Carlson_Wang_2007.pdf
Cognitive Development XXXXXXXXXX–510
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Inhibitory control and emotion regulation
in preschool children
Stephanie M. Carlson ∗, Tiffany S. Wang
Department of Psychology, University of Washington, United States
Abstract
This research investigated the relation between individual differences in inhibitory control and emotion
egulation. Preschool children (N = 53) ages 4–6 (M = 5; 0) were assessed on
ief batteries of inhibitory
control of prepotent responses and emotion regulation. Individual differences in inhibitory control were
significantly co
elated with children’s ability to regulate their emotions. This relation held up even afte
controlling for age and ve
al ability, and persisted for both Emotion Understanding and “online” control of
emotional expressions that were negative (Disappointing Gift) or positive (Secret Keeping). Parent report of
children’s self-control and emotion regulation co
oborated the behavioral results. These findings suggest
that executive control of attention, action, and emotion are skills that develop in concert in the preschool
period. However, there was also evidence of a quadratic relation in which emotion regulation was optimal
at intermediate levels of inhibition, highlighting the interplay of both cognitive control and temperament in
socio-emotional functioning.
© 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Inhibitory control; Executive function; Emotion regulation; Temperament; Preschool
1. Introduction
The ability to control potentially interfering thought processes and actions develops rapidly in
the preschool period. Children of age 3 years have difficulty on tasks that require inhibitory control
of attention and motor responses, such as suppressing a dominant response in accordance with
ules. By 5 years of age they are much more proficient at these tasks (for a summary see Carlson,
2005). At the same time, children improve in the ability to regulate the experience of emotions by
monitoring their expressive behavior. Saarni XXXXXXXXXXfound that young children made an attempt to
inhibit negative expressions upon receiving an undesirable gift, but they had trouble neutralizing
∗ Co
esponding author at: Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United
States.
E-mail address: XXXXXXXXXX (S.M. Carlson).
XXXXXXXXXX/$ – see front matter © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cogdev XXXXXXXXXX
490 S.M. Carlson, T.S. Wang / Cognitive Development XXXXXXXXXX–510
their expressions. Older children were more likely to attempt to feign positive expressions of
emotion, although there were individual differences in these skills at all ages. Explaining individ-
ual differences in emotion regulation that appear early in childhood is an important undertaking
ecause older children who have difficulty managing emotions (e.g., anger) are at risk for devel-
oping behavioral disorders (Cole, Michel, & Teti, 1994; Dodge & Ga
er, XXXXXXXXXXBoth the control
of attention and action in relatively unemotional “cool” contexts and the control of emotional
expressions in affectively charged “hot” contexts appear to have key requirements in common:
prevention of an impulsive response and ca
ying out an opposite act. Furthermore, deficits in
attention and emotion regulation tend to co-occur in certain atypical and at-risk populations, such
as children with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (Barkley, XXXXXXXXXXSurprisingly, however,
little research has examined the relation between children’s regulation of action and emotion.
Zelazo and Müller XXXXXXXXXXdescribed potentially separate and shared neuroanatominal pathways
for executive function in cool and hot task paradigms, but the question remains as to whethe
inhibitory control of prepotent responses and online emotion regulation in a social context are
overlapping or independent skills at the level of individual differences. The aim of the present
study was to assess the relation between individual differences in the deliberate control ove
actions and emotional expressions in typically developing preschool children.
1.1. Executive function
Executive function (EF), defined as the conscious control of thought and action needed fo
future-oriented and purposeful behavior (Welsh, Pennington, & Groisser, 1991; Zelazo, Carter,
Reznick, & Frye, 1997), involves a diverse set of cognitive processes, including planning, work-
ing memory, set-shifting, e
or detection and co
ection, and the inhibitory control of prepotent
esponses (e.g., Roberts, Ro
ins, & Weiskrantz, 1998; Stuss & Benson, XXXXXXXXXXEF is required
for goal-directed behaviors to solve novel problems, particularly those calling for the inhibition
of automatic or established thoughts and responses (e.g., Casey, Tottenham, & Fossella, 2002;
Roberts & Pennington, XXXXXXXXXXInhibitory control (IC), then, refers to the ability to inhibit o
suppress salient thought processes or actions that are not relevant to the goal or task at hand
(Rothbart & Posner, XXXXXXXXXXNote that flexible employment of inhibitory control in problem-solving
situations may involve not only the suppression of a dominant (but inco
ect) response, but also
the activation of a subdominant (but adaptive) response, or alternation between initiating and
inhibiting a prepotent response according to setting conditions. For example, in the Bea
Dragon
task (a simplified version of Simons Says), children are told to perform all actions commanded by
a “nice” bear puppet but to suppress all actions commanded by a “naughty” dragon puppet, in an
alternating fashion. Young 3-year-olds have difficulty inhibiting their actions in this task despite
understanding the rule, whereas older 3-year-olds and most 4-year-olds can do so selectively
(Reed, Pien, & Rothbart, XXXXXXXXXXThis example illustrates one of many similar EF tasks showing
marked improvement between ages 3 and 6, when children become much better at resolving con-
flict of attention and/or motor responses, waiting for a reward, and staying on-task in the face of
tempting distractions (Carlson, 2005; Kochanska, Mu
ay, & Harlan, 2000).
Diverse problem-solving scenarios are likely to require flexible suppression and selection of
information in working memory and ensuing responses. Indeed, inhibitory control is thought to
contribute to individual differences and/or developmental changes in a wide a
ay of cognitive
abilities including attention, memory, reading comprehension, and theory of mind (e.g., Carlson,
Mandell, & Williams, 2004; Dempster, 1992; Harnishfeger & Bjorklund, 1993; Posner & Rothbart,
2000). EF in general is strongly associated with prefrontal cortex (PFC), which has an extremely
S.M. Carlson, T.S. Wang / Cognitive Development XXXXXXXXXX–510 491
protracted maturational period (e.g., Bunge & Zelazo, 2006; Diamond, 2002; Giedd, Blumenthal,
& Jeffries, 1999), however, age-related changes in EF are apparent early on in development and
are most striking during the preschool period.
1.2. Emotion regulation
Emotional development includes changes in emotion expression, understanding, and regu-
lation. Of these, emotion regulation (ER) is particularly likely to be related to EF. It has been
difficult to achieve consensus on a single definition of ER (see Bridges, Denham, & Ganiban,
2004; Cole, Martin, & Dennis, 2004; Eisenberg & Spinrad, XXXXXXXXXXOur behavioral research exam-
ines children’s online modulation of their own emotion expression as the social situation calls
for it (down-regulation of negative or excitatory states and potential up-regulation/activation of
the opposite feeling state). Hence, we will use the definition provided by Saarni XXXXXXXXXXin which
ER refers to regulating the experience of emotion by monitoring one’s expressive behavior. This
conceptualization of ER relies on intrinsic regulatory processes as well as extrinsic factors, par-
ticularly children’s growing awareness of cultural display rules as they move from early to late
childhood. Display rules are social conventions that dictate where, when, and how emotion-related
ehaviors should be expressed (Ekman & Friesen, 1969).
In Saarni’s XXXXXXXXXXclassic disappointment paradigm, children were given an undesirable gift
(e.g., a babyish toy) and then observed to see how much they tried to dissemble or hide thei
disappointment. Six-year-olds (especially boys) were openly negative in their expressions, olde
children showed transitional behavior in which arousal level was apparent (e.g., lip biting) but
were less overtly negative, and it was not until 10–11 years of age that children were able to
exhibit positive behavior (e.g., exaggerate a smile). However, other studies using this procedure
have found developmental change and individual differences in ER among preschoolers (Cole,
1986; Garner & Power, 1996; Josephs, 1994; Liew, Eisenberg, & Reiser, XXXXXXXXXXEven toddlers
egin to become aware of their own distress and take steps to alleviate negative feelings, such as
distracting themselves from a fo
idden toy by playing with a substitute object (Grolnick, Bridges,
& Connell, 1996; Kopp, XXXXXXXXXXInfants, too, engage in rudimentary forms of ER including gaze
aversion, sucking, and proximity seeking (Buss & Goldsmith, 1998; Rothbart, Ziaie, & O’Boyle,
1992) Thus, similar to EF, ER is an early emerging set of skills that takes a long time to develop
ut shows marked improvement in the preschool period.
ER has been linked to several aspects of social functioning in preschoolers, including social
competence, popularity with peers and teachers, adjustment, shyness/introversion, and sympathy.
It is seen as a vital aspect of social competence and one that determines, in large measure, the
crucial social task of preschool children: positive engagement and self-regulation during pee
interaction (Denham et al., XXXXXXXXXXThe increasing complexity and demands of the social world of
a preschooler make it necessary for children to modify their emotional reactions, made possible by
way of developmental increases in both the comprehension and control of emotionality (Denham
et al., 2003; Lewis, Sullivan, & Vasen, 1987).
Uncontrolled negative emotionality, in particular, is a serious detriment to children’s social
interactions (e.g., Denham, Blair, Schmidt, & DeMulder, 2002; Underwood, Coie, & He
sman,
1992). In examining individual differences in preschool and school-age children’s social compe-
tence, Eisenberg and colleagues have identified an interaction between negative emotionality and
effortful control, defined by Rothbart and Bates XXXXXXXXXXas the ability to voluntarily inhibit a dom-
inant response to activate a subdominant response. Specifically, children rated by adults as high
in negativity tended to have poorer social outcomes, but this effect was moderated by individual
492 S.M. Carlson, T.S. Wang / Cognitive Development XXXXXXXXXX–510
differences in effortful control (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 1995; Eisenberg et al., 1996; Eisenberg et
al., 1997; Liew et al., 2004; see also Denham et al., XXXXXXXXXXChildren high in effortful control
(as reported by parents and/or teachers) are less likely to express negative emotionality, presum-
ably because they can better manage their attention, emotions, and behavioral responses. Hence,
effortful control is thought to contribute to the modulation (e.g., maintaining, activating, inhibit-
ing) of emotion-related activities in specific situations, but also to reflect individual/dispositional
differences across situations (i.e., a key aspect of temperament) (Eisenberg & Spinrad, 2004).
Eisenberg and Fabes XXXXXXXXXXproposed a tripartite model to account for this pattern of inter-
actions between temperament and self-regulation. Undercontrolled children are considered low
in emotion regulation,