Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T04:36:22.571Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What changes when? A reply to Beauchaine and Slep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 September 2018

Joyce Weeland ,
Rabia R. Chhangur ,
Sara R. Jaffee ,
Danielle van der Giessen ,
Walter Matthys ,
Bram Orobio de Castro  and
Geertjan Overbeek
Joyce Weeland*
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam Utrecht University
Rabia R. Chhangur
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam Utrecht University
Sara R. Jaffee
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
Danielle van der Giessen
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
Walter Matthys
Affiliation:
Utrecht University
Bram Orobio de Castro
Affiliation:
Utrecht University
Geertjan Overbeek
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Joyce Weeland, Research Institute of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 127 Amsterdam; E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In their commentary, Beauchaine and Slep (2018) raise important issues regarding research on behavioral parenting training (BPT). In this reply we highlight key points of agreement and respond to issues that we feel require clarification. BPT has been repeatedly proven effective in decreasing disruptive child behavior (also in the work of our research team). Yet, there is much to learn about for whom and how BPT is effective. Specifically, assessing the how (i.e., mediation) comes with many challenges. One of these challenges is taking into account the timeline of change, and being able to infer causal mechanisms of change. We argue that cross-lagged panel models (which we, and many other scholars, used) are a valid and valuable method for testing mediation. At the same time, our results raise important questions, specifically about the timing and form of expected changes in parenting and child behavior after BPT. For example, are these changes linear and gradual or do they happen more suddenly? To select the appropriate design, assessment tools, and statistical models to test mediation, we need to state detailed hypotheses on what changes when. An important next step might be to assess multiple putative mediators on different timescales, not only before and after, but specifically also during BPT.

Type
Commentary
Information
Development and Psychopathology , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , October 2018 , pp. 1535 - 1540
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This work was financially supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO: 452-10-005).

References

Aderka, I. M., Nickerson, A., Bøe, H. J., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Sudden gains during psychological treatments of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80, 93–101. doi:10.1037/a0026455Google Scholar
Aliev, F., Latendresse, S. J., Bacanu, S.-A., Neale, M. C., & Dick, D. M. (2014). Testing for measured gene–environment interaction: Problems with the use of cross-product terms and a regression model reparameterization solution. Behavior Genetics, 44, 165–181. doi:10.1007/s10519-014-9642-1Google Scholar
Aunola, K., Viljaranta, J., & Tolvanen, A. (2017). Does daily distress make parents prone to using psychologically controlling parenting? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 41, 405–414. doi:10.1177/0165025416658555Google Scholar
Bamberger, K. T. (2016). The application of intensive longitudinal methods to investigate change: Stimulating the field of applied family research. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 19, 21–38. doi:10.1007/s10567-015-0194-6Google Scholar
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173Google Scholar
Beauchaine, T. P., & Slep, A. (2018). Mechanisms of child behavior change in parent training: Comment on Weeland et al. (2018). Development and Psychopathology. doi:10.1017/S0954579418000810Google Scholar
Bell, Z., Shader, T. M., Webster-Stratton, C., Reid, M. J., & Beauchaine, T. P. (2018). Improvements in negative parenting mediate changes in children's autonomic responding following a preschool intervention for ADHD. Clinical Psychological Science, 6, 134–144.Google Scholar
Berry, D., & Willoughby, M. T. (2017). On the practical interpretability of cross-lagged panel models: Rethinking a developmental workhorse. Child Development, 88, 1186–1206. doi:10.1111/cdev.12660Google Scholar
Bolger, N., & Laurenceau, J.-P. (2013). Intensive longitudinal methods: An introduction to diary and experience sampling research (1st ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Burke, J. D., & Loeber, R. (2016). Mechanisms of behavioral and affective treatment outcomes in a cognitive behavioral intervention for boys. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 44, 179–189. doi:10.1007/s10802-015-9975-0Google Scholar
Chhangur, R. R., Weeland, J., Overbeek, G., Matthys, W., & Orobio de Castro, B. (2012). ORCHIDS: An observational randomized controlled trial on childhood differential susceptibility. BMC Public Health, 12, 917. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-917Google Scholar
Chhangur, R. R., Weeland, J., Overbeek, G., Matthys, W., Orobio de Castro, B., van der Giessen, D., & Belsky, J. (2017). Genetic moderation of intervention efficacy: Dopaminergic genes, the Incredible Years, and externalizing behavior in children. Child Development, 88, 796–811. doi:10.1111/cdev.12612Google Scholar
Cohen, L. L., Feinstein, A., Masuda, A., & Vowles, K. E. (2014). Single-case research design in pediatric psychology: Considerations regarding data analysis. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 39, 124–137. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jst065Google Scholar
Cole, D. A., & Maxwell, S. E. (2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 558–577. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.558Google Scholar
Dick, D. M., Agrawwal, A., Keller, M. C., Adkins, A., Aliev, F., Monroe, S., … Sher, K. J. (2015). Candidate gene-environment interaction research: Reflections and recommendations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 37–59. doi:10.1177.1745691614556682Google Scholar
Falk, A., & Compton, S. N. (2016). Using sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trial (SMART) methodology to tailor evidence-based treatments. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55, S262. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2016.07.137Google Scholar
Feldman, M. A., & Werner, S. E. (2002). Collateral effects of behavioral parent training on families of children with developmental disabilities and behavior disorders. Behavioral Interventions, 17, 75–83. doi:10.1002/bin.111Google Scholar
Fritz, M. S., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological Science, 18, 233–239. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01882.xGoogle Scholar
Geukes, K., Nestler, S., Hutteman, R., Küfner, A. C. P., & Back, M. D. (2017). Trait personality and state variability: Predicting individual differences in within- and cross-context fluctuations in affect, self-evaluations, and behavior in everyday life. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 124–138. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.003Google Scholar
Hamaker, E. L., Kuiper, R. M., & Grasman, R. P. (2015). A critique of the cross-lagged panel model. Psychological Methods, 21, 102–116. doi: 10.1037/a0038889Google Scholar
Hesser, H., Hedman-Lagerlöf, E., Andersson, E., Lindfors, P., & Ljótsson, B. (2018). How does exposure therapy work? A comparison between generic and gastrointestinal anxiety–specific mediators in a dismantling study of exposure therapy for irritable bowel syndrome. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 86, 254–267. doi:10.1037/ccp0000273Google Scholar
Kazdin, A. E. (2007). Mediators and mechanisms of change in psychotherapy research. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 3, 1–27. doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091432Google Scholar
Kazdin, A. E., & Nock, M. K. (2003). Delineating mechanisms of change in child and adolescent therapy: Methodological issues and research recommendations. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 1116–1129. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00195Google Scholar
Lebowitz, M. S. (2016). Stigmatization of ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 20, 199–205. doi:10.1177/1087054712475211Google Scholar
Leijten, P., Dishion, T. J., Thomaes, S., Raaijmakers, M. A., Orobio de Castro, B., & Matthys, W. (2015). Bringing parenting interventions back to the future: How randomized microtrials may benefit parenting intervention efficacy. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 22, 47–57. doi:10.1111/cpsp.12087Google Scholar
Leijten, P., Raaijmakers, M. A. J., Orobio de Castro, B., Van den Ban, E., & Matthys, W. (2017). Effectiveness of the Incredible Years parenting program for families with socioeconomically disadvantaged and ethnic minority backgrounds. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 46, 59–73. doi:10.1080/15374416.2015.1038823Google Scholar
Lemmens, L. H. J. M., Müller, V. N. L. S., Arntz, A., & Huibers, M. J. H. (2016). Mechanisms of change in psychotherapy for depression: An empirical update and evaluation of research aimed at identifying psychological mediators. Clinical Psychology Review, 50, 95–107. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2016.09.004Google Scholar
Longwell, B. T., & Truax, P. (2005). The differential effects of weekly, monthly, and bimonthly administrations of the beck Depression Inventory-II: Psychometric properties and clinical implications. Behavior Therapy, 36, 265–275. doi:10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80075-9Google Scholar
Manson, J. H., & Robbins, M. L. (2017). New evaluation of the electronically activated recorder (EAR): Obtrusiveness, compliance, and participant self-selection effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 658. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00658Google Scholar
Mathis, E. T. B., & Bierman, K. L. (2015). Effects of parent and child pre-intervention characteristics on child skill acquisition during a school readiness intervention. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 33, 87–97. doi:10.1016/J.ECRESQ.2015.07.002Google Scholar
Mehl, M. R. (2017). The electronically activated recorder (EAR). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 184–190. doi:10.1177/0963721416680611Google Scholar
Menting, A. T. A., Orobio de Castro, B., & Matthys, W. (2013). Effectiveness of the Incredible Years parent training to modify disruptive and prosocial child behavior: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 901–913. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2013.07.006Google Scholar
Menting, A. T. A., Orobio de Castro, B., Wijngaards-de Meij, L. D., & Matthys, W. (2014). A trial of parent training for mothers being released from incarceration and their children. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 43, 381–396.Google Scholar
Mikami, A. Y., Chong, G. K., Saporito, J. M., & Na, J. J. (2015). Implications of parental affiliate stigma in families of children with ADHD. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44, 595–603. doi:10.1080/15374416.2014.888665Google Scholar
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Lepage, L. (2001). The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet, 357, 1191–1194. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3Google Scholar
Mouton, B., & Roskam, I. (2015). Confident mothers, easier children: A quasi-experimental manipulation of mothers’ self-efficacy. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 2485–2495. doi:10.1007/s10826-014-0051-0Google Scholar
Pek, J., & Hoyle, R. H. (2016). On the (in)validity of tests of simple mediation: Threats and solutions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 150–163. doi:10.1111/spc3.12237Google Scholar
Posthumus, J. A., Raaijmakers, M. A. J., Maassen, G. H., van Engeland, H., & Matthys, W. (2012). Sustained effects of incredible years as a preventive intervention in preschool children with conduct problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40, 487–500. doi:10.1007/s10802-011-9580-9Google Scholar
Rimestad, M. L., O'Toole, M. S., & Hougaard, E. (2017). Mediators of change in a parent training program for early ADHD difficulties: The role of parental strategies, parental self-efficacy, and therapeutic alliance. Journal of Attention Disorders. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1087054717733043Google Scholar
Ros, R., Hernandez, J., Graziano, P. A., & Bagner, D. M. (2016). Parent training for children with or at risk for developmental delay: The role of parental homework completion. Behavior Therapy, 47, 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2015.08.004Google Scholar
Ryu, E., & Cheong, J. (2017). Comparing indirect effects in different groups in single-group and multi-group structural equation models. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 747. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00747Google Scholar
Salvatore, J. E., & Dick, D. M. (2015). Gene–Environment interplay: Where we are, where we are going. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 77, 344–350. doi:10.1111/jomf.12164Google Scholar
Selig, J. P., & Preacher, K. J. (2009). Mediation models for longitudinal data in developmental research. Research in Human Development, 6, 144–164. doi:10.1080/15427600902911247Google Scholar
Settipani, C. A., O'Neil, K. A., Podell, J. L., Beidas, R. S., & Kendall, P. C. (2013). Youth anxiety and parent factors over time: Directionality of change among youth treated for anxiety. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 42, 9–21. doi:10.1080/15374416.2012.719459Google Scholar
Shaffer, A., Lindhiem, O., Kolko, D. J., & Trentacosta, C. J. (2013). Bidirectional relations between parenting practices and child externalizing behavior: A cross-lagged panel analysis in the context of a psychosocial treatment and 3-year follow-up. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41, 199–210. doi:10.1007/s10802-012-9670-3Google Scholar
Shelleby, E. C., & Shaw, D. S. (2014). Outcomes of parenting interventions for child conduct problems: A review of differential effectiveness. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 45, 628–645. doi:10.1007/s10578-013-0431-5Google Scholar
Stone, C. A., & Sobel, M. E. (1990). The robustness of estimates of total indirect effects in covariance structure models estimated by maximum. Psychometrika, 55, 337–352. doi:10.1007/BF02295291Google Scholar
Te Brinke, L. W., Deković, M., Stoltz, S. E. M. J., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2017). Bidirectional effects between parenting and aggressive child behavior in the context of a preventive intervention. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 45, 921–934. doi:10.1007/s10802-016-0211-3Google Scholar
Van Aar, J., Leijten, P., Orobio de Casstro, B., Weeland, J., Matthys, W., Chhangur, R., & Overbeek, G. (2018). Families who benefit and families who do not: Integarting person- and variable-centered analyses of parenting intervention responses. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Vannest, K. J., & Ninci, J. (2015). Evaluating intervention effects in single-case research designs. Journal of Counseling & Development, 93, 403–411. doi:10.1002/jcad.12038Google Scholar
Weeland, J., Chhangur, R. R., Jaffee, S. R., van Der Giessen, D., Matthys, W., Orobio de Castro, B., & Overbeek, G. (2018). Does the Incredible Years reduce child externalizing problems through improved parenting? The role of child negative affectivity and serotonin transporter linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) genotype. Development and Psychopathology, 30, 93–112. doi:10.1017/S0954579417000499Google Scholar
Weeland, J., Chhangur, R. R., van der Giessen, D., Matthys, W., Orobio de Castro, B., & Overbeek, G. (2017). Intervention effectiveness of the Incredible Years: New insights into sociodemographic and intervention-based moderators. Behavior Therapy, 48, 1–18. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2016.08.002Google Scholar
Wu, W., Carroll, I. A., & Chen, P.-Y. (2017). A single-level random-effects cross-lagged panel model for longitudinal mediation analysis. Behavior Research Methods. Advance online publication. doi:10.3758/s13428-017-0979-2Google Scholar