understanding parenting as a process: frontal eeg …
TRANSCRIPT
The Pennsylvania State University
The Graduate School
College of the Liberal Arts
UNDERSTANDING PARENTING AS A PROCESS: FRONTAL EEG ALPHA
ASYMMETRY AS A MEASURE OF “ONLINE” MATERNAL RESPONSIVENESS
TO INFANT CUES
A Dissertation in
Psychology
by
Lauren A. Killeen
© 2010 Lauren A. Killeen
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
August 2010
ii
The dissertation of Lauren A. Killeen was reviewed and approved* by the following: Douglas M. Teti Professor of Human Development, Psychology, and Pediatrics Dissertation Advisor Co-Chair of Committee Pamela M. Cole Professor of Psychology Academic Advisor Co-Chair of Committee William J. Ray Professor of Psychology Ginger A. Moore Assistant Professor of Psychology Paul R. Amato Arnold and Bette Hoffman Professor of Family Sociology and Demography Melvin M. Mark Professor of Psychology Head of the Department of Psychology *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School
iii
ABSTRACT Parenting is widely regarded as a major contributor to child mental health, yet little is known about the processes that underlie parenting behaviors. The use of high-density EEG may allow unique insight into the complexity of mothers’ in-the-moment responses to their infants and emotional/motivational processes that can undermine competent parenting. The present study examined the links between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait measure (baseline condition), state measure (experimental conditions), and an index of ones capacity for emotional responding (shift in asymmetry from a baseline to an experimental condition) and maternal responsiveness. During continuous a EEG recording, mothers viewed videos of their own infants expressing joy, anger/distress, and neutral interest. Maternal responsiveness was conceptualized as self-reported experienced emotions in response to infant emotion displays, self-reported anxious and depressive symptoms, and observed emotional availability during mother-infant free-play interaction. Greater relative right frontal activity at baseline was associated with greater reported anxiety, but was unrelated to maternal responsiveness. Limited relations emerged between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the experimental conditions (infant emotion videos) and maternal responsiveness. However, a shift toward greater relative right frontal activation was associated with maternal experience of sadness, concern, irritability, and a lack of joy in response to seeing ones own infant in distress, along with lower anxiety and adaptive parenting behaviors. These findings are suggestive of an empathetic maternal response. The shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry was driven by a decrease in left frontal activation from a baseline condition to the onset of the infant emotion videos. Implications of the study findings for conceptualizing parenting risk are discussed.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ..............................................................................................................vi LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.....................................................................................................x CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................1 Parenting as an Emotional Process ............................................................................4 Dix’s (1991) Model of the Affective Organization of Parenting ....................6 Parental Expressed Emotion and Child Outcomes .........................................8 Maternal Depression, Parenting, and Child Outcomes .................................. 10 “Online” Parenting Emotions ...................................................................... 13 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Emotion ......................................................... 18 Trait Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Trait-Like Measures ................... 19 Trait Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and State-Dependent Change ............ 21 Trait Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Depression .................................. 22 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry as a State Measure ..................................... 25 Models of Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Emotion ............................. 27 Neural Correlates of Parenting ................................................................................ 32 The Current Study .................................................................................................. 37 Hypotheses ................................................................................................. 39 CHAPTER II. METHOD.................................................................................................... 53 Participants ............................................................................................................. 53 Procedure and Measures ......................................................................................... 54 Phase Ia – Elicitation of Infant Emotion ...................................................... 54 Phase Ib – Extraction of Infant Emotion Stimuli .......................................... 56 Phase Ic – Self-Reported Depressive and Anxious Symptoms ..................... 56 Phase II – Mother-Infant Free Play Interaction & Emotional Availability .... 57 Phase IIIa – EEG Data ................................................................................ 58 Phase IIIb – Maternal Self-Reported Emotional Experience and Perceptions of Infant Emotions ................................................. 63 CHAPTER III. RESULTS .................................................................................................. 65 Study Aim 1 ......................................................................................................... 65 1a. Frontal EEG activity............................................................................... 65 1b. Frontal EEG activation........................................................................... 66 1c. Frontal EEG trait vs. state ...................................................................... 68 1d. Moderation............................................................................................. 71 Study Aim 2 ......................................................................................................... 71 2a. Frontal EEG activity............................................................................... 71 2b. Frontal EEG activation........................................................................... 72 2c. Frontal EEG trait vs. state ...................................................................... 72 2d. Moderation............................................................................................. 74
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Study Aim 3 ......................................................................................................... 74 3a. Frontal EEG activity............................................................................... 74 3b. Frontal EEG activation........................................................................... 74 3c. Frontal EEG trait vs. state ...................................................................... 75 3d. Moderation............................................................................................. 77 Posthoc Analyses .................................................................................................... 77 Contributions of Individual Hemisphere Changes for Joy & Anger .............. 78 Contributions of Individual Hemisphere Changes for Neutral....................... 78 CHAPTER IV. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................... 79 “Affective Style” and Maternal Responsiveness ..................................................... 81 State-Dependent Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry & Maternal Responsiveness ....... 84 A Shift from Baseline to State-Dependent Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry & Maternal Responsiveness ............................................................................ 87 Medial vs. Lateral Findings ..................................................................................... 95 Limitations and Future Directions............................................................................ 98 Implications........................................................................................................... 101 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 104
vi
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Participant Demographics ........................................................................... 122 Table 2: Frequency of Mothers Reporting “Yes” to Various Emotions During Infant Emotion Videos ................................................................................ 122 Table 3: Alpha Power by Infant Emotion Video and Hemisphere of EEG Recording....................................................................................... 122 Table 4: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos ............................................................................ 123 Table 5: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos ............................................................................ 124 Table 6: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos ............................................................................ 125 Table 7: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos ............................................................................ 126 Table 8: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline .... 127 Table 9: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline .... 128 Table 10: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ...................................................................... 129 Table 11: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ...................................................................... 130
vii
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) Table 12: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline .... 131 Table 13: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline .... 132 Table 14: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ...................................................................... 133 Table 15: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ...................................................................... 134 Table 16: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms............................... 135 Table 17: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms............................... 135 Table 18: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline ........................................................ 136 Table 19: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline ........................................................ 136 Table 20: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ........................ 137 Table 21: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers’ Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms – After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ........................ 137 Table 22: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability................................................................. 138
viii
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) Table 23: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability................................................................. 138 Table 24: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability – After Subtracting Asymmetry From Baseline ............................................................................................. 139 Table 25: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability – After Subtracting Asymmetry From Baseline ............................................................................................. 139 Table 26: F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability – After Subtracting Asymmetry From Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ............................................................. 140 Table 27: F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability – After Subtracting Asymmetry From Inter-Stimulus Blank Screens ............................................................. 140 Table 28: Summary of Study Findings for Baseline Condition .................................... 141 Table 29: Summary of Study Findings for Infant Emotion Videos .............................. 142
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net 128 Channel Map with Electrode Clusters Corresponding to F3, F4, F7, F8 of the International 20-10 System ............................................................................................. 143
x
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project reflects the input of so many people, both in front of and behind the scenes, and I would like to express my gratitude for their help and support. I am tremendously grateful for the mentorship of my dissertation advisor, Douglas Teti, who created the enriching academic environment within which this project took root. His thoughtful feedback, intellectual investment, time, support, and encouragement have truly promoted my growth as a scientist. My academic advisor, Pamela Cole, helped cultivate my academic and professional landscape at Penn State and beyond, and I am very grateful for her insight, openness, and direction. I would also like to thank my doctoral committee members, William Ray, Ginger Moore, and Paul Amato, for their enthusiasm for this project, diverse and exciting perspectives on family systems, and constructive feedback throughout the process. I would like to thank Keith Crnic and the members of the Parenting at Risk Initiative of the Child Study Center for giving me the opportunity to be a part of this unique and creative group, for sharing their contagious passion for the study of parenting and child development, and for their contributions to the framework for this project. Additionally, this study would never have come to fruition without the significant efforts of a dedicated, hard-working, and collaborative research team – Thank you, Mark Feinberg, Joe Stitt, Nissa Towe-Goodman, Christine Fortunato, Bo-Ram Kim, Nastassia Hajal, and Elizabeth Schwall. For instilling in me as a young girl the notion that I could achieve whatever I put my mind to, and for being among my biggest cheerleaders for the last three decades, I would very much like to thank my parents, Anna and Bill Killeen. During my years at Penn State, I was also very fortunate to be surrounded by a community of friends and a terrific cohort that understood the highs and lows of academic pursuits, and I am thankful for their support and camaraderie. I truly appreciate Marie, John, Jack, Cate, Grace, and Jane Lynch who adopted me during my internship year – the supportive, fun, boisterous, and warm home they provided was the perfect boost that helped “Auntie” complete this project. I am thankful for the folks at Linz & Vail who allowed me to sit in their shop for hours on end, week after week after week, while providing the best lattes and gelato that kept me fueled while I wrote! And finally, I am extremely grateful to my husband, John Trzupek, who knew me before I started down a career path in Psychology, and was my partner along a journey spanning 10 years and 5 cities, with 7 years of long-distance in-between. His love, humor, guidance, support, and belief in me were immeasurable and continually propelled me forward, whether we were face-to-face or 2,000 miles apart. Now, with the completion of this project, I am thankful to be finally coming home!
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Parenting is widely regarded as a major contributor to child mental health, yet little is
known about the processes that underlie parenting behaviors. Advances in the use and
analysis of high-density electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings have offered tremendous
opportunity for advancing the field of affective neuroscience and developmental
psychopathology. In particular, the use of high-density EEG may allow unique insight into
the complexity of mothers’ in-the-moment responses to their infants and
emotional/motivational processes that can undermine competent parenting. As many
emotional processes occur very quickly and may be outside conscious awareness, methods
such as self-report, observation, and neurochemical analysis may not adequately capture the
complexity of maternal emotional responses (Papousek, Papousek, & Bornstein, 2002).
Furthermore, evidence for coherence among emotional response systems (Rosenberg &
Ekman, 2005), including self-reported emotion experience, observed behavior, and
physiological markers, is mixed (Mauss, Levenson, McCarter, Wilhelm, & Gross, 2005).
Modest to weak correlations across methods suggest that each technique may measure
related, yet distinct aspects of emotional responding. In contrast to the above limitations, the
high temporal resolution of EEG offers the unique capacity to detect covert processes in real
time, with tremendous potential to further elucidate parental emotional responding.
In the “Decade of the Brain,” investigators increasingly employed the methods of
affective neuroscience in examinations of family processes, in order to study parental
responsiveness to infant cues. However, no studies specifically examined parental emotional
/motivational responsiveness at the level of frontal EEG activity. Unique information
2
obtained from this line of research can further explicate the neural correlates of parenting,
which may predispose the development of psychopathology in children. The current study
examined parental responsiveness at a micro-level of analysis – frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry – and linked it with parental responsiveness at a macro-level of analysis – self-
report of emotional experience, depressive and anxious symptomatology, and observed
maternal emotional availability.
Empirical investigations of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry suggest that hemispheric
alpha power asymmetry in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) is related to emotional and
motivational response tendencies, which may have important implications for parenting. At
rest, relatively greater right frontal activity is associated with withdrawal tendencies, while
relatively greater left frontal activity is associated with approach tendencies. In response to
emotional stimuli, greater left frontal activation has been found in response to joy and anger,
and greater right frontal activation has been found in response to sadness or disgust (Coan &
Allen, 2004; Davidson, 2004). Although many EEG studies of emotion have examined
frontal hemispheric asymmetry within the alpha band (Allen, Urry, Hitt, & Coan, 2004; Coan
& Allen, 2003), the current study aimed to extend these findings into the domain of
emotional responding within the context of the mother-infant relationship. The current study
utilized video clips of mothers’ own infants displaying positive and negative emotions – a
more ecologically valid set of stimuli than still photographs or sound clips of infant
vocalizations, which have been the primary stimuli used in fMRI studies of maternal
responsiveness to date. Furthermore, a central goal of the present investigation was to
examine individual differences in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a function of maternal
3
emotional availability, anxious and depressive symptom severity, and experienced emotions
in mothers of infants in their first year of life.
Maternal depression is known to place children at risk for social and emotional
problems, and can disrupt the development of secure emotional attachment in infants (Teti &
Towe-Goodman, 2010). Depression undermines competent parenting in that depressed
mothers are more inattentive, unresponsive, and less sensitive in caregiving than non-
depressed mothers. Additionally, they often fail to provide an adequately structured
environment for the child, and there is an absence of pleasure and positive affect within the
mother-child relationship (Gelfand & Teti, 1990). Given this risk to parenting competency,
further investigation of the nature of depression is critical in promoting healthy child
development. However, methodological complications contribute to the difficulty in this line
of research. Self-report of emotional experiences is likely biased in depressed samples, and
behavioral observations cannot accurately differentiate between the absence of emotional
experience and the behavioral regulation of an emotional experience. Examination of
mothers’ online emotional/motivational responding to child events, employing EEG
methodology, can aid our understanding of the precursors to maternal parenting behavior and
ultimately the conditions that place parenting at risk.
By examining the links between mothers’ frontal EEG alpha asymmetry responses to
their infants, depressive and anxious symptoms, and affective interactions in the parenting
context, findings from the current study have the potential to help clarify normative maternal
response to infant cues, detect maladaptive response patterns, and identify potential targets
for psychological intervention (Banaschewsk & Brandeis, 2007). Although the dispositional
withdrawal tendency seen in depressed mothers is known to be associated with greater right
4
frontal activity, these processes have yet to be explored using mothers’ own infants as
emotional and behavioral elicitors. Furthermore, no study to date has examined the relations
between mothers’ online responding in this way and the quality of the parent-child emotional
relationship. Understanding parenting as a process – how online response patterns are elicited
by ongoing inputs from parents’ children – may help identify and contextualize risk and
protective factors in child mental health trajectories.
Parenting as an Emotional Process
Theory and empirical study identify the family as a central contributor to children’s
mental health (Belsky, 1984; Cox & Paley, 1997; Minuchin, 1985). Investigations of risk
conditions within the family have often focused on factors mainly within the parent, and how
these factors influence the parent-child emotional relationship and parenting competency.
Such factors include parental psychopathology (e.g. maternal depression and parental
substance abuse; (Conners et al., 2003; Field, 1986; Jameson, Gelfand, Kulcsar, & Teti,
1997; Teti & Gelfand, 1991), parental abuse (De Bellis, 2001; Paz, Jones, & Byrne, 2005),
and marital conflict and divorce (Amato & Keith, 1991; Grych & Fincham, 1990; McHale,
Kuersten, & Lauretti, 1996). However, we must move beyond a “family address model of
parenting” if we are to understand parenting as a process (Darling & Steinberg, 1993).
Investigation of parents’ emotional experiences in response to ongoing affective inputs from
their children may provide a window into the processes that can facilitate or undermine
competent parenting. Such a line of study can help elucidate and contextualize risk and
protective factors in child mental health trajectories.
In a seminal paper, Belsky (1984) introduced an ecological model of the determinants
of parenting that included contributions from the parent and child and contextual sources of
5
social stress and support. In this model, parents’ developmental history influences parental
personality development, which subsequently influences the quality of and support from the
marital relationship, work life, and social networks. These factors in combination affect
parenting practices. Belsky (1984) briefly highlighted maternal depression as a critical
personality factor that could undermine parenting competency, and indeed much research
since that time has supported this hypothesis (Gelfand & Teti, 1990; Goodman, 2003). Since
Belsky’s (1984) paper however, theories on the determinants of parenting have increased in
complexity to include the influence of greater ecological contexts including diversity in
family structures and family cultures (Parke, Buriel, Damon, & Eisenberg, 1998),
neighborhood safety (Ceballo & McLoyd, 2002), and economic hardship (Conger, Conger,
Elder, & Lorenz, 1992; McLoyd, 1990). Additionally, the role of parental emotion has
emerged as a central focus in models of the determinants of parenting competence (Dix,
1991). Even so, empirical study on emotion in the parenting context has primarily examined
behavioral expression of emotion during parent-child interactions (e.g. observed facial
expressions), rather than emotions experienced by the parent in-the-moment (e.g. subjective
emotional experience). This is an important distinction as studies have demonstrated that
behavioral expression and self-reported experience of emotion are only moderately, if at all,
correlated (Martin, Clements, & Crnic, 2002; Rosenberg & Ekman, 2005). Such evidence
suggests that expressed and experienced emotion may tap related, yet distinct processes
occurring during parent-child interactions. Furthermore, the mechanism by which each
affects child development likely differs. For instance, expressed emotion during parent-child
interactions may directly influence child behavior and the child’s emotional experience,
whereas parental experienced emotion indirectly affects the child through its influence on
6
parenting behaviors (i.e. emotional availability). Understanding parents’ quickly occurring
emotional reactions to their children, which may even be outside conscious awareness,
provides an initial step in understanding the determinants of competent parenting and the
factors that place parenting at risk.
Dix’s (1991) Model of the Affective Organization of Parenting. Dix’s (1991) analysis
of emotion and parenting placed emotion at the center of parenting competency. His 3-
component model of the affective organization of parenting emphasized the intersection of
parenting and child concerns in the generation of parental emotions, which subsequently
affect parenting behaviors. He proposed that (1) child, parent, and contextual factors elicit
parent emotions in relation to their childrearing goals and concerns (activation); (2) after they
are activated, emotions have organizing, orienting, and motivating effects on parents that
direct them to meet the needs of their children (engagement); and (3) parents regulate their
emotions in order to maintain a level of arousal that is within an optimal range for adaptive
parenting (regulation). Indeed, research on the antecedents of maternal cognitive and
affective responsiveness to infant cues has identified five “emotional competencies” (Leerkes
& Crockenberg, 2006) that contribute to competent parenting: (1) parental accuracy in
detecting infants’ emotions; (2) parental empathy; (3) parental negative emotion; (4) parental
sense of emotional efficacy in responding to infant distress; and (5) parental emotion goals
for the parent-infant interaction. These emotional competencies are independently related to
maternal sensitivity (Leerkes, Crockenberg, & Burrous, 2004), further supporting the Dix’s
(1991) proposition that emotion is at the core of facilitating sensitive responding within the
parent-child dyad. Given the prominent role of emotion in promoting parental competency, a
principal goal of the current study was to examine mothers’ emotional and motivational
7
activation in response to child-created events – a primary step in Dix’s (1991) model of the
emotional determinants of parenting (activation) – and link these responses to patterns of
parental engagement (i.e. maternal emotional availability).
Emotion activation processes are those that determine which emotions occur, at what
time, and with what intensity. Cognitive appraisal of a child’s behavior as either facilitating
or hindering parents’ child-oriented concerns is key in the emotion activation process. Events
that are perceived as in conflict with parents’ child-oriented concerns may lead to negative
parental emotions, whereas those facilitating parents’ goals may give rise to positive parental
emotions. The specific positive and negative emotions that arise depend on the parents’
appraisal of the potential outcomes, obstacles, and supports available to them. Once an
emotion has been activated, it has orienting, organizing, and motivating properties. The
engagement phase in Dix’s (1991) model involves changes in cognition, physiology,
motivation, and behavior as a result of the specific activated emotion and its intensity. Dix
(1991) suggested that excessive or insufficient emotion activation might interfere with
optimal parenting practices. For instance, a lack of joy during positive parent-child
interactions or a lack of anxiety during child endangerment situations might underlie parental
withdrawal and neglect. An excess of parental anger during child transgressions might
underlie parental abuse. Although less common, an excess of positive emotion may also
interfere with adaptive parenting behaviors, particularly if the emotion is not matched to the
parent-child situation (Dix, 1991). In such a setting, one might see excess joy result in
parental intrusiveness.
Dix’s (1991) model of the affective organization of parenting provides a valuable
framework for the current study, focusing on emotion activation processes as a primary step
8
in understanding competent parenting. The model, however, does not explicitly address
children’s emotion displays as the activating agent of parents’ emotional responses, and
instead focuses on child behavior (i.e. transgressions) as the activating agent. Children’s
emotional reactions to events are likely potent elicitors of empathetic emotional responses or
personal distress in parents. The current study employed infants’ emotional displays as the
activating agent for maternal emotional and motivational responding. Such a design permits a
differentiation between maternal empathetic concern (a negative emotion with a
hypothesized approach motivation), and personal distress (a negative emotion with a
hypothesized withdrawal motivation). It is likely that each might underlie different parenting
behaviors (e.g. soothing or withdrawal). Child behaviors are complex phenomena; by using
infant facial emotional expressions as the activating agent in the current study, we focused on
more specific aspects of child signaling thereby increasing the interpretability of maternal
response patterns.
Parental Expressed Emotion and Child Outcomes. Empirical investigations of
parenting and emotion have overwhelmingly focused on parents’ behavioral expressions of
emotion and its impact on the parent-child relationship and child functioning. Parents’
positive affect has repeatedly been associated with favorable outcomes in young children.
Mothers who express greater happiness than anger during interactions with their preschoolers
have children who do the same in their peer interactions (Denham, Mitchell-Copeland,
Strandberg, Auerbach, & Blair, 1997). Mothers who maintain positive emotion, even during
challenging tasks, have children who are rated as more adept at understanding emotions by
their teachers. Maternal positive affective displays are also associated with higher
sociometric ratings of children by their peers (Boyum & Parke, 1995; Cassidy, Parke,
9
Butkovsky, & Braungart, 1992; Putallaz, 1987), more constructive strategies in emotionally
charged peer interactions (Garner & Spears, 2000), greater compliance and internalization of
family rules (Kochanska, Aksan, & Koenig, 1995), and the lowest rates of externalizing
behaviors in toddlers (Pettit & Bates, 1989). These relations between positive affect in
parenting and healthy child outcomes appear to hold across parents' race, ethnicity, family
structure, education, income, or gender (Amato & Fowler, 2002).
Conversely, parental negative affect has been repeatedly associated with unfavorable
outcomes in young children. In particular, maternal behavioral expressions and self-reported
experience of anger during parent-child interactions are associated with children’s difficulties
in peer interactions (Cummings, Zahn-Waxler, & Radke-Yarrow, 1981), deficits in play
skills with peers (Gottman & Katz, 1989), lack of confidence in challenging situations
(Crockenberg, 1987), withdrawn, nonassertive interaction style with peers (Denham,
Renwick, & Holt, 1991), anger reactions with peers (Garner & Estep, 2001) parent and
teacher reports of externalizing behaviors both concurrently and over time (Denham et al.,
2000), and exacerbation of child conduct problems (Cole, Teti, & Zahn-Waxler, 2003). The
role of parental anger appears to be most potent with children who are already at risk for
externalizing disorders (i.e. high frequency of behavior problems). Anger expression, even
when displayed by an unfamiliar adult and not directed at the child, can decrease age-
appropriate activities such as vocalizations, play, and exploration in toddlers (Jenkins,
Franco, Dolins, & Sewell, 1995). Furthermore, the effects of such anger displays may persist
during subsequent neutral interactions. This research is consistent with the empirical work on
marital conflict: children’s exposure to marital discord, even though not directed at the child,
10
is highly distressing and results in negative child emotional responses that range from anger
to fear and sadness (Cummings et al., 1981; El-Sheikh, Cummings, & Goetsch, 1989).
Although negative emotional expressions by parents have been linked to a variety of
negative child outcomes, the lack of positive affect also has important implications for child
functioning. Olson, Bates, Sandy, and Lanthier (2000) found that mothers who provided low
maternal affectionate contact when their infants were 6 months of age, had teenagers who
were higher in externalizing behavior. In fact, a meta-analysis demonstrated that the lack of
positive, affectionate parent-child interactions was the most powerful predictor of child
conduct problems, above and beyond ineffective, harsh parenting (Loeber & Stouthamer-
Loeber, 1986). Infants as young as 10 weeks of age have been shown to differentially
respond to maternal joy, anger, and sadness (Haviland & Lelwica, 1987). Furthermore, their
responses seem to implicate a change in state as evidenced by sustained interest over multiple
presentations of joy, freezing or looking away from angry maternal faces, and mouthing, self-
soothing behaviors during maternal sadness. Thus, it is clear that maternal emotional
expression can shape infant emotional experiences in positive and negative ways in even
very young infants.
Maternal Depression, Parenting, and Child Outcomes. Emotions in the parenting
context may directly influence child functioning through the modeling of emotion-related
skills and emotional contagion, or indirectly by undermining parental competence. The
empirical support for the role of maternal depression in parenting competence and child
functioning is perhaps one of the richest databases of information demonstrating how
emotions within the parenting context can place parenting at risk. Depression is a disorder of
emotion and emotion regulation abilities (Cummings & Davies, 1994; Dix, 1991; Downey &
11
Coyne, 1990) that has both direct and indirect effects on child development. Directly,
exposure to chronic negative mood has implications for child development (summarized
above). Indirectly, depression affects the cognitions, emotions, and behaviors of parents that
subsequently shape child developmental trajectories. Of further consequence, maternal
depression is associated with marital distress and conflict – a stressor that impacts parenting
capacities and child development in the short term (Downey & Coyne, 1990; Erel & Burman,
1995; Rutter & Quinton, 1984) and well-being in the long term (Amato, 2006).
Depressed mothers are more inattentive, unresponsive, and less sensitive in
caregiving than non-depressed mothers; they often fail to provide an adequately structured
environment for the child, and there is an absence of pleasure and positive affect within the
mother-child relationship (Gelfand & Teti, 1990). Maternal depression is known to place
children at risk for social and emotional problems, disrupt the development of secure
emotional attachment in infants, and undermine adaptive parenting (Teti & Towe-Goodman,
2010). Additionally, the social interactions of depressed persons are often characterized by
poor eye contact, slow and infrequent speech (Gotlib, 1982), facial expressions of negative
emotion, reduced motor activity, dysphoria, irritability, and hostility (Gelfand & Teti, 1990).
Such interaction styles disrupt the formation of positive relationships and undermine the
formation of healthy parent-child attachment relationships. Indeed, in face-to-face
interactions, depressed persons have been shown to evoke negative reactions from their
infants (Cohn & Campbell, 1992) as well as from strangers (Coyne, 1976).
Numerous depressive cognitions appear to contribute to parenting difficulties:
pessimistic views of the self and others are characteristic depressive symptoms (Beck, 1976).
Teti and Gelfand (1991) found that when mothers’ sense of self-efficacy in their parenting
12
role is compromised by depression, their actual parenting abilities are more likely to be
negatively affected. The negative perceptions of ones parenting competence can adversely
influence mothers’ ability to consistently and positively respond to their children, especially
during demanding child situations (e.g. child noncompliance; Bugental & Cortez, 1988). In
addition to negative self-perceptions, depressed parents also hold more negative views of
their children than non-depressed parents (Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). Such
negative views of the child may directly contribute to reduced child self-esteem if expressed
by the parent, but may also indirectly influence child functioning by narrowing parents’
attentional focus to and exacerbating their perception of negative child behaviors. Indeed,
maternal depression has been related to anger, overly harsh discipline strategies (Shay &
Knutson, 2008), and coercive processes whereby negative parent-child interactions serve to
maintain and exacerbate child behavior problems (Cummings & Davies, 1999; Patterson,
2002). Conversely, the increased self-absorption, preoccupation, and inattention to child cues
often displayed by depressed mothers may lead to lax, undercontrol of child problem
behaviors (Gelfand & Teti, 1990). Thus, maternal depression has been linked to overall
difficulties in effective child management strategies.
Numerous empirical investigations have also demonstrated a link between maternal
depression and insecure parent-child attachment (De Wolff & van Ijzendoorn, 1997; Radke-
Yarrow, Cummings, Kuczynski, & Chapman, 1985; Teti, Gelfand, Messinger, & Isabella,
1995), which, in turn, has implications for increased risk of child maladjustment. Sensitive
parenting, generally characterized as empathetic, aware, and responsive parenting, is strongly
associated with secure parent-child attachment relationships (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, &
Wall, 1978; Lamb, 1987), while insensitive, emotionally unavailable parenting is linked to
13
insecure parent-child attachment relationships (Ainsworth et al., 1978; De Wolff & van
Ijzendoorn, 1997). Maternal depression appears to undermine the formation of a secure
attachment relationship due to deficits in parental sensitivity. For instance, Cohn, Matias,
Tronick, Connell, and Lyons-Ruth (1986) identified two parent-child interaction styles that
typified interactions with a depressed mother: (1) flat affect, reduced activity, and reduced
contingent responding; and (2) alternation between withdrawal and intrusion. Such
interaction styles suggest that maternal depression has undermined mothers’ capacities for
responsiveness to and warmth toward their child, resulting in decreased monitoring and a
lack of awareness of their children’s needs.
Maternal depression during infancy has been linked to a three- to four-fold increased
risk of disorganized-disoriented attachment style during the preschool period (Teti et al.,
1995). Given this risk to parenting competency and healthy parent-child emotional bonds,
further investigation of the nature of depression is critical in promoting healthy child
development. However, methodological complications contribute to the difficulty in this line
of research. Self-report of emotional experiences are likely to be biased in depressed
samples, and behavioral observations cannot accurately differentiate between the absence of
emotional experience and the behavioral regulation of an emotional experience. Utilizing
EEG methodology to examine mothers’ online responses to child events can aid our
understanding of the precursors to maternal parenting behavior, and ultimately the conditions
that place parenting at risk.
“Online” Parenting Emotions. Parents’ emotions are the barometer for the quality of
the parent-child relationship and have important implications for healthy child development
(Emde & Easterbooks, 1985). Parental positive emotion has become a defining feature of
14
adaptive parenting styles (Baumrind, 1971; Maccoby & Martin, 1983) and sensitive
parenting (Ainsworth et al., 1978; Bowlby, 1969). Parenting that is sensitive, warm,
supportive, responsive, child-oriented, and emotionally synchronous is typically associated
with positive outcomes in children including emotional security, prosocial behavior, self-
regulatory abilities, and intellectual achievement (Cummings & Davies, 1996; Eisenberg et
al., 2006; van Ijzendoorn, Dijkstra, & Bus, 1995). Furthermore, some evidence suggests that
it is sensitivity specifically to infant distress that promotes positive child outcomes (Leerkes,
Blankson & O’Brien, 2009). Parenting that is characterized by warmth and sensitivity has
also been linked to the development of secure parent-child attachment relationships
(Easterbrooks, Biesecker, & Lyons-Ruth, 2000; Robinson & Spieker, 1996). Despite the
extensive body of empirical work examining warm, responsive parenting and healthy
emotional parent-child relationships, the mechanism by which competent parenting emerges
is often neglected. In other words, we know relatively little about the emotions parents
experience “in-the-moment,” during parent-child interactions, and how those emotions may
promote or undermine competent parenting. In order to understand why some parents
consistently use effective, positive parenting practices across a range of parenting situations
while others do not, we must first understand the emotions that are activated during parenting
events. Despite the vast literature on the role of emotion in the quality of the parent-child
relationship and healthy child development, investigations of “online” parenting emotion are
rare. A few key exceptions, however, support Dix’s (1991) model of parenting in which
emotion is a potent determinant of parenting competency. These studies deserve a more
detailed discussion as they directly relate to the current study of mothers’ online responding
15
to their infants (Dix, Gershoff, Meunier, & Miller, 2004; Lorber & Slep, 2005; Martin et al.,
2002).
In general, mothers tend to express predominantly positive emotions during play
interactions with their children, and a greater range of emotions, from positive to negative,
during more challenging tasks (Martin et al., 2002). Martin et al. (2002) found that maternal
self-reported negative emotion during a challenging parent-child task was inversely
associated with child displays of positive affect, suggesting interdependence between mother
and child emotion. Although much empirical study has focused on the role of parental
emotional expression as a predictor of concurrent and long-term child competencies, the
transactional nature of emotion within the parent-child dyad is recognized as a crucial
component in children’s emerging regulatory abilities (Cohn & Tronick, 1988; Cole et al.,
2003; Tronick, 1989). Cole et al. (2003) found that mothers typically displayed neutral
emotional expressions in interactions with their preschoolers, and that almost 93% of
codeable maternal emotion displays were in response to an expression of child emotion.
Similarly, Mayes, Carter, Egger, and Pajer (1991) found that mothers reported negative affect
in response to their child’s negative affect during the Still Face Paradigm (Tronick, Als,
Adamson, Wise, & Brazelton, 1978), an observational procedure in which mothers maintain
an affectively neutral face during interaction with their child after engaging the child in play.
Child emotion displays appear to be potent elicitors of maternal emotion and thus the current
study used positive, neutral, and negative emotional displays from mothers’ own infants as
elicitors of maternal emotional and motivational responding. Interestingly, Cole et al. (2003)
also found differential relations between self-reported and expressed emotion according to
child gender. Self-reported maternal anger was related to mothers’ expressed anger only with
16
their daughters. Similarly, Martin et al. (2002) also found no relation between mothers’ self-
reported emotion and their emotional displays during interactions with their child, suggesting
that self-reported and displayed parental emotion may tap different parenting processes.
Martin et al. (2002) found that maternal emotion moderated the relation between family
stress and maternal sensitivity in that family stress predicted less sensitive caregiving when
mothers experienced parent-child interactions less positively/more negatively. The
association did not hold for mothers who experienced parent-child interactions more
positively/less negatively. Parents’ experienced emotions during parenting events are a key
determinant in family health and positive child development. The affective neuroscience
methods employed in the current study offered an exciting opportunity to extend our
knowledge of mothers’ emotional and motivational responding to their own infants beyond
self-report and observation of emotions.
In another rare study that attempted to capture “online” parenting emotion, mothers
continuously rated their emotions while watching previously recorded video of their
interaction with their 1-year-old child (Dix, Gershoff, Meunier, & Miller, 2004). Using a dial
that rotated from a high degree of positive emotion to a high degree of negative emotion,
mothers shifted the dial during the video to capture what they had felt during the interaction,
and then verbally reported on the specific emotion they had experienced in that moment in
the video (see Gottman & Levenson, 1985). Dix et al. (2004) found that during times of
maternal reported guilt, interest, and joy, mothers expressed more child-oriented concerns
and displayed less asynchronous (more supportive) interactions with their child. Conversely,
during times of maternal reported sadness, worry, relief, and anger, mothers experienced
fewer child-oriented concerns and displayed more asynchronous (less supportive)
17
interactions with their child. Additionally, greater depressive symptoms in this non-clinical
sample were related to a decrease in child-oriented concerns, an increase in reported negative
emotion, and a decrease in reported positive emotion. Maternal emotional experiences during
parenting events appear to underlie supportive parenting. Interestingly, Lorber and Slep
(2005) found that when mothers’ emotions were highly dependent on their child’s
expressions of negative emotion, mothers utilized more ineffective (harsh and/or lax)
discipline strategies. However, mothers’ emotional dependence on their child’s rule-breaking
behavior was unrelated to mothers’ discipline strategies. Such findings lend further support
to the notion that child affective cues are a powerful trigger of maternal emotional responses,
which subsequently affect parental behavioral responses.
These studies of online parenting emotion have advanced our view of parenting as a
process, but have important limitations. First, mothers’ self-report of emotional experiences
during parent-child interactions were completed after the parent-child interaction, allowing
mothers time to reflect on their emotions and behaviors. Furthermore, mothers may have
used their own behavioral emotion cues from the video to report on their experienced
emotions and their intensity during the video-mediated recall procedures. It is unclear what
effects this may have had on the relation between parents’ experienced emotions, observed
emotions, and parenting behaviors. Lastly, such procedures are unable to assess the degree to
which parents are regulating their emotions during interactions with their children. Adults
are capable of altering their reports or behavioral expressions of emotion in social situations
as a function of their personality characteristics and personal goals, or in an attempt to
comply with social display rules (Saarni, 1993). The current study used dynamic infant
emotion cues – video clips of mothers’ own infants expressing various emotions – as the
18
eliciting stimuli for mothers’ emotional and motivational responding. Mothers’ frontal EEG
alpha activity, which presumably taps emotion processing and motivational tendencies, was
assessed and subsequently linked to mothers’ self-reported emotional experience, depressive
and anxious symptoms, and observations of maternal emotional availability.
Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Emotion
EEG pioneers, Hallowell and Pauline Davis, Fred and Erma Gibbs, and William
Lennox, are credited as the founders of clinical encephalography with their discovery of the
alpha rhythm and brainwave activity associated epilepsy in the mid-1930s (Schmitt, 1994).
Pauline Davis (1941) was among the first to systematically describe and interpret EEG
recordings in normal and abnormal individuals, and described normal alpha activity to be
within the 8.5-12 Hz frequency range. Before a review of the empirical evidence linking
prefrontal cortical (PFC) EEG asymmetry in the alpha bandwidth and emotion-related
constructs, it is first necessary to address and clarify several key issues in the interpretation of
hemispheric alpha asymmetry. First, in recent work, the alpha bandwidth has been defined as
8-13 Hz in adults (Pizzagalli, 2007), and thus this range was used in the current study. Alpha
power is inversely related to cortical activity, and therefore an increase in alpha power
reflects a decrease in cortical activity (see Ray, 1990). As is conventional in the literature on
PFC hemispheric asymmetry, alpha asymmetry findings will be discussed in the current
study in terms of cortical activity, and not alpha power per se. It follows that decreases in
alpha power in the left or right hemisphere will be described as increases in cortical activity
in those hemispheres. Additionally, asymmetry calculations are computed by subtracting the
natural log of alpha power in the left hemisphere from the natural log of alpha power in the
right hemisphere (ln[right alpha] – ln[left alpha]). Therefore, positive asymmetry values
19
reflect greater left frontal activity (greater right frontal alpha power), and negative values
reflect greater right frontal activity (greater left frontal alpha power). Lastly, following the
recommendation of Coan and Allen (2004), the current study will use the term activity to
refer to EEG data collected from participants during rest or a baseline condition, and
activation to refer to EEG data collected during emotional stimulus presentations. Given this
distinction, EEG activity is most closely associated with alpha asymmetry as a trait measure,
and EEG activation is most closely associated with alpha asymmetry as a state measure.
A vast body of literature examining the association between prefrontal cortical (PFC)
asymmetry in electroencephalographic (EEG) activity and patterns of emotional/motivational
responding has accumulated in recent decades. These empirical investigations can be
categorized as falling into one of the following four categories: (1) studies examining trait
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and other trait-like measures; (2) studies examining trait
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a predictor of state-dependent changes; (3) studies
examining trait frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a correlate or risk factor for
psychopathology; and (4) studies of state frontal EEG alpha asymmetry (Coan & Allen,
2003, 2004)
Trait Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Trait-Like Measures. Studies that examine
trait frontal EEG alpha asymmetry in relation to other trait-like measures have spanned a
wide range of human qualities including the Behavioral Inhibition/Activation System
(BIS/BAS; Sutton & Davidson, 1997), positive/negative emotionality (Tomarken, Davidson,
Wheeler, & Doss, 1992a), social competence (Fox et al., 1995), dispositional anger
(Hagemann et al., 1999), infants with intrusive vs. withdrawn mothers (Jones et al., 1997),
defensive coping styles (Kline, Allen, & Schwartz, 1998), well-being (Urry et al., 2004),
20
emotion regulatory abilities (Curtis & Cicchetti, 2007) and even attachment styles (Rognoni,
Galati, Costa, & Crini, 2008). The trait-like quality of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest
has been called “affective style” by Davidson (1998), and can be conceptualized as a
predisposition to respond in a particular way to environmental stimuli; a potential diathesis
for the development of psychopathology. Indeed, frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest has
demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas from .81-.90) and acceptable test-
retest stability (intraclass correlations from .53-.84), supporting its status as a trait
(Tomarken, Davidson, Wheeler, & Kinney, 1992b). Davidson’s “affective style” model of
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry will be discussed in further detail in a subsequent section.
The current review will address a number of particularly interesting findings that have
contributed to our understanding of the nature of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest.
Perhaps most notably, trait frontal EEG alpha asymmetry has been consistently linked to
Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS Scales, which were designed to assess Gray’s (1987)
behavioral inhibition and activation systems. To briefly summarize, Gray (1987) proposed
that two independent, yet interactive mechanisms contribute to personality. The behavioral
activation system (BAS) is sensitive to reward and is motivated to seek reward. The
behavioral inhibition system (BIS) is sensitive to punishment and is motivated to avoid
punishment. Sutton and Davidson (1997) demonstrated that greater left frontal EEG activity
was associated with higher BAS scores, and greater right frontal EEG activity was associated
with higher BIS scores, thus supporting an approach/withdrawal model of frontal EEG
asymmetry. Additionally, empirical investigations have demonstrated that individuals with
left frontal EEG activity reported greater dispositional positive affect and less dispositional
negative affect than individuals with right frontal EEG activity, as measured by the Positive
21
and Negative Affective Schedule (PANAS; Jacobs & Snyder, 1996; Tomarken et al., 1992a).
These investigations support an approach motivation-positive emotion association with left
frontal activity, and a withdrawal motivation-negative emotion association with right frontal
activity. A discussion of the conceptual models that have emerged to account for these
findings follows.
Trait Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and State-Dependent Change. In an extension
of the empirical literature of trait frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and trait-like measures,
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest has also been found to be a predictor of state-dependent
emotional responses. Thus, “affective style” appears to be a reliable predictor of an
individual’s emotional response during an emotional situation. This limited body of research
has mainly focused on infants’ response to maternal separation (Davidson & Fox, 1989; Fox,
Bell, & Jones, 1992) and subjective emotional experience in response to emotional stimuli
presentations (Allen, Harmon-Jones, & Cavender, 2001; Tomarken, Davidson, & Henriques,
1990; Wheeler, Davidson, & Tomarken, 1993). Infants who cry in response to maternal
separation have been shown to display greater right frontal EEG activity at rest than infants
who do not cry during separation (Davidson & Fox, 1989), and this pattern is stable over a 5-
month period (Fox et al., 1992). In the adult literature, individuals with greater right frontal
EEG activity at rest respond to negative film clips with a greater intensity of negative
emotion, and individuals with greater left frontal EEG activity at rest respond to positive film
clips with a greater intensity of positive emotion (Tomarken et al., 1990; Wheeler et al.,
1993). Thus, affective style appears to tap a propensity to respond in a particular way given
an emotional situation, and may serve as a diathesis for affective disorders (Davidson, 1998).
The current study attempted to extend these findings into the domain of intimate
22
relationships by examining the association between trait frontal EEG alpha asymmetry in
mothers and mothers’ subjective emotional responses after viewing affective video clips of
their own infants.
Trait Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Depression. Given Davidson’s (1998)
theory that trait frontal EEG asymmetry may serve as a diathesis for the development of
affective disorders, a substantial body of literature has examined the association between trait
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry (EEG alpha asymmetry at rest) and symptoms of depression
and anxiety. Investigations of adults with depressive symptoms, clinically depressed adults,
and infants of depressed mothers all support the proposition that greater right frontal
activation is associated with depressive symptomatology. In fact, a recent meta-analysis
(Thibodeau, Jorgensen, & Kim, 2006) found that depressive symptoms have a moderate-
sized association with right frontal EEG activity, with mean weighted effect sizes ranging
from .54 for adult studies to .61 for infant studies (Cohen, 1987).
Schaffer, Davidson, and Saron (1983) were among the first to examine the relation
between depressive symptoms and alpha asymmetry in the prefrontal cortex. They compared
individuals who scored high and low on the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck, Ward,
Mendelson, Mock, & Erbaugh, 1961) and found that high-scorers exhibited greater right
frontal activity at rest than low-scorers. This pattern of findings has been often replicated,
though some studies have failed to find frontal EEG alpha asymmetry differences between
depressed and non-depressed individuals (e.g. Reid, Duke, & Allen, 1998). Additionally,
depressed individuals appear to spend a greater percentage of the EEG recording baseline
period with right frontal activity as compared to non-depressed individuals (Baehr,
Rosenfeld, Baehr, & Earnest, 1998). Even previously depressed individuals who are not
23
currently depressed show less left frontal activity in comparison to never-depressed
individuals, and the current and previously depressed groups do not significantly differ from
each other (Gotlib, Ranganath, & Rosenfeld, 1998; Henriques & Davidson, 1990, 1991).
These findings suggest that frontal EEG alpha asymmetries in depressed individuals are
stable over time. Indeed, recent investigations have found adequate reliability in alpha
asymmetry patterns in clinically depressed individuals (Allen et al., 2004), with intraclass
correlations ranging from .56-.61 from 3 to 5 occasions of measurement. In fact, up to 60%
of the variance in alpha asymmetry at baseline is stable in this clinical population, which is
comparable to findings in non-clinical samples (Hagemann, Naumann, Thayer, & Bartussek,
2002; Tomarken et al., 1992b). Furthermore, such stability is maintained across time
regardless of sex, severity of depression, or history of depression (Vuga et al., 2006). Given
the stability of right frontal activation in depressed individuals over time and the fact that not
all individuals with a pattern of right frontal EEG activity at rest are depressed, frontal EEG
asymmetry appears to serve as a diathesis for the development of depression. A pattern of
right frontal EEG activity at rest may place an individual at increased risk for the
development of depression, given certain environmental stressors.
Data from depression treatment studies further support the association between right
frontal activity and depressive symptoms. Depressed individuals who subsequently
responded to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as indexed by self-reported
improvement on the Clinical Global Impression Improvement Scale (CGI-I), had greater left
frontal EEG activity during baseline prior to treatment than those who were non-responders,
even though alpha asymmetry did not change over the course of the 12 week treatment
program (Bruder et al., 2008; Bruder et al., 2001). Thus, left frontal EEG activity at rest may
24
be a marker for those individuals who will respond positively to pharmacological
interventions for depression. Even non-traditional treatments such as music and massage
therapy with depressed adolescents and infants of depressed mothers have demonstrated
attenuation of right frontal EEG activity (Jones & Field, 1999; Jones, Field, & Davalos,
1998a) during treatment.
Empirical investigation of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry in infants of depressed
mothers has further enriched our understanding of the EEG correlates of depressive
symptomatology. Numerous studies have demonstrated that infants of depressed mothers
have lower left frontal EEG activity than infants of non-depressed mothers at rest (Dawson,
Frey, Panagiotides, & Osterling, 1997; Field, Fox, Pickens, & Nawrocki, 1995; Jones et al.,
1998b), during interactions with their mothers, or even during interactions with a familiar,
non-depressed adult (Dawson et al., 1999). This pattern held more for withdrawn-depressed
mothers than intrusive-depressed mothers (Diego, Field, Jones, & Hernandez-Reif, 2006).
Lastly, investigations of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and anxiety have been mixed,
with some studies demonstrating that greater relative right frontal activation is associated
with anxiety traits (Sutton and Davidson, 1997, Tomarken et al., 1992) while others have not
demonstrated this link (Coan & Allen, 2003; Harmon-Jones & Allen, 1997; Tomarken &
Davidson, 1994). Heller and colleagues’ distinction between “anxious arousal” and “anxious
apprehension,” with the former involving physiological arousal and hyper-reactivity under
panic conditions, and the latter involving worry and verbal rumination, may account for this
variability in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry findings regarding anxiety (Nitschke, Heller,
Palmieri & Miller, 1999; Heller, Nitschke, Etienne & Miller, 1997). In fact, a recent
examination of this framework by Mathersul, Williams, Hopkinson, and Kemp (2008)
25
demonstrated that right frontal activity during a baseline condition was associated with
higher anxious arousal, whereas left frontal activity was associated with higher anxious
apprehension.
The current study attempted to extend the present state of the literature on the
association between maternal depressive and anxious symptoms and frontal EEG asymmetry
by examining such patterns within the context of the mother-child relationship, using
ecologically valid stimuli of mothers’ own infants displaying positive and negative emotions.
Thus, the present investigation not only examined a trait measure of EEG asymmetry in
association with past and current depressive symptoms, but also a state measure of EEG
asymmetry, using highly relevant child stimuli. Conducting investigations that examine
responses during emotionally demanding tasks is particularly suited for understanding
parenting as a process; mothers’ responses during emotionally taxing situations may yield
important information to aid in the detection of markers for maternal depression beyond
affective style alone.
Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry as a State Measure. Studies involving the
examination of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a state rather than trait measure have
demonstrated that changes in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry can be elicited through emotional
paradigms such as voluntary facial expressions (Coan, Allen, & Harmon-Jones, 2001),
emotional films (Davidson, Ekman, Saron, Senulis, & Friesen, 1990), stranger vs. mother
approach with infants (Fox & Davidson, 1987), and pleasant vs. unpleasant odors (Kline,
Blackhart, Woodward, Williams, & Schwartz, 2000). Whereas investigations of trait frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry examine an individual’s predisposition to respond in an expected way
across situations, investigations of state frontal EEG alpha asymmetry examine patterns of
26
response that are specific to a situation. For example, early studies demonstrated that infants
respond to videos of an actress performing a happy face with increased left frontal EEG
activation (Davidson & Fox, 1982). Furthermore, infants who reach for their mothers during
an approach task displayed concomitant left frontal EEG activation, whereas infants who
cried during maternal separation displayed concomitant right frontal EEG activation (Fox &
Davidson, 1987). In studies with adults, Ekman and Davidson (1993) found that when
individuals perform genuine, Duchenne smiles (smiles that utilize the obicularis pars lateris
muscle) they show greater concurrent left frontal EEG activation than when they perform
“unfelt” smiles. Similarly, voluntary facial expressions corresponding to withdrawal-oriented
emotions (disgust, fear) are associated with reduced left frontal EEG activation (Coan, Allen,
& Harmon-Jones, 2001). The work of Harmon-Jones and colleagues, discussed in further
detail below, has consistently demonstrated that anger, an approach-negative emotion, is
associated with increased left frontal EEG activation (e.g. Harmon-Jones, Sigelman, Bohlig,
& Harmon-Jones, 2003). Such evidence supports the proposition that environmental
situations that evoke approach tendencies are associated with left frontal EEG activation, and
environmental situations that evoke withdrawal tendencies are associated with right frontal
EEG activation. The current study examined mothers’ frontal EEG activation during the
presentation of emotional video clips of their own infants and connected these patterns to
mothers’ subjective emotional experiences, depressive and anxious symptoms, and emotional
availability during parent-infant interaction. Investigations of this nature provide a window
into mothers’ online affective and motivational responses to a range of emotional expressions
from their infants – highly salient and relevant stimuli in the investigation of parenting as a
process.
27
Across all four categories of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and emotion studies
discussed above, it is important to note that a substantial number examine frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry as a dependent variable with emotion-related constructs as the grouping or
independent variable. Findings from such a design warrant different interpretations than
those in which frontal EEG alpha asymmetry is treated as an independent variable, with
emotion-related constructs as the dependent variable. When frontal EEG alpha asymmetry is
examined as an independent variable, interpretations are framed as variations in a
psychological event (ψ), given variations in a physiological event (φ); P(ψ/φ) – a “bottom-
up” approach. Thus, we aim to understand the neural substrates of psychological phenomena.
When frontal EEG alpha asymmetry is examined as a dependent variable, interpretations are
framed as variations in a physiological event (φ), given a psychological event (ψ); P(φ/ψ) – a
“top-down” approach. Thus, we aim to understand the psychological substrates of neural
phenomena. It is important to note that P(ψ/φ) is not necessarily equal to P(φ/ψ) (Sarter,
Berntson, & Cacioppo, 1996). The current study aimed to understand variations in self-
reported emotional experience, depressive and anxious symptomatology, and maternal
emotional availability (ψ), given variations in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest and
during emotional stimulus presentations (φ). Thus, the current study conceptualized frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry as a diathesis for parenting at risk: the design of the current study
followed accordingly (P(ψ/φ)).
Models of Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry and Emotion. Several conceptual models
have been proposed to explain the extensive empirical evidence that prefrontal cortical
asymmetry in the alpha bandwidth is reliably associated with emotion and motivation
constructs. However, in almost all studies, emotion and motivational tendencies are
28
confounded; that is to say that only approach-positive emotions (e.g. joy) and withdrawal-
negative emotions (e.g. disgust) were utilized. Thus, several different models appeared to
account for the empirical evidence. For instance, the valence model (Gotlib et al., 1998;
Heller, 1990; Heller, Nitschke, & Miller, 1998; Silberman & Weingartner, 1986) purported
that left frontal activity was associated with the experience and expression of positive
emotion, and that right frontal activity was associated with the experience and expression of
negative emotion. Instead, the motivational direction model (Davidson, Jackson, & Kalin,
2000; Fox, 1991; Harmon-Jones & Allen, 1997; Sutton & Davidson, 1997) purported that
motivational tendencies better accounted for the hemispheric lateralization findings such that
left frontal EEG activity was associated with the experience and expression of approach
motivation, and that right frontal EEG activity was associated with the experience and
expression of withdrawal motivation. Finally, the valenced motivational model (Davidson,
1998; Tomarken & Keener, 1998) purported that left frontal activity was associated with the
experience and expression of approach-positive emotions, and that right frontal activation
was associated with the experience and expression of withdrawal-negative emotions, without
addressing the possible patterns associated with emotions that violate such pairings (e.g. the
approach-negative emotion, anger).
In an innovative body of work, Harmon-Jones and colleagues began to investigate
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and the experience of anger. Harmon-Jones and Allen (1998)
found that dispositional anger in middle school children, as measured by the Aggression
Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992), was associated with greater left frontal EEG activity at
rest. Considering that some individuals may regard anger as a positive emotion, thus
accounting for the left frontal EEG activity findings, a follow-up study (Harmon-Jones,
29
2007) revealed that this association held after controlling for participants’ attitudes toward
anger. These findings supported the motivational direction model of frontal EEG asymmetry
in that left frontal activation is most closely associated with approach motivation, regardless
of the valence of the emotion. Furthermore, experienced anger with an action potential is
associated with greater left frontal EEG activation than experienced anger with no potential
for action (Harmon-Jones et al., 2003). In this well-designed study, college students who
were opposed to a tuition increase heard a radio editorial that favorably discussed increasing
tuition at their university. Those participants who believed they could take action against the
increase by signing a petition had greater levels of self-reported anger and increased left
frontal EEG activation than those individuals who believed the tuition increase had already
occurred. Thus, the action (approach) potential appeared to account for the left frontal EEG
activation in participants and not the experience of anger per se. Furthermore, approach-
oriented stimuli that are highly relevant to an individual appear to produce greater left frontal
EEG activation than those that are less relevant (Harmon-Jones, Lueck, Fearn, & Harmon-
Jones, 2006). The current study utilized the highly relevant stimuli of mothers’ own infants
expressing a range of emotions in order to elicit stronger responses from mothers. The design
of the current study also provided a unique opportunity to investigate another hypothetical
approach-negative emotion that has yet to be examined in the frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
literature as it pertains to parents: empathetic concern. When mothers view videos of their
infants in distress, it is possible that the discomfort they experience is associated with
approach motivation. In fact, Dix’s (1991) model of the affective organization of parenting
would suggest that parental experience of negative emotion, accompanied by child-oriented
concerns, would motivate the parent to take action.
30
The work of Harmon-Jones and colleagues not only aids our understanding of the
motivational tendencies associated with frontal EEG alpha asymmetry, but also underscores
the utility of examining EEG activation in addition to activity. That is to say that an
individual’s pattern of motivational and emotional responding during emotional events may
provide important added information beyond motivational and emotional traits measured at
rest. Studies supporting the motivational direction model have largely targeted frontal EEG
activity at rest, measuring individuals’ propensities to consistently respond with approach- or
withdrawal-related motivation across a range of situations (Davidson, 1998). Alternatively,
individuals’ responses may also be situation-specific such that most individuals would be
expected to respond in a similar way to a given environmental stimulus (e.g. a fear situation).
Lastly, it is possible that individual predispositions might interact with situation-specific
factors to produce behavioral outcomes. Although investigations of individual differences in
affective style have aided our understanding of the neural correlates of personality traits,
psychopathology, and state-related emotional changes, examination of individual differences
in affective capabilities, as indexed by an individual’s capacity to respond given situation
demands, can enhance our understanding of online emotional/motivational responding and
parenting as a process (Coan, Allen, & McKnight, 2006).
Coan, Allen and McKnight’s (2006) capability model of frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry and emotion-related constructs examines an individual’s capacity for approach or
withdrawal given the situational demands. Individual differences in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry should be thought of as an interaction between individuals’ emotion-regulation
abilities and the emotional demands of the situation. The model hypothesizes that individual
differences in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry will be more pronounced during emotion-
31
elicitation procedures than during baseline, based on evidence that individuals engage in a
range of uncontrolled mental activity during baseline or rest procedures (e.g. Binder et al.,
1999). Furthermore, the model hypothesizes that individual differences in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry measured during emotion-elicitation procedures will demonstrate stronger
relations with emotion-related constructs than individual differences in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry measured at rest. This hypothesis was based on evidence that frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during emotion tasks appears to predict traits and behaviors that frontal EEG
asymmetry at rest does not (e.g. Harmon-Jones, et al., 2002). Coan, Allen and McKnight
(2006) collected frontal EEG alpha asymmetry data from participants during a baseline
period and across 5 emotion-elicitation conditions (anger, disgust, fear, joy, and sadness).
Preliminary findings support the hypotheses of the capability model. For instance, frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry during an induced fear condition was related to self-reported negative
affect, whereas frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest was not. Interestingly, stable individual
differences (EEG at rest) and condition type accounted for 26% and 5% of the variance in
overall asymmetry scores across conditions, respectively. The interaction between stable
individual differences and condition, however, accounted for 50% of the variance. This
evidence supports the notion that stable individual differences in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry represent differential capacities for responding that depend on the situational
demands.
The capability model is particularly suited for investigations of parenting as a
process. Parenting competence is not defined as the possession of a set of adaptive parenting
skills per se, but rather having the capacity to utilize these skills in the moment, given the
demands of the parent-child interaction. As an example, Cole and colleagues (Cole, Woolger,
32
Power, & Smith, 1992) found that although father-daughter incest survivors did not differ
from non-risk mothers in their attitudes about warmth and discipline in parenting, they did
report lower confidence, a reduced sense of efficacy, and inconsistency in their parenting.
Mothers in the risk group possessed knowledge of adaptive parenting skills, but were unable
to utilize them during emotionally challenging interactions with their child. The capability
model offers another heuristic to examine individual differences in emotional/motivational
responding in the moment, and suggests that frontal EEG alpha asymmetry values would not
necessarily generalize from one environmental situation (e.g. play interactions with a happy
child) to another (e.g. discipline interactions with a noncompliant child). Given the range of
the emotional demands on parents (e.g. handling child transgressions, engaging the child in
joyful play, soothing a distressed child) the capability model offers an exciting framework for
the study of conditions that place parenting at risk.
Neural Correlates of Parenting
The vast body of empirical evidence documenting parents’ role in healthy child
developmental trajectories spans multiple disciplines, levels of analysis, and methodologies.
Therefore, it is not surprising that in the “Decade of the Brain,” emerging neuroscience
technologies were increasingly employed to investigate parental responsiveness to infant
cues. Information derived at this level of analysis further aids our understanding of
underlying risk and protective factors in parenting processes and the quality of the parent-
child emotional relationship. The human research in this domain has been an extension of
findings from animal studies that implicated specific neuroanatomical structures in maternal
behavior (see Numan, 1994). Given the high spatial resolution of functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI), it follows that most of the human research to date has utilized this
33
technique to investigate neuroanatomical structures involved in maternal behavior (i.e.
Bartels & Zeki, 2004; Britton et al., 2006; Leibenluft, Gobbini, Harrison, & Haxby, 2004;
Lorberbaum et al., 1999; Ranote et al., 2004; Strathearn, Li, Fonagy & Montague, 2008). No
studies to date, however, have utilized electroencephalography (EEG) technology within the
parenting context. Examination of EEG activity, specifically regarding emotional and
motivational responding within the context of intimate relationships, is a glaring omission in
the field. Unique information obtained from studies of EEG activity can further explicate the
neural correlates of parenting behavior. Furthermore, understanding which infant stimuli can
elicit meaningful responses from parents is extremely important if we hope to identify
conditions of parenting risk and resilience. Infant photos and infant cries have been the most
commonly used stimuli in studies examining the neural correlates of maternal responsiveness
(Bartels & Zeki, 2004; Green & Gustafson, 1983; Leibenluft et al., 2004; Lorberbaum et al.,
2002; Strathearn, et al., 2008). The current study used video clips of mothers’ own infants
displaying various emotional expressions, and contends that these videos are more
ecologically valid in the study of emotional and motivational responding within the parenting
context than still photographs or sound clips. Furthermore, the inclusion of positive, negative,
and neutral emotional expressions from mothers’ own infants permitted the examination of
how mothers differentially respond to a range of affective infant cues. No study has used
these unique stimuli in an attempt to understand maternal responsiveness from an EEG
perspective.
Despite recent fMRI investigations of maternal responsiveness to infant cues, the
neural underpinnings of parenting behavior are still largely unknown. The existing body of
work, however, highlights differences in the processing of infant stimuli compared to less
34
personally relevant emotional stimuli. For instance, Lorberbaum et al. (2002) found that
several brain regions in first-time mothers responded uniquely or more intensely to an
unknown infant’s crying (an innate elicitor of maternal caregiving) than to a white-noise
control. Although this study did not utilize mothers’ own infants, studies have demonstrated
that a majority of parents can distinguish their own infants’ cries from an unknown infants’
cries, based solely on acoustic cues within the cry (Green & Gustafson, 1983). Infant cries
appear to evoke a unique response in mothers, and mothers may be even more attuned to
cues from their own infants. Feelings of maternal love have been found to produce brain
activation in areas similar to Lorberbaum et al.’s (2002) infant cry study (i.e. Bartels & Zeki,
2004). As mothers viewed pictures of their own and unfamiliar children, there was particular
activation of brain structures of the reward and salience detection systems. These structures
are also known to have dense oxytocin and vasopressin receptors – hormones associated with
pair-bonding and attachment (Insel, 1997, 2003; Young, Murphy Young, & Hammock, 2005;
Young & Wang, 2004). Additionally, there was enhanced activation in areas related to pain
suppression and decreased activation in social judgment networks and negative emotion
centers. In a similar fMRI study, Strathearn et al. (2008) used pictures of own- and
unfamiliar-infants displaying happy, sad, or neutral facial expressions. Congruent with
previous studies, greater medial prefrontal activation was seen with own vs. unfamiliar
infants. However, mothers also demonstrated differential responding based on the valence of
own-infant emotional expressions such that dopaminergic reward-related brain regions were
activated during happy, but not sad infant photos. Thus, sensory stimuli from one’s own child
may uniquely tap emotion/motivation processes in the brain that other emotional stimuli may
not, and the valence of infant emotion may be of particular importance. The current study
35
examined frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as an index of affective-motivational responding as
an extension of the findings from these fMRI studies, with the aim of better understanding
online emotions in parenting.
In further support of the unique maternal emotional response to one’s own infants,
Nitschke et al. (2004) found greater orbitofrontal cortex activation in mothers when they
were viewing photos of their own infant compared to an unfamiliar infant, and this activation
was positively correlated with their self-report of positive affect while viewing the photos.
The positive affect experienced by mothers with their infants might best be characterized as
“post goal attainment positive affect” (Davidson, Pizzagalli, Nitschke, & Kalin, 2003). A
sense of appreciation, fulfillment, and enjoyment underlies this type of positive affect,
differentiating it from positive affect in response to less personally relevant stimuli. Post goal
attainment positive affect may be akin to Dix’s (1991) model of the affective organization of
parenting in which he contends that parental positive affect arises when events facilitate
parents’ child-oriented concerns. In fact, mothers in Nitschke et al.’s (2004) study did not
show habituation in their positive emotional response to images of their own infant, but did
with other pleasant stimuli. However, it is important to note that this study did not examine
maternal response to negative infant cues. In one of the few studies to use both positive and
negative child stimuli, Seifritz et al. (2003) found that non-parents showed stronger
activation to an unfamiliar infant’s laughing than parents, and parents showed stronger
activation to an unfamiliar infant’s crying than non-parents, particularly in regions associated
with attentional control of cognitive and emotional processes. Parenting experience may lead
one to selectively attend to the infant cries over laughter because of its biological relevance
and signal for approach/action from the parent. The current study used both positive and
36
negative visual infant stimuli from mothers’ own infants to better understand maternal
responsiveness to a range of infant cues and to elucidate those cues that are the most
meaningful to parents.
A relevant body of work by Swain and colleagues (see Swain, Lorberbaum, Kose &
Strathearn, 2007 for a review) has been accumulating in recent years regarding human parent
brain responses to infant cries and pictures. In one such example, Swain et al. (2004) have
demonstrated a change in response over the initial postpartum period, as well as differences
between mothers and fathers. Primiparous mothers demonstrated more activity in amygdala
and basal ganglia in response to their infant’s cries within 2-4 weeks postpartum, as well as
greater reported preoccupation with infant well-being in this period. In contrast, fathers
reported less preoccupation and demonstrated a corresponding lack of activation in amygdala
and basal ganglia. However, when mothers viewed the same stimuli again in the 3-4 month
postpartum period, mothers showed no amygdala activation, but rather activation in medial
prefrontal cortical and hypothalamic (hormone control) regions. Such findings suggest a
change in regional brain responses to ones own infant with the development of the parent-
infant relationship over time that it is characterized by less anxiety and greater association of
infant signals with social behaviors and routines. In the current study, mothers were shown
videos of their 6-8 month old infants. Findings from Swain et al (2004) suggest that results of
the current study can be interpreted within the context of longer parent-infant relationship
development.
In sum, converging evidence is emerging that emotional processing within the parent-
child context may be reflected in the brain differently than emotional processing in less
personally relevant emotional contexts. Furthermore, studies have typically employed fMRI
37
methodology to identify specific neuroanatomical regions of activation, and very few studies
have examined positive, negative, and neutral video stimuli of mothers’ own infants in order
to differentiate parental responses to a range of infant emotional cues. Frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry is a particularly promising area of study that can further our understanding of the
neural correlates of emotional responding within the parenting context.
The Current Study
Parenting is an inherently emotional experience, yet little is known about the
emotions that parents experience “online” during interactions with their children.
Furthermore, such emotional experiences may facilitate or undermine competent parenting,
and empirical investigations of parenting emotion can aid our understanding of those
conditions that place parenting at risk. Much of the research on parenting emotion to date
utilizes observational and self-report measurements. Often times these measurements are
only weakly correlated, if at all, suggesting that they may tap different parenting processes.
Furthermore, adults have the ability to mask or alter their social behaviors and reports.
Empirical investigation of parenting emotion typically focuses on expressed emotion rather
than experienced emotion. Such evidence suggests that positive expressed emotions are
consistent with a variety of positive outcomes in children such as peer competency,
decreased externalizing difficulties, and increased emotional understanding. Conversely,
negative expressed emotions are consistent with negative outcomes in children such as
deficits in peer play, increased externalizing difficulties, and increased child anger displays.
Indirect pathways of influence have also been examined, particularly in relation to maternal
depression - a disorder of emotion and emotion regulation. Maternal depression can serve to
undermine competent parenting in that depressed mothers are more inattentive, unresponsive,
38
and less sensitive in caregiving than non-depressed mothers. Additionally, they often fail to
provide an adequately structured environment for the child and there is an absence of
pleasure and positive affect within the mother-child relationship. Given this risk to parenting
competency, further investigation of the nature of depression is critical in promoting healthy
child development. In the study of parenting and emotion, it is important to remember that
emotion within the parent-child dyad is transactional in nature and children’s emotional
expressions can be potent elicitors of parental emotion.
Understanding parents’ “online” emotional experiences can aid our understanding of
the conditions that place parenting at risk. The field of affective neuroscience offers exciting
tools for the exploration of in-the-moment parental experiences in response to affective
information from their own children. Frontal EEG alpha asymmetry has been consistently
linked to affective-motivational tendencies in humans. Left frontal activity is associated with
approach emotions (e.g. happiness, anger), and right frontal activity is associated with
withdrawal emotions (e.g. sadness, disgust). Additionally, depressive symptoms have
consistently been linked to right frontal EEG activity. Given this important link and our
understanding of the ways in which maternal depression may undermine competent
parenting, the necessary next steps involve the investigation of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
and depressive symptoms, within a parenting context. Lastly, “affective style” (EEG
measured at rest) appears to represent an individual’s predisposition to respond with an
approach or withdrawal orientation across various environmental situations. However, such
individual differences in affective style likely interact with the emotional demands of a given
situation. Together, affective style and online emotional/motivational responding reflect an
individual’s capacity for emotional responding, given the demands of an emotional situation.
39
Such a dynamic approach in the study of frontal EEG activity is well suited for investigations
of parenting as a process in that parents face a wide range of emotionally challenging tasks in
interactions with their children. This approach holds promise for the expansion our
conceptualization of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry, and its extension into the domain of
intimate relationships.
The current study aimed to address the following, interrelated questions to further
understand the nature of parents’ emotional and motivational responding to their infants. If
we are to understand the conditions that place parenting at risk, we must investigate how
mothers’ affective style and online responding to their own infants relate to mothers’
subjective emotional experiences, depressive and anxious symptoms, and emotional
availability in interactions with their infants.
1) What is the association between mothers’ frontal EEG asymmetry and mothers’
emotional experience in response to their infants’ emotional displays?
a) What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG activity (measured at rest; a
trait measure) and mothers’ self-reported emotional experience in response to
their infants’ emotional displays? Affective style (i.e. EEG activity as a trait
measure, assessed during a baseline condition; Davidson, 1998) appears to be a
reliable predictor of state-dependent emotional responses (i.e. an individual’s
subjective emotional experience in response to an emotional situation). Adults with
greater left frontal EEG activity at rest respond to positive emotion situations with
greater self-reported positive emotion than adults with greater right frontal EEG
activity at rest. Congruently, adults with greater right frontal EEG activity at rest
respond to negative emotion situations with greater self-reported negative emotion
40
than adults with greater left frontal EEG activity at rest (e.g. Tomarken et al., 1990;
Wheeler et al., 1993). Thus, affective style appears to tap a propensity to respond
emotionally given an emotional situation. The current study aimed to extend such
findings into the domain of emotional responding within intimate relationships,
namely the mother-infant relationship. Mothers’ trait frontal EEG asymmetry was
examined in relation to mothers’ subjective emotional experiences after viewing
affective video clips of their own infants. Furthermore, the current study provided a
unique opportunity to investigate an approach-negative emotion that has yet to be
examined in the frontal EEG asymmetry literature: parental empathetic concern.
Hypothesis 1.a.i: Positive asymmetry values reflect greater left frontal EEG activity
and negative asymmetry values reflect greater right frontal EEG activity. Thus, a
positive relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest and
mothers’ self report of positive emotion (joy) in response to the infant joy and infant
neutral conditions. As mothers’ asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG
activity, they will report fewer and a lower intensity of positive emotions after seeing
their infant in a joyous or neutral state.
Hypothesis 1.a.ii: A negative relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry at rest and mothers’ self report of negative emotion (sadness and
anxiety/fear) in response to the infant anger/distress condition. As mothers’
asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activity, they will report more and
a greater intensity of negative emotion after seeing their infant in an angry/distressed
state.
41
Hypothesis 1.a.iii: A positive relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry at rest and mothers’ self report of concern/worry in response to the infant
anger/distress condition. As mothers’ asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal
EEG activity, they will report less concern/worry, conceptualized as an empathetic,
approach-oriented concern for ones infant. Less clear were predictions regarding the
relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest and mothers’ self-report of
guilt in response to the infant anger/distress condition. Feelings of guilt might be
associated with a withdrawal tendency and thus it would be expected to be associated
with greater right frontal EEG activity at rest. However, guilt might also be associated
with an approach motivation and thus it would be expected to be associated with
greater left frontal EEG activity at rest. In fact, findings from Dix et al. (2004)
suggest that maternal guilt is associated with child-oriented concerns. One might
expect that mothers’ child-oriented concerns involve an approach motivation.
b) What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG activation (measured as
mothers view video of their infants’ emotional displays; a state measure) and
mothers’ self-reported emotional experience in response to their infants’
emotional displays? Studies involving the examination of frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry as a state rather than trait measure have demonstrated that changes in
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry can be reliably elicited through a range of emotional
paradigms. Whereas investigations of trait frontal EEG alpha asymmetry examine an
individual’s predisposition to respond in an expected way regardless of the situation,
investigations of state frontal EEG alpha asymmetry examine patterns of response
that are specific to a situation. Empirical evidence supports the proposition that
42
environmental situations that evoke approach tendencies are associated with increases
in left frontal EEG activation, and environmental situations that evoke withdrawal
tendencies are associated with increases in right frontal EEG activation (e.g. Coan,
Allen, & Harmon-Jones, 2001; Ekman & Davidson, 1993; Harmon-Jones, Sigelman,
Bohlig, & Harmon-Jones, 2003). The current study extended these findings into the
domain of intimate relations by examining mothers’ frontal EEG activation in
response to emotional video clips of their own infants. In fact, Dix (1991) places the
activation of emotion at the center of understanding parenting as a process.
Hypothesis 1.b.i: A pattern of left frontal EEG activation was expected to emerge
during the infant joy condition, and a pattern of right frontal EEG activation was
expected to emerge during the infant anger/distress condition.
Hypothesis 1.b.ii: Positive asymmetry scores reflect greater left frontal EEG
activation and negative asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activation.
Thus, a positive relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during
the infant joy and neutral conditions and mothers’ self report of positive emotions
(joy) in response to infant joy and infant neutral expressions. As mothers’ asymmetry
scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activation, they will report fewer and a lower
intensity of positive emotions after seeing their infant in a joyous or neutral state.
Hypothesis 1.b.iii: A negative relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during the infant anger/distress condition and mothers’ self report of
negative emotions (sadness and anxiety/fear) in response to infant anger/distress. As
mothers’ asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activation, they will
43
report more and a greater intensity of negative emotions after seeing their infant in an
angry/distressed state.
Hypothesis 1.b.iv: A positive relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during the infant anger/distress condition and mothers’ self report of
concern/worry in response to infant anger/distress. As mothers’ asymmetry scores
reflect greater right frontal EEG activity, they were expected to report less
concern/worry, conceptualized as an empathetic, approach-oriented concern for ones
infant. Less clear were predictions regarding the relations between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during the infant anger/distress condition and mothers’ self-report of guilt
in response to infant anger/distress. Feelings of guilt might be associated with a
withdrawal motivation when mothers see their child in distress and thus it would be
expected to be associated with greater right frontal EEG activation. However, guilt
might also be associated with an approach motivation and thus it would be expected
to be associated with greater left frontal EEG activation when mothers see their child
in distress. In fact, findings from Dix et al. (2004) suggest that maternal guilt is
associated with child-oriented concerns. One might expect that mothers’ child-
oriented concerns involve approach motivation.
c) Which is a better predictor of mothers’ self-reported emotional experience in
response to their infants’ emotional displays: EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait or
state measure? Coan, Allen, and McKnight’s (2006) capability model of frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry and emotion-related constructs examines an individual’s
capacity for approach or withdrawal, given the situational demands. Such an
approach is particularly suited for investigations of parenting as a process. For
44
example, parenting competency is not the possession of a set of adaptive parenting
skills per se, but rather having the capacity to utilize those skills in the moment, given
the demands of the parent-child interaction. Preliminary investigations of the
capability model suggest that individual differences in frontal EEG asymmetry
measured during emotion-elicitation procedures produced stronger relations with
emotion-related constructs than individual differences in asymmetry measured at rest.
Hypothesis 1.c: Frontal EEG asymmetry measured during the infant joy, neutral, and
anger/distress conditions was expected to be a stronger predictor of mothers’ self-
reported emotional responses to the video clips than frontal EEG asymmetry
measured at rest.
d) Does mothers’ frontal EEG activation (state) moderate the relation between
frontal EEG activity (trait) and mothers’ self-reported emotional experience in
response to their infants’ emotional displays? In further exploration of the
capability model, Coan, Allen, and McKnight (2006) found that the interaction
between stable individual differences in EEG activity (baseline) and EEG activation
during specific emotion stimulus conditions, accounted for a much greater proportion
of the variance in EEG asymmetry across the entire study than either individual
differences or condition type alone (Coan, Allen, & McKnight, 2006). The current
study initially aimed to examine how stable individual differences in EEG activity
(baseline) and state-dependent EEG activation (while mothers’ view video clips of
their infants’ emotional displays) interacted to better predict mothers’ self-reported
emotional experience in response to these videos. However, the lack of significant
associations between frontal EEG activity during baseline and frontal EEG activation
45
during infant emotion videos with mothers’ self-reported emotional experience, as
well as small sample size, did not permit the investigation of the hypothesis that:
Hypothesis 1.d: Frontal EEG activation (state) was expected to moderate the relation
between frontal EEG activity (trait) and mothers’ self-reported emotional experience
in response to infant emotional video clips.
2) What is the association between frontal EEG asymmetry and maternal depressive and
anxious symptomatology?
a) What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG activity (measured at rest; a
trait measure) and the severity of self-reported past and current depressive
symptomatology, and current anxious symptomatology? Given Davidson’s (1998)
theory that trait frontal EEG asymmetry may serve as a diathesis for the development
of affective disorders, a substantial body of literature has examined the association
between trait frontal EEG asymmetry (EEG asymmetry at rest) and symptoms of
depression and anxiety. Investigations of adults with depressive symptoms, clinically
depressed adults, and infants of depressed mothers all support the proposition that
greater right frontal activation/lesser left frontal activation is associated with
depressive symptoms (see Thibodeau, Jorgensen, & Kim, 2006). Even previously
depressed individuals who are not currently depressed show decreased left frontal
activation in comparison to never-depressed individuals (Gotlib, Ranganath, &
Rosenfeld, 1998). Furthermore, right frontal activity during a baseline condition was
associated with higher anxious arousal, whereas left frontal activity was associated
with higher anxious apprehension (i.e. rumination; Mathersul, Williams, Hopkinson,
& Kemp, 2008). Anxious symptoms in the current study were assessed with the SCL-
46
90-R, which addresses symptoms more similar in nature to anxious arousal (i.e.
shakiness, trembling, heart pounding) than anxious apprehension. The current study
extended the present state of the literature on the association between internalizing
symptoms (i.e. depression and anxiety) and frontal EEG asymmetry by examining
such patterns within the domain of intimate relationships by using the ecologically
valid stimuli of mothers’ own infants displaying positive and negative emotions.
Hypothesis 2.a: Positive asymmetry scores reflect greater left frontal EEG activity
and negative asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activity. Thus, a
negative relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest and
severity of past and current depressive symptoms and anxiety. As mothers’
asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activity at rest, they will report
more severe depressive and anxious symptomatology.
b) What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG activation (measured as
mothers view video of their infants’ emotional displays; a state measure) and the
severity of self-reported past and current depressive symptomatology and
current anxious symptomatology. Much of the empirical investigations of frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry and depressive and anxious symptoms have focused on trait
measures of EEG asymmetry (assessed during a baseline condition). The current
study extended these findings by examining the link between state-dependent EEG
asymmetry and depressive and anxious symptomatology in mothers, specifically
within a parenting context.
Hypothesis 2.b: Positive asymmetry scores reflect greater left frontal EEG activation
and negative asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activation. Thus, a
47
negative relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the
infant joy, neutral, and anger/distress conditions and mothers’ self report of past and
current depressive symptoms and current anxious symptoms. As mothers’ asymmetry
values reflect greater right frontal EEG activation during infant emotional
expressions, mothers will report more severe depressive and anxious symptomatology
c) Which is a better predictor of mothers’ self report of past and current
depressive symptoms and current anxious symptoms: EEG alpha asymmetry as
a trait or state measure? As mentioned above, the capability model (Coan, Allen,
& McKnight, 2006) suggests that individual differences in frontal EEG asymmetry
measured during emotion-elicitation procedures would produce stronger relations
with emotion-related constructs than individual differences in asymmetry measured at
rest.
Hypothesis 2.c: Frontal EEG alpha asymmetry measured during infant joy, neutral
and anger/distress conditions was expected to be a stronger predictor of mothers’ self
reported past and current depressive symptoms and current anxious symptoms than
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry measured at rest.
d) Does mothers’ frontal EEG activation (state) moderate the relation between
frontal EEG activity (trait) and the severity of mothers’ self-reported past and
current depressive symptomatology and current anxious symptomatology? In a
further test of the capability model discussed above (Coan, Allen, & McKnight, 2006)
and an extension of the research on frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest and
internalizing symptoms, the current study initially aimed to examine how stable
individual differences in EEG activity (baseline) and state-dependent EEG activation
48
(while mothers’ view video clips of their infants’ emotional displays) interacted to
better predict mothers’ current and past depressive symptoms and current anxious
symptoms. However, the lack of significant associations between frontal EEG activity
during infant emotion videos with mothers’ internalizing symptoms, as well as small
sample size, did not permit the investigation of the hypothesis that:
Hypothesis 2.d.: Frontal EEG activation (state) was expected to moderate the relation
between frontal EEG activity (trait) and mothers’ self-reported current and past
depressive symptoms and current anxious symptoms.
3) What is the association between frontal EEG asymmetry and the emotional quality of
mothers’ parenting? As no studies to date have explicitly linked frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry and observations of adult emotional behavior within a parenting context,
hypotheses regarding these associations were tentative, and largely grounded within the
literature on maternal depression and its relation to parenting behavior.
a) What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG activity (measured at rest; a
trait measure) and observed maternal emotional availability? As previously
discussed, research has repeatedly documented a link between right frontal EEG
activity, withdrawal-oriented motivation/emotion, and depressive symptoms.
Furthermore, depression has been shown to undermine competent parenting in that
depressed mothers are more inattentive, unresponsive, and less sensitive in caregiving
than non-depressed mothers. They often fail to provide an adequately structured
environment for the child, and there is an absence of pleasure and positive affect
within the mother-child relationship (Gelfand & Teti, 1990). Lastly, Dix (1991) has
suggested than an excess of emotion, even positive emotion, may lead to maladaptive
49
parenting behavior when not properly matched to a given parenting situation. Thus,
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry has been implicated in maternal depression, and
maternal depression has been implicated in parenting sensitivity, structuring,
intrusiveness and hostility. The current study aimed to close the loop by examining
the relation between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and parenting competence.
Hypothesis 3.a.i: Positive asymmetry scores reflect greater left frontal EEG activity
and negative asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activity. Thus, a
positive relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest and
mothers’ sensitivity and structuring with their children during observed mother-infant
free play. As mothers’ asymmetry scores at rest reflect greater right frontal EEG
activity, mothers will demonstrate less sensitivity and less structuring with their
children. Additionally, it is expected that infants of mothers with greater right frontal
EEG asymmetry at rest will demonstrate less responsiveness and involvement with
their mothers.
Hypothesis 3.a.ii: Less clear was the expected relation between frontal EEG activity
at rest and mothers’ intrusiveness and hostility. Both may be conceptualized as
negative-approach qualities and thus, according to the motivational direction model
of frontal EEG asymmetry, one might expect a positive relation between frontal EEG
asymmetry at rest and mothers’ intrusiveness and hostility with their children.
b) What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG activation (measured during
mothers’ viewing of their infant’s emotional displays; a state measure) and
observed maternal emotional availability? Although depression is associated with
right frontal EEG activation (withdrawal), depressed mothers can also be intrusive
50
and hostile toward their infants (Cohn et al., 1986). Such behaviors may be
characterized as approach-oriented, and thus the motivational direction model of
frontal EEG asymmetry would purport that such behaviors would be associated with
left frontal EEG activation. The unique design of the current study allowed us to go
beyond affective style alone in the investigation of maternal depression and attempt to
understand how responses in-the-moment may further explicate the neural correlates
of maternal depression and parenting at risk. Differential responding to infant
emotional cues may help explain why some depressed mothers are intrusive, whereas
others are more withdrawn, even though both subtypes might exhibit right frontal
EEG activity at rest.
Hypothesis 3.b.i: Positive asymmetry scores reflect greater left frontal EEG activation
and negative asymmetry scores reflect greater right frontal EEG activation. Thus, a
positive relation was expected between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during all
infant emotion conditions and mothers’ sensitivity and structuring with their children
during observed mother-infant free play. As mothers’ asymmetry scores reflect
greater right frontal EEG activation during infant joy, neutral, and anger/distress
expressions, mothers will demonstrate less sensitivity and less structuring with their
children.
Hypothesis 3.b.ii: It is also possible that a negative relation exists between frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry during the infant anger/distress condition and non-
intrusiveness and non-hostility. As mothers’ asymmetry scores reflect greater right
frontal EEG activation during infant anger/distress conditions, mothers may be more
non-intrusive (less intrusive) and more non-hostile (less hostile) with their children.
51
Hypothesis 3.b.iii: Less clear was the expected relation between frontal EEG
activation during the infant joy and neutral conditions and mothers’ intrusiveness and
hostility. Although these can be conceptualized as negative-approach qualities and
thus reflected in left frontal EEG activation according to the motivational direction
model of frontal EEG asymmetry, it is possible that left frontal EEG activation under
joy conditions is unrelated to these negative-approach parenting qualities, or is
negatively related. Or, it may be that a combined pattern of responding across
positive and negative infant cues is the key to understanding emotional unavailability.
Perhaps a mother who shows greater right frontal EEG activation (approach) during
both positive and negative infant emotional states would display les sensitivity in
parenting. However, a mother with greater right frontal EEG activation during
positive infant emotional states, but greater left frontal EEG activation during
negative infant emotional states might display greater intrusiveness and hostility in
parenting.
c) Which is a better predictor of observed maternal emotional availability: EEG
alpha asymmetry as a trait or state measure?
Hypothesis 3.c: Frontal EEG asymmetry measured during the infant joy, neutral, and
anger/distress conditions was expected to be a stronger predictor of observed
maternal emotional availability than frontal EEG asymmetry measured at rest.
d) Does mothers’ frontal EEG activation (state) moderate the relation between
frontal EEG activity (trait) and observed maternal emotional availability? In a
further test of the capability model discussed above (Coan, Allen, & McKnight, 2006)
and an extension of the question answered above, the current study initially aimed to
52
examine how stable individual differences in EEG activity (baseline) and state-
dependent EEG activation (while mothers’ view video clips of their infants’
emotional displays) interacted to better predict mothers’ observed emotional
availability. However, the lack of significant associations between frontal EEG
activity during baseline and during infant emotion videos with mothers’ observed
emotional availability, as well as small sample size, did not permit the investigation
of the hypothesis that:
Hypothesis 3.d.: Frontal EEG activation (state) was expected to moderate the relation
between frontal EEG activity (trait) and emotional availability.
53
CHAPTER II
METHOD
Participants
The current study utilized data from the Minds of Mothers Study (MOMS), funded by
The Pennsylvania State University Child Youth and Family Consortium. The larger MOM
study aimed to use the tools of affective neuroscience to further our understanding of
mothers’ emotional responses and emotion regulation capacities in the face of child-created
emotional events. All families were recruited through newspaper advertisements and the
Penn State Child Study Center’s FIRSt Families database – a database of families interested
in volunteering for research studies that are from the central Pennsylvania region.
Forty-seven mothers and their infants participated in the larger project. Due to
equipment malfunctions, 20 mothers did not have analyzable EEG data. Therefore, the
analyses of the current study included 27 mothers and their infants (see Table 1 for a
summary of participant demographic information), including 14 female and 13 male infants.
Infants were 6.94 months old on average (SD = .81) at the time of the first home visit,
ranging from 5.6 – 8.7 months old. Twelve infants were first-born, 12 were second-born, and
3 were third-born. Mothers were 30.67 years old on average (SD = 5.07) at the time of the
first home visit, ranging from 22 – 45 years old. All participants had at least a high school
degree. Thirty-seven percent of mothers also had a Bachelor’s degree, and 44% held
advanced degrees. Sixty-seven percent of mothers described themselves as unemployed or
stay-at-home-moms, and 67% of those who were working were full-time. All participants
were living with a partner, and 93% percent of mothers were married at the time of
recruitment. The average household annual income was $78,308 (SD = $58,794) and ranged
54
from $12,000 to $300,000. Of the participants in the present study, 85% are Caucasian, 7%
are African American, 4% are Hispanic/Latino, and 4% did not provide information
regarding race.
Procedure
The current study was divided into three phases. Phase I involved a home visit in
which infant emotional expressions were videotaped in order to create the infant emotion
stimuli for use during mothers’ laboratory visit in Phase III. Additionally, mothers were
administered a questionnaire battery assessing demographic characteristics, psychiatric
symptoms, parenting cognitions, and the quality of the mother-infant relationship. Phase II
involved a second home visit in which mother-infant free play interactions were videotaped
for later coding of mothers’ emotional availability. Phase III involved mothers’ visit to the
Human Electrophysiology Facility (HEF) at Penn State to participate in an EEG recording
protocol utilizing the pre-recorded video segments of infant emotional expressions from
Phase I. Additionally, mothers reported their emotional experiences in response to the infant
emotion stimuli and their perceptions of the type and intensity of their infants’ emotions in
the video, after the EEG recordings were complete. Standard procedures for acquiring
informed consent were used, and tasks were briefly described to mothers prior to the start of
each visit.
Phase Ia – Elicitation of Infant Emotion. At the time of the first home visit, infants
were placed securely in an infant seat situated on the floor in a quiet room in the mothers’
homes. Mothers were within auditory but not visual proximity of their infant during these
procedures. The camera was perched behind the Research Assistant (RA) on a tripod,
55
focused solely on the infant and continuously recording infant facial activity. The RA was
situated within 2 feet of the infant.
Finger/Block Tracking. Infant neutral expressions were obtained by having
infants visually track the RA’s moving finger or an orange block in the RA’s hand in order to
elicit interest without positive or negative facial expressions.
Peek-a-Boo & Social Smile. Infant expressions of joy were obtained by having
the RA smile and quietly vocalize to the infant, and/or play a game of peek-a-boo. Given the
ubiquity of infant social smiling by 6 months of age in response to the social smiles of and
interaction with others, we expected this to be a reliable procedure in eliciting positive
emotion in infants. In the few instances when the RA was unable to elicit positive emotion
from the infant, the infant’s mother was brought into the room to elicit infant smiling using
the same procedures.
Arm Restraint. Infant displays of angry distress (anger and anger/sadness
blends) were elicited through the use of the gentle arm-restraint procedure, a well-established
procedure used in studies of emotion regulation in very young children (Stifter & Braungart,
1995; Stifter & Jain, 1996). Because very young children often exhibit anger expressions
accompanied by sadness (Camras, Sullivan, & Michel, 1993), the distress exhibited by
infants during this task is likely an anger-sadness blend. In this task, the RA sat directly
behind the infants in the infant seat, and gently held the infants’ arms down at his/her side for
2 minutes or 20 seconds of hard crying, whichever came first. The RA then released the
infants’ arms for 1 minute and remained motionless behind the infant while the video
recording continued.
56
Phase Ib – Extraction of Infant Emotion Stimuli. Five unique 10-second segments of
infant expressed emotion were extracted from the continuous video recording described
above: 2 joy segments, 2 anger/distress segments, and 1 neutral segment. Two joy and two
anger/distress segments were extracted to reduce possible habituation to the emotional
stimuli. The 10-second clips were centered on the peak intensity of an expressed emotion
(i.e. peak emotional expression was around the 5-second mark of each clip).
Phase Ic – Self-Reported Depressive and Anxious Symptoms. The Symptom Rating
Checklist 90-Revised (SCL-90-R; Derogatis, Lazarus, & Maruish, 1994) depression and
anxiety subscales were used to assess the severity of mothers’ depressive symptoms.
Participants were asked to indicate how much each listed problem had bothered them during
the past 7 days. The depression subscale contained 13 items including “feeling blue,”
“feeling hopeless about the future,” and “feelings of worthlessness.” The anxiety subscale
contained 10 items including “feeling tense or keyed up,” “nervousness or shakiness inside,”
and “the feeling that something bad is going to happen to you.” Each item was rated on a 5-
point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). An average score for the subscale was
computed and converted to a T-score, using norms from non-patient adult females. The SCL-
90-R has strong psychometric credentials, including high internal and test-retest reliability,
factorial validity, and convergent and discriminant validity (Derogatis, Lazarus, & Maruish,
1994). Additionally, a Lifetime Depression Interview was created for the current study.
Participants were asked to describe any periods during their lifetime in which they felt
depressed or down for most of the day, for longer than 2 weeks.Trained clinical psychology
doctoral students coded the content of the interview and categorized mothers as having a
significant depression history if mothers reported 2 or more episodes of depression, with each
57
episode lasting at least one month. The total number of months spent depressed in mothers’
lifetime was also used as a measure of a lifetime history of depression.
Phase II – Mother-Infant Free Play Interaction and Emotional Availability. A second
home visit was conducted within one week of the first home visit. During this visit, mothers
were videotaped while playing with their infants for 30 minutes. Mothers were free to
structure the activity in whatever way was typical for them. The RA adjusted the camera to
capture the mother and infant in profile whenever possible. The mother-infant interactions
were assessed with the Emotional Availability Scales system (EAS; Biringen, Robinson, &
Emde, 1998), a system closely aligned with attachment theory and Ainsworth’s
conceptualization of parental sensitivity (Bretherton, 2000). Two female coders, trained and
certified by the EAS developer, Zeynep Biringen, coded the interactions. Adequate inter-rater
reliability was achieved for all scales (intraclass correlations range from .668 to .738), with
the exception of Non-hostility (intraclass correlation = .411), likely due to the limited range
in scores on that subscale. The EAS has earned the reputation of being one of the most well-
conceived systems for assessing the emotional quality of parent-child interaction in the field
(Teti & Huang, 2005). Maternal emotional availability is assessed with four dimensions:
Sensitivity (a 9-point scale assessing parental warmth and emotional connectedness with the
child); Structuring (a 5-point scale assessing parents’ ability to scaffold their children’s play
and set appropriate limits); Non-intrusiveness (a 5-point reversed scale assessing parental
controlling behavior during the interaction); and Non-hostility (a 5-point reversed scale
assessing covertly- and overtly-directed hostility during the interaction). The child’s
emotional availability is assessed with two scales: Responsiveness (a 7-point scale assessing
infants’ enthusiasm and pleasure in interactions with their mothers); and Involvement (a 7-
58
point scale assessing the degree to which infants attends to and directly engage their mothers
in interaction).
Phase IIIa – EEG Data. Within one week of the second home visit, mothers visited
the Human Electrophysiology Facility (HEF) at Penn State to participate in an EEG
recording protocol using the pre-recorded video segments of infant emotion obtained during
the initial home visit.
Data Acquisition. The current study used an Electrical Geodesics, Inc. (EGI)
250 Dense-Array EEG System. This system included: 3 HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Nets, a
Net Amps 250 amplifier, an Apple PowerMac G5, Net Station 4.1.2. software, a 23-inch
Apple Cinema Display, and an appropriately placed chin rest situated approximately 61
centimeters from the computer display monitor to minimize head movement. The system
utilizes a Geodesic sensor net configured for 128 channels of data, the placement of which
maps onto the traditional International 10-20 system (Klem, Luders, Jasper, & Elger, 1999).
Net application uses a non-abrasion application method. The net includes electrodes placed
on the supra- and suborbit of each eye to detect eye blink artifacts. Electrodes are also affixed
to the left and right ears to enable the computation of “linked ear” (mastoid) reference, which
can be used in addition to an averaged reference and Cz (vertex) reference in data analysis
(Hagemann, 2004). During acquisition, data were referenced to channel 129 (Cz; vertex) and
were re-referenced offline to the average reference with PARE correction (see further
description below). The system’s Net Station software enables the integration of stimulus
presentation events and external signals, detection of artifacts (i.e. eye blinks and eye
movements), detection and correction of bad channels, and re-referencing of data based on
criteria defined by the user. All electrode impedances in all EEG recordings were kept below
59
50kΩ and signals were sampled at a rate of 250 samples/second. The Human
Electrophysiology Facility (HEF) is equipped with two dark-sealed testing rooms that are
configured to allow video and audio feeds among testing chambers. The EEG suite is also
equipped with an Apple iSight digital video camera to record mothers’ facial expressions
during the procedure. Additionally, a mirror was placed adjacent to mothers’ faces that
reflected the computer monitor’s image to the iSight camera.
Baseline Procedure. Following the procedure of Tomarken et al. (1992a) each
mother participated in an 8-minute baseline recording session, subdivided into eight 1-minute
trials (four with eyes open (O), four with eyes closed (C), in the following order: C, O, O, C,
O, C, C, O). Participants heard instructions to either open or close their eyes each minute. In
his review of methodological issues attendant to studies of PFC asymmetry, Hagemann
(2004) noted that an eight-minute resting period such as this is likely to yield highly reliable
baseline measurement of asymmetry. E-Prime, an experiment operating system, inserted
markers into the EEG recording, in real time, when each 1-minute trial began. These markers
were then used to segment the EEG record by trial during data analyses.
Emotion Video Presentation. Continuous EEG data were recorded while
mothers watched a 15-minute video stream of their infant’s emotion video clips. The clips
were cut together into a single video presentation, with a 15-second black screen presented
between each emotion segment. The order of the positive (P1 and P2), negative (N1 and N2)
and neutral (Ne) video clips was counterbalanced within the video stream, and each mother
viewed the emotion clips of their infants in the same order with 15-second black screens
between each clip: Ne, P1, N1, Ne, N2, P2, N1, Ne, P1, N2, P2, Ne, P1, Ne, N1, P2, N2, Ne,
Ne, P1, N1, Ne, N2, P2, N1, Ne P1, N2, P2, Ne, P1, Ne, N1, P2, N2, Ne. Therefore, mothers
60
saw each unique joy clip 6 times (for a total of 12 joy clips), each unique anger/distress clip 6
times (for a total of 12 anger/distress clips), and each neutral clip 12 times. The entire infant
emotion video presentation lasted 15 minutes. A mirror placed adjacent to mothers’ heads
reflected the computer monitor’s image to the digital video camera. After completion of the
EEG recording, the video from the digital video camera was synched to the EEG record.
Markers were manually inserted into the continuous EEG record at the onset of each emotion
clip and black screen, based on the timing of each clip and the clip’s image reflected in the
mirror. These markers were later used to segment the EEG record by stimulus type during
data analyses.
Data Cleaning. After EEG data acquisition, a 1-30 Hz bandpass filter was
applied to isolate EEG activity within the 1-30 Hz range (see Ray, 1990). Artifacts were
screened and bad channels were replaced using automated Net Station 4.1.2 artifact detection
software. In bad channel replacement, data from “bad” channels (fast transits exceeding 200
µv in a 640 ms window size) were replaced with data interpolated from the remaining
channels using spherical splines. Studies have demonstrated that by utilizing spherical
splines, voltage values at a given scalp location can be accurately interpolated from other
evenly-distributed scalp locations (Luu et al., 2001; Perrin, Pernier, Bertrand, Giard, &
Gechallier, 1987). Data were re-referenced offline using an average reference with Polar
Average Reference Effect (PARE) correction. An average reference is preferable to a Cz
reference in that no single scalp location can be assumed to have a voltage value of 0, against
which all other locations can be referenced. In contrast, the dipolar nature of neural sources
suggests that the voltage at every evenly-distributed, uniformly sampled electrode on a given
surface body will sum to zero. That is to say, the positive and negative fields across the scalp
61
would sum to zero. However, despite the use of high-density EEG nets, uniform sampling is
impossible as there are no electrodes located at the bottom of the head. Therefore, the
average reference would be biased toward scalp locations with a greater density of
electrodes, namely the top of the head. This polar average reference effect (PARE) must be
corrected in order to obtain a more accurate average reference that is closer to the ideal value
of 0. Average reference with PARE correction uses spline interpolation to interpolate
voltages at the bottom of the head where there are no electrodes, and uses this information to
calculate a more accurate average reference (Junghoefer, Elbert, Tucker, & Braun, 1999).
Lastly, principal components analysis (PCA) was used to remove artifacts in the continuous
EEG record. PCA decomposes complex, superimposed effects in the EEG signal into
uncorrelated constructs that are spatially orthogonal. Wallstrom, Kass, Miller, Cohn, and Fox
(2004) found that PCA effectively reduced ocular artifact in the EEG record with minimal
spectral distortion. Furthermore, they found that small epoch lengths (around 1-second as
opposed to 60-seconds) improved the accuracy of estimating spectral power in the alpha
bands. The current study used 2-second epochs, further discussed below.
Data Reduction. Each 10-second segment corresponding to the video
presentation of infant emotion was divided into 2-second epochs that overlapped by 1.5
seconds. The overlap compensates for the minimal weight accorded to the ends of each
epoch from the application of a Hamming window weighting function. A Fast Fourier
Transform (FFT) was applied to all artifact-free epochs (after PCA analyses), and all power
measures were log-transformed to avoid non-normal distribution. Average power in the 8-13
Hz band was taken as an index of alpha power. An asymmetry score was computed by taking
the difference of natural log transformed scores for all sites that have symmetrical left and
62
right locations. A cluster of six electrodes surrounding the F3 (left) location of the
International 10-20 System (see Ray, 1990) (electrodes 19, 20 23, 24, 27, 28) were averaged
and subtracted from the average of a symmetrical cluster of six electrodes surrounding the F4
(right) location of the International 10-20 system (electrodes 3, 4, 117, 118, 123, 124). A
cluster of six electrodes surrounding the F7 (left) location (electrodes 26, 27, 32, 33, 34, 38)
were averaged and subtracted from the average of a symmetrical cluster of six electrodes
surrounding the F8 (right) location (electrodes 1, 2, 116, 121, 122, 123; see Figure 1). The
asymmetry score was computed such that the left log transformed score was always
subtracted from the right (i.e. ln[right]-ln[left]), with higher values on this index reflecting
relatively greater left activity (i.e. relatively greater right alpha). Asymmetry scores were
computed for the F4-F3 and F8-F7 pairings. The natural log transformation is customary in
research on EEG asymmetry as EEG power values tend to be positively skewed (Tomarken
et al., 1992a).
The unique experimental design of the current study permitted multiple approaches in
the examination of the relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the three
infant emotion video conditions and maternal responsiveness (self-reported emotional
experience, self-reported depressive and anxious symptoms, and observed maternal
emotional availability in mother-infant free-play interaction). Mothers saw each 10-second
infant emotion video multiple times, and the following variables were created: average
asymmetry across all presentations of a given infant emotion video (i.e. EEG asymmetry
values across all seconds of all of the infant joy videos, averaged together); average
asymmetry of each video type separately (i.e. EEG asymmetry values across all seconds of
the infant joy 1 video averaged together, infant joy 2 video, etc...); average asymmetry for the
63
first 3 presentations of an infant emotion video in order to reduce potential effects of
habituation (i.e. EEG asymmetry values across all seconds of only the first 3 presentations of
any infant joy video); average maximum asymmetry achieved for a given infant emotion
video (i.e. the one EEG asymmetry value within each infant joy video presentation that
deviated the most from 0, averaged together across all infant joy videos); and average
asymmetry of a given infant emotion by thirds (i.e. EEG asymmetry values for the first 5
seconds of all infant joy videos averaged together, the second (middle) 5 seconds, etc...), as
mothers may have had their strongest reactions at the onset of the video, or during the middle
of the video where peak infant emotion was centered. A similar pattern of results emerged for
all methodological approaches to frontal EEG alpha asymmetry scores. Therefore, only
overall averaged asymmetry values (i.e. all infant joy videos) and average asymmetry of each
video type separately (i.e. EEG asymmetry values across all seconds of the infant joy 1 video
averaged together, infant joy 2 video, etc...) are reported in the Results.
Phase IIIb - Maternal Self-Reported Emotional Experience & Perceptions of Infant
Emotions. Following the EEG recording session, mothers were presented with each of the 5
unique 10-second emotion video clips of their infant and responded to a series of questions
about the emotions she and the infant were experiencing. Videos were presented in the
following order: Neutral, Positive 1, Negative 1, Negative 2, Positive 2. Based on work by
Cole, Teti, and Zahn-Waxler (2003) mothers were presented with several discrete emotions
(joy, irritability/anger, sadness, anxiety/fear, disgust, concern/worry, embarrassment, and
guilt) after each video clip and selected all the emotions they had experienced while viewing
that video segment. For each emotion mothers endorsed, they then rated its intensity from 1
(weak intensity) to 3 (strong intensity), described why they felt the way they did, and
64
indicated whether each particular stimulus made them want to approach or withdraw from
their child with the option of providing and explaining an alternate experience. Finally,
mothers selected one of 13 emotions/states that they felt typified their child’s emotional
display in the video (joy, surprise, anger/frustration, sadness, anxiety/fear, disgust,
concern/worry, fatigue, interest, excitement, hunger, boredom, or pain), with the option of
providing and explaining an alternative emotion/state. For the selected emotion/state,
mothers rated the intensity of their infants’ emotional display as compared to the infant’s
typical display of that emotion, from 1 (very little) to 9 (very much).
65
CHAPTER III
RESULTS
Study Aim 1: What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and
mothers’ reported emotional experience in response to their infants’ emotional displays?
1a. Frontal EEG activity (measured at rest; a trait measure) as a correlate of
mothers’ reported emotional experience in response to infant emotion videos. Correlational
analyses were conducted to examine the following hypotheses: Greater right frontal
activation (negative asymmetry scores) during the baseline condition would be associated
with (1) less mother reported joy during infant joy and neutral videos (positive relation); (2)
greater mother reported sadness and anxiety/fear during infant anger/distress videos (negative
relation); and (3) less mother reported concern/worry (conceptualized as empathetic concern)
during infant anger/distress videos (positive relation). Less clear were predictions of mothers’
experience of guilt during infant anger/distress videos. Mothers’ endorsement of emotions
(Yes/No responses) and the intensity of each experienced emotion in response to infant
emotion videos were examined. Several emotions were infrequently endorsed (see Table 2).
Those emotions endorsed by 2 or fewer participants (< 10% of the participant sample) were
excluded from analyses.
None of the hypothesized relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during
baseline and mothers’ reported emotional experience in response to infant emotions videos
were significant; this was true for mothers’ endorsement of discrete emotions at medial-
frontal (F4/F3) and lateral-frontal (F8/F7) sites (see Tables 4 & 5), as well as for intensity
ratings of mothers’ experienced emotions at medial-frontal and lateral-frontal sites (see
Tables 6 & 7).
66
1b. Frontal EEG activation (measured as mothers view video of their infants’
emotional displays; a state measure) as a correlate of mothers’ reported emotional
experience in response to infant emotion videos. A 3 x 2 within-subjects analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was conducted with infant emotion video condition (joy vs. anger/distress vs.
neutral interest) and hemisphere site of measured EEG alpha power (lnF3 – left hemisphere
vs. lnF4 – right hemisphere) as the independent variables in order to test the hypothesis that
left frontal activation would be greater during the infant joy videos than during infant
anger/distress videos, and right frontal activation would be greater during infant
anger/distress videos than during infant joy videos. In other words, these analyses served as a
“manipulation check” that the infant emotion videos elicited maternal frontal EEG activation
in the hypothesized directions. There was no significant main effect of infant emotion video
on alpha power, F(2, 25) = 2.319, p > .05. However, there was a significant main effect of
hemisphere site such that left alpha power was significantly greater than right alpha power
across all infant emotion video conditions F(1, 26) = 7.842, p < .01. Alpha power is inversely
related to activation; thus, mothers experienced greater right frontal activation during all
video conditions, regardless of infant emotional valence. There was no significant video x
hemisphere interaction F(2, 25) = .994, p > .05. (See Table 3 for means and standard
deviations).
Correlational analyses were conducted to examine the following hypotheses: Greater
right frontal activation (negative asymmetry scores) during the infant joy and neutral video
would be associated with (1) less mother-reported joy during infant joy and neutral videos
(positive relation); (2) greater mother-reported sadness and anxiety/fear during infant
anger/distress videos (negative relation); and (3) less mother-reported concern/worry
67
(conceptualized as empathetic concern) during infant anger/distress videos (positive relation).
Less clear were predictions of mothers’ experience of guilt during infant anger/distress
videos. Mothers’ endorsement of emotions (Yes/No responses) and the intensity of each
experienced emotion in response to infant emotion videos were examined. Again, those
emotions endorsed by 2 or fewer participants (< 10% of the sample) were excluded from
analyses.
There were significant negative relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
during all three infant emotion videos and mothers’ endorsement of irritability/anger in
response to version 1 of the infant anger/distress video at medial-frontal sites (r’s(25) range
from -.423 to -.464, p < .05; see Table 4). Greater right frontal activation (negative
asymmetry scores) during each of the three infant emotion videos was associated with
mothers’ endorsement of irritability/anger in response to seeing the infant anger/distress
video. At lateral-frontal sites, there was a significant positive relation between frontal EEG
alpha asymmetry during the infant neutral video and mothers’ endorsement of sadness during
version 2 of the infant anger/distress videos (r(25) = .380, p < .05; see Table 5). Greater right
frontal activation (negative asymmetry scores) during infant neutral videos was associated
with mothers not endorsing sadness during version 2 of the infant anger/distress video.
Contrary to expectations, frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos was
unrelated to the intensity of mothers’ emotional experiences in response to the infant emotion
videos at medial-frontal (see Table 6) and lateral-frontal (see Table 7) sites. However, there
were significant negative relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during all three
infant emotion videos and mother-rated intensity of the infants’ expressed emotion during the
infant joy and neutral videos at medial-frontal sites (r’s(24) range from -.423 to -.608, p <
68
.05; see Table 6). Greater right frontal activation (negative asymmetry scores) during all the
three infant emotion videos was associated with greater intensity of infant expressed emotion
in the joy and neutral videos only, as rated by their mothers. Of note, mothers described their
own infant as expressing primarily joy (50.0%), interest (14.8%) or excitement (27.7%) in
the infant joy video conditions. In the infant neutral video condition, mothers described their
own infant as primarily expressing interest (59.3%) or contentment (14.8%).
1c. Which is a better predictor of mothers’ self-reported emotional experience in
response to their infants’ emotional displays: EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait or state
measure? Due to largely nonsignificant relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
during baseline and mothers’ emotional experience in response to their infants’ emotional
displays, the hypothesis that frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a state measure (recorded
during infant emotion videos) would better predict mothers’ reported emotional experience
than frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait measure (recorded during baseline) was not
tested directly. An alternative measure of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry was computed,
which may be more sensitive to individual differences in the capacity to respond with
approach or withdrawal tendencies, given situational demands. Frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during baseline was subtracted from frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the
infant emotion videos. Thus, this computed difference score reflects a relative shift toward
greater right or left frontal activation from a previously recorded baseline period to the
infant emotion videos. A parallel approach was also investigated, in which frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during the inter-stimulus blank screens during the infant emotion video condition
was subtracted from frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the infant emotion videos.
Similarly, this computed difference score reflects a relative shift toward greater right or left
69
frontal activation from a concurrently recorded “baseline” (i.e. the 15-second blank screens
between each 10-second emotion video presentation) to the infant emotion videos. A similar
pattern of results emerged for both approaches, with several additional significant relations
utilizing the latter measure. Therefore, results will be reported below for the difference scores
reflecting a relative shift toward greater right or left frontal activation from a concurrently
recorded “baseline” (i.e. inter-stimulus blank screens) to infant emotion videos. Correlations
for difference scores reflecting a relative shift toward greater right or left frontal activation
from a previously recorded baseline period to the infant emotion videos can be found in
Tables 8 and 9 for mothers’ yes/no emotion responses to infant emotion videos, and Tables
12 and 13 for mother-reported intensity of emotional experiences in response to infant
emotion videos.
Frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos is highly correlated with
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the inter-stimulus blank screens (r’s(25) range from
.989 to .995, p < .001). Therefore, frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the inter-stimulus
blank screens was related to mothers’ reported emotional experiences to infant emotion
videos at medial-frontal and lateral-frontal sites in a similar pattern as previously reported for
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos (see Tables 4-7). This strong
correlation between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos and during
the inter-stimulus blank screens may mask subtle shifts in asymmetry that occur with the
onset of each infant video. Correlational analyses were conducted with the frontal EEG
asymmetry difference scores described above (frontal EEG alpha asymmetry from inter-
stimulus blank screens subtracted from frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion
video). A shift toward greater right frontal activation at medial-frontal sites during infant
70
anger/distress videos was associated with mothers not endorsing joy during both versions of
the infant anger/distress video (Version 1: r(25) = .488, p < .01; Version 2: r(25) = .468, p <
.05), and mothers’ endorsement of irritability/anger during version 1 of the infant
anger/distress video (r(25) = -.445, p < .05; see Table 10). A shift toward greater right frontal
activation at medial-frontal sites during infant neutral videos was also associated with
mothers not endorsing joy during version 1 of the infant anger/distress video (r(25) = .441, p
< .01; see Table 10). A shift toward greater right frontal activation at medial-frontal sites
during infant joy videos was significantly associated with mothers not endorsing guilt to
version 1 of the infant anger/distress video (r(25) = .396, p < .05; see Table 5). A similar
pattern of results emerged for lateral-frontal sites; see Table 11.
Regarding the intensity of mothers’ emotional experiences, a shift toward greater right
frontal activation at medial-frontal sites to infant anger/distress videos was significantly
associated with greater intensity of mother-reported sadness (r(19) = -.530, p < .05), greater
intensity of concern/worry (r(16) = -.488, p < .05) and greater intensity of mother-rated child
emotional intensity (r(24) = -.381 p < .05; See Table 14) during the infant anger/distress
videos. Additionally, a shift toward greater right frontal activation at medial-frontal sites
during infant neutral videos was related to lower intensity of mother-reported joy during
infant joy videos (r(25) = .434, p < .05; see Table 14). There were no significant relations
between the shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at lateral-frontal sites and the intensity of
mothers’ reported emotional experiences to infant emotion videos (see Table 15). Of note,
mothers described their own infant as expressing primarily anger/frustration (78.8%) in the
infant anger/distress video conditions.
71
1d. Does mother’s frontal EEG activation (state measure) moderate the relation
between frontal EEG activity (trait measure) and mothers’ reported emotional experience in
response to their infants’ emotional displays? Given the largely nonsignificant relations
between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during baseline and mothers’ emotional experience in
response to their infants’ emotional displays, as well as in the context of the analyses
described above utilizing a measure of the shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry from a
baseline condition to the infant emotion video condition, the moderation analyses were
unnecessary.
Study Aim 2: What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and
maternal anxious and depressive symptoms?
2a. Frontal EEG activity (measured at rest; a trait measure) as a correlate of
mothers’ self-reported anxious and depressive symptoms. Correlational analyses were
conducted to examine the hypotheses that greater right frontal activation (negative
asymmetry scores) during the baseline condition would be associated with greater severity of
current anxious and depressive symptoms, as well as a lifetime history of depression
(negative relations). Contrary to expectation, there were no significant relations between
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at medial-frontal or lateral-frontal sites and mothers’ reported
current or passed depressive symptoms (see Tables 16 & 17). However, as hypothesized,
greater right frontal activation at medial-frontal sites during baseline was associated with
higher T-scores on the SCL-90-R anxiety subscale (r(25) -.429, p < .05; see Table 16). This
relation appeared to be driven by the large correlation with “feeling tense” (r(25) = -.639, p <
.001). There were no significant relations at lateral-frontal sites (see Table 17).
72
2b. Frontal EEG activation (measured as mothers view video of their infants’
emotional displays; a state measure) as a correlate of mothers’ self-reported anxious and
depressive symptoms. Correlational analyses were conducted to examine the hypotheses that
greater right frontal activation (negative asymmetry scores) during the infant emotion videos
would be associated with greater severity of current anxious and depressive symptoms, as
well as a lifetime history of depression (negative relations). Contrary to expectations, there
were no significant relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during any of the infant
emotion videos at medial-frontal or lateral-frontal sites and mothers’ reported current anxious
or depressive symptoms, nor a lifetime history of depression (see Tables 16 & 17).
2c. Which is a better predictor of mothers’ self-reported anxious and depressive
symptoms: EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait or state measure? Due to largely nonsignificant
relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos and mothers’
self-reported anxious and depressive symptoms, the hypothesis that frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry as a state measure (recorded during infant emotion videos) would better predict
mothers’ self-reported anxious and depressive symptoms than frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
as a trait measure (recorded during baseline) was not tested directly. An alternative measure
of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry was computed, as utilized above in the examination of
mothers’ reported emotional experience to infant emotion videos. Frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during baseline was subtracted from frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the
infant emotion videos. Thus, this computed difference score reflects a relative shift toward
greater right or left frontal activation from a previously recorded baseline period to the
infant emotion videos. A parallel approach was also investigated, in which Frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during the inter-stimulus blank screens during the infant emotion video condition
73
was subtracted from frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the infant emotion videos.
Similarly, this computed difference score reflects a relative shift toward greater right or left
frontal activation from a concurrently recorded “baseline” (i.e. the 15-second blank screens
between each 10-second emotion video presentation) to the infant emotion videos. More
significant results emerged when utilizing the former measure. Therefore, results will be
reported below for the difference scores reflecting a relative shift toward greater right or left
frontal activation videos from a previously recorded baseline period to the infant emotion
videos. Correlations for difference scores reflecting a relative shift toward greater right or
left frontal activation from a concurrently recorded “baseline” (i.e. inter-stimulus blank
screens) to infant emotion can be found in Tables 20 and 21.
Again, frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos is highly
correlated with frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the inter-stimulus blank screens (r’s(25)
range from .989 to .995, p < .001). Therefore frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the inter-
stimulus blank screens was related to mothers’ reported anxious and depressive symptoms at
medial-frontal and lateral-frontal sites in a similar pattern as previously reported for frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos (see Tables 16 & 17), and is not reported
here.
A shift toward greater right frontal activation at medial-frontal sites during infant joy
(r(25) = .414, p < .05), infant anger/distress (r(25) = .395, p < .05), and infant neutral (r(25)
= .393, p < .05) videos was associated with lower T-scores on the SCL-90-R anxiety subscale
(see Table 18). There were no significant relations between shift in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry and current or past depressive symptoms at medial-frontal sites (see Table 18).
74
Additionally, there were no significant relations between shift in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry and depressive or anxious symptoms at lateral-frontal sites (see Tables 19).
2d. Does mother’s frontal EEG activation (state measure) moderate the relation
between frontal EEG activity (trait measure) and mothers’ self-reported anxious and
depressive symptoms? Given the largely nonsignificant relations between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during infant emotion videos and mothers’ reported anxious and depressive
symptoms, as well as in the context of the analyses described above utilizing a measure of
the shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry from a baseline condition to the infant emotion
video condition, the moderation analyses were unnecessary.
Study Aim 3: What is the relation between mothers’ frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and the
emotional quality of mothers’ parenting?
3a. Frontal EEG activity (measured at rest; a trait measure) as a correlate of
observed maternal emotional availability. Correlational analyses were conducted to examine
the following hypotheses: Greater right frontal activation (negative asymmetry scores) during
the baseline condition would be associated with (1) with less maternal sensitivity and
structuring (positive relations); (2) less child responsiveness and child involvement with the
mother (positive relations); and (3) greater non-intrusiveness and greater non-hostility
(negative relations). There were no significant relations between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry at medial-frontal and lateral-frontal sites during the baseline and observed
maternal emotional availability (see Tables 22 & 23).
3b. Frontal EEG activation (measured as mothers view video of their infants’
emotional displays; a state measure) as a correlate of observed maternal emotional
availability. Correlational analyses were conducted to examine the following hypotheses: (1)
75
greater right frontal activation (negative asymmetry) during all infant emotion videos would
be associated with less maternal sensitivity and structuring (positive relations); (2) greater
right frontal activation (negative asymmetry) during infant anger/distress videos would be
associated with greater non-intrusiveness and greater non-hostility (negative relations); (3)
less clear were predictions of the relation between frontal EEG activation during infant joy
and neutral videos, and mothers’ non-intrusiveness and non-hostility. There were no
significant relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at medial-frontal sites during
infant emotion videos and observed maternal emotional availability (see Table 22). However,
at lateral-frontal sites, greater right frontal activation during infant joy (r(25) = .392, p < .05
), anger/distress videos (r(25) =.383, p < .05) and neutral (r(25) = .386, p < .05) videos and
was associated with less observed maternal non-hostility (i.e. greater hostility; see Table 23).
3c. Which is a better predictor of observed maternal emotional availability: EEG
alpha asymmetry as a trait or state measure? Due to largely nonsignificant relations
between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during baseline and during infant emotion videos and
observed maternal emotional availability, the hypothesis that frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
as a state measure (recorded during infant emotion videos) would better predict observed
maternal emotional availability than frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait measure
(recorded during baseline) was not tested directly. An alternative measure of frontal EEG
alpha asymmetry was computed, as utilized above in the examination of mothers’ reported
emotional experience to infant emotion videos and mothers’ self-reported anxious and
depressive symptoms. Frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during baseline was subtracted from
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the infant emotion videos. Thus, this computed
difference score reflects a relative shift toward greater right or left frontal activation from a
76
previously recorded baseline period to the infant emotion videos. A parallel approach was
also investigated, in which Frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the inter-stimulus blank
screens during the infant emotion video condition was subtracted from frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during the infant emotion videos. Similarly, this computed difference score
reflects a relative shift toward greater right or left frontal activation from a concurrently
recorded “baseline” (i.e. the 15-second blank screens between each 10-second emotion
video presentation) to the infant emotion videos. More significant results emerged for with
the latter measure. Therefore, results will be reported below for the difference scores
reflecting a relative shift toward greater right or left frontal activation from a concurrently
recorded “baseline” (i.e. inter-stimulus blank screens) to infant emotion. Correlations for
difference scores reflecting a relative shift toward greater right or left frontal activation
videos from a previously recorded baseline period to the infant emotion video can be found
in Tables 24 and 25.
Again, frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos is highly
correlated with frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the inter-stimulus blank screens (r’s(25)
range from .989 to .995, p < .001). Therefore, frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the inter-
stimulus blank screens was related to observed maternal emotional availability at medial-
frontal and lateral-frontal sites in a similar pattern as previously reported for frontal EEG
alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos (see Tables 22 & 23), and is not reported
here. A shift toward greater right frontal activation at medial-frontal sites during infant joy
and anger/distress videos was associated with greater observed maternal sensitivity,
structuring, non-intrusiveness (i.e. less intrusiveness) and non-hostility (i.e. less hostility; see
Table 26). There were no significant relations between shift in frontal EEG activation from
77
inter-stimulus blank screens to infant emotion videos at lateral-frontal sites and observed
maternal emotional availability (see Table 27).
3d. Does mother’s frontal EEG activation (state measure) moderate the relation
between frontal EEG activity (trait measure) and observed maternal emotional availability?
Given the largely nonsignificant relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during
infant emotion videos and observed maternal emotional availability, as well as in the context
of the analyses described above utilizing a measure of the shift in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry from a baseline condition to the infant emotion video condition, the moderation
analyses were unnecessary.
Posthoc Analyses
In the analyses described above, significant relations between frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during emotion videos and mothers’ emotional experiences to infant emotion
videos, self-reported anxious and depressive symptoms, and observed maternal emotional
availability emerged when frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during a baseline (either previously
or concurrently recorded) was controlled for. In order to contextualize these results, the
individual contributions of shifts in the left and right hemispheres to shifts in alpha
asymmetry were investigated. Alpha power is inversely related to frontal EEG activation; A
shift toward greater right frontal activation from frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the
inter-stimulus blank screens to frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos
could be a result of an increase in left frontal alpha power (i.e a decrease in left frontal
activation), or a decrease in right frontal alpha power (i.e. an increase in right frontal
activation), or a combination of both.
78
Contribution of Individual Hemisphere Changes in Alpha Power to Changes in Alpha
Asymmetry for Infant Joy and Anger/Distress Videos. An increase in lnF3 (left hemisphere)
alpha power predicted a shift toward greater right frontal activation from concurrently
recorded baseline (i.e. inter-stimulus blank screens) to both infant joy and anger/distress
videos. An increase in left alpha power indicates a decrease in activation of that hemisphere.
Thus, frontal EEG alpha asymmetry difference scores reflecting a shift toward greater right
frontal activation are due to the left hemisphere going “offline” during infant joy and
anger/distress video presentations. Increases in left alpha power accounted for 15.6% (infant
joy), and 21.2% (infant anger/distress) of the variance in the negative shift in frontal EEG
alpha asymmetry (infant joy: ß = -.395, p < .05), F(1, 25) = 4.612; infant anger/distress: (ß =
-.461, p < .05), F(1, 25) = 6.735). Change in lnF4 (right hemisphere) alpha power accounted
for 0% (infant joy) and .1% (infant anger/distress) of the variance in the negative shift in
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry (infant joy: ß = .014, p > .05) F(1, 25) = .005; ß = -.035, p >
.05), F(1, 25) = .031).
Contribution of Individual Hemisphere Changes in Alpha Power to Changes in Alpha
Asymmetry for Infant Neutral Videos. Neither changes in lnF3 (left hemisphere) nor lnF4
(right hemisphere) alpha power predicted the negative shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
(increased right frontal activation) from concurrently recorded baseline to infant neutral
videos. An increase in left alpha power accounted for 4.8% of the variance in the decrease in
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry, (ß = -.219, p > .05), F (1, 25) =1.262), and a decrease in right
alpha power accounted for 1.8% of the variance in the decrease in alpha asymmetry, (ß =
.133, p > .05), F(1, 25) = .453).
79
CHAPTER IV
DISCUSSION
Theory and empirical study identify parenting as a central contributor to child
psychopathology. Research to date has largely focused on “family address” or static models
of parenting. Such approaches have examined the effects of parental psychopathology (i.e.
Conners’ et al., 2003; Teti & Towe-Goodman, 2010), poverty (i.e. Conger, Conger, Elder, &
Lorenz, 1992), abuse (i.e. Margolin, Gordis, Medina, & Oliver, 2003), and conflict/divorce
(i.e. Amato & Keith, 1991; Grych & Fincham, 1990) on parenting and child outcomes.
However, parenting is a highly complex and emotional process in which input from the child
activates parental cognitions and emotions, which leads to subsequent parental behavior,
which then alters the input from the child, and so on in a recursive fashion. Emotion is at the
core of this process (Dix, 1991). Specifically, it is a parent’s experienced emotion that can
promote or undermine competent parenting. To understand parenting as a dynamic process
therefore necessitates the input of child-created events, the measurement of experienced
emotion as it unfolds in response to this input (Dix’s notion of the “activation” of emotion),
and a link to parental behavior (Dix’s notion of “engagement” of emotion). The tools of
affective neuroscience provide a methodological framework that enables one to capture this
unfolding or “online” emotional experience. Accumulating evidence of the last two decades
suggests that greater relative right frontal electroencephalographic (EEG) activation of the
prefrontal cortical (PFC) (denoted by decreased alpha) reflects approach-oriented emotions
such as joy and anger (Harmon-Jones, 2007), whereas greater right frontal activation reflects
withdrawal-oriented emotions such as sadness and disgust. Alpha asymmetry can be
conceptualized as a trait measure (“affective style” Davidson, 1998), a state measure (Coan,
80
Allen, & Harmon-Jones, 2001), or the interaction of both which measures an individual’s
capacity to respond emotionally in an emotional context (Coan, Allen, & McKnight, 2006).
The current study employed each of these approaches – overall affective style,
responding within an emotional context, and ones capacity for responding with an emotional
context – in the investigation of online maternal responsiveness to infant emotion cues. A
constellation of factors comprised the study’s conceptualization of maternal responsiveness:
mothers’ report of experienced emotions in response to their own infant’s emotional displays,
mothers’ reported anxious and depressive symptomatology, and observed emotional
availability during mother-infant free-play interaction. In general, findings from the current
study did not support an association between “affective style” and maternal responsiveness
(See Table 28for a summary of findings for the baseline condition). Furthermore,
associations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry within an emotional context and
maternal responsiveness were limited. In contrast, a shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
from a baseline condition to the emotional context, conceptualized as mothers’ capacity to
respond within an emotional context, was related to mothers’ experienced emotions when
seeing their infant’s emotional displays, severity of mothers’ anxiety symptoms, and
maternal emotional availability (see Table 29 or a summary of findings for the infant emotion
video conditions). The overall findings also reflected a match between negative emotionality
in mothers and their infants. In other words, mothers’ frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during
their infant’s displays of anger/distress were linked to multiple negative emotions in mothers,
but the same was not true for positive emotionality (i.e. mothers’ frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during their infant’s displays of joy was unrelated to mothers’ intensity of
experienced joy). Mothers demonstrated an overall pattern of right frontal activation in
81
response to infant displayed emotions, regardless of emotional valence. Additionally,
mothers demonstrated a shift toward greater relative right frontal activation from a baseline
condition to the emotional context, and that shift was driven by a decrease in left frontal
activation rather than an increase in right frontal activation. However, this was only true for
shifts during infant joy and infant anger/distress. Lastly, the current study demonstrated a
medial vs. lateral distinction in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as it relates to maternal
responsiveness; most of the significant associations emerged for frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry assessed at medial frontal sites.
“Affective Style” & Maternal Responsiveness
Affective style (i.e. frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait measure, assessed during
a baseline condition; Davidson, 1998) is a reliable predictor of state-dependent emotional
responses (i.e. an individual’s subjective emotional experience in response to an emotional
situation). It appears to tap a propensity to respond emotionally given an emotion situation.
Individuals with greater left frontal activity at rest respond to positive emotion situations with
greater reported positive emotions than those with greater right frontal activity at rest.
Conversely, individuals with greater right frontal activity at rest respond to negative emotion
situations with greater reported negative emotions than those with greater left frontal activity
at rest. A conceptualization of affective style as a diathesis for the development of affective
disorders was derived from these findings, and a substantial body of empirical data has
demonstrated an association between right frontal activity at rest and symptoms of depression
and anxiety (Nitschke, Heller, Palmieri & Miller, 1999; Sutton and Davidson, 1997;
Thibodeau, Jorgensen, & Kim, 2006; Tomarken et al., 1992). Furthermore, evidence that
affective style may be a diathesis for affect disorders is relevant to the study of parenting in
82
that maternal depression has been shown to undermine competent parenting. Depressed
mothers are more inattentive, unresponsive and less sensitive in caregiving than non-
depressed mothers. They often fail to provide an adequately structured environment for the
child, and there is an absence of pleasure and positive affect within the mother-child dyad
(Gelfand & Teti, 1990; Teti & Towe-Goodman, 2010). Emotions arising in the parenting
context can promote or undermine competent parenting practices. The current study
examined the relation between affective style and the nature of maternal responsiveness:
mothers’ experienced emotions in an emotional context, depressive and anxious
symptomatology, and observed maternal emotional availability.
Surprisingly, the current study did not find the expected relations between affective
style (frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during baseline) and mothers’ experienced emotions in
an emotional context or observed maternal emotional availability. It may be that mothers’
emotional responding to their own infant is more situational or state-dependent than a
reflection of individual differences in trait-like approach or withdrawal motivational
tendencies. Parenting may be a unique emotional experience; positive and negative emotions
in the parenting context may hold an entirely different meaning than positive and negative
emotions to less personally relevant stimuli. Globally, positive and negative emotions
involve personal goal attainment or failure. In the parenting context, however, positive and
negative emotions may reflect an interaction between both parent- and child-oriented goals
and concerns (Dix, 1991; Leerkes & Crockenberg, 2007). This may partly account for the
lack of association in the current study between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait
measure and state-dependent emotional responses and observed emotional availability during
parent-child interaction. Emotional responding to ones own infant involves more than
83
personal or individual goals and concerns. The current study utilized ecologically valid and
highly relevant stimuli to the parenting context – ones own infant. The unique nature of these
stimuli may have elicited a different pattern of emotional responding than has been
demonstrated by previous studies, which have typically used videos of actors displaying
emotions (e.g. Davidson et al., 1990), voluntary facial movements by the participants (e.g.
Coan et al., 2001), and video scenes of positive and negative events (e.g. Reeves et al., 1989).
Affective style may be too broad of a measure and too far removed from the parenting
context to account for individual differences in parenting. That is to say that a parent’s
propensity to respond emotionally given an emotion situation is not as sensitive of a measure
as a parent’s capacity to respond within the unfolding emotional parenting context (i.e.
seeing their own infant express a range of emotions). As will be discussed below, significant
associations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and parenting behavior emerged when
this capacity for responding (a shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry from baseline to the
infant emotion videos) was assessed.
It is also noteworthy that the current study found no significant associations between
affective style and depressive symptoms, which is in stark contrast to a large body of
research in this domain demonstrating a consistent link between right frontal activity at rest
and depressive symptoms (i.e. Sutton and Davidson, 1997; Thibodeau, Jorgensen, & Kim,
2006; Tomarken et al., 1992). However, greater right frontal activity at rest was in fact
associated with greater reported anxiety in the current study. Although participants in the
current study reported a range of depression and anxiety scores on a self-report measure of
symptoms, none of the mothers reported symptoms within the clinical range (i.e. T-scores >
69), and most scores would be considered within normal limits. It may be that affective style
84
is a better predictor of more severe affective symptomatology, even if it is sub-threshold, and
less useful as a marker of normative variance in depressive symptoms within a non-clinical
sample. Findings from the current study, however, suggest that frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
at rest may serve as a marker for anxiety, even when considering normal variation within a
non-clinical sample. Empirical investigations of anxiety and frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
have been mixed. To account for variability in these findings, Heller and colleagues (i.e.
Nitschke, Heller, Palmieri & Miller, 1999; Heller, Nitschke, Etienne & Miller, 1997) have
suggested a distinction between “anxious arousal” and “anxious apprehension,” with the
former involving physiological arousal and hyper-reactivity under panic conditions, and the
latter involving worry and verbal rumination. In an examination of this framework,
Mathersul, Williams, Hopkinson, and Kemp (2008) demonstrated that right frontal activity
during a baseline condition was associated with higher anxious arousal, whereas left frontal
activity was associated with higher anxious apprehension. Viewed within this context,
mothers with greater right frontal activity at rest may be those mothers who experience
higher levels of physiological arousal. In fact, the significant association between frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry at rest and anxiety symptoms appears to have been largely driven by
the strong association with mothers’ endorsement of the single item of “feeling tense.”
State-Dependent Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry & Maternal Responsiveness
Studies involving the examination of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a state rather
than trait measure have demonstrated that changes in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry can be
reliably elicited through a range of emotional paradigms. Empirical evidence supports the
proposition that environmental situations that evoke approach or withdrawal tendencies are
associated with left or right frontal activation, respectively (i.e. Coan, Allen, & Harmon-
85
Jones, 2001; Davison et al., 1990; Harmon-Jones et al., 2003). Contrary to expectations, a
pattern of right frontal activation emerged for all environmental situations (i.e. all infant
emotion videos, regardless of emotion valence).
Furthermore, the current study demonstrated that mothers with greater right frontal
activation during all infant video conditions perceived their infants as expressing a greater
intensity of positive emotions in joy and neutral videos, and they were more likely to endorse
feeling irritability/anger when seeing their infant in distress. There were no significant
relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during the infant emotion video and anxious
or depressive symptoms. Lastly, greater right frontal activation during the infant joy and
anger/distress videos only was related to lower non-hostility (i.e. greater hostility) in
observed parent-child interaction. There was a limited range of observed maternal hostility in
the current sample, with instances of hostility typically reflecting negative emotionality and
covert rather than overt displays of hostility toward the child.
In the context of the motivational direction model of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
(Harmon-Jones et al., 2003), these findings would suggest that mothers were experiencing a
withdrawal motivation when viewing their infants, regardless of the infant’s emotional state.
The recent investigations of Light and colleagues, however, provides a useful heuristic within
which to interpret the findings of the current study. This group has investigated how shifts in
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry may not only reflect approach or withdrawal motivations, but
also signal whether the induced emotional state is internally or externally focused. They
contend that withdrawal motivation could include both negative and positive emotion states
that are internally focused, such as sadness and contentment. In an analogous body of work,
Harmon-Jones (Harmon-Jones et al., 2003) has demonstrated that approach motivations can
86
include both negative and positive emotion states that are externally focused, and showed
that anger is associated with left frontal activation. Thus, using an internal/external
framework in the study of emotional responding, Light, Coan, Frye, Goldsmith, and
Davidson (2009a) examined whether varying intensities of positive emotions were
differentially reflected in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry. They examined contentment
because of its qualities as internally-focused, with a limited outward display of positive
emotion, and a lack of action-orientation. In their study of over 100 children, age 6-10, Light
et al. (2009a) found that the rate of accelerating pleasure during an enjoyable task was linked
to the rate of growth in relative left frontal activation as the task unfolded. In contrast, those
children who experienced unchanging moderate pleasure as the task unfolded showed a
pattern of decreasing left frontal and increasing right frontal activation as the task unfolded.
They propose that such a pattern reflects a non-approach positive emotion – contentment – as
well as a form of affective working memory, serving to propagate calm, positive emotional
states over time. Perhaps mothers in the current study were experiencing a low-level,
positive, and internally-focused emotion – contentment – when seeing their infants in a
context that did not permit nor require their intervention, especially if they perceived their
infants as experiencing high intensity positive affect. This could then contribute to the
subjective experience of irritability/anger when mothers saw their infant in a state of distress.
Although not addressed in the current study, it would have been informative to have mothers
indicate whether their irritability/anger was directed toward their infant, themselves, or the
circumstances/person eliciting the infant negative affect.
The stimuli used in the current study would not necessarily elicit an approach-
motivation in mothers, even when the infants were expressing distress, as there was no
87
possibility of intervention. Additionally, mothers consented to the procedures used to elicit
positive and negative emotions from their infants, and were aware of the time lapse between
the video recordings and the lab visit, providing ample time to be confident that their infant
was not experiencing any continual distress from the procedures used.
Lastly, evidence from neuroimaging studies of autobiographical memory have
important implications for the current study. Autobiographical memory involves memory for
information and events pertaining to ones life. It is likely that the unique stimuli employed –
ones own infant – activated autobiographical memory due to its highly personal nature.
Investigations using fMRI have demonstrated bilateral activation during autobiographical
memory, but greater right than left activation in the orbital prefrontal cortex particularly
when emotional events were probed directly (e.g. Andreasen et al., 1995; Niki & Luo, 2002;
Nyberg et al., 2002). The predominant right frontal activation in the current study, regardless
of the valence of infant emotional expression, may have been influenced by the stimuli’s
activation of autobiographical memory.
Mothers’ responses to infant emotion stimuli, much like affective style, may be too
broad of a measure and still too far removed from the parenting context to account for
individual differences in parenting. That is to say that a parent’s emotional response during
infant emotion displays that are removed from an interactive context may not be as sensitive
of a measure as a parent’s capacity for responding within the unfolding emotional parenting
context (i.e. seeing their own infant express a range of emotions), which will be discussed
below.
A Shift from Baseline to State-Dependent Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry & Maternal
Responsiveness
88
There were very few relations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a state
measure and mothers’ experienced emotions in an emotional context and observed maternal
emotional availability. Additionally, there were no significant relations between frontal EEG
alpha asymmetry as a state measure and depressive and anxious symptoms. Thus, at first
pass, there was little evidence in the current study to support the capability model: individual
differences in asymmetry will be more pronounced during emotion-elicitation procedures
than during baseline, and will also demonstrate stronger relations with emotion-related
constructs than individual differences in asymmetry at rest (Coan, Allen, & McKnight,
2006).
The capability model examines an individual’s capacity for approach or withdrawal
given situational demands. Although the current study did not demonstrate initial support for
the capability model when frontal EEG alpha asymmetry was measured during emotion-
elicitation tasks, an alternate approach proved to be very informative. By subtracting
mothers’ affective style (frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during a baseline condition) from
their state-dependent frontal EEG alpha asymmetry (measured during infant emotion videos),
we examined only mothers’ shift toward greater right or left frontal EEG activation with the
onset of infant emotion videos. Conceptually, such a measure might be a more sensitive
measure of individual differences in the capacity to respond in emotional contexts. This shift
reflects the degree to which mothers change relative to their motivational predispositions.
Evidence from the current study suggests that examination of this shift in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry from a baseline to an emotional context may be the most important marker of
maternal responsiveness, as many more relations emerged with emotion-related constructs.
89
The most striking pattern to emerge from analyses of the shift in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry was that a shift toward right frontal activation during all three infant emotion
videos was associated with mothers’ experienced emotions predominantly during the infant
anger/distress video. That is to say that a shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry was unrelated
to mothers’ experienced emotions when they saw their infant in a positive or neutral/content
state (infant joy and neutral videos), and was only related to their experienced emotions when
they saw their infant in distress. This was particularly the case if the shift in frontal EEG
alpha asymmetry was measured during the infant anger/distress video. Mothers experiencing
a shift toward greater right frontal activation during the infant anger/distress video endorsed
irritability/anger, did not endorse joy, experienced greater intensities of sadness and concern,
and perceived their child as showing a greater intensity anger/distress.
It might be expected that within-condition associations would be the strongest (i.e.
shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant anger/distress would be expected to be
more strongly associated with mothers’ experienced emotions during that same infant
emotion video condition) given the emotional congruence. Due to the lack of variability in
positive emotions experienced by mothers during infant joy videos (100% of participants
endorsed joy), the relation between shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant joy
and mothers’ experience of joy could not be examined. Despite this, it could also be argued
that a parent’s capacity to respond to their infant is best captured, and perhaps most
important, during challenging situations (i.e. Leerkes, Blankson, & O'Brien, 2009). Findings
from the current study would support a notion that a shift toward right frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during a challenging emotional situation corresponded with a complex
constellation of emotions. Findings from the current study appeared to reflect affect-
90
matching between mother and infant: negative emotions and concern were experienced by
the mother during a display of negative infant emotion. This, in the context of a shift toward
right frontal activation (a potential reflection of non-approach oriented contentment) might
actually be suggestive of maternal empathetic concern.
Once again, the recent work of Light and colleagues, with their examination of
internally/externally-focused emotions, provides a framework within which to interpret the
findings of the current study. Similar to their investigation of contentment, Light, Coan,
Zahn-Waxler, Frye, Goldsmith, and Davidson (2009b) examined empathy and patterns of
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry. Empathy refers to the experience of emotions from someone
else’s perspective. Empathy is, arguably, an internally focused emotion that can be positive
or negative. Light et al. (2009) make a distinction between empathetic concern (i.e.
experiencing feelings of goodwill and concern in response to someone’s distress), empathetic
cheerfulness (i.e. a tendency to exude positive emotion in response to the negative emotions
of another as a means to alleviate another’s suffering) and empathetic happiness (i.e. positive
affect sharing). They argue that empathy is an internal representation of another’s emotional
state, accompanied by a feeling of goodwill within the empathizing individual. Thus, it is an
internally-focused emotion, like contentment, and would therefore be expected to elicit
greater right frontal activation. Behavioral manifestations of empathy were coded in 6-10
year old children during an empathy task, and frontal EEG alpha asymmetry was measured
on an independent occasion during a pleasurable task. Interestingly, those children rated high
on empathetic concern during the empathy task showed a pattern of frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during a pleasurable task that began with greater relative right frontal activation,
and shifted to greater left frontal activation over the course of the pleasurable task. Those
91
children rated high on empathetic happiness exhibited and maintained relatively equal left
and right frontal activation over the course of the pleasurable task. Finally those children
rated high on empathetic cheerfulness exhibited consistent left frontal EEG alpha activation
over the course of the pleasurable task.
Of note, this study employed an independent measure of empathy that was not
acquired concurrently with the recording of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry, and it was
measured in children, not adults. However, it provides a scaffold for understanding the
complex construct of empathetic concern and how it may be reflected in frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry. Empathy involves the internal representation of the emotion state of another.
This internally-focused emotion might therefore be expected to relate to greater right frontal
activation. Interestingly, individual hemisphere contributions to the shift toward right frontal
EEG alpha asymmetry in the current study indicated that during infant joy and infant
anger/distress, left hemisphere activation was decreasing, rather than right hemisphere
activation increasing. Thus, mothers did not become more withdrawn when seeing their
infant express emotion, but rather they became less approach-oriented. It is a decrease in left
frontal activation that appears to be consistent with a feeling of contentment and an
empathetic response, rather than an increase in right frontal activation.
It is customary in the frontal EEG alpha asymmetry literature to discuss relative
hemispheric activation when it is used as a trait or state measure. However, the current study
also examined a shift in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry from baseline to an emotional context.
As a result, change in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry was examined, and findings from the
current study suggest that an assessment of individual hemispheric contributions to that
change is necessary in order to contextualize the relations between frontal EEG alpha
92
asymmetry and maternal responsiveness. Therefore, it may be more accurate to discuss
changes in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as reflecting a decrease in left activation, rather
than a shift toward greater right frontal activation. Although a decrease in approach-
motivation is conceptually different than an increase in withdrawal-motivation, it still
remains an empirical question as to whether it is the relative nature of the resulting
asymmetry (i.e. right activation is still relatively greater than left activation) or the change in
each hemisphere (i.e. decreasing left activation) that is most crucial in understanding
maternal responsiveness.
In the Light et al. (2009b) study, the children high on empathetic concern maintained
greater right frontal activation for well beyond the first 30 seconds of the task before shifting
toward greater left-frontal activation. The current study recorded frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry during emotion epochs that were only one-third that amount of time – 10
seconds. The pattern of findings in the current study may be reflective of the initial stages of
an empathetic concern response by mothers to seeing their infant in distress. It would be
interesting to investigate a longer time course in future studies in order to examine shifts in
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as they unfold during an emotional event.
In addition to these intriguing findings, which are suggestive of an empathetic
process, the current study also demonstrated that a shift toward greater right frontal activation
during infant expressions of both positive and negative emotions were related to more
sensitive parenting, structuring, non-intrusiveness, and non-hostility. A shift toward greater
right frontal EEG activation during infant neutral displays, however, was unrelated to
parenting behavior. This differential pattern of association suggests that a parent’s capacity to
respond emotionally to infant expressed emotion, and not just to the infant him- or her-self, is
93
intimately linked with parenting behavior. Taken together, these findings that a shift toward
greater right frontal activation was associated with mothers’ seemingly empathetic response
to infant anger/distress, along with competent parenting, is congruent with Dix’s (1992)
discussion of the critical role of parental empathy in parental responsiveness. Similar to his
thesis on the affective organization of parenting, Dix (1992) proposed that there are several
cognitive and affective consequences for a parent who has child-centered, empathetic goals.
Cognitively, parents must attempt to understand what children are feeling and thinking in
order to facilitate their child’s goal attainment. Additionally, events evoke parental emotion
directly as well as indirectly through their effect on a parent’s child. Given these important
components, empathetic parenting serves to organize sensitive, responsive parenting. Several
studies have empirically demonstrated a link between parental empathy and parental
competency (i.e. Coyne et al., 2007; Leerkes, Crockenberg, & Burrous). For example, Coyne
et al (2007) developed an Empathetic Understanding Assessment (EUA) coding scheme to
assess mothers’ empathetic responding to pre-recorded mother-toddler challenging
interactions. They found that mothers who were better able to consider their child’s
perspective, motivations, thoughts and behaviors in the videotape experienced a greater
intensity of emotion themselves, and were rated by independent observers to be more
sensitive in free-play interactions with their child.
Competent parenting strategies involve attempts to maintain positive infant emotion
as well as alleviate infant distress. Of particular interest in the current study is the change in
direction of association between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during infant emotion videos
and observed maternal non-hostility before and after subtracting frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry from a baseline condition. Greater right frontal activation during infant joy and
94
infant anger/distress videos was associated with more observed hostility in mothers.
However, the shift toward greater right frontal activation from baseline to the infant emotion
videos was associated with less hostility. This suggests that an individual’s emotional
responding within an emotional context provides a very different index of “online”
responsiveness than ones capacity for change. A shift toward greater right frontal activation
was related to less observed hostility. Perhaps those mothers with greater flexibility in
situational responding are those that can respond more sensitively to their children. This also
lends support to the capability model in that it allows for the possibility that capacity for
emotions and motivations can differ from one situation to another.
It was also particularly interesting that a shift toward right frontal activation from
baseline to any infant emotion video was associated with less anxiety in mothers. This
finding was in stark contrast to the association between right frontal activation and more
anxiety during baseline, and the lack of association with anxiety when examining frontal
EEG asymmetry within the video conditions alone. Again, it seems that frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry as a trait measure, as a state measure, and the capacity for change are all different
markers of maternal responsiveness within the parenting context. We would contend that a
mother’s capacity to shift toward a more internally focused, low-level positive
affect/contentment at seeing their infant express a range of emotions, in a context in which
there is no opportunity to intervene, is synonymous with lower anxiety. Although mothers
who are more right frontal at baseline may be more anxious in general (but within the non-
clinical range of severity), mothers with the capacity for empathetic concern and the
experience of contentment in a parenting context are less likely to be anxious when they see
their infant express a range of emotions. Furthermore, the current findings are congruent with
95
neuroimaging work by Swain et al (2004) suggesting that after an initial postpartum period
(i.e. 2-4 weeks postpartum), there is a shift in regional brain responses reflecting a decrease
in amygdala activation and new activation in medial prefrontal cortical and hypothalamic
(hormone control) regions. Such as shift is suggestive of less parental anxiety in response to
infant signals (i.e. crying) and greater association of infant signals with social behaviors and
routines.
Taken together, the findings of the current study suggest that affective style and
emotional responding within emotion-elicitation events cannot capture the full picture of
maternal responsiveness as measured by frontal EEG. Rather, the examination of mothers’
capacity for change/flexibility given an emotional context provides a more panoramic view
of maternal responsiveness to infant cues.
Medial vs. Lateral Findings
The current study demonstrated a trend toward more significant associations between
frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and maternal responsiveness (i.e. maternal experienced
emotions, anxious and depressive symptomatology, and observed emotional availability) at
medial-frontal rather than lateral-frontal sites. Several intriguing bodies of work may help
explain this trend. In their comprehensive review of the functional neuroanatomy of the
human orbitofrontal cortex, Kringelbach and Rolls (2004) identify a medial vs. lateral trend
based on a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. More specifically, medial orbitofrontal
cortex activity appears to be related to decoding and monitoring the reward value of many
different reinforcers such as money (O’Doherty et al., 2001) or facial expressions
(Kringelbach & Rolls, 2003), whereas lateral orbitofrontal cortex activity appears to be
related to the evaluation of punishers subsequently affecting behavior. The study utilizing
96
facial expressions as a reinforcer is of particular relevance to the current study given the
nature of the stimuli – human faces. Using a probabilistic reversal-learning task design,
participants were instructed to select one of two neutral faces. Upon making their selection,
the facial expression changed to a “happy” or “angry” face. Through trial-and-error
participants learned which face selections had a higher probability of changing to a “happy”
face (i.e. successful trial). Thus, an “angry” face signaled a need for a change in behavior (i.e.
different selection due to an unsuccessful trial). Once participants completed a specified
number of successful trials indicating that they had learned the probabilities, the probabilities
changed without any cues and participants had to adapt to this reversal. Participants also
completed a similar task where they selected one of two “angry” faces that then changed to a
“happy” face (i.e. successful trial) or became a “neutral” face (i.e. unsuccessful trial). Lateral
parts of the orbitofrontal cortex became activated when a behavior change was signaled,
regardless of the valence of the facial expression (i.e. “angry” vs. “neutral” signals for
change).
Given the nature of the stimuli in the current study, no behavioral response/action was
indicated for the mothers. In fact, the global pattern of greater right frontal activation,
regardless of infant emotional valence, would suggest that the task did not elicit approach
motivation (which is arguably associated with behavioral action/change), and is congruent
with the notion that mothers were more likely in a state in which they were monitoring the
reward value of seeing their own infants, with no signal for behavioral change. Furthermore,
such a pattern is congruent with the above discussed interpretations that mothers were
experiencing internally-focused contentment and empathetic concern while viewing videos
of their own infants expressing various emotions.
97
Additionally, the prefrontal cortex plays an important roll in contextual recollection;
that is to say the context within which an event occurred. In an attempt to characterize the
roll of the anterior prefrontal cortex in this process utilizing fMRI, Simons et al. (2005)
identified lateral regions of the PFC to be involved in the early retrieval specification stages
of recollection – the readiness to make memory judgments – and medial regions to be
involved in later stages such as in monitoring and verification. More specifically, medial
regions of the PFC were activated at the time during a memory task when an external
stimulus signaled the participant to recall an earlier judgment they had made about the
stimulus (i.e. whether it was pleasant or unpleasant), and peaked in intensity at a later time
point than lateral sites. Simons et al. (2005) contend that this reflects stimulus-oriented
processing of information that was internally generated (i.e. a value judgment). Furthermore,
studies have demonstrated a deactivation in lateral prefrontal cortex and other areas
associated with cognitive processing (i.e. working memory, attention) during emotional
autobiographical memory retrieval studies (Fink et al., 1996; Gemar et al, 1996). One could
argue that nature of the stimuli in the current study, which are very personally relevant,
engaged episodic/autobiographical memory processes (i.e. numerous encounters with ones
child expressing emotion). Seeing ones own infant may have cued internally-generated
judgments from a long history of parent-infant interactions, which would be reflected in
greater medial activation with lateral deactivation.
Finally, differences in heritability of medial frontal and lateral frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry are of interest to the current study. Given the stability of frontal EEG alpha
asymmetry at baseline and its association with liability for mood disorders, Anokhin, Heath,
and Myers (2005) examined whether asymmetry could serve as an endophenotype of mood
98
disorders. Their investigation of identical and fraternal young adult female twins found a
modest degree of heritability of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry during baseline at medial
frontal sites, with 27% of observed individual differences in this measure attributable to
genetic factors, and 73% to individually specific environmental factors. However, there was
no evidence for a genetic influence at lateral frontal sites. It is interesting that the majority of
associations between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry and maternal responsiveness in the
current study involved medial frontal sites where measured frontal EEG alpha asymmetry has
a higher genetic influence. The finding that related individuals are more likely to resemble
each other in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at medial sites may be reflective of a similar
pattern of emotionality in family members. Since the current study used mothers’ own infants
as the emotional stimuli, there may have been greater synchrony between how the child
experiences/expresses emotion, and how the mother experiences/expresses emotion, leading
to a stronger link between the two as measured by EEG. However, heritability estimates were
based on frontal EEG alpha asymmetry at rest (i.e. during a baseline condition), and it is
unclear whether the capacity for change in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry, given an emotional
context, also has a genetic influence.
Limitations and Future Directions
Findings from the current study demonstrated that mothers’ capacity for responding
within an emotional context was a better marker of maternal experienced emotions, maternal
anxiety, and observed emotional availability than affective style or absolute responding
within an emotional context. Furthermore, a capacity for change to greater right frontal
activation in during an emotional context was related to maternal affect-matching in response
to infant distress, more competent parenting, and lower anxiety. The strengths of the current
99
study include the ecologically valid and personally relevant infant emotion videos, the range
of emotional contexts including infant displays of joy, anger/distress, as well as neutral
contentment, and the measurement of maternal responsiveness from multiple perspectives
including self-report and observation. The present study is the first to capture frontal EEG
alpha asymmetry in mothers as they respond to video of their infants, and the first to measure
“online” maternal responsiveness utilizing EEG. This unique methodology suggests several
avenues for future investigation of online maternal responsiveness to infant emotion cues.
First, the affective chronometry investigations of Light and colleagues (Light et al.,
2009a; Light et al., 2009b) suggest that studying change in parental emotional experience
over the course of unfolding parent-child interactions may further explicate the nature of
parental responsiveness. It may be that in addition to parents’ capacity for emotional
experience, the rate and degree to which emotional experiences shift during parent-infant
contexts are linked to emotion regulation and parents’ abilities for competent parenting.
Additionally, the current study only used mothers’ own infants as the emotional stimuli.
Future investigations of EEG as an index of online maternal responsiveness must employ a
control condition of an unfamiliar infant in order to truly identify a parenting response versus
a more general response to an infant.
Future research should also investigate online maternal responsiveness at different
developmental stages (i.e. infancy, toddlerhood, childhood). Additionally, the types of
positive and negative child emotions that could be used as emotion stimuli could range to fit
the developmental period (i.e. noncompliance episodes in toddlers, successful completion of
a puzzle by young children). The nature of maternal responsiveness and its link to parenting
100
behaviors becomes more complex over time as the repertoire of child-created emotional
events grows to meet the advancing development of the child.
Furthermore, patterns of frontal EEG alpha asymmetry in the current study, as a
reflection of affective/motivational responding, might have been different if mothers believed
they could take action to maintain infant positive affect or alleviate infant distress. Future
work might attempt to incorporate methods by which mothers could take some form of
action. For instance, if mothers believed that their infant’s anger/distress expressions were
live, and they were given a method by which they could intervene (i.e. press a button that
would turn on soothing music in the infant’s room), a different approach/withdrawal
motivation pattern might be activated.
The present study was also limited by a small sample size, and thus had limited power
to detect anything but large effects. In fact, many correlations in the present study exceeded
.30 – a “medium” effect size (Cohen, 1992) – but did not reach significance at the p < .05
level. Additionally, limited significant findings and low power precluded the use of advanced
statistical analyses including the originally proposed moderation analyses. A larger sample
size would permit the investigation of additional moderators of maternal responsiveness,
such as parity. Studies have demonstrated that maternal responsiveness at the level of the
brain changes over time as the parent-infant relationship develops (i.e. Swain et al., 2004). It
might also be possible that the level of parental experience (i.e. duration of parenthood and
the number of previous children a parent has raised) would influence online maternal
responsiveness.
Lastly, despite a wide range of internalizing symptoms endorsed by mothers in the
present study, levels of depression and anxiety were sub-clinical. A larger sample, including
101
participants with clinical levels of internalizing symptoms, might shed light as to the nature
of online maternal responsiveness to infant cues within a clinically depressed or anxious
population, and how thoughts, feelings, and behaviors associated with these disorders serves
to undermine parental competence.
Continued investigations of the nature of online emotional responding in parents has
the potential to help clarify normative maternal response to infant cues, detect maladaptive
response patterns, and identify potential targets for psychological intervention. Such
investigations can inform our understanding of those factors that place parenting at risk, and
thereby undermine healthy child development.
Implications
Results of the current study suggest that frontal EEG alpha asymmetry as a trait
measure appears limited as an index of online maternal responsiveness. Rather, mothers’
capacity/flexibility for emotional responding appears to be a promising marker of online
maternal emotions and subsequent parenting behaviors. A shift toward greater right frontal
EEG activation in response to infant emotion cues was associated with negative affect-
matching, less anxiety, and adaptive parenting behaviors, suggestive of an empathetic
process. The methodology employed in the current study provides a unique window into
understanding maternal responsiveness that is not captured by self-reported or observed
emotions alone. Furthermore, the lack of association between frontal EEG alpha asymmetry
as a trait measure suggests maternal responsiveness may be a malleable rather than
dispositional construct, and may perhaps respond to intervention. Thus, investigations of this
nature may aid in the identification of risk within the parenting context, and inform family
interventions that promote healthy child development.
102
Interventions aimed at promoting more empathetic, responsive parenting may involve
skills training for parents’ behavioral responses to challenging child events. However,
findings from the current study suggest that effective interventions might also need to target
processes occurring earlier in parent-child interactions, namely the generation of emotions
and emotion regulation capabilities. In 2001, James Gross proposed a process model for
emotion regulation in adulthood in which emotion could be regulated at different points in
the emotion-generative process. Antecedent-focused emotion regulation strategies that can
be employed early in the emotion-generative process include: situation selection – making a
choice about which situations to place yourself in, depending on how the options will make
you feel; situation modification – either enhancing or reducing the emotional impact of an
event; attentional deployment – focusing on some aspects of a situation while ignoring others
in order to regulate mood; and cognitive change – selecting among several different possible
meanings to apply to a particular aspect of the situation. A response-focused emotion
regulation strategy that can be employed after an emotion has been evoked is response
modulation – attempting to influence the emotion response tendencies. Antecedent-focused
strategies have been shown to be more effective in decreasing emotional, behavioral, and
physiological responding (i.e. Gross & Levenson, 1993), because they involve a process of
cognitively neutralizing a potentially emotional situation. Although a response-focused
strategy reduces outward behavioral expression of the emotion, it does not impact the
emotional experience and can actually increase physiological responding due to the energy
expended inhibiting the ongoing experience and behavioral tendencies.
Quickly-occurring shifts in frontal EEG alpha asymmetry in response to child
emotional displays holds promise as a marker for risk within the parenting context. These
103
shifts may capture a parent’s capacity/flexibility for emotional responding that is outside
conscious awareness, but nevertheless malleable. This suggests that parenting interventions
should target parental emotion regulation skills that are antecedent-focused, and involve
cognitive change rather than response modulation within the context of challenging parent-
child interactions.
104
REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Oxford, England: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Allen, J. J. B., Harmon-Jones, E., & Cavender, J. H. (2001). Manipulation of frontal EEG asymmetry through biofeedback alters self-reported emotional responses and facial EMG. Annual Meetings of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Oct 1996, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 38(4), 685-693.
Allen, J. J. B., Urry, H. L., Hitt, S. K., & Coan, J. A. (2004). The stability of resting frontal electroencephalographic asymmetry in depression. Annual Meeting of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Oct 1999, Granada, Spain, 41(2), 269-280.
Amato, P. R. (2006). Marital discord, Divorce, and children's well-being: Results from a 20-year longitudinal study of two generations. In A. Clarke-Stewart & J. Dunn (Eds.), Families count: Effects on child and adolescent development. (pp. 179-202). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.
Amato, P. R., & Fowler, F. (2002). Parenting practices, child adjustment, and family diversity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(3), 703-716.
Amato, P. R., & Keith, B. (1991). Parental divorce and the well-being of children: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 26-46.
Andreasen, N. C., O'Leary, D. S., Cizadlo, T., Arndt, S., Rezai, K., Watkins, G. L., et al. (1995). Remembering the past: two facets of episodic memory explored with positron emission tomography. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152(11), 1576-1585.
Anokhin, A. P., Heath, A. C., & Myers, E. (2006). Genetic and environmental influences on frontal EEG asymmetry: a twin study. Biological Psychology, 71(3), 289-295.
Baehr, E., Rosenfeld, J. P., Baehr, R., & Earnest, C. (1998). Comparison of two EEG asymmetry indices in depressed patients vs. normal controls. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 31(1), 89-92.
Banaschewsk, T., & Brandeis, D. (2007). Annotation: What electrical brain activity tells us about brain function that other techniques cannot tell us--A child psychiatric perspective. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48(5), 415-435.
Bartels, A., & Zeki, S. (2004). The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love. Neuroimage, 21(3), 1155-1166.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology, 4(1, Pt.2), 1-103.
105
Baving, L., Laucht, M., & Schmidt, M. H. (2003). Frontal EEG correlates of externalizing spectrum behaviors. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 12(1), 36-42.
Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. Oxford, England: International Universities Press.
Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: The Guilford Press.
Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561-571.
Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: A process model. Child Development, 55(1), 83-96.
Binder, J. R., Frost, J. A., Hammeke, T. A., Bellgowan, P. S. F., Rao, S. M., & Cox, R. W. (1999). Conceptual processing during the conscious resting state: A functional MRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11(1), 80-93.
Biringen, Z., Robinson, J., & Emde, R. N. (1998). Emotional availability scales (3rd ed.).Unpublished manuscript, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Colorado State University.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Disruption of affectional bonds and its effects on behavior. Canada's Mental Health Supplement, 59, 12.
Boyum, L. A., & Parke, R. D. (1995). The role of family emotional expressiveness in the development of children's social competence. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57(3), 593-608.
Bretherton, I. (2000). Emotional availability: An attachment perspective. Attachment and Human Development Special Issue: Mapping the terrain of emotional availability and attachment, 2(2), 233-241.
Britton, J. C., Phan, K. L., Taylor, S. F., Welsh, R. C., Berridge, K. C., & Liberzon, I. (2006). Neural correlates of social and nonsocial emotions: An fMRI study. Neuroimage, 31(1), 397-409.
Bruder, G. E., Sedoruk, J. P., Stewart, J. W., McGrath, P. J., Quitkin, F. M., & Tenke, C. E. (2008). Electroencephalographic alpha measures predict therapeutic response to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant: Pre- and post-treatment findings. Biological Psychiatry, 63(12), 1171-1177.
Bruder, G. E., Stewart, J. W., Tenke, C. E., McGrath, P. J., Leite, P., Bhattacharya, N., et al. (2001). Electroencephalographic and perceptual asymmetry differences between responders and nonresponders to an SSRI antidepressant. Biological Psychiatry, 49(5), 416-425.
106
Bugental, D. B., & Cortez, V. L. (1988). Physiological reactivity to responsive and unresponsive children as moderated by perceived control. Child Development, 59(3), 686-693.
Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(3), 452-459.
Camras, L. A., Sullivan, J., & Michel, G. (1993). Do infants express discrete emotions? Adult judgments of facial, vocal, and body actions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior Special Issue: Development of nonverbal behavior: I. Emotional experience and expression, 17(3), 171-186.
Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 319-333.
Cassidy, J., Parke, R. D., Butkovsky, L., & Braungart, J. M. (1992). Family-peer connections: The roles of emotional expressiveness within the family and children's understanding of emotions. Child Development, 63(3), 603-618.
Ceballo, R., & McLoyd, V. C. (2002). Social support and parenting in poor, dangerous neighborhoods. Child Development, 73(4), 1310-1321.
Coan, J. A., & Allen, J. J. B. (2003). Frontal EEG asymmetry and the behavioral activation and inhibition systems. Annual Meeting of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Oct 2000, San Diego, CA, US, 40(1), 106-114.
Coan, J. A., & Allen, J. J. B. (2004). Frontal EEG asymmetry as a moderator and mediator of emotion. Biological Psychology Special Issue: Frontal EEG Asymmetry, Emotion, and Psychopathology, 67(1-2), 7-49.
Coan, J. A., Allen, J. J. B., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2001). Voluntary facial expression and hemispheric asymmetry over the frontal cortex. Psychophysiology, 38(6), 912-925.
Coan, J. A., Allen, J. J. B., Hugdahl, K., & Davidson, R. J. (2003). The state and trait nature of frontal EEG asymmetry in emotion. In Anonymous (Ed.), The asymmetrical brain. (pp. 565-615). Cambridge, MA, US: MIT Press.
Coan, J. A., Allen, J. J. B., & McKnight, P. E. (2006). A capability model of individual differences in frontal EEG asymmetry. Biological Psychology, 72(2), 198-207.
Cohen, J. (1987). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. ed.). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159.
107
Cohn, J. F., & Campbell, S. B. (1992). Influence of maternal depression on infant affect regulation. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Toth (Eds.), Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology, Rochester, NY, US (Vol. 4, pp. 103-130). Rochester, NY, US: University of Rochester Press.
Cohn, J. F., Matias, R., Tronick, E. Z., Connell, D., & Lyons-Ruth, K. (1986). Face-to-face interactions of depressed mothers and their infants. New Directions for Child Development, 34, 31-45.
Cohn, J. F., & Tronick, E. Z. (1988). Mother-infant face-to-face interaction: Influence is bidirectional and unrelated to periodic cycles in either partner's behavior. Developmental Psychology, 24(3), 386-392.
Cole, P. M., Teti, L. O., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2003). Mutual emotion regulation and the stability of conduct problems between preschool and early school age. Development and Psychopathology, 15(1), 1-18.
Cole, P. M., Woolger, C., Power, T. G., & Smith, K. D. (1992). Parenting difficulties among adult survivors of father-daughter incest. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16(2), 239-249.
Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., Elder, G. H., & Lorenz, F. O. (1992). A family process model of economic hardship and adjustment of early adolescent boys. Child Development, 63(3), 526-541.
Conners, N. A., Bradley, R. H., Mansell, L. W., Liu, J. Y., Roberts, T. J., Burgdorf, K., et al. (2003). Children of mothers with serious substance abuse problems: An accumulation of risks. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 29(4), 743-758.
Cox, M. J., & Paley, B. (1997). Families as systems. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 243-267.
Coyne, J. C. (1976). Depression and the response of others. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85(2), 186-193.
Coyne, L. W., Low, C. M., Miller, A. L., Seifer, R., & Dickstein, S. (2007). Mothers' empathetic understanding of their toddlers: Associations with maternal depression and sensitivity. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16(483-497).
Crockenberg, S. (1987). Predictors and correlates of anger toward and punitive control of toddlers by adolescent mothers. Child Development, 58(4), 964-975.
Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. (1996). Emotional security as a regulatory process in normal development and the development of psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 8(1), 123-139.
Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (1994). Maternal depression and child development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35(1), 73-112.
108
Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (1999). Depressed parents and family functioning: Interpersonal effects and children's functioning and development. In T. Joiner & J. C. Coyne (Eds.), The interactional nature of depression: Advances in interpersonal approaches. (pp. 299-327). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
Cummings, E. M., Zahn-Waxler, C., & Radke-Yarrow, M. (1981). Young children's responses to expressions of anger and affection by others in the family. Child Development, 52(4), 1274-1282.
Curtis, W. J., & Cicchetti, D. (2007). Emotion and resilience: A multilevel investigation of hemispheric electroencephalogram asymmetry and emotion regulation in maltreated and nonmaltreated children. Development and Psychopathology, 19(3), 811-840.
Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 487-496.
Davidson, R. J. (1998). Affective style and affective disorders: Perspectives from affective neuroscience. Cognition and Emotion Special Issue: Neuropsychological perspectives on affective and anxiety disorders, 12(3), 307-330.
Davidson, R. J. (2004). What does the prefrontal cortex "do" in affect: Perspectives on frontal EEG asymmetry research. Biological Psychology Special Issue: Frontal EEG Asymmetry, Emotion, and Psychopathology, 67(1-2), 219-233.
Davidson, R. J., Ekman, P., Saron, C. D., Senulis, J. A., & Friesen, W. V. (1990). Approach-withdrawal and cerebral asymmetry: Emotional expression and brain physiology: I. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(2), 330-341.
Davidson, R. J., & Fox, N. A. (1982). Asymmetrical brain activity discriminates between positive and negative affective stimuli in human infants. Science, 218(4578), 1235-1237.
Davidson, R. J., & Fox, N. A. (1989). Frontal brain asymmetry predicts infants' response to maternal separation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 98(2), 127-131.
Davidson, R. J., Jackson, D. C., & Kalin, N. H. (2000). Emotion, plasticity, context, and regulation: Perspectives from affective neuroscience. Psychological Bulletin Special Issue: Psychology in the 21st Century, 126(6), 890-909.
Davidson, R. J., Pizzagalli, D., Nitschke, J. B., & Kalin, N. H. (2003). Parsing the subcomponents of emotion and disorders of emotion: Perspectives from affective neuroscience. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of Affective Sciences (pp. 8-24). New York: Oxford University Press.
Davis, P. A. (1941). Technique and evaluation of the electroencephalogram. Journal of Neurophysiology, 4, 92-114.
109
Dawson, G., Frey, K., Panagiotides, H., & Osterling, J. (1997). Infants of depressed mothers exhibit atypical frontal brain activity: A replication and extension of previous findings. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(2), 179-186.
Dawson, G., Frey, K., Panagiotides, H., Yamada, E., Hessl, D., & Osterling, J. (1999). Infants of depressed mothers exhibit atypical frontal electrical brain activity during interactions with mother and with a familiar, nondepressed adult. Child Development, 70(5), 1058-1066.
Dawson, G., Klinger, L. G., Panagiotides, H., & Hill, D. (1992). Frontal lobe activity and affective behavior of infants of mothers with depressive symptoms. Child Development, 63(3), 725-737.
Dawson, G., Panagiotides, H., Klinger, L. G., & Spieker, S. (1997). Infants of depressed and nondepressed mothers exhibit differences in frontal brain electrical activity during the expression of negative emotions. Developmental Psychology, 33(4), 650-656.
De Bellis, M. D. (2001). Developmental traumatology: The psychobiological development of maltreated children and its implications for research, treatment, and policy. Development and Psychopathology Special Issue: Stress and development: Biological and psychological consequences, 13(3), 539-564.
De Wolff, M., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (1997). Sensitivity and attachment: A meta-analysis on parental antecedents of infant attachment. Child Development, 68(4), 571-591.
Debener, S., Beauducel, A., Nessler, D., Brocke, B., Heilemann, H., & Kayser, J. r. (2000). Is resting anterior EEG alpha asymmetry a trait marker for depression? Findings for healthy adults and clinically depressed patients. Neuropsychobiology, 41(1), 31-37.
Denham, S. A., Mitchell-Copeland, J., Strandberg, K., Auerbach, S., & Blair, K. (1997). Parental contributions to preschoolers' emotional competence: Direct and indirect effects. Motivation and Emotion, 21(1), 65-86.
Denham, S. A., Renwick, S. M., & Holt, R. W. (1991). Working and playing together: Prediction of preschool social-emotional competence from mother-child interaction. Child Development, 62(2), 242-249.
Denham, S. A., Workman, E., Cole, P. M., Weissbrod, C., Kendziora, K. T., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2000). Prediction of externalizing behavior problems from early to middle childhood: The role of parental socialization and emotion expression. Development and Psychopathology, 12(1), 23-45.
Derogatis, L. R., Lazarus, L., & Maruish, M. E. (1994). SCL-90--R, Brief Symptom Inventory, and matching clinical rating scales. In Anonymous (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcome assessment. (pp. 217-248). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
110
Diego, M. A., Field, T., Jones, N. A., & Hernandez-Reif, M. (2006). Withdrawn and intrusive maternal interaction style and infant frontal EEG asymmetry shifts in infants of depressed and non-depressed mothers. Infant Behavior and Development, 29(2), 220-229.
Dix, T. (1991). The affective organization of parenting: Adaptive and maladaptative processes. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 3-25.
Dix, T. (1992). Parenting on behalf of the child: Empathic goals in the regulation of responsive parenting. In A. V. M. Irving E. Sigel, Jacqueline J. Goodnow (Ed.), (2nd ed., pp. 319-346). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dix, T., Gershoff, E. T., Meunier, L. N., & Miller, P. C. (2004). The Affective Structure of Supportive Parenting: Depressive Symptoms, Immediate Emotions, and Child-Oriented Motivation. Developmental Psychology, 40(6), 1212-1227.
Downey, G., & Coyne, J. C. (1990). Children of depressed parents: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 108(1), 50-76.
Easterbooks, M. A., Lyons-Ruth, K., Biesecker, G., & Carper, A. (1996). Infancy predictors of emotional availability in middle childhood: The role of attachment and maternal depression. Infant Behavior and Development, 19(1), 196.
Easterbrooks, M. A., Biesecker, G., & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2000). Infancy predictors of emotional availability in middle childhood: The roles of attachment security and maternal depressive symptomatology. Attachment and Human Development Special Issue: Mapping the terrain of emotional availability and attachment, 2(2), 170-187.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., Damon, W., & Lerner, R. M. (2006). Prosocial Development. In Anonymous (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3, Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed.). (pp. 646-718). Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Ekman, P., & Davidson, R. J. (1993). Voluntary smiling changes regional brain activity. Psychological Science, 4(5), 342-345.
El-Sheikh, M., Cummings, E. M., & Goetsch, V. L. (1989). Coping with adults' angry behavior: Behavioral, physiological, and verbal responses in preschoolers. Developmental Psychology, 25(4), 490-498.
Emde, R. N., & Easterbooks, M. A. (1985). Assessing emotional availability in early development. In W. K. Frankenburg, R. N. Emde & J. W. Sullivan (Eds.), Early identification of children at risk: An international perspective (pp. 79-101). New York: Plenum.
Erel, O., & Burman, B. (1995). Interrelatedness of marital relations and parent-child relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 108-132.
111
Field, T. (1986). Models for reactive and chronic depression in infancy. New Directions for Child Development, 34, 47-60.
Field, T., Fox, N. A., Pickens, J., & Nawrocki, T. (1995). Relative right frontal EEG activation in 3- to 6-month-old infants of "depressed" mothers. Developmental Psychology, 31(3), 358-363.
Fink, G. R., Markowitsch, H. J., Reinkemeier, M., Bruckbauer, T., Kessler, J., & Heiss, W. D. (1996). Cerebral representation of one's own past: neural networks involved in autobiographical memory. Journal of Neuroscience, 16(13), 4275-4282.
Fox, N. A. (1991). If it's not left, it's right: Electroencephalograph asymmetry and the development of emotion. American Psychologist, 46(8), 863-872.
Fox, N. A., Bell, M. A., & Jones, N. A. (1992). Individual differences in response to stress and cerebral asymmetry. Developmental Neuropsychology, 8(2-3), 161-184.
Fox, N. A., & Davidson, R. J. (1987). Electroencephalogram asymmetry in response to the approach of a stranger and maternal separation in 10-month-old infants. Developmental Psychology, 23(2), 233-240.
Fox, N. A., Rubin, K. H., Calkins, S. D., Marshall, T. R., Coplan, R. J., Porges, S. W., et al. (1995). Frontal activation asymmetry and social competence at four years of age. Child Development, 66(6), 1770-1784.
Garner, P. W., & Estep, K. M. (2001). Emotional competence, emotion socialization, and young children's peer-related social competence. Early Education and Development, 12(1), 29-48.
Garner, P. W., & Spears, F. M. (2000). Emotion regulation in low-income preschoolers. Social Development, 9(2), 246-264.
Gelfand, D. M., & Teti, D. M. (1990). The effects of maternal depression on children. Clinical Psychology Review, 10(3), 329-353.
Gemar, M. C., Kapur, S., Segal, Z. V., Brown, G. M., & Houle, S. (1996). Effects of self-generated sad mood on regional cerebral activity: a PET study in normal subjects. Depression, 4(2), 81-88.
Goodman, S. H. (2003). Genesis and epigenesis of psychopathology in children with depressed mothers: Toward an integrative biopsychosocial perspective. In D. Cicchetti & E. Walker (Eds.), Neurodevelopmental mechanisms in psychopathology. (pp. 428-460). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.
Gotlib, I. H. (1982). Self-reinforcement and depression in interpersonal interaction: The role of performance level. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 91(1), 3-13.
112
Gotlib, I. H., Ranganath, C., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (1998). Frontal EEG alpha asymmetry, depression, and cognitive functioning. Cognition and Emotion Special Issue: Neuropsychological perspectives on affective and anxiety disorders, 12(3), 449-478.
Gottman, J. M., & Katz, L. F. (1989). Effects of marital discord on young children's peer interaction and health. Developmental Psychology, 25(3), 373-381.
Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1985). A valid procedure for obtaining self-report of affect in marital interaction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(2), 151-160.
Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress (2nd ed.). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.
Green, J. A., & Gustafson, G. E. (1983). Individual recognition of human infants on the basis of cries alone. Developmental Psychobiology, 16(6), 485-493.
Gross, J. J., Levenson, R. W. (1993). Emotional suppression: Physiology, self-report, and expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 970-986.
Gross, J. J. (2001). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 224-237.
Grych, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (1990). Marital conflict and children's adjustment: A cognitive-contextual framework. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 267-290.
Hagemann, D. (2004). Individual differences in anterior EEG asymmetry: Methodological problems and solutions. Biological Psychology, 67(1-2), 157-182.
Hagemann, D., Naumann, E., Lurken, A., Becker, G., Maier, S., & Bartussek, D. (1999). EEG asymmetry, dispositional mood and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 27(3), 541-568.
Hagemann, D., Naumann, E., Thayer, J. F., & Bartussek, D. (2002). Does resting electroencephalograph asymmetry reflect a trait? An application of latent state-trait theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 619-641.
Harman, D. W., & Ray, W. J. (1977). Hemispheric activity during affective verbal stimuli: An EEG study. Neuropsychologia, 15(3), 457-460.
Harmon-Jones, E. (2007). Trait anger predicts relative left frontal cortical activation to anger-inducing stimuli. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 66(2), 154-160.
Harmon-Jones, E., Abramson, L. Y., Sigelman, J. D., Bohlig, A., Hogan, M. E., & Harmon-Jones, C. (2002). Proneness to hypomania/mania symptoms or depression symptoms and asymmetrical frontal cortical responses to an anger-evoking event. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 610-618.
113
Harmon-Jones, E., & Allen, J. J. B. (1997). Behavioral activation sensitivity and resting frontal EEG asymmetry: Covariation of putative indicators related to risk for mood disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106(1), 159-163.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Allen, J. J. B. (1998). Anger and frontal brain activity: EEG asymmetry consistent with approach motivation despite negative affective valence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1310-1316.
Harmon-Jones, E., Lueck, L., Fearn, M., & Harmon-Jones, C. (2006). The Effect of Personal Relevance and Approach-Related Action Expectation on Relative Left Frontal Cortical Activity. Psychological Science, 17(5), 434-440.
Harmon-Jones, E., Sigelman, J. D., Bohlig, A., & Harmon-Jones, C. (2003). Anger, coping, and frontal cortical activity: The effect of coping potential on anger-induced left frontal activity. Cognition and Emotion, 17(1), 1-24.
Haviland, J. M., & Lelwica, M. (1987). The induced affect response: 10-week-old infants' responses to three emotion expressions. Developmental Psychology, 23(1), 97-104.
Heller, W. (1990). The neuropsychology of emotion: Developmental patterns and implications for psychopathology. In N. L. Stein, B. Leventhal & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Psychological and biological approaches to emotion. (pp. 167-211). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Heller, W., & Nitschke, J. B. (1999). The puzzle of regional brain activity in depression and anxiety: The importance of subtypes and comorbidity. Cognition and Emotion, 12(3), 421-447.
Heller, W., Nitschke, J. B., Etienne, M. A., & Miller, G. A. (1997). Patterns of regional brain activity differentiate types of anxiety. J Abnorm Psychol, 106(3), 376-385.
Heller, W., Nitschke, J. B., & Miller, G. A. (1998). Lateralization in emotion and emotional disorders. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(1), 26-32.
Henriques, J. B., & Davidson, R. J. (1990). Regional brain electrical asymmetries discriminate between previously depressed and healthy control subjects. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 99(1), 22-31.
Henriques, J. B., & Davidson, R. J. (1991). Left frontal hypoactivation in depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100(4), 535-545.
Insel, T. R. (1997). A neurobiological basis of social attachment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154(6), 726-735.
Insel, T. R. (2003). Is social attachment an addictive disorder? Physiology and Behavior, 79(3), 351-357.
114
Jacobs, G. D., & Snyder, D. (1996). Frontal brain asymmetry predicts affective style in men. Behavioral Neuroscience, 110(1), 3-6.
Jameson, P. B., Gelfand, D. M., Kulcsar, E., & Teti, D. M. (1997). Mother-toddler interaction patterns associated with maternal depression. Development and Psychopathology, 9(3), 537-550.
Jenkins, J. M., Franco, F., Dolins, F., & Sewell, A. (1995). Toddlers' reactions to negative emotion displays: Forming models of relationships. Infant Behavior and Development, 18(3), 273-281.
Jones, N. A., & Field, T. (1999). Massage and music therapies attenuate frontal EEG asymmetry in adolescents. Adolescence, 34(135), 529-534.
Jones, N. A., Field, T., & Davalos, M. (1998). Massage therapy attenuates right frontal EEG asymmetry in one-month-old infants of depressed mothers. Infant Behavior and Development, 21(3), 527-530.
Jones, N. A., Field, T., Fox, N. A., Davalos, M., Lundy, B., & Hart, S. (1998). Newborns of mothers with depressive symptoms are physiologically less developed. Infant Behavior and Development, 21(3), 537-541.
Jones, N. A., Field, T., Fox, N. A., Davalos, M., Malphurs, J., Carraway, K., et al. (1997). Infants of intrusive and withdrawn mothers. Infant Behavior and Development, 20(2), 175-186.
Jung, R., & Berger, W. (1979). [Fiftieth anniversary of Hans Berger's publication of the electroencephalogram. His first records in 1924--1931 (author's transl)]. Arch Psychiatr Nervenkr, 227(4), 279-300.
Junghoefer, M., Elbert, T., Tucker, D. M., & Braun, C. (1999). The polar average referenced effect: A bias in estimating the head surface integral in EEG recording. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 110(1149-1155).
Klem, G. H., Luders, H. O., Jasper, H. H., & Elger, C. (1999). The ten-twenty electrode system of the International Federation. The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 52, 3-6.
Kline, J. P., Blackhart, G. C., Woodward, K. M., Williams, S. R., & Schwartz, G. E. R. (2000). Anterior electroencephalographic asymmetry changes in elderly women in response to a pleasant and an unpleasant odor. Biological Psychology, 52(3), 241-250.
Kochanska, G., Aksan, N., & Koenig, A. L. (1995). A longitudinal study of the roots of preschoolers' conscience: Committed compliance and emerging internalization. Child Development, 66(6), 1752-1769.
115
Kringelbach, M. L., & Rolls, E. T. (2003). Neural correlates of rapid reversal learning in a simple model of human social interaction. Neuroimage, 20(2), 1371-1383.
Kringelbach, M. L., & Rolls, E. T. (2004). The functional neuroanatomy of the human orbitofrontal cortex: evidence from neuroimaging and neuropsychology. Progress in Neurobiology, 72(5), 341-372.
Lamb, M. E. (1987). Predictive implications of individual differences in attachment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(6), 817-824.
Leerkes, E. M., Crockenberg, S. C., & Burrous, C. E. (2004). Identifying components of maternal sensitivity to infant distress: The role of maternal competencies. Parenting: Science and Practice, 4, 1-23.
Leerkes, E. M., & Crockenberg, S. C. (2007). Antecedents of mothers' emotional and cognitive resonses to infant distress: The role of family, mother, and infant characteristics. Infant Mental Health Journal, 27(4), 405-428.
Leerkes, E. M., Blankson, A. N., & O'Brien M. (2009). Differential effects of maternal sensitivity to infant distress and nondistress on social-emotional functioning. Child Development, 80(3), 762-775.
Leibenluft, E., Gobbini, M. I., Harrison, T., & Haxby, J. V. (2004). Mothers' neural activation in response to pictures of their children and other children. Biological Psychiatry, 56(4), 225-232.
Light, S. N., Coan, J. A., Frye, C., Goldsmith, H. H., & Davidson, R. J. (2009a). Dynamic variation in pleasure in children predicts nonlinear change in lateral frontal brain electrical activity. Dev Psychol, 45(2), 525-533.
Light, S. N., Coan, J. A., Zahn-Waxler, C., Frye, C., Goldsmith, H. H., & Davidson, R. J. (2009b). Empathy is associated with dynamic change in prefrontal brain electrical activity during positive emotion in children. Child Dev, 80(4), 1210-1231.
Loeber, R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1986). Family factors as correlates and predictors of juvenile conduct problems and delinquency. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 7, 29-149.
Lorber, M. F., & Slep, A. M. S. (2005). Mothers' Emotion Dynamics and Their Relations With Harsh and Lax Discipline: Microsocial Time Series Analyses. Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy Convention, Nov 2002, Reno, NV, US, 34(3), 559-568.
Lorberbaum, J. P., Newman, J. D., Dubno, J. R., Horwitz, A. R., Nahas, Z., Teneback, C. C., et al. (1999). Feasibility of using fMRI to study mothers responding to infant cries. Depression and Anxiety, 10(3), 99-104.
116
Lorberbaum, J. P., Newman, J. D., Horwitz, A. R., Dubno, J. R., Lydiard, R. B., Hamner, M. B., et al. (2002). A potential role for thalamocingulate circuitry in human maternal behavior. Biological Psychiatry, 51(6), 431-445.
Luu, P., Tucker, D. M., Englander, R., Lockfeld, A., Lutsep, H., & Oken, B. (2001). Localizing acute stroke-related EEG changes: Assessing the effects of spatial undersampling. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 18, 302-217.
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in contexts of the family: Parent-child interaction. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol 4. Socialization, personality, and social development. (4th ed., pp. 1-101). New York: Wiley.
Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2003). Co-occurrence between marital aggression and parents' child abuse potential: the impact of cumulative stress. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Special Issue: Children and domestic violence., 18(3), 243-258.
Martin, S. E., Clements, M. L., & Crnic, K. A. (2002). Maternal emotions during mother-toddler interaction: Parenting in an affective context. Parenting: Science and Practice, 2(2), 105-126.
Mathersul, D., Williams, L. M., Hopkinson, P. J., & Kemp, A. H. (2008). Investigating models of affect: relationships among EEG alpha asymmetry, depression, and anxiety. Emotion, 8(4), 560-572.
Mauss, I. B., Levenson, R. W., McCarter, L., Wilhelm, F. H., & Gross, J. J. (2005). The tie that binds? Coherence among emotion experience, behavior, and physiology. Emotion, 5(2), 175-190.
Mayes, L. C., Carter, A. S., Egger, H. L., & Pajer, K. A. (1991). Reflections on stillness: Mothers' reactions to the still-face situation. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 30(1), 22-28.
McHale, J. P., Kuersten, R., & Lauretti, A. (1996). New directions in the study of family-level dynamics during infancy and early childhood. In J. P. McHale & P. A. Cowan (Eds.), Understanding how family-level dynamics affect children's development: Studies of two-parent families. (pp. 5-26). San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.
McLoyd, V. C. (1990). The impact of economic hardship on Black families and children: Psychological distress, parenting, and socioemotional development. Child Development Special Issue: Minority children, 61(2), 311-346.
Minuchin, P. (1985). Families and individual development: Provocations from the field of family therapy. Child Development Special Issue: Family development, 56(2), 289-302.
Nagin, D. S. (1999). Analyzing developmental trajectories: A semi-parametric group-based approach. Psychological Methods, 4, 139-177.
117
Niki, K., & Luo, J. (2002). An fMRI study on the time-limited role of the medial temporal lobe in long-term topographical autobiographic memory. J Cogn Neurosci, 14(3), 500-507.
Nitschke, J. B., Heller, W., Palmieri, P. A., & Miller, G. A. (1999). Contrasting patterns of brain activity in anxious apprehension and anxious arousal. Psychophysiology, 36(5), 628-637.
Nitschke, J. B., Nelson, E. E., Rusch, B. D., Fox, A. S., Oakes, T. R., & Davidson, R. J. (2004). Orbitofrontal cortex tracks positive mood in mothers viewing pictures of their newborn infants. Neuroimage, 21(2), 583-592.
Numan, M. (1994). A neural circuitry analysis of maternal behavior in the rat. Acta Paediatrica Supplement, 397, 19-28.
Nyberg, L., Forkstam, C., Petersson, K. M., Cabeza, R., & Ingvar, M. (2002). Brain imaging of human memory systems: between-systems similarities and within-system differences. Brain Research, 13(2), 281-292.
O'Doherty, J., Kringelbach, M. L., Rolls, E. T., Hornak, J. & Andrews, C. (2001). Abstract reward and punishment representations in the human orbitofrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 4(1), 95-102.
Olson, S. L., Bates, J. E., Sandy, J. M., & Lanthier, R. (2000). Early developmental precursors of externalizing behavior in middle childhood and adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28(2), 119-133.
Papousek, H., Papousek, M., & Bornstein, M. H. (2002). Intuitive parenting. In Anonymous (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 2: Biology and ecology of parenting (2nd ed.). (pp. 183-203). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Parke, R. D., Buriel, R., Damon, W., & Eisenberg, N. (1998). Socialization in the family: Ethnic and ecological perspectives. In Anonymous (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, 5th ed.: Vol 3. Social, emotional, and personality development. (pp. 463-552). Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Patterson, G. R. (2002). The early development of coercive family process. In J. B. Reid, G. R. Patterson & J. Snyder (Eds.), Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention (pp. 25-44). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Paz, I., Jones, D., & Byrne, G. (2005). Child maltreatment, child protection and mental health. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 18(4), 411-421.
Perrin, F., Pernier, J., Bertrand, O., Giard, M., & Gechallier, J. F. (1987). Mapping of scalp potentials by surface spline interpolation. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 66, 75-81.
118
Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (1989). Family interaction patterns and children's behavior problems from infancy to 4 years. Developmental Psychology, 25(3), 413-420.
Pizzagalli, D. A. (2007). Electroencephalography and high-density electrophysiological source localization. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (3rd ed.). (pp. 56-84). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.
Putallaz, M. (1987). Maternal behavior and children's sociometric status. Child Development, 58(2), 324-340.
Radke-Yarrow, M., Cummings, E. M., Kuczynski, L., & Chapman, M. (1985). Patterns of attachment in two- and three-year-olds in normal families and families with parental depression. Child Development, 56(4), 884-893.
Ranote, S., Elliott, R., Abel, K. M., Mitchell, R., Deakin, J. F., & Appleby, L. (2004). The neural basis of maternal responsiveness to infants: An fMRI study. Neuroreport, 15(11), 1825-1829.
Ray, W. J. (1990). The electrocortical system. In J. T. Cacioppo & L. G. Tassinary (Eds.), Principles of psychophysiology: Physical, social, and inferential elements (pp. 385-412). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Reeves, B., Lang, A., Thorson, E., Rothschild, M. (1989). Emotional television scenes and hemispheric specialization. Human Communication Research, 15, 493–508.
Reid, S. A., Duke, L. M., & Allen, J. J. B. (1998). Resting frontal electroencephalographic asymmetry in depression: Inconsistencies suggest the need to identify mediating factors. Psychophysiology, 35(4), 389-404.
Robinson, J., & Spieker, S. (1996). Adolescent mothers and their children: Early predictors of emotional availability at age four. Infant Behavior and Development, 19(1), 195.
Rognoni, E., Galati, D., Costa, T., & Crini, M. (2008). Relationship between adult attachment patterns, emotional experience and EEG frontal asymmetry. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(4), 909-920.
Rosenberg, E. L., & Ekman, P. (2005). Coherence between expressive and experiential systems in emotion. New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
Rutter, M., & Quinton, D. (1984). Parental psychiatric disorder: Effects on children. Psychological Medicine, 14(4), 853-880.
Saarni, C. (1993). Socialization of emotion. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions. (pp. 435-446). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
119
Sarter, M., Berntson, G. G., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1996). Brain imaging and cognitive neuroscience: Toward strong inference in attributing function to structure. American Psychologist, 51(1), 13-21.
Schaffer, C. E., Davidson, R. J., & Saron, C. (1983). Frontal and parietal electroencephalogram asymmetry in depressed and nondepressed subjects. Biological Psychiatry, 18(7), 753-762.
Schmitt, F. O. (1994). Hallowell Davis (31 August 1896-22 August 1992). Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 138(3), 415-419.
Seifritz, E., Esposito, F., Neuhoff, J. G., Luthi, A., Mustovic, H., Dammann, G., et al. (2003). Differential sex-independent amygdala response to infant crying and laughing in parents versus nonparents. Biological Psychiatry, 54(12), 1367-1375.
Shay, N. L., & Knutson, J. F. (2008). Maternal depression and trait anger as risk factors for escalated physical discipline. Child Maltreatment, 13(1), 39-49.
Silberman, E. K., & Weingartner, H. (1986). Hemispheric lateralization of functions related to emotion. Brain and Cognition, 5(3), 322-353.
Simons, J. S., Gilbert, S. J., Owen, A. M., Fletcher, P. C., & Burgess, P. W. (2005). Distinct roles for lateral and medial anterior prefrontal cortex in contextual recollection. Journal of Neurophysiology, 94(1), 813-820.
Stifter, C. A., & Braungart, J. M. (1995). The regulation of negative reactivity in infancy: Function and development. Developmental Psychology, 31(3), 448-455.
Stifter, C. A., & Jain, A. (1996). Psychophysiological correlates of infant temperament: Stability of behavior and autonomic patterning from 5 to 18 months. Developmental Psychobiology, 29(4), 379-391.
Strathearn, L., Li, J., Fonagy, P., & Montague, P. R. (2008). What's in a smile? Maternal brain responses to infant facial cues. Pediatrics, 122(1), 40-51.
Sutton, S. K., & Davidson, R. J. (1997). Prefrontal brain asymmetry: A biological substrate of the behavioral approach and inhibition systems. Psychological Science, 8(3), 204-210.
Swain, J. E., Mayes, L. C., & Leckman, J. F. (2004). The development of parent-infant attachment through dynamic and interactive signaling loops of care and cries. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(4), 472-473.
Swain, J. E., Lorberbaum, J. P., Kose, S., & Strathearn, L. (2007). Brain basis of early parent-infant interactions: psychology, physiology, and in vivo functional neuroimaging studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 48(3-4), 262-287.
120
Teti, D. M., & Gelfand, D. M. (1991). Behavioral competence among mothers of infants in the first year: The mediational role of maternal self-efficacy. Child Development, 62(5), 918-929.
Teti, D. M., Gelfand, D. M., Messinger, D. S., & Isabella, R. (1995). Maternal depression and the quality of early attachment: An examination of infants, preschoolers, and their mothers. Developmental Psychology, 31(3), 364-376.
Teti, D. M., & Huang, K. Y. (2005). Developmental perspectives in parenting competence. In D. M. Teti (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in developmental science (pp. 161-182). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Teti, D. M., & Towe-Goodman, N. (2010). Post-partum depression: Effects on child. In M. Haith & J. Benson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of infant and early child development (pp. 562-572). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Thibodeau, R., Jorgensen, R. S., & Kim, S. (2006). Depression, Anxiety, and Resting Frontal EEG Asymmetry: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115(4), 715-729.
Tomarken, A. J., Davidson, R. J., & Henriques, J. B. (1990). Resting frontal brain asymmetry predicts affective responses to films. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(4), 791-801.
Tomarken, A. J., Davidson, R. J., Wheeler, R. E., & Doss, R. C. (1992). Individual differences in anterior brain asymmetry and fundamental dimensions of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(4), 676-687.
Tomarken, A. J., Davidson, R. J., Wheeler, R. E., & Kinney, L. (1992). Psychometric properties of resting anterior EEG asymmetry: Temporal stability and internal consistency. Psychophysiology, 29(5), 576-592.
Tomarken, A. J., & Keener, A. D. (1998). Frontal brain asymmetry and depression: A self-regulatory perspective. Cognition and Emotion Special Issue: Neuropsychological perspectives on affective and anxiety disorders, 12(3), 387-420.
Tronick, E. Z. (1989). Emotions and emotional communication in infants. American Psychologist Special Issue: Children and their development: Knowledge base, research agenda, and social policy application, 44(2), 112-119.
Tronick, E. Z., Als, H., Adamson, L., Wise, S., & Brazelton, T. B. (1978). The infant's response to entrapment between contradictory messages in face-to-face interaction. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 17(1), 1-13.
Urry, H. L., Nitschke, J. B., Dolski, I., Jackson, D. C., Dalton, K. M., Mueller, C. J., et al. (2004). Making a life worth living: Neural correlates of well-being. Psychological Science, 15(6), 367-372.
121
van Ijzendoorn, M. H., Dijkstra, J., & Bus, A. G. (1995). Attachment, intelligence, and language: A meta-analysis. Social Development, 4(2), 115-128.
Vuga, M., Fox, N. A., Cohn, J. F., George, C. J., Levenstein, R. M., & Kovacs, M. (2006). Long-term stability of frontal electroencephalographic asymmetry in adults with a history of depression and controls. Annual meeting of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Oct 2003, Chicago, IL, US, 59(2), 107-115.
Wallstrom, G. L., Kass, R. E., Miller, A., Cohn, J. F., & Fox, N. A. (2004). Automatic correction of ocular artifacts in the EEG: a comparison of regression-based and component-based methods. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 53(2), 105-119.
Wheeler, R. E., Davidson, R. J., & Tomarken, A. J. (1993). Frontal brain asymmetry and emotional reactivity: A biological substrate of affective style. Psychophysiology, 30(1), 82-89.
Young, L. J., Murphy Young, A. Z., & Hammock, E. A. (2005). Anatomy and neurochemistry of the pair bond. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 493(1), 51-57.
Young, L. J., & Wang, Z. (2004). The neurobiology of pair bonding. Nature Neuroscience, 7(10), 1048-1054.
122
M (SD) or % Range
Mother CharacteristicsAge in years: M (SD) 30.67 (5.07) 22-45Race: % Caucasian 85.20%Education: % Bachelor's Degree 40.70%Employment: % Not Employed 66.70%Income: < $60,000 50.00%Marital Status: % Married 92.60%Parity: % Primiparous 44.40%
Child CharacteristicsAge in months: M (SD) 6.94 (0.81) 5.57-8.67Sex: % Female 51.90%
Table 1. Participant Demographics
Left: lnF3 Right: lnF4
Joy 0.02 (1.13) -0.31 (1.22) -0.15 (0.22)Anger/Distress 0.07 (1.14) -0.28 (1.20) -0.10 (0.22)Neutral/Interest 0.06 (1.14) -0.27 (1.23) -0.10 (0.22)Totals 0.05 (0.22) -0.29 (0.23)
Infant Emotion Video
Hemisphere M (SD) Totals
M (SD)
Table 3. Alpha Power by Infant Emotion Video and Hempisphere of EEG Recording
Mothers' Reported Experienced Emotions
Infant Joy Video 1
Infant Joy Video 2
Infant Neutral Video
Infant Anger / Distress Video 1
Infant Anger / Distress Video 2
Joy 26 (100%) 27 (100%) 23 (85.2%) 3 (11.1%) 5 (18.5%) Irritability/Anger 0 (0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 6 (23.1%) 6 (22.2%) Sadness 1 (3.7%) 1 (3.7%) 2 (7.4%) 21 (77.8%) 17 (63.0%) Fear 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 11 (40.7%) 7 (25.9%) Disgust 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (3.7%) 0 (0.0%) Concern/Worry 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 17 (63.0%) 13 (48.1%) Embarrassment 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Guilt 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 7 (25.9%) 6 (22.2%)
Table 2. Frequency of Mothers Reporting "Yes" to Various Emotions During Infant Emotion Videos
123
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Endorsed Emotion:
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt Joy
-.365 -.078 .119 .225 .149 .095 .080(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.025 -.443* .018 -.145 -.010 -.227 .058(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.036 -.464* .019 -.118 -.054 -.260 .061(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
0.11 -.423* 0.24 -.125 -.018 -.253 .047(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.036 -.415* .004 -.119 -.029 -.282 .027(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.242 -.056 .258 .157 -.026 -.004(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.195 -.147 .192 .275 -.123 .031(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.128 -.164 .166 .303 -.144 .022(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.174 -.128 .187 .302 -.133 .013(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.196 -.110 .168 .300 -.151 .025(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
8 min. Baseline
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress Video 1 r (N)
Table 4. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos
8 min. Baseline
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
Infant Anger/Distress Video 2 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
124
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Endorsed Emotion:
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt Joy
-.247 -.113 .015 .238 -.035 -.021 .132(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.087 -.271 .088 .070 .023 -.269 .034(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.109 -.261 .089 .081 .009 -.267 .032(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.100 -.258 .083 .071 .022 -.273 .037(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.085 -.254 .085 .079 .017 -.276 .026(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.194 -.047 .193 .104 -.111 -.057(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.013 -.298 .371 .211 .153 -.079(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.006 -.297 .379 .229 .155 -.077(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.010 -.293 .380 .227 .158 -.087(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.015 -.283 .373 .222 .147 -.076(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Anger/Distress
Table 5. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos
Infant Neutral
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Anger/Distress Video 2 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
8 min. Baseline
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display
Infant Joy
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress Video 1 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display
8 min. Baseline
125
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.272 .096 -.142 -.021 .039 -.073 .126(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.026 -.325 -.119 -.027 -.377 -.389 -.194(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.035 -.366 -.171 -.054 -.419 -.376 -.229(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.055 -.287 -.106 -.049 -.348 -.279 -.193(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.033 -.297 -.094 -.022 -.355 -.336 -.171(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
-.216 .067 -.257(27) (22) (26)
-.210 .113 -.589**(27) (22) (26)
-.196 .116 -.592**(27) (22) (26)
-.181 .138 -.608**(27) (22) (26)
-.230 .125 -.601**(27) (22) (26)
-.470*(36)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
-.191(26)
-.423*(26)
-.450*(26)
-.475*(26)
Table 6. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos
8 min. Baseline
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Anger/Distress Videos r (N)
Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotion After Viewing:
8 min. Baseline
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Joy Videos r (N)
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Mothers' Joy
Mothers' Joy
126
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.324 .090 .030 .053 .082 .077 -.169(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (27)
-.420 .636 -.098 -.197 -.018 -.338 .056(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (27)
-.396 .635 -.114 -.200 -.029 -.328 .063(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (27)
-.375 .646 -.099 -.200 -.015 -.329 .059(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (2)
-.402 .633 -.090 -.188 -.013 -.314 .050(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (27)
-.169 .080 -.313(27) (22) (26)
.056 -.121 -.267(27) (22) (26)
.063 -.135 -.251(27) (22) (26)
.059 -.126 -.278(27) (22) (26)
.050 -.129 -.267(27) (22) (26)
-.046(26)
-.333(26)
-.033(26)
-.030(26)
-.055(26)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
8 min. Baseline
Infant Joy
Infant Neutral
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Joy Videos r (N)
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Mothers' Joy
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Mothers' Joy
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
8 min. Baseline
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Table 7. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display
Infant Anger/Distress Videos r (N)
Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotion After Viewing: Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
127
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Endorsed Emotion:
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt Joy
.345 -.433* -.102 -.395* -.165 -.354 -.106(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.410* -.448* -.101 -.358 -.211 -.380 -.015(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.390* -.399* -.097 -.375 -.175 -.385* -.030(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
.027 -.109 -.047 .15 -.113 .038(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.107 -.122 -.082 .170 -.131 .028(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.055 -.086 -.057 .179 -.124 .018(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
Infant Anger/Distress Video 2 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
Infant Anger/Distress Video 1 r (N)
Table 8. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Infant Joy
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
128
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Endorsed Emotion:
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt Joy
.255 -.212 .081 -.087 .047 -.263 -.053(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.276 -.200 .081 -.076 .032 -.258 -.056(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.270 -.199 .076 -.086 .046 -.269 -.050(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
.116 -.276 .254 .149 .232 -.043(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.135 -.270 .256 .163 .231 -.040(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.119 -.272 .265 .166 .238 -.052(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Anger/Distress Video 1 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Infant Joy
Infant Neutral
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Anger/Distress
Table 9. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress Video 2 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
129
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Endorsed Emotion:
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt Joy
.081 -.375 .112 -.249 .151 .396* .265(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.488** -.445* .098 .008 -.165 .155 .226(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.441* -.131 .186 -.077 .103 .238 .194(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.042 -.338 .243 -.136 .199 .056(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.468* -.365 -.015 .012 .051 -.015(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.185 -.186 .205 .066 .151 -.110(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress Video 1 r (N)
Table 10. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
Infant Anger/Distress Video 2 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
130
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Endorsed Emotion:
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt Joy
.056 -.507** .081 -.236 .173 .162 .223(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.448* -.144 .062 .034 -.154 .209 .107(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.312 -.110 -.031 -.162 .102 .030 .221(27) (26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
.050 -.464* .001 -.269 .181 -.084(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.393* -.227 .053 .092 .129 -.014(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.089 -.237 .197 .120 .249 -.238(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Anger/Distress
Table 11. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Endorsement of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress Video 2 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:
Infant Neutral
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Anger/Distress Video 1 r (N)
Mothers’ Endorsed (Yes/No) Emotion:EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Joy
131
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
.491 -.342 .007 -.015 -.419 -.394 -.351(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.476 -.384 -.041 -.047 -.450 -.377 -.379(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.532 -.306 .025 -.041 -.403 -.382 -.350(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
-.016 .062 -.403*(27) (22) (26)
.007 .059 -.382(26) (22) (26)
.020 .090 -.421*(27) (22) (26)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
-.283(26)
-.295(26)
-.339(26)
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Joy Videos r (N)
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Mothers' Joy
Mothers' Joy
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Table 12. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Anger/Distress Videos r (N)
Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotion After Viewing:
132
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.109 .429 -.122 -.219 -.065 -.353 -.046(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
-.059 .422 -.137 -.221 -.075 -.342 -.043(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
-.079 .438 -.124 -.223 -.061 -.346 -.046(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.170 -.178 -.069(27) (22) (26)
.176 -.190 -.050(27) (22) (26)
.174 -.183 -.081(27) (22) (26)
.190(26)
.164(26)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
.187(26)
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Mothers' Joy
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Infant Joy
Table 13. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Infant Anger/Distress Videos r (N)
Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotion After Viewing:
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Neutral
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Infant Joy Videos r (N)
Mothers' Joy
133
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.072 -.518 -.244 -.074 -.379 -.579 -.240(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
-.002 -.561 -.530 -.503 -.488* -.572 -.391*(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.217 .431 -.148 -.296 -.048 -.511 -.236(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.112 -.067 -.032(27) (22) (26)
.235 -.070 .087(27) (22) (26)
.434* .153 -.150(27) (22) (26)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
.303(26)
.157(26)
-.112(26)
Table 14. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Anger/Distress Videos r (N)
Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotion After Viewing:
Infant Neutral
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Joy
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Anger/Distress
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Joy Videos r (N)
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
Mothers' Joy
Mothers' Joy
134
Joy Irrit. / Anger Sadness Anx. /
FearConc. / Worry Guilt
-.405 .279 -.221 -.352 -.196 -.632 -.323(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.288 -.202 -.430 -.426 -.349 -.332 -.162(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.096 .643 -.239 -.282 -.058 -.348 -.215(6) (7) (21) (12) (18) (9) (26)
.169 .197 -.042(27) (22) (26)
.239 -.107 .345(27) (22) (26)
.190 .042 -.259(27) (22) (26)
.314(26)
-.201(26)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
.357(26)
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Neutral
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Joy Videos r (N)
Mothers' Joy
Infant Neutral
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Joy
Table 15. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Emotions Experienced in Response to Infant Emotion Videos - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Anger/Distress Videos r (N)
Mothers’ Rating of Intensity of Emotion After Viewing: Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Mothers' Joy
Mothers' Rating of Intensity of Infants'
Emotion
Infant Neutral Video r (N)
135
-.429* -.091 -.187(27) (27) (27)
-.023 .110 -.179(27) (27) (27)
-.039 .078 -.184(27) (27) (27)
-.046 .092 -.189(27) (27) (27)
-.070 .109 -.206(27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display
Anxiety T-Score
Depression T-Score
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Table 16. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms
SCL-90-R Subscales r (N) Total Lifetime
Months Depressed r (N)
8 min. Baseline
Infant Neutral
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
-.342 .099 -.278(27) (27) (27)
.112 .265 -.331(27) (27) (27)
.114 .251 -.323(27) (27) (27)
.098 .247 -.328(27) (27) (27)
.102 .264 -.326(27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Anxiety T-Score
Infant Joy
8 min. Baseline
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display
Table 17. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms
Total Lifetime Months Depressed
r (N)Depression T-Score
SCL-90-R Subscales r (N)
136
.414* .218 -.145(27) (27) (27)
.395* .177 -.169(27) (27) (27)
.393* .198 -.173(27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Neutral
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Depression T-Score
Table 18. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
SCL-90-R Subscales r (N) Total Lifetime
Months Depressed r (N)Anxiety
T-Score
.344 .206 -.155(27) (27) (27)
.344 .189 -.143(27) (27) (27)
.331 .190 -.153(27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Table 19. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
SCL-90-R Subscales r (N) Total Lifetime
Months Depressed r (N)Anxiety
T-ScoreDepression
T-Score
137
.381* .030 .179(27) (27) (27)
.217 -.217 .153(27) (27) (27)
.225 -.153 .134(27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Neutral
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Joy
Table 20. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
SCL-90-R Subscales r (N) Total Lifetime
Months Depressed r (N)Anxiety
T-ScoreDepression
T-Score
.289 .059 -.163(27) (27) (27)
.218 -.283 .110(27) (27) (27)
-.074 -.298 -.067(27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Depression T-Score
Infant Joy
Table 21. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Mothers' Reported Anxious and Depressive Symptoms - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
SCL-90-R Subscales r (N) Total Lifetime
Months Depressed r (N)Anxiety
T-Score
138
.063 -.006 -.296 .135 .087 .090(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.041 -.033 -.249 .035 .010 .010(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.080 -.046 -.225 .028 .037 .037(26) (27) (7) (27) (27) (27)
.099 .010 -.235 .055 .048 .048(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.018 .025 -.208 .087 .036 .036(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
8 min. Baseline
Infant Joy
Table 22. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability
Emotional Availability ScalesEEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display
Sensitivity Structuring Non-Intrusiveness
Non- Hostility
Child Responsive
Child Involvement
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
* p < .05 ** p < .01
.040 -.012 -.330 .083 .042 .046(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.325 .278 .207 .392* .265 .183(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.316 .268 .212 .383* .263 .182(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.327 .284 .197 .386* .273 .196(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.330 .284 .209 .395* .265 .182(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Table 23. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display
Emotional Availability Scales
Sensitivity Structuring Non-Intrusiveness
Non- Hostility
Child Responsive
Child Involvement
8 min. Baseline
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
Inter-Stimulus Blanks
139
-.018 -.031 .021 -.099 -.077 -.081(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.020 -.044 .057 -.107 -.063 -.052(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.026 .017 .041 -.078 -.036 -.040(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Table 24. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
Emotional Availability Scales
Sensitivity Structuring Non-Intrusiveness
Non- Hostility
Child Responsive
Child Involvement
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
.309 .295 .434* .349 .245 .158(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.296 .280 .436* .335 .240 .154(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
.314 .302 .425* .345 .255 .172(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Child Responsive
Child Involvement
Table 25. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Baseline
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Baseline)
Emotional Availability Scales
Sensitivity Structuring Non-Intrusiveness
Non- Hostility
Infant Neutral
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
140
-.473* -.473* -.397* -.416* -.167 -.208(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.435* -.480* -.110 -.403* -.060 .001(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.165 -.137 -.298 -.301 .159 .117(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Table 26. F4/F3 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
Emotional Availability Scales
Sensitivity Structuring Non-Intrusiveness
Non- Hostility
Child Responsive
Child Involvement
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F4/F3) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
-.099 -.127 -.014 -.023 .041 .054(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.321 -.358 .027 -.282 -.063 -.027(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
-.016 .029 -.227 -.131 .206 .311(26) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
* p < .05 ** p < .01
Table 27. F8/F7 Frontal EEG Alpha Asymmetry During Infant Videos and Observed Emotional Availability - After Subtracting Asymmetry from Inter-Stimulus Blanks
EEG Alpha Asymmetry (F8/F7) During Video Display (Subtracting Inter-Stimulus Blanks)
Emotional Availability Scales
Sensitivity Structuring Non-Intrusiveness
Non- Hostility
Child Responsive
Child Involvement
Infant Joy
Infant Anger/Distress
Infant Neutral
141
Table 28. Summary of Study Findings for Baseline Condition
MOTHER-REPORTED EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES TO INFANT VIDEOS
· No significant findingsMOTHERS’ ANXIOUS & DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS
· Greater anxietyMATERNAL EMOTIONAL AVAILABILITY
· No significant findings
Greater Relative Right Frontal Activation During 8-MINUTE BASELINE
was associated with:
142
Whe
n m
easu
red
durin
g em
otio
n vi
deos
:W
hen
mea
sure
d as
a sh
ift fr
om b
asel
ine
to e
mot
ion
vide
os
· En
dors
ing
“irr
itabi
lity/
ange
r” to
infa
nt a
nger
/dis
tres
s vid
eo·
Gre
ater
inte
nsity
of p
erce
ived
chi
ld e
mot
ion
in in
fant
joy
and
infa
nt n
eutr
al v
ideo
s
· N
o si
gnifi
cant
find
ings
· Le
ss a
nxie
ty
· G
reat
er S
ensi
tivity
· G
reat
er S
truct
urin
g·
Gre
ater
Non
-Int
rusi
vene
ss (L
ess I
ntru
sive
)·
Gre
ater
Non
-Hos
tility
(Les
s Hos
tility
)
· En
dors
ing
“irr
itabi
lity/
ange
r” to
infa
nt a
nger
/dis
tres
s vid
eo·
Endo
rsin
g “i
rrita
bilit
y/an
ger”
to in
fant
ang
er/d
istr
ess v
ideo
· G
reat
er in
tens
ity o
f per
ceiv
ed c
hild
em
otio
n in
infa
nt jo
y an
d in
fant
neu
tral
vid
eos
· N
ot e
ndor
sing
“jo
y” to
infa
nt a
nger
/dis
tres
s vid
eo
· G
reat
er in
tens
ity o
f “sa
dnes
s” to
infa
nt a
nger
/dis
tres
s vid
eo·
Gre
ater
inte
nsity
of “
conc
ern”
to in
fant
ang
er/d
istr
ess v
ideo
· G
reat
er in
tens
ity o
f per
ceiv
ed c
hild
em
otio
n in
infa
nt
ange
r/di
stre
ss v
ideo
· N
o si
gnifi
cant
find
ings
· Le
ss a
nxie
ty
· G
reat
er S
ensi
tivity
· G
reat
er S
truct
urin
g·
Gre
ater
Non
-Int
rusi
vene
ss (L
ess I
ntru
sive
)·
Gre
ater
Non
-Hos
tility
(Les
s Hos
tility
)
· En
dors
ing
“irr
itabi
lity/
ange
r” to
infa
nt a
nger
/dis
tres
s vid
eo·
Not
end
orsi
ng “
joy”
to in
fant
ang
er/d
istr
ess v
ideo
· G
reat
er in
tens
ity o
f per
ceiv
ed c
hild
em
otio
n in
infa
nt jo
y an
d in
fant
neu
tral
vid
eos
· Lo
wer
inte
nsity
of “
joy”
to in
fant
joy
vide
o
· N
ot e
ndor
sing
sadn
ess t
o in
fant
ang
er/d
istr
ess v
ideo
· N
o si
gnifi
cant
find
ings
· Le
ss a
nxie
ty
· Lo
wer
non
-hos
tility
(gre
ater
hos
tility
)·
No
sign
ifica
nt fi
ndin
gs
Gre
ater
Rel
ativ
e R
ight
Fr
onta
l Act
ivat
ion
Dur
ing
INFA
NT
NE
UT
RA
L
VID
EO
w
as a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith:
Tabl
e 29
. Su
mm
ary
of S
tudy
Fin
ding
s fo
r In
fant
Em
otio
n Vi
deos
Gre
ater
Rel
ativ
e R
ight
Fr
onta
l Act
ivat
ion
Dur
ing
INFA
NT
AN
GE
R /
DIS
TR
ESS
VID
EO
w
as a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith:
Gre
ater
Rel
ativ
e R
ight
Fr
onta
l Act
ivat
ion
Dur
ing
IN
FAN
T J
OY
VID
EO
was
ass
ocia
ted
with
:
· Lo
wer
non
-hos
tility
(gre
ater
hos
tility
)
MO
THER
-REP
ORT
ED E
MO
TIO
NAL
EXP
ERIE
NCE
S TO
INFA
NT
VID
EOS
MO
THER
S’ A
NXI
OU
S &
DEP
RESS
IVE
SYM
PTO
MS
MAT
ERN
AL E
MO
TIO
NAL
AVA
ILAB
ILIT
Y
· Lo
wer
Non
-Hos
tility
(Gre
ater
Hos
tility
)
MO
THER
-REP
ORT
ED E
MO
TIO
NAL
EXP
ERIE
NCE
S TO
INFA
NT
VID
EOS
MO
THER
S’ A
NXI
OU
S &
DEP
RESS
IVE
SYM
PTO
MS
MAT
ERN
AL E
MO
TIO
NAL
AVA
ILAB
ILIT
Y
MO
THER
-REP
ORT
ED E
MO
TIO
NAL
EXP
ERIE
NCE
S TO
INFA
NT
VID
EOS
· N
ot e
ndor
sing
“gu
ilt”
to in
fant
ang
er/d
istr
ess v
ideo
MO
THER
S’ A
NXI
OU
S &
DEP
RESS
IVE
SYM
PTO
MS
MAT
ERN
AL E
MO
TIO
NAL
AVA
ILAB
ILIT
Y
143
Figure 1. HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net 128 Channel Map with Electrode Clusters Corresponding to F3, F4, F7, and F8 of the International 10-20 System.
VITA LAUREN A. KILLEEN
EDUCATION Ph.D., Clinical Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University (Aug 2010) M.S., Clinical Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University (May 2006) B.A., Psychology, Northwestern University (June 2002) GRADUATE EXPERIENCE Research Research Coordinator, The Minds of Mothers Study (MOMS) (Jan 2006 – June 2008) Research Assistant, Parenting at Risk Initiative, Child Study Center (Sept 2003 – Dec 2006) Research Assistant, Collaborative Family Study (Sept 2003 – Dec 2004) Clinical Predoctoral Intern in Pediatric Psychology, Rush University Medical Center (July 2009 – June 2010) Neuropsychology Technician, Neuropsychology Partners, Inc. (July 2008 – May 2009) Staff Therapist, Pennsylvania State University Psychological Clinic (Jan 2004 – May 2008) Teaching Graduate Course Instructor, Abnormal Psychology (Aug 2006 – Dec 2006) Graduate Lab Instructor, Basic Research Methods in Psychology (Jan – May 2006 & 2007) SELECTED PUBLICATIONS Teti, D. M., Killeen, L. A., Candelaria, M., Miller, W., Hess, C. R., & Melissa O’Connell, M. (2008). Adult attachment, parental commitment to early intervention, and developmental outcomes in an African American sample at double jeopardy. In H. Steel & M. Steele (Eds.), Clinical Applications of the Adult Attachment Interview (pp. 126-153). New York: The Guilford Press. Killeen, L. A., Lopez-Zafra, E., & Eagly, A. E. (2006). Envisioning oneself as a leader: Comparisons of women and men in Spain and the United States. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(3), 312-322. Schweinsburg, A. D., Paulus, M., P., Barlett, V. C., Killeen, L. A., Caldwell, L. C., Pulido, C., Brown, S. A., & Tapert, S. F. (2004). An fMRI study of response inhibition in youths with a family history of alcoholism. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1021, 391-394. SELECTED PRESENTATIONS Teti, D. M., Killeen, L. A., Hajal, N. J., Cole, Pamela A., Feinberg, M. E. (2010). Prefrontal cortical asymmetry in mothers to infant emotional events and emotional availability. Paper presented at the International Conference on Infant Studies (ICIS), Baltimore, MD, March 2010. Killeen, L. A., & Crnic, K. A. (2007). Across-parent associations between observed parenting behavior and reported marital quality: Child gender as moderator. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD). Boston, MA, April 2007. Killeen, L. A., Gaze, C. M., & Crnic, K. A. (2004). Marital quality in typically developing children and children with developmental delays. Poster presented at the Gatlinburg Conference, San Diego, CA, March 2004. HONORS & AWARDS International Philanthropic Educational Organization (PEO) Scholar Award, 2008 Liberal Arts Graduate Scholar, The Pennsylvania State University, 2003-2005