

 

 

Std. Dev = 5.99
Mean = 14.0
N = 151.00

 

 

 

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
2.5 7.5 12.5 17.5 22.5 27.5

HYDGTHCIIVIIY

Figure 16: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Hyperacﬁvity Factor
Scores from ﬁre Connors Behavioral Scale

107

Family Cohesion

 

40

 

 

Frequency

 

Family Cohesion

Figure 17: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Family Cohesion
Factor Scores on ﬁre FACES

108

Dysthymia

 

50

4O

30

20

 

10
g Std. Dev=4.38
é Mean =4.1
I: o N =151.00

 

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.014.016.0 18.0

 

DYSthymia

Figure 18: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Dysthymia Factor Scores on ﬁre
Brief Symptom Inventory

109

 

Psychotc

100

 

 

5‘

5 Std. Dev=4.12
a?” Mean =2.6

u: N =151.00

   

Psychotc

Figure 19: Frequency Distribuﬁon of Psychoﬁc Factor Scores on ﬁre Brief
Symptom Inventory

110

APPENDIX C
ARCHIVAL MODELS

111

 

 

Family
Cohesion

 
 
 
 
 

 

 

Verbal l

 

 

l Total sss l

 

 

 

  
     

[ Immaturity T—

-.24**

 

Psychoﬁc

 

 

*=p<95
**=p<.01

x“ = 2.963
DF=3
P = 0.397

Figure 20:

Archival Modal: Inﬂuence of SES, Maternal Psychoﬁc
Behavior, and Family Cohesion on Child Outcome

112

[ Hyporacﬁvity 1*; '

.41

 

Family
Cohesion

-.24

 

Totl SES

 

 

\ -.35*
—Pl Dysﬁrymia

* =p<.05
** =p<.01

 

x’ = 7.116
DF=6
P = 3.310

  
  

 

Child’s IO 1

 

 

l Immaturity

 

-.24**

 

l Hyperacﬁvity

 

I*

.39

Figure 21: Archival Model: Inﬂuence of SES, Matrnal Dysﬁrymia, and
Family Cohesion on Child Outcome

113

 

REFERENCES

Adams, J. (1989). A descripﬁon of some parcepﬁons in Jamaican
immigrant. In V. Clarke (Ed.), Estblishing now lives: Selected

readings in Caribbean immigrant in New York. New York: Caribbean
Research Center, Madgar Evers College, City University of New York.

Amato, P. (2000). Diversity wiﬁrin single-parent families. In D. H. Demo 8 K.
R. Allen (Eds.), Handbook of family diversity (pp. 149-172). New York:
Oxford University Press.

Arbuckle, J. L., 8 Woﬁrke, W. (1999). Amos usprs guide. Chicago, IL:
Smallwaters Corporaﬁon.

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Mood Disorders, Diagnosﬁc and

stﬁsﬁcal manual of mantl disordprs (4ﬁr ed., pp. 213-233).
Washington, 0.0.: American Psychiatric Associaﬁon.

Baker, B. L., 8 Heller, T. L. (1996). Preschool children wiﬁr externalizing
behaviors: Experience of faﬁrers and moﬁrers. Journal of Abnormal

Child PsycholggyI 24(4), 513-532.

Barﬁlow, H. A. (1997). The debt dilemma: IMF nagoﬁaﬁons in Jamaicall
anadaI and prana. London: Macmillan.

Baumrind, D. (1971). Harmonious parent and ﬁrelr preschool children.
Developmentl Psycholpgy, 4(1, Pt. 1), 99-102.

Beitchman, J. H., Wilson, 8., Brownlie, E. B., 8 Walters, H. (1996). Long-
terrn consistency in speechllanguage proﬁles: ll. Behavioral,
emoﬁonal, and social outcomes. Journal of ﬁre American Academy

of Child 8: Adolescent PsychiaﬂI 35(6), 815-825.

Benasich, A. A., 8 Curﬁss, S. (1993). Language, learning, and behavioral
disturbances in childhood: A longitudinal perspecﬁve. Journal of

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiat_ryI 32(3), 585-
594.

Biafora, F. (1995). Cross-cultural perspacﬁve and wellness: lmplicaﬁons for
depression. Journal of Social Distress 8 me Homeless, 4(2), 105-129.

Billings, A. G., 8 Moos, R. H. (1983). Comparison of children of depressed
and nondepressed parent: A social-environmentl perspecﬁva.

Jggrnal of Abnormal Child Psycholpgy, 1 1(4), 463-485.

114

 

Billings, A. G., 8 Moos, R. H. (1986). Children of parent wiﬁr unipolar
depression: A controlled 1-year follow-up. Journal of Abnormal Child

Psycholggy, 14(1), 149-166.

Brenner, V., 8 Fox, R. A. (1998). Parentl discipline and behavior problems
in young children. Journal of Geneﬁc Psycholgy, 159(2), 251 -256.

Brice-Baker, J. (1996). Jamaican families. In M. McGoldrick 8 J. Gordono 8

J. K. Pearce (Eds.), Eﬁrnicjty and Family Therapy (pp. 84-96). New
York: Guilford.

Brigman, G., Lana, D., Switer, D., Lane, D., 8 Lawrence, R. (1999).
Teaching children school success skills. Journal of Educaﬁonal
Research, 92(6), 323-329.

Bronfenbrennor, U. (1986). Ecology of ﬁre family as a context for human
development: Research perspecﬁves. Development and Psycholpgy,
23(6), 723-742.

Brookﬁeld, S. D. (1995). Becoming a criﬁcally reﬂective teacher. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 296 pp.

Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G., 8 Britto, P. R. (1999). Are socioeconomic
gradient for children similar to ﬁrose for adult?: Achievement and
healﬁr of children in ﬁre United Sttas. In D. Keaﬁng 8 C. Hartman

(Eds.), Developmentl healﬁr and waalﬁr of naﬁpns: Social,
biological, and educaﬁonal dynamics (pp. 94-124). New York: The

Guildford Press.

Brooks-Gunn, J., Klebanov, P. K., Llaw, F., 8 Duncan, G. (1995). Toward an
understnding of ﬁre effect of poverty upon children.

Brown, J., Newland, A., Anderson, P., 8 Chevannes, B. (1997). Caribbean
faﬁrerhood: Underrasoarched, misunderstood. In J. L. Roopnarina 8

J. Brown (Eds.), Caribbean families: Diversity among aﬁrnic groupp
(pp. 85-114). Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporaﬁon.

Bukowskl, W. M., 8 Sippola, L. K. (1998). Diversity and ﬁre social mind:
Goals, construct, culture, and development. Developmentl

Peycholggy, 34(4), 742-746.

Bullock, J. R., 8 Pennington, D. (1988). The relaﬁonship between parentl
percepﬁons of ﬁre family environment and children's perceived
competence. Child Study Journal, 18(1), 17-31.

115

Campbell, S. B. (1987). Parent-referred problem ﬁrree-year-olds:
Developmentl changes in symptoms. Journal of Child Psychology

and Psychiat_ry and Allied Disciplines, 28(6), 835-834.

Campbell, S. B. (1990). Behavior problems in preschool children: Clinical
and davelopmentl issues. New York: The Guilford Press.

Campbell, 8. B. (1991). Longitudinal studies of acﬁva and aggressive
preschoolers: Individual differences in early behavior and outcomes.
In D. Cicchetﬁ 8 S. L. Toﬁr (Eds.), Intemalizing and externalizing
expressions of dypfuncﬁon (pp. 57-89). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Campbell, S. B. (1995). Behavior problems in preschool children: A review

of recent research. Journal of Child Psycholpgy and Psychlagy 8
Allied Disciplines, 36(1), 113-149.

Campbell, S. B. (1998). Developmentl perspecﬁves. In T. H. Ollendick 8 M.

Herson (Eds.), Handbook of child gychopaﬁrolpgy (3rd ed. ed., pp.
3-35). New York: Plenum Press.

Campbell, S. B., Cohn, J. F., 8 Meyers, T. (1995). Depression in ﬁrst-ﬁma
moﬁrers: Moﬁrer-infant interacﬁon and depression chronicity.

Developmentl Psycholpgy, 31(3), 349-357.

Campbell, S. B., 8 Ewing, L. J. (1990). Follow-up of hard-to-manage
preschoolers: Adjustment at age 9 and predictors of conﬁnuing

symptoms. Journal of Child Psycholpgy and Psychiat_ry 8 Allied
Dipciplinas, 31(6), 871 -889.

Campbell, S. 8., March, C., Pierce, E. W., 8 Ewing, L. J. (1991a). Hard to
manage preschool boys: Family context and ﬁre stbility of

externalizing behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psycholpgy, 19(3),
301 -318.

Campbell, S. B., 8 Pierce, E. W. (1996). Boys' extemallzing problems at
elementry school age: Pathways from early behavior problems,
maternal control, and family stress. Development and

Peychopgtholpgy, 8, 701 -719.

Campbell, S. 3., Pierce, E. W., March, C., 8 Ewing, L. J. (1991b).
Noncompliant behavior, overacﬁvity, and family stress as predictors
of negaﬁve maternal control wiﬁr preschool children. Development

and Psychopaﬁrolpgy, 3(2), 175-190.

116

Campbell, S. 8., Pierce, E. W., March, C., 8 Ewing, L. J. (1994). Hard-to-
manage preschool boys: Symptomaﬁc behavior across context and

time. Child Development, 65(3), 836-851.

Carlton, M. P., 8 Winsler, A. (1999). School readiness: The need for a
paradigm shift. School Psycholpgy Review, 28(3), 338-352.

Carson, D. K., Klee, T., Perry, C. K., Muskina, G., 8 Donagy, T. (1998).
Comparisons of children wiﬁl delayed and normal language at 24
monﬁrs of age on measures of behavioral difﬁculﬁes, social, and
cogniﬁve development. Internal Mentl Healﬁr Journal, 19(1), 59-75.

Case, R., Grifﬁn, S., 8 Kelly, W. (1999). Socioeconomic gradient in
mathemaﬁcal ability and ﬁroir responsiveness to intrvenﬁon during
early childhood. In D. Keaﬁng 8 C. Hartman (Eds.), Developmentl

health and ﬁre wealﬁr of naﬁons: Social, biological, and educaﬁonal
dynamics (pp. 125-149). New York: The Guilford Press.

Case, R., Grifﬁn, S., 8 Kelly, W. (2001). Socioeconomic differences in
children's early cogniﬁve development and ﬁreir readiness for

schooling. In S. Golbeck (Ed.), Psycholpgical pprsmﬁves on early

childhood educaﬁon: Reframing dilemmas in research and pracﬁce
(pp. 37-63). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Caspi, A. Mofﬁtt, T., Newman, D., 8 Silva P.A. (1997). Behavioral
observaﬁons at age 3 years predict adult psychiatric disorders:
Longitudinal evidence from a birth cohort. In M. E. Hertig 8 E. A.

Farber (Eds.), Annual prpgress in child gychiagy and child
development (pp. 319-331).

Clayton, P. J. (1998). Depression subtyping: Treatment implicaﬁons.
Journpl pf Clinical Psychiagy, 59(16), 5-12.

Cole, D. A., 8 Jordan, A. E. (1989). Assessment of cohesion and
adaptbility in component family dyads: A quosﬁon of convergent

and discriminant validity. Journal of Counseling Psycholgy, 36(4),
456-463.

Cole, M. (1999). Culture in development. In M. H. Bornstein 8 M. Lamb

(Eds.), Developmentl ppycholpgy: An advanced textbook (4ﬁr ed.,
pp. 73-123).

117

Committee for Early Childhood Pedagogy, Com mission on Behavioral and
Social Sciences and Educaﬁon, Naﬁonal Research Council, (2001).
Barbara Bowman, M. Suzanne Donovan, 8 M. Susan Burns (Eds.)

Eager to Learn: Educaﬁng our preschoolers. Washington: Naﬁonal
Academy Press.

Coolahan, K., Fantuzzo, J., Mendez, J., 8 McDermott, P. (2000). Preschool
peer Interacﬁons and readiness to loam: Relaﬁonships between
classroom peer play and learning behaviors and conduct. Journal of

Educaﬁonal Epychology, 92(3), 458-465.

Crick, N. R., 8 Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulaﬁon of social
infonnaﬁon-processing mechansims in children's social adjustment.

Psycholggical Bulletin, 1 1 5(1), 74-1 01 .

Crick, N. R., 8 Dodge, K. A. (1996). Social lnforrnaﬁon-processing
mechanisms on reacﬁve and proacﬁve aggression. Chilg

ngelopment, 67(3), 993-1002.

Crnic, K., 8 Lamberty, G. (1994 Apr). Reconsidering school readiness:

Conceptual and applied perspecﬁves. Eaply Education and
Development, 5(2), 91 -105.

Cummings, E. M., Iannotﬁ, R. J., 8 Zahn-Waxler, C. (1989). Aggression
between peers in early childhood: Individual conﬁnuity and
developmentl change. Child vaelopmept, 60, 887-895.

Darling, N., 8 Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenﬁng style as context: An
integraﬁva model. Psycholpgical Bulleﬁn, 113(3), 487-496.

Davies, D. (1999). Child develoment: A pracﬁoner's guide. New York:
Guilford.

DeKIyan, M., Biambaum, M. A., Greenberg, M. T., 8 Spelt, M. L. (1998).
Faﬁrers and preschool behavior problems. vaplopmentl

Ps oh I 34(2), 264-275.

Darogaﬁs, L. R. (1992). Brief Symptom Inventogy (BSI): Adminisﬁaﬁon,
scoring, and procedures manual. Third Ediﬁon.

Derogatis, L. R. (1993). Brief Symmm Inventol_'y. Minneapolis, MN: Naﬁonal
Computer Systems.

Dix, T. (1991). The Affecﬁve Organizaﬁon of Parenﬁng: Adapﬁve and
Maladapﬁve Processes. Epycholpgical Bulleﬁn, 110(1), 3-25.

118

Dodge, K. A. (1990). Developmentl Psychopaﬁrology in Children of
Depressed Moﬁrers. Developmentl Psychology, 26(1), 3-6.

Dohrenwend, B. P. (1990). Socioeconomic sttus (SES) and psychiatric
disorders: Are the issues sﬁll compelling? Social Psychiat_ry and

Psychiatric Epidemiolpgy, 25(1), 41 -47.

Dohrenwend, B. P., Levav, I., Shrout, P. E., 8 Schwart, S. (1992).
Socioeconomic sttus and psychiatric disorders: The casuaﬁon-
selocﬁon issue. Science 255(5047), 946-952.

 

Doucette-Gates, A., Brooks-Gunn, J., 8 Chase-Lansdale, P. L. (1998). The
role of bias and equivalence in ﬁre study of race, class, and eﬁrnicity.
In V. C. McLoyd 8 L. Steinberg (Eds.), Studying minority

adolescent: Conceptual, methodological, and ﬁrooreﬁcal issug (pp.
211-236). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associats.

Downey, G., 8 Coyne, J. C. (1990). Children of depressed parent: An
integraﬁvo review. Psycholpgical Bulleﬁn, 108(1), 50-76.

Duncan, G., Brooks-Gunn, J., 8 Klebanov, P. K. (1994). Economic
doprivaﬁon and early childhood development. Child Development

Sgcial Issue, 65(2), 296-318.

Duncan, G., 8 Young, W. J. (1998). How much does child poverty affect ﬁre
life chances of children? American Sociolpgical Review, 63(June),
406-423.

Durbrow, E. H. (1999). Cultural processes in child competence: How rural
caribboan pparont evaluate ﬁreir children. In A. Masten (Ed.),

Cultural Processes in Child Development (Vol. 29, pp. 92-122).
Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Eisert, D. C., Walker, H. M., Severson, H., 8 Block, A. (1988). Patterns of
social-behavioral competence in behavior disordered preschoolers.

Early Child Development 8 Care, 41, 139-152.

Ekman, P., 8 Davidson, R. J. (Eds.). (1994). The nature of emoﬁons:
Fundamentl guosﬁons. New York: Oxford University Press.

Evans, H. L. (1989). Parsmﬁves on ﬁre socializaﬁon of ﬁre working-class
Jamaican child (Vol. 38).

Field, T. M. (1995). Psychologically depressed parent. In M. H. Bornstein

(Ed.), Handbook of paronﬁng (Vol. 4: Applied and pracﬁcal parenﬁng,
pp. 85-99). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associats. Inc.

119

Floyd, F. J., 8 Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in ﬁre development
and reﬁnement of clinical assessment instrument. Psychological

Assossment:Sgcial Issue: Meﬁrodological issues in gycholpgical
assessment research, 7(3), 286-299.

Geert, C. (1973). The inte_r_prettion of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Goldsmiﬁr, D. F., 8 Rogoff, B. (1995). Sensiﬁvlty and teaching by dysphoric
and nondysphoric women in structured versus unstructured
situaﬁons. Developmentl Psycholgy, 31(3), 388-394.

Goldsmiﬁr, D. F., 8 Rogoff, B. (1997). Moﬁrers' and toddlers' coordinated
joint focus of attenﬁon: Variaﬁons wiﬁr maternal dysphoric

symptoms. Developmentl Psycholpgy, 33(1), 113-119.

Gonzalez-Ramos, G., Zayas, L. H., 8 Cohen, E. V. (1998). Child-roaring
values of low-income, urban Puerto Rican moﬁrers of preschool

children. Professional Psycholpgy: Research 8 Pracﬁco, 29(4), 377-
382.

Goodman, S. H., 8 Goﬁib, l. H. (1999). Risk for psychopaﬁrology in ﬁre
children of depressed moﬁrors: A developmentl model for
understnding mechanisms of transmission. Psycholpgical Review,
196(3). 458-490.

GopauI-McNicol, S. (1998). Cariboan families: Social and emoﬁonal
problems. Journal of Social Distress 8 ﬁre Homeless, 7(1), 55-73.

Gopaul-McNicol, S. (1999). Eﬁlnocultural porspocﬁvos on childrearing
pracﬁces in ﬁre Caribbean. Internaﬁonal Social Work 42(1), 79-86.

 

Gorman-Smiﬁr, D., Tolan, P. H., Zelli, A., 8 Huesmann, L. R. (1996). The
relaﬁon of family funcﬁoning to violence among inner-city youﬁrs.

Journal of Family Psycholpgy, 10 (2), 115-129.

Gottrnan, M. J., Kat, F., 8 Hooven, P. (1997). Met-omoﬁon: How families
communicate emoﬁonally. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Goyette, C. H., Connors, C. K., 8 Ulrich, R. F. (1978). Norrnaﬁvo dat on
revised Connors parent and teacher raﬁng scales. Journal of

Abnormal Child Psycholpgy, 6(2), 221 -236.

120

Gralinskl, J., 8 Kopp, C. B. (1993). Everyday rules for behavior: Moﬁrers'

request to young children. Developmentl Psycholpgy, 29(3), 573-
584.

Grant, D. R. B. (1974). Living condiﬁons of some Basic School children:
Pointers to disadvantge. Kingston, Jamaica: Bernard Van Leer

Foundaﬁon for Early Childhood Educaﬁon.

Grant, D. R. B. (1984). Early Childhood Educaﬁon: Funcﬁonal lnteracﬁvity
of Family—Community-School (Posiﬁon paper; Researchltochnical

report Eric Number: ED244721). Kingston, Jamaica: Bernard Van
Leer Foundaﬁon for Early Childhood Educaﬁon.

Greenberg, M. T., Lengua, L. J., Cole, J. D., 8 Pinderhughes, E. E. (1999).
Predicﬁng developmentl outcomes at school entry using a .
muIﬁpIe-risk model: Four American communlﬁes. Developmentl

Peycholmy, 35(2), 403-417.

Hasﬁngs, P. D., 8 Rubin, K. H. (1999). Predicﬁng moﬁrers' beliefs about
preschool-aged children's social behavior: Evidence for maternal
atﬁtudos moderaﬁng child effect. Child Dovelppmont, 70(3), 722-
741.

Haller, T. L., 8 Baker, B. L. (2000). Maternal negaﬁvlty in children's

externalizing behavior. Early Educaﬁon and Development, 11(4), 483-
498.

Hohn, G. (1996). The effect of family funcﬁoning on ﬁre psychological and
social adjustment of Jamaican immigrant children. Dissortﬁon

Abstract Internaﬁonal: Socﬁon B: The Sciences and Engineering,
gas-B), 341 1 .

Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four factor index of social sttus. New Haven,
CT: Yale University, Department of Sociology.

Holloway, S. D., Rambaud, M. F., Fuller, 8., 8 Eggers-Piorola, C. (1995).
What is ”appropriate pracﬁco" at home and in child care? Low-
income moﬁrors' views on preparing ﬁreir children for school. Early

Childhood Research Quarterly, 10(4), 451 -473.

Hops, H. (1995). Ago- and gender-speciﬁc effect of parentl depression: A
commentry. Developmentl Psycholpgy, 31(3), 428-431.

Hu, L.-T., 8 Benﬁor, P. M. (1995). Evaluaﬁng model ﬁt. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.),

Structural oguaﬁon modeling: Concept, issues, and applicaﬁons
(pp. 76-99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publicaﬁons, Inc.

121

James, S. (1977). Obsorvaﬁons of classroom space: lmplicaﬁons for
learning and teaching children in ﬁre caribboan. Caribbean Journal
of Educaﬁon 4(3), 112-145.

 

Johnson, M. A., 8 Brown, M. M. (1995). Croaﬁvity and ﬁre learning
environment: Jamaican early childhood schools. Caribbean Journal
of Educaﬁon 17(2), 279-297.

 

Johnson, V. K., Cowan, P. A., 8 Cowan, C. P. (1999). Children's classroom
behavior: The unique contribuﬁon of family organizaﬁon. Journal of

Family Psycholpgy, 13(3), 355-371.

Kalpidou, M. D., Roﬁrbaum, F., 8 Rosen, K. S. (1998). A longitudinal study
of moﬁrors' and preschool children's aversive behaviors during

dyadic interacﬁons. The Journal of Genoﬁc Psychology, 159(1), 103-
1 1 6.

Kaufman, A. S., 8 Kaufman, N. L. (1977). Clinical Evaluaﬁon of Young
Children wiﬁr ﬁre McCarﬁry Scales. New York: Grune 8 Stratton.

Koaﬁng, D., 8 Hartman, C. (Eds.). (1999). Developmentl healﬁr and ﬁre

wealﬁr of naﬁons: Social, biolpgical, and oducaﬁonal dynamics. New
York: The Guilford Press.

Keenan, K., 8 Shaw, D. (1994). The development of aggression in toddlers:
A study of low-income families. Journal of Abnormal Child

Psycholpgy, 22(1), 53-77.

Klein, L. (1995). Paﬁr analysis. In L. G. Grimm 8 P. R. Yarnold (Eds.),

Reading and understnding mulﬁvariate stﬁsﬁcs (pp. 65-98).
Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Associaﬁon.

Kupersmidt, J. B., Griesler, P. C., DeRosier, M. E., 8 Patterson, C. J. (1995).
Childhood aggression and peer relaﬁons in ﬁre context of family and
neighborhood factors. Child Development, 66(2), 360-375.

Lambert, M., Knight, F., Taylor, 8 Achenbach, T. (1996). Comparisons of
behavioral and emoﬁonal problems among children in Jamaica and
ﬁre United SttszTeacher report for ages 6-11. Journal of Cross-

Cultural Psychology, 27(1), 82-97.

Lambert, M., Weisz, J., 8 Knight, F. (1989a). Over and undercontrollod
problems of Jamaican and American children and adolescent.

Journal of Consulﬁng and Clinical Psycholpgy, 57, 467-472.

122

Lambert, M. C., Knight, F., Taylor, R., 8 Achenbach, T. (1994). Epidemiology
of behavioral and omoﬁonal problems among children of Jamaica
and ﬁre United Sttos: Parent report for ages 6-11. Journal of

Abnormal Child Psycholpgy, 22(1), 113-128.

Lambert, M. C., Knight, F., Taylor, R., 8 Newell, A. L. (1993). Furﬁrer
comparisons of teacher and parent raﬁngs of behavior and
emoﬁonal problems of Jamaican children. lnternaﬁonal Journal of
Intercultural Rolaﬁons 17(1), 1-18.

 

Lambert, M. C., 8 Lyubansky, M. (1999). Behavior and omoﬁonal problems
among Jamaican children and adolescent: An epidemiological
survey of parent, teacher, and self-report for ages 6-18.
lnternaﬁonal Journal of Intercultural Rolaﬁons 23(5), 727-751.

 

Lambert, M. C., Lyubansky, M., 8 Achenbach, T. (1998). Behavioral and
omoﬁonal problems among adolescent of Jamaica and ﬁre United
Sttos: Parent, teacher, and self-report for ages 12 to 18. Journal of
Emoﬁonal 8 Behavioral Disorders 6(3), 180-187.

 

Lambert, M. C., Puig, M., Lyubansky, M., 8 Rowan, G. T. (2001a). Adult
perspecﬁves on behavior and omoﬁonal problems in African
American children. Journal of Black Psycholpgy, 27(1), 64-85.

Lambert, M. C., Samms-Vaughan, M. E., Lyubansky, M., Podolski, C.,
Hannah, S. D., McCaslin, S. E., 8 Rowan, G. T. (1999). Behavior and
emoﬁonal problems of clinic-referred children of ﬁre African
diaspora: A cross-naﬁonal study of African American and Jamaican
children ages 4 to 18. Journal of Black Psycholgy, 25(4), 504-523.

Lambert, M. C., Schmltt, N., Samms-Vaughan, M. E., Russ, C. M., Lewis, K.
M., Lancaster, K. E., 8 Orellana, C. (2001b). The family cohesion and
adaptbility scale-ll (FACES-II: Is ﬁre factor structure for Jamaicans
similar to ﬁrat astblished in ﬁre United Sttes. under review.

Lambert, M. C., Thesiger, C., Overly, K., 8 Knight, F. (1990). Teacher and
parent raﬁngs of behavior problems in Jamaican children and

adolescent: Convergence and divergence of views. lnternaﬁonal
Journal of Intercultural Relaﬁons 14(2), 177-191.

 

Lambert, M. C., Weisz, J. R., 8 Thesiger, C. (1989b). Principal component
analyses of behavior problems in Jamaican clinic-referred children:
Teacher report for ages 6-17. Journal of Abnormal Child

Psycholpgy, 17(5), 553-562.

123

Lang, C., Field, T. M., Pickens, J., 8 Marﬁnez, A. (1996). Preschoolers of

dysphoric moﬁrers. Journal of Child Psycholpgy 8 Psychiagy 8
Allied Disciplines, 37(2), 221-224.

Lave, J., 8 Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Ieaming: I_.pgiﬁmate gripheral
parﬁcigﬁon. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Leﬂrowlt, M. M., Huesmann, L. R., 8 Eron, L. D. (1978). Parentl
punishment: A longitudinal analysis of effect. Archives of General

Psychiat_ry, 35(2), 186-191.

Leo-Rhynie, E. (1993). The Jamaican famljy: conﬁnuity and change.
Kingston: The Grace, Kennedy Foundaﬁon.

Leo-Rhynio, E., 8 Hamilton, M. (1993). Life-style as a measure of socio-
economic sttus: The development of an instrument for use in
Jamaica. Social and Economic Studies 35-52.

 

Lindahl, K. M. (1998). Family process variables and children's disruptive
behavior problems. Journal of Famlu Psycholpgy, 12(3), 420-436.

Loeber, R. (1991). Anﬁ-social behavior: More enduring ﬁran Changeable?

Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psyphiagy,
32(3), 393-397.

Loeber, R., 8 Dishion, T. (1983). Early predictors of male delinquency: A
review. Psycholgoical Bulloﬁn, 94(1), 68-99.

Loeber, R., 8 Stouﬁramor-Loebor, M. (1998). Development of juvenile
aggression and violence: Some common misconcepﬁons and
controversies. American Psycholpgist, 53(2), 242-259.

Maccoby, E. E. (1992). The role of parent in ﬁre socializaﬁon of children:
An historical overview. mvolopmontl Psycholpgy, 28(6), 1006-1017.

Mathijssen, J. J. P., Koot, H. M., Verhulst, F. C., DaBruyn, E., 8 Oud, J. H.
(1998). The relaﬁonship between mutual family relaﬁons and child

psychopaﬁrology. Journal of Child Psycholpgy 8 Psychiagy 8 Allied
Disciplines, 39(4), 477-487.

May, D. C. 8 Kundert, D. K. (1997). School readiness pracﬁces and children
at-risk: Examining ﬁre issues. Psycholpgy in ﬁre Schmls, 34 (2), 73-
84.

124

McLoyd, V. C., 8 Ceballo, R. (1998). Concaptualizing and assessing
economic context: Issues in ﬁre study of race and child
development. In V. C. McLoyd 8 L. Steinberg (Eds.), Studying

minomy' adolescent: Conceptual, methodological, and ﬁreoreﬁcal
issues (pp. 251-278). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Minuchln, S. (1992). The rostoriod history of family ﬁrerapy. In J. K. Zeig

(Ed.), The avoluﬁon of gychotherapy: The second conference (pp. 3-
12). Philadelphia: BrunnerlMazel, Inc.

Mofﬁtt, T. E. (1990). Juvenile delinquency and attenﬁon deﬁcit disorder:
Boys’ developmentl trajectories from age 3 to age 15. Child

Development, 61, 893-910.

Morrison, J. W., Ipsa, J., 8 Milner, V. (1998). Ideas about child rearing
among Jamaican moﬁrers and early childhood educaﬁon teachers.
Journal of Research in Childhood Educaﬁon 12(2), 166-175.

 

Morrison, J. W., 8 Milner, V. (1995). Formal oducaﬁon of children in
Jamaica. Childhood Educaﬁon 71 194-196.

 

Murphy-Bonnan, V., Levesque, H. L., 8 Barman, J. J. (1996). U.N.
convonﬁon on the right of ﬁre child: A cross-cultural view (1996).

American Psychologist 51 (12), 1257-1261.

Nelson, K. (1996). Language in cpgniﬁve development: Emergence of ﬁre
mediated mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Olson, D. H., 8 Russell, C. S. (1980). Circumplex model of maritl and family
systems II: Empirical studies and clinical intervenﬁon. Advances In

Family lntervonﬁon, Assessment, and Theory, 1, 129-179.

Olson, D. H., Sprenklo, D. H., 8 Russell, C. S. (1979). Circumplex model of
maritl and family systems: I. Cohesion and adaptbility dimensions,
family types, and clinical applicaﬁons. Family Processes, 18, 3-28.

Pedhazur, E. J. (1973). Mulﬁple mression in behavioral

resoarch:Explanaﬁon and predicﬁon (2nd ed.). Chicago: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.

Plant, R. C. (1999). Enhancing rolaﬁonshlg between children and
teachers. Washington DC: American Psychological Associaﬁon.

125

Portes, P. R., Cuents, T. E., 8 Zady, M. (2000). Cogniﬁvo socializaﬁon
across eﬁrnocultural context: literacy and cultural differences in
intellectual performance and parent-child interacﬁon. The Journal of

Geneﬁc Psychology, 161(1), 79-98.

Portes, P. R., Sandhu, D. S., Cuents, T. E., 8 Zady, M. (1995). Cultural and
school achievement aspect of parent-child interacﬁons. Korean

Journalof Thinking 8 Problem-Solving, 5(2), 21 -44.

Quigglo, N. L., Garber, J., Panak, W. F., 8 Dodge, K. A. (1992). Social
informaﬁon processing in aggressive and depressed children. Child

Developmenp 63, 1305-1320.

Radke-Yarrow, M. (1998). Children of depressed moﬁrels: From early
childhood to maturity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
216 pp.

Ramsey, P. G. (1988). Social skills and peer sttus: A comparison of two
socioeconomic groups. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 34(2), 185-202.

Raver, C. C., 8 Leadbeater, B. J. (1999). Moﬁrering under pressure:
Environmentl, child, and dyadic correlats of maternal self-efﬁcacy
among low-income women. Journal of Family Psycholpgy, 13(4), 523-
534.

Richards, M. P. (1974). The int_egration of a child into a social world. New
York: Cambridge University Press.

Rodgers-Jenkins, F. 8 Chapman, D. W. (1990). Job saﬁsfacﬁon of
Jamaican elementry school teachers. International Review of
Educaﬁonllntemaﬁonale Zeitcrift fur

Erziehungswissenschafthevuo lnternaﬁonale do po_dagpgie, 36 (3),
299-313.

Rogler, L. H. (1999). Meﬁrodological sources of culﬁlral insensiﬁvity in
mantl healﬁr research. American Psycholpgist, 54(6), 424-433.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenﬁceship in ﬁrinking: aniﬁve development in a
social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rogoff, B., Baker-Sonnett, J., Lacasa, P., 8 Goldsmiﬁr, D. F. (1995).
Development ﬁrrough parﬁcipaﬁon in sociocultural acﬁvity. In J.
Goodnow 8 P. Miller (Eds.), Cultural pracﬁces as context for

development (pp. 45-65).

126

Rogoff, B., Mistry, J., Goncu, A., 8 Mosier, C. (1993). Guided parﬁcipaﬁon in
cultural acﬁvity by toddlers and caregivers. Monographs of ﬁre
Society for Research in Child Development, 58(8), v-179.

Rose, D. (1998). Alexithymia and hosﬁlity in Jamaican adult. Unpublished
Masters Thesis, Michigan Stte University, E. Lansing.

Roﬁrbaum, F., 8 Weisz, J. (1994). Parentl caregiving and child
externalizing behavior in nonclinical samples: A met-analysis.

Psycholpgical Bulletin, 116(1), 55-74.

Rutter, M. (1995). Relaﬁonships betrneon mantl disorders in childhood and
adulﬁlood. Act Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 91(2), 73-85.

Rutter, M., Yule, B., Morton, J., a Bagley, c. (1975). Children of West Indian
immigrant: III. Home circumstnces and family patterns. Journal of

Child Psycholpgy 8 Psychiatry 8 Allied Disciplines, 16(2), 105-123.

Sameroff, A. J. (1975). Transacﬁonal models in early social relaﬁons.

Human Development, 18(1-2), 65-79.

Sameroff, A. J., 8 Seifer, R. (1990). Early contributors to developmentl
risk. In J. Rolf 8 A. S. Masten (Eds.), Risk and protecﬁvo factors in

ﬁre development of psychopaﬁrolpgy (pp. 554). New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Sameroff, A. J., 8 Seifer, R. (1995). Accumulaﬁon of environmentl risk and
child mantl healﬁr. In H. E. Fitgerald 8 B. M. Lester (Eds.), Children

of mveLty: Research, healﬁr, and alley issues (pp. 233-258). New
York: Garland Publishing, Inc.

Samms-Vaughan, M. E. (1998a). Preliminag scienﬁﬁc reﬂrt on ﬁre

relaﬁonship between iron deﬁciency anaemia, mantl development

and behavior in Jamaican pro-school children: University of ﬁre West
Indies.

Samms-Vaughan, M. E. (1998b). An epidmiological anajgis of cpgniﬁon,

educaﬁonal attainment and behaviour in a cohort of Jamaican
children: University of ﬁre West Indies.

Satﬁer, J. (1992). Assessment of children: Revised and ugated ﬁrird

ediﬁon. San Diego: Jerome Satﬁer, Publisher, Inc.

127

 

 

Scott-McDonald, K. (1997). The sttus of child care support for Jamaican
families. In J. Roopnarina 8 J. Brown (Eds.), Caribbean families:

Diversity among eﬁrnic groug (pp. 147-176). Greenwich, CT: Ablex
Publishing Corporaﬁon.

Seifer, R., 8 Sameroff, A. J. (1987). Mulﬁple determinant of risk and
invulnerability. In E. J. Anﬁrony 8 B. J. Cohler (Eds.), ﬁlls;
invulnerable child (pp. 51 -69). New York: The Guilford Press.

Sroufe, L. A., 8 Fleeson, J. (1988). The coherence of family relaﬁonships. In
R. Hinde 8 J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), Rolaﬁonshig wiﬁrin familipg:
Mutual inﬂuences (pp. 2747). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Stbbins, R. A. (1973). Physical context inﬂuences behavior: The case of
classroom disorderlinoss. Environment and Behavior, 5 (3), 291 -314.

Sﬁpek, D. J. (2001). Paﬁrways to construcﬁve lives: The importance of early
school success. In A. C. Bohart8 D. J. Stipek (Eds), Construcﬁve.
I d

 

(pp. 291-316). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Society.

Sﬁpok, D. J., 8 Ryan, R. H. (1997). Economically disadvantaged
preschoolers: Ready to loam but furﬁler to go. Developmentl

Psycholpgy, 33(4), 71 1 -723.

Storrnont, M. (1998). Family factors associated wiﬁr externalizing disorders
in preschoolers. Journal of Early lntervenﬁon, 21 (3), 232-251.

Stonnshak, E., Bionnan, K., and The Conduct Problems Prevonﬁon
Research Group (1998). The implicaﬁons of different developmentl
patterns of disrupﬁve behavior problems for school adjustment.

Development and Psychogﬁrolpgy, 10, 451-467.

Tamowski, K. J., 8 Rohrbeck, C. A. (1993). Disadvantged Children and
Families. In T. H. Ollendick 8 R. J. Prinz (Eds.), Advances in Clinical
Child Psycholpgy (Vol. 15, pp. 41 -78). New York: Plenum Press.

Teﬁ, D. M., Gelfand, D., Messinger, D. S., 8 Isabella, R. (1995). Maternal
depression and ﬁre quality of early attchmont: An examinaﬁon of

infant, preschoolers and ﬁreir moﬁrers. Developmentl Psycholpgy,
31(3), 364-376.

Tremblay, R. E. (1999). When children's social development fails. In D.
Kaaﬁng 8 C. Hartman (Eds.), Developmentl healﬁr and ﬁre wealﬁr

of naﬁons: Social, biological, and educaﬁonal dynamics (pp. 55-71).
New York: The Guilford Press.

128

Valsiner, J. (1989). Human Development and Culture: The Social Nature of
Personality and It Study (First ed.). Lexington: D.C. Hoaﬁr and

Company.

Vygotky, L. S. (1930l1978). Mind in society: The development of higher
gycholpgical processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Weissman, M., 8 Warner, V. (1997). Offspring of depressed parent: 10
years later. Archives of General Psychiat_ry, 54, 932-940.

Weissman, M. M., Gammon, G. D., John, K., 8 Morikangas, K. R. (1987).
Children of depressed parent: Increased psychopaﬁrology and early

onset of major depression. Archives of General Psychiat_ry, 44(10),
847-853. .

Whit, B. L. (1995). The new ﬁrst years of life. New York: Fireside Book.

Wint, E., 8 Brown, J. (1987). Promoﬁng effecﬁvo parenﬁng: a study of two
moﬁrods in Kingston, Jamaica. Child Welfare, 66, 507-516.

Zahn-Waxlor, C., Cole, P. M., Richardson, D. T., Friedman, R. J., Michel, M.
K., 8 Belouad, F. (1994). Social problem solving in disrupﬁve
preschool children: Reacﬁons to hypoﬁreﬁcal situaﬁons of conﬂict

and distress. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 40(1), 98-119.

Zucker, R. A., 8 Fitgerald, H. E. (1991). Early developmentl factors and

risk for alcohol problems. Alcohol Healﬁr and Research Worlg, 15(1),
18-24.

Zucker, R. A., 8 Gomberg, E. S. (1986). Eﬁology of alcholism reconsidered:

The case for a biopsychosocial process. American Psycholpgist,
,4_1_ (7), 783-793.

129

   
 

    
  

   
  

   

11111111211111

3

011111020:

5 -