Chapter 4 134 Summary of Predicted Responsivity Patterns (H3): Main Analysis vs. Sensitivity Analyses Across studied time interval (lagged vs. concurrent) and informant (adolescent vs. parent), differences emerged in the sample distribution of the predicted responsivity patterns (H3). That is, 2% to 14% of adolescents demonstrated an adverse sensitive pattern, 1% to 19% a vantage sensitive pattern, 13% to 61% a differential susceptible pattern, and 0% to 18% an unsusceptible pattern. Moreover, in the adolescent-reported models, considerably more adolescents were classified as differential susceptible (26% to 61%) than adverse sensitive (2% to 5%) or vantage sensitive (1% to 3%), especially in the concurrent models. In the parent-reported parenting models, these predicted patterns were more equally distributed in the sample (9% to 19%). Furthermore, although we found little evidence for the predicted unsusceptible pattern with adolescent-reported data, we did find this pattern with parent-reported parenting in 18% of the sample. Notwithstanding the differences, we repeatedly found that different adolescents demonstrated different predicted (but also unpredicted) responsivity patterns. DISCUSSION One of the ongoing debates in the parenting literature is the extent to which parenting has universal or heterogeneous effects upon child functioning (Grusec, 2008; Rohner et al., 2005; Soenens et al., 2015). Environmental sensitivity models assume parenting effect heterogeneity, such that children’s responses to parenting depend on their general sensitivity to environmental influences (Greven et al., 2019; Pluess, 2015). Three theoretical models (see Figure 1) posit a subgroup of highly sensitive children who are more responsive to either (1) adverse parenting (“for worse”, diathesis-stress model; (Monroe & Simons, 1991; Zuckerman, 1999) or (2) supportive parenting (“for better”, vantage sensitivity model; (Pluess, 2017), or (3) to both (“for better and for worse”, differential susceptibility model; (Belsky et al., 2007; Belsky & Pluess, 2009). In all three models, highly responsive children are compared against a subgroup of non-responsive unsusceptible children. In the current study, we tested the “coexisting responsivity patterns hypothesis” among adolescents, proposing that the models complement each other and each explain a different subgroup in the population (Pluess, 2015; Pluess & Belsky, 2012, 2013). We applied a preregistered within-family approach, using intensive longitudinal (bi-weekly) data. By applying this approach, we could estimate parenting effects for each individual adolescent in the sample separately, which enabled us to assess individual differences in parenting effects. Our main findings indeed demonstrate
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw