Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384

The moderating effect of extraversion on the relation between

self-reported and observed parenting

Riitta-Leena MetsapeltoT, Lea Pulkkinen

Department of Psychology, University of Jyvaskyla, Psykocenter/Agora, PO Box 35, FIN-40014 Jyvaskyla, Finland

Available online 6 May 2005

Abstract

The present study examined multiple measures of parenting (i.e., nurturance reported by parents themselves,

child-centered behavior rated by trained observers, and child-reported parenting and family atmosphere) and their

association with parents’ personality trait of extraversion (E). The study was part of the Jyvaskyla Longitudinal

Study of Personality and Social Development and it concerned 106 families with school-aged children (8–13 years

of age). Data on parenting were collected from parents (54 mothers and 52 fathers) and children (48 girls and 58

boys) through questionnaires; in addition, behavioral observations were conducted to measure parent–child

interaction. The results showed that, among parents who judged themselves to be highly nurturant, mothers were

observed to be highly child-centered, if they were extraverted, whereas fathers were observed to be highly child-

centered, if they were introverted. When the children’s views about parenting and family atmosphere were

examined, parents’ introversion was related to a more favorable family environment. The results suggest that the

data collection method and the information about parental personality characteristics should be considered in

seeking to determine the quality of parenting.

D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Parenting; Self-report; Behavioral observation; Multi-method assessment; Extraversion

1. Introduction

When gathering information about parenting, researchers have typically used self-reports collected

from parents themselves, child-reported evaluations of parenting and the home environment, or

0193-3973/$ -

doi:10.1016/j.a

T Correspond

E-mail add

see front matter D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

ppdev.2005.04.005

ing author.

ress: riitta-leena.metsapelto@psyka.jyu.fi (R.-L. Metsapelto).

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384372

behavioral observations made by trained observers (Holden, 1990). Although the multi-method

assessment of parenting has gained currency during recent decades (Schumm, 1990), researchers have

often relied upon a single source of data. Insufficient knowledge therefore exists about the

interdependence of different parenting measures and their ability to coherently describe parenting

quality. There are also very few studies that have examined the factors related to parents’ appraisals of

their child-rearing and to the evaluations made by children or trained observers. Hence, the present study

was conducted to examine the associations between multiple measures on parenting. The study also

explored parents’ personality characteristics in order to examine whether they were related to parenting

measures.

While some of the previous attempts to relate parent’s reports of their child-rearing to their actual

behavior have been unsuccessful (Bornstein, Cote, & Venuti, 2001; Cote & Bornstein, 2000), at least

some degree of correspondence has often been documented. Significant associations have been found

between mothers’ representations of their relationship with their toddlers and their observed mothering

(Slade, Belsky, Aber, & Phelps, 1999), mothers’ reported and actual behaviors when shopping with

their 2-year-old children (Holden, Ritchie, & Coleman, 1992), and mothers’ reported authoritarian and

authoritative patterns of child-rearing and their actual management of their young children

(Kochanska, Kuczynski, & Radke-Yarrow, 1989). Mothers’ child-rearing philosophy has also been

found to predict future parenting behaviors and interaction patterns with children across 2–3 years

(Kochanska, 1990). The empirical linkages among parental cognition and behavior have been shown

to depend on conceptual and methodological issues. The emergence of significant relationships

between parenting measures is enhanced when there is a close fit between the content of the verbal

statement and the actions taken (Goodnow, 1988; Sigel, 1986); when they reflect the same level of

generality (Goodnow, 1984); when parental behaviors are observed across a variety of situations

(Goodnow, 1988); and when both parents’ cognitions and their actual behavior during parent–child

interaction are measured through multi-item scales and coding schemes rather than through single-item

measures (Sigel, 1986).

The present study was designed to shed light on the issue of the association between self-report and

behavior in parents, and it involved a secondary analysis of data drawn from a more extensive

ongoing longitudinal study. As pointed out by McCall and Appelbaum (1991), reliance on collected

data often limits the focus of a study, but the findings can nevertheless expand our understanding of

the phenomena. In the current study, we focused on parents’ acceptance-involvement, an aspect of

parenting that has been identified in the literature as a core component of a more comprehensive child-

rearing pattern, that is, authoritative parenting (Gray & Steinberg, 1999). Acceptance-involvement

describes individual differences in the extent to which the parent is loving, responsive and involved,

and it has been shown to exert a favorable influence on many aspects of adolescent development,

including academic achievement and identity development, and to protect adolescents from drug use,

conduct problems, and psychological problems such as anxiety and depression (Gray & Steinberg,

1999).

The acceptance-involvement dimension has emerged out of parents’ self-report inventories, such as

Block’s Child Rearing Practices Report (CRPR), widely used in socialization research. The dimension,

describing a parent’s willingness to share feelings and experiences with their child, to show affection,

acceptance and responsiveness to the child’s needs, and to consider the child’s opinion, has been

labeled nurturance (Dekovic, Janssens, & Gerris, 1991; Rickel & Biasatti, 1982). At the level of

ongoing interactions, such behaviors can be regarded as child-centered (Mannikko & Pulkkinen, 2001;

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384 373

Pulkkinen, 1982). Through their child-oriented goals and empathic attunement (Dix, 1992), child-

centered mothers and fathers organize their behavior from the perspective of the child by providing a

context in which the child feels the parents’ warmth and acceptance, sustained involvement and

interest in the child’s activities, consideration of the child’s opinions, and responsiveness to the child’s

needs for comfort and guidance.

Although one might expect nurturant parents to manifest high child-centeredness during parent–

child interaction, researchers have failed in their attempts to link self-reported nurturance to the quality

of observed behavior (Dekovic et al., 1991). Previous studies have indicated that the relationship

between reported and observed behavior may, indeed, be more complex than generally believed and

that a closer link between evaluations might be found with some people rather than others (Holden et

al., 1992; Kochanska, 1990). The latter possibility indicates that the relationship between parenting

measures is modified by a third variable, a moderator, which functions by altering the direction or the

strength of the association between an independent and a dependent variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986).

Although the possibility of moderated associations between measures on parenting has been

recognized (Holden et al., 1992), there have been few attempts to examine such associations

empirically.

A study by Kochanska (1990) showed that nondepressed mothers behaved more in accord with

their reported child-rearing orientations than depressed mothers, suggesting that intrapersonal factors

may have a moderating effect on the self-report-behavior association in parents. In the current study,

we focused on the personality trait of extraversion (E), describing the intensity of interpersonal

interaction, the level of activity, demand for stimulation and capacity for positive emotions. Those

high in E are lively, energetic, assertive, enthusiastic, optimistic, warm, and gregarious, while those

low in E (i.e., introverts) are quiet, reserved, retiring, silent, withdrawn, and socially aloof (McCrae &

John, 1992; Watson & Clark, 1997). Extraversion describes an individual’s functioning in the

interpersonal sphere (McCrae & John, 1992); it is revealed relatively directly in social behavior

(Funder & Dobroth, 1987); and it is a marker of the individual’s tendency to experience positive

emotions (Watson & Clark, 1997). As parenting is social task involving interpersonal behavior and

emotional involvement, E has been found to relate to adaptive parenting (Belsky & Barends, 2002),

although opposite findings have also been reported (Clark, Kochanska, & Ready, 2000; Kochanska,

Clark, & Goldman, 1997).

We hypothesized that through its association with self-esteem and self-evaluation (McCrae & Costa,

1990), E would be linked to the cognitive appraisals that mothers and fathers make of their actions

and practices as parents. We also assumed that through its influence on the quality of social interaction

(Eaton & Funder, 2003; McCrae & Costa, 1990; Watson & Clark, 1997) and how other people

perceive an individual and experience his or her company (Berry & Hansen, 1996), E would be

associated with how observers perceive parental behavior and the way in which children experience

parenting. Consequently, we expected that high E in parents would be related to favorable self-reports

on parenting (high nurturance), positive observations on parental behavior (high child-centeredness),

and favorable evaluations about parenting and family atmosphere by children. We further

hypothesized that understanding how parental E is linked to different aspects of parenting would

help to clarify the associations between parenting data obtained from different informants. More

specifically, we presumed that owing to their overall tendency to be socially active and to easily

express positive emotions, self-reported nurturance would be effective in explaining observed child-

centered behavior particularly in parents high in E.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384374

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

This study was part of the ongoing Jyvaskyla Longitudinal Study of Personality and Social

Development (JYLS), which began in 1968 with a sample of Finnish children aged 8 years (173 girls and

196 boys) (Pulkkinen, 1982, 1998). Thereafter, data have been gathered at adolescence, early adulthood,

and adulthood. Comparisons between data from the longitudinal study and data from Statistics Finland

have indicated that, at ages 36 and 42, the original sample represented the 1959 cohort of Finns in family

type, number of children, and work status (Pulkkinen et al., 2003; Sinkkonen & Pulkkinen, 1996).

The sample in the present study was drawn from the 1997 to 1999 data collection wave when the

participants were approximately 39 years of age. Altogether 145 participants, who had at least one school-

aged child, were invited to the laboratory study, which involved family interaction tasks and cognitive and

emotion regulation tests and questionnaires for the children. Thirty-six families refused to participate,

mainly owing to the long distance between home and laboratory or due to the difficulty in finding a

suitable time for the laboratory visit. The final sample consisted of 109 families (75% of the maximum

sample). The present study concerned families (n=106) where the participating parent (52 fathers and 54

mothers) and the child resided in the same household. The age of the participating child (48 girls, 58 boys)

ranged between 8 and 13 years (M=10.5 years). The participating family members were told that the goal

of the study and its associated data collection was to increase the understanding of the social development

of children and, therefore, the parents and children would be asked to discuss and solve problems together.

After the laboratory visit, family members were offered gift vouchers to a restaurant or movie theater.

We used data collected at several phases of the longitudinal study. At age 39, observations on the

parents’ child-centeredness were conducted on the basis of parent–child interactions while parent and

child were working on two structured interactive tasks in a laboratory setting. Questionnaires concerning

the children’s views about their parents’ parenting practices and family atmosphere were also collected.

Parental reports on child-rearing, including nurturance, were obtained with the questionnaire filled in by

the participants when they were 36 and 42 years of age. The numbers of mothers and fathers for whom

the self-reported parenting data were obtained was 53 and 51, respectively. Information about the

parents’ personality traits were measured as part of the data collected in 1992, when the participants were

33 years of age. Data about personality factors were available from 46 mothers and 43 fathers.

2.2. Measures and variables

2.2.1. Parents’ self-reported parenting

Parents’ self-reported parenting was based on the 28-item Child-rearing Practices Questionnaire

(Metsapelto & Pulkkinen, 2003), which concerned parents’ behaviors, attitudes, goals and child-rearing

values, and measured parenting in general rather than the parenting of one particular child. In the

questionnaire, parents evaluated on a 4-point Likert-scale the degree to which items described them as

parents (1=not at all, 4=very much). The items were formulated in the first-person format and they were

drawn from the Child-rearing Practices Report (Roberts, Block, & Block, 1984) and the inventory by

Gerris et al. (1993). A principal-axis factor analysis was carried out on the data gathered at age 36. The

analysis, with a minimum Eigenvalue of 1.66, yielded four factors, which were labeled Nurturance,

Restrictiveness, Parenting stress, and Parental knowledge (Metsapelto & Pulkkinen, 2003). In this study,

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384 375

only the composite score for Nurturance, explaining 17% of the total variance, was used for the

comparison with observed child-centeredness, as it reflected parental affection, involvement, and

consideration of the child’s opinion and corresponded closely to aspects of parenting observed during the

parent–child interaction. Other parenting variables were not examined in this study as these behaviors

either were not elicited by the interactive tasks used (Restrictiveness, Parental knowledge) or they were

inappropriate given the object of the study (Parenting stress).

The score for Nurturance was calculated as the mean of the 10 items with the highest loadings on the

factor: parent expresses appreciation (.73), encourages independence (.65), jokes with the child (.63),

shows affection (.59), respects the child’s opinions (.57), believes in praise rather than in punishment

(.57), emphasizes verbal give-and-take when the child misbehaves (.57), reports a good relationship with

the child (.54), is easygoing and relaxed with the child (.53), and takes the child’s opinions into account

(.42). An identical composite score for Nurturance was calculated for the self-report data gathered at age

42. The final Nurturance score was calculated as the mean of the parents’ scores at ages 36 and 42. The

correlations between the parents’ scores at these two ages, after correcting for attenuation, were .63 for

mothers and .83 for fathers. The rationale for combining the two data waves to compute a composite

score for self-reported parenting was based on our goal of obtaining a general and robust, not a child-

specific, measure of child-rearing orientation from the parents’ point of view.

2.2.1.1. Reliability. Internal consistency reliability was assessed by Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. An

alpha level of .80 or higher has generally been considered adequately reliable (Schumm, 1990). Our

results indicated good internal consistency for the Nurturance scale as the Cronbach’s alphas were, at age

36, .84 for mothers and .81 for fathers, and, at age 42, .83 for mothers and .87 for fathers. It is worthy of

note that the same scale has been used in several studies, although it has been named differently by

different researchers (Aunola, Nurmi, Onatsu-Arvilommi, & Pulkkinen, 1999; Kinnunen & Pulkkinen,

2001; Mannikko & Pulkkinen, 2001; Metsapelto & Pulkkinen, 2003). Some studies have used samples

other than the JYLS. The scale has shown a consistent factor-structure across the samples used, although

in some studies from one to three additional items have been included. The internal consistency of the

scale has been adequate, as the Cronbach’s alphas have ranged between .81 and .87.

Another form of reliability we examined was test–retest reliability. Again, values over .80 have been

considered acceptable, although longer time-lags between measurements may result in lower correlations

being seen as acceptable (Schumm, 1990). For the nurturance-scale, test–retest correlations have ranged

from .77 (across 1 year) to .65 (across 2 years) (Aunola & Nurmi, 2004, submitted for publication),

suggesting a satisfactory level of test–retest reliability across an even longer time-lag.

2.2.1.2. Validity. The scale has been found to correlate with closely related concepts and relevant

external criteria (e.g., other parenting dimensions, family relations, and personality characteristics). More

specifically, high nurturance has been found to relate to high parental knowledge about the child’s

activities (Kinnunen & Pulkkinen, 2001; Metsapelto & Pulkkinen, 2003) and low child-rearing stress

(Kinnunen & Pulkkinen, 2001). Conversely, it has been found to be independent of the level of parental

restrictiveness (Metsapelto & Pulkkinen, 2003). Furthermore, high nurturance has been shown to be

positively related to a secure attachment style, marital satisfaction, and a trusting family atmosphere

(Kettunen & Krats, 1996). Finally, it has also been found to associate with parents’ personality traits

(high openness to experience, high extraversion, and low neuroticism; Metsapelto & Pulkkinen, 2003),

and high self-esteem and mastery-orientation (Aunola et al., 1999).

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384376

2.2.2. Behavioral observations

Behavioral observations on parent–child interaction were conducted by two independent observers

during two problem-solving tasks, the Crossword Task and the Compound Word Task (Metsapelto,

Pulkkinen, & Poikkeus, 2001). In the Crossword Task (duration: M=10 min 51 s, SD=3 min 2 s), the

parent and index child were given a sheet of paper with a crossword puzzle, and eight folded cards each

containing three clues utilizing which the puzzle was to be solved. The dyad was instructed to work

together and to solve the puzzle using as few of the clues provided on the cards as possible. In the

Compound Word Task (M=8 min 50 s, SD=1 min 52 s), the subjects were given 30 single-word cards,

each containing a (Finnish) noun. The child was requested to join the nouns up into 15 grammatically

correct compound words, a common feature of Finnish. The task was addressed to the child, and the

parent was instructed to provide help only when necessary.

The tasks were designed to be relevant for use with parents and school-aged children. The Crossword

Task offered an opportunity for playful, game-like cooperation without pressure of time and the

Compound Word Task required the parent to allow the child greater freedom of exploration while at the

same time drawing on the parent’s sensitivity to the child’s need for help. The interactions were focussed

on play, comfort, and guidance, and therefore they were considered to reflect individual differences in

parents’ child-centered empathic goals and behaviors (Dix, 1992).

In both tasks, the coding concerned the entire observation period and was based on video-

recordings of the interaction made from behind one-way mirrors. The coding scheme consisted of five

items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale (from low to high) measuring: (1) enjoyment of interaction

(from lack of expressed enjoyment to clear and spontaneous expressions of joy during interaction); (2)

positive affect (from negative, nonchalant feelings to positive and warm feelings expressed toward the

child); (3) interest in the child’s activity (from the parent being non-involved and showing little

interest in the child to the highest mutual involvement in which the parent sensitively monitors the

child’s activities); (4) democratic participation (from a high level of parental domination and control to

joint problem-solving during which the initiatives of both partners were taken into account); and (5)

assistance (from the parent giving no assistance to the parent providing the child with hints and advice

to facilitate his/her problem-solving). A composite score for observed child-centeredness was

calculated as the mean of these five scores.

In judging parental behavior during each task, the parents were observed several times in order to

assign them a specific score on each behavioral dimension. The observers emphasized the quality of

parental behavior during the majority of the period to be observed. However, parental behaviors clearly

divergent to the parent’s predominant style (e.g., negative or hostile acts in an otherwise warm parent)

resulted in the score increase or decrease. In the coding scheme, each score in the Likert-scale was

described and examples of the parental behaviors were provided.

2.2.2.1. Reliability. Parental behavior was coded by a different coder in each task. Prior to the coding

procedure, the coders were trained extensively using videotapes of interactions. Interobserver reliability

was estimated by having two coders independently assess the same randomly selected cases (20% of the

data). The Pearson correlation coefficients between two independent coders in the Crossword Task and

Compound-word Task, respectively, were as follows: .89 and .86 for enjoyment of the interaction; .90

and .84 for positive affect; .78 and .83 for interest in the child’s activity; .88 and .79 for democratic

participation; .76 and .81 for assistance. The Cronbach’s alphas for observed child-centeredness were .92

for mothers and .91 for fathers.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384 377

2.2.2.2. Validity. The review by Holden (1990) indicated that there is large variation in the length

of parent–child dyadic behavior sampled from one study to another (from 3 min to 2 h). In this

study, the mean duration of the two interactive tasks was 20 min (range 8–26 min; mode 22

min), with 79% of observations lasting longer than 17 min. Although it is generally accepted that

as the length of the observation increases, the more accurate and representative the sample of

behavior becomes (Leyendecker, Lamb, Scholmerich, & Fricke, 1997; Wachs, 1987), observations

of this length have succeeded in effectively discriminating between groups of individuals (e.g.,

Janssens & Dekovic, 1997; Kornhaber & Marcos, 2000).

2.2.3. Parents’ Extraversion

Parents’ Extraversion, reflecting warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, and activity, was

measured by the Big Five Personality Inventory (Pulver, Allik, Pulkkinen, & Hamalainen,

1995), an authorized adaptation of the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI; Costa & McCrae,

1985) of which about one-quarter of the items were substitutes for the original American items.

The substitute items were restatements or variations in a non-Indo-European language (Finnish and

Estonian) of the same major theme expressed by the original English items and they were carefully

compared for parity in the general characteristics of the respective global trait domains and facets

given by Costa and McCrae (1985). The substitute statements were used if, because of cultural

differences, an original item had a very low correlation with the total score of the scale to which

it was supposed to belong; if an item had a strong secondary correlation with the other factors

beside the appropriate one; if the item was extremely skewed; or if there was evidence that the

item was socially desirable. In the resultant 181-item inventory, participants assessed on a 5-point

Likert-scale the extent to which they agreed with the items (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly

agree). The scale for Extraversion consisted of 48 items such as bI am known as a warm and

friendly personQ, bWhen I do things, I do them vigorouslyQ, and bI like to have a lot of people

around meQ. The Cronbach’s alphas for the scale were .85 for mothers and .90 for fathers.

2.2.4. Children’s views on parenting and family atmosphere

Children’s views on parenting and family atmosphere were measured using a 16-item Family

Atmosphere Questionnaire. In the questionnaire, the child was asked to evaluate the extent to

which the items characterize his or her parents’ child-rearing (e.g., bMy parents try to talk it over

when I have misbehavedQ; 1=nearly always to 4=seldom or never) and family atmosphere (e.g.,

bTo what extent do you live in a quarrelsome family atmosphere?Q; 1=completely, 5=not at all).

Principal-axis factor analysis with varimax rotation was computed for the child-rearing variables

(with a minimum Eigenvalue of 1.03) and family atmosphere variables (1.71) separately. On the

basis of the analysis, five factors describing the child’s views on parenting and family atmosphere

were computed. In this study, two of them, labeled Positive parenting (explaining 10.4% of total

variance) and Negative family atmosphere (13.2%), were used. The composite score for Positive

parenting included four items (factor loadings in parenthesis): parents give the child acknowl-

edgment (.64), listen to the child’s opinions (.57), encourage the child to be independent (.47),

and try to talk it over when the child misbehaves (.42). The factor for Negative family

atmosphere described the child’s experience of the family atmosphere as quarrelsome (.66), harsh

(.54), indifferent (.51), and unfair (.47). All items were reversed before calculating the composite

scores.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384378

2.2.4.1. Reliability. The Cronbach’s alphas for child-reported Positive parenting (.66) and Negative

family atmosphere (.63) were marginally acceptable.

2.2.4.2. Validity. Child-assessed Negative family atmosphere was found in the present sample to be

positively related to teacher-rated externalizing problems and negatively to adaptive behavior. In

addition, girls with internalizing problems reported lower Positive parenting than girls without such

problems.

3. Results

3.1. Data analysis

The overall data analysis was as follows: We first analyzed the intercorrelations between parents’ self-

reported nurturance, observed child-centeredness and E and the child’s views of positive parenting and

negative family atmosphere. Then, we used hierarchical regression analysis to investigate the moderator

effects. Third, we studied whether the child’s views varied according to the parent’s level of E. Those

parents who considered themselves to be nurturant parents were divided into two groups according to

their level of E, and t-tests were used to compare the child’s views about parenting and family

atmosphere across the groups.

3.2. Descriptive statistics

Means, standard deviations, and Pearson correlations for the study variables are presented in Table 1.

The correlations showed that parental high E was associated with high self-reported nurturance in both

mothers and fathers. The associations among parenting measures obtained from the parents themselves,

the observers and the children were not significant.

3.3. Predicting observed child-centeredness from self-reported nurturance and extraversion

Observed child-centeredness was predicted from parents’ self-reported nurturance and E in the first

step and from their interaction term in the second step by means of hierarchical regression analysis.

The analyses were conducted separately for mothers and fathers. The results (Table 2) showed, for

both mothers and fathers, that self-reported nurturance and E yielded no significant main effects for

observed child-centeredness. However, for both sexes, entering the interaction term into the

regression equation increased the prediction significantly, but with beta coefficients with opposite

signs.

To describe the form of the interactions, the slope of the final equation was computed at points that

corresponded to high and low levels of the predictor variables, that is, one standard deviation below and

above the mean. The results showed that mothers who were high in self-reported nurturance were

observed to be high in observed child-centeredness, if they were extraverted. An opposite pattern was

obtained for fathers. Among those high in nurturance, introverted fathers were observed to be higher in

child-centeredness than extraverted fathers. Mothers and fathers who scored low in self-reported

nurturance were typically moderate in observed child-centeredness regardless of their level of E.

Table 1

Means, standard deviations, and Pearson correlations for the study variables

Study variables Mean Standard

deviation

Nurturance Child-centeredness E Positive

parenting

Negative family

atmosphere

Parents’ self-reported

Nurturance (R =1–4)

3.32 0.38 – 0.11 0.38TT 0.07 �0.04

Parents’ observed

child-centeredness (R =1–5)

3.31 0.74 0.19 – 0.27 �0.11 0.07

Parents’ extraversion (R =1–5) 2.33 0.39 0.52TTT �0.20 – �0.13 0.05

Child’s view regarding

positive parenting (R =1–4)

3.19 0.57 0.10 �0.04 0.04 – �0.35T

Child’s view regarding negative

family atmosphere (R =1–5)

2.01 0.66 �0.05 �0.05 �0.11 �0.01 –

Means and standard deviations are presented for the total sample. For the Pearson correlations, mothers are above diagonal and

fathers below diagonal.

Tp b .05. TTp b .01. TTTp b .001.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384 379

3.4. Children’s view on parenting, family atmosphere and parental extraversion

We examined whether the child’s views about positive parenting and negative family atmosphere

would vary according to the level of E of the parents. Differences in E in relation to observed child-

centeredness were most pronounced for those parents who were high in self-reported nurturance.

Consequently, a comparison of the child’s views was conducted for these nurturant parents. The mothers

and fathers who were above the mean in self-reported nurturance were divided into two groups: those

who were above and those who were below the mean in E. The results showed that the children of those

Table 2

Hierarchical regression analysis predicting observed child-centeredness

Predictor B (SE)a t

Mothers

Step 1. Nurturance .07 (.16) 0.44

Extraversion .30 (.17) 1.82

R2 change F(2, 42)=1.66

Step 2. Nurturance�Extraversion .37 (.18) 2.04TR2 change F(1, 41)=4.17TTotal model F(3, 41)=2.58#; R2= .16

Fathers

Step 1. Nurturance .18 (.17) 1.07

Extraversion � .15 (.18) �0.86

R2 change F(2, 39)=1.88

Step 2. Nurturance�Extraversion � .37 (.17) �2.15TR2 change F(1, 38)=4.63TTotal model F(3, 38)=2.91T; R2= .19

a B, SE, and t-values are drawn from the final regression model.# p b .07.

T p b .05.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384380

fathers who were extraverted reported lower positive parenting (M=3.20, SD=.58, n=14) than the

children of introverted fathers (M=3.71, SD=.22, n=7; t =2.92, pb .01). Along similar lines, the results

showed that the children of extraverted mothers tended to report a more negative family atmosphere

(M=1.97, SD=.54, n=17) than the children of introverted mothers (M=1.57, SD=.43, n=7; t=�1.72,

pb .10). No other noteworthy group differences were found.

4. Discussion

4.1. Main findings

The present study showed that high extraversion in mothers and fathers was related to high self-

reported nurturance. Furthermore, extraverted mothers not only judged themselves to be nurturant

caregivers, but they were also evaluated by observers to be highly child-centered. This finding was in

line with our expectations and with earlier research, which has shown that extraverted individuals have a

positive emotional core combined with a high activity level: they appraise themselves favorably and

easily exhibit affection, positive emotions, and enthusiasm (McCrae & Costa, 1990; Watson & Clark,

1997). Extraverts have also been shown to create a positive social environment through their own

positivity (Eaton & Funder, 2003), and interactions with high-positive-affect individuals have been

regarded as pleasant, enjoyable, and satisfying (Berry & Hansen, 1996).

In the light of these findings, it was unsurprising to find low levels of observed child-centeredness

in introverted, nurturant mothers. The observers did not consider introverted mothers as child-centered,

presumably due to their social withdrawal, quiet and reserved behavior, and lower expression of

positive emotions. Earlier studies have shown that people are less likely to reveal information about

themselves when they are aware that they are being observed (Olberz & Steiner, 1969). This may be

accentuated when the information at stake concerns personal issues such as the expression of

attachment, and the people under observation are sensitive to the presence of observers or other

people, as may be the case in introverted individuals.

In fathers, introversion, rather than extraversion, in combination with high nurturance was related to

high scores in child-centeredness during parent–child interaction. This was an unexpected finding. The

result may be explained in part by low assertiveness and in part by firm control of impulses, which are

attributes of introversion (McCrae & John, 1992). Given that the problem-solving tasks were designed

for school-aged children, and were thus easily mastered by adults, the instruction to work together on

a Crossword Task and to allow the child freedom of exploration in the Compound Word Task did

indeed require low assertiveness and high impulse control from the part of the parent. It seems

possible that, in these particular interactive situations, introverted fathers were more controlled and

capable of organizing their behavior from the perspective of the child than their extraverted

counterparts. Extraverted fathers possibly behaved in a more dominant or even power-assertive

manner and were thus judged to be less child-centered.

Owing to the striking difference between mothers and fathers in the way extraversion moderated the

association between self-reported nurturance and observed child-centeredness, we turned to children’s

views about parenting and family atmosphere to obtain further evidence of the relation between

extraversion and parenting. The assertion that less extraversion in parents might be related to a more

favorable family environment was supported by the children’s evaluations. When mothers and fathers

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384 381

assessed themselves as nurturant child-carers, the less extraverted they were, the more positively the

children assessed their parenting and family atmosphere.

At least two tentative explanations may be offered for these findings. The first stems from the relation

between introversion in fathers and their observed child-centeredness discussed above. Children may

experience their parents as more caring and nurturant when they are less extraverted, less assertive and

more likely to control their own impulses. Assertive behavior and a rapid personal tempo may result in

failure to adopt goals and behaviors that are compatible with those of their children, causing frustration and

conflict during parent–child interaction and coercion on the part of the parent (see Dix, 1992).

Second, the relations between parents’ high extraversion and family atmosphere may be indirect

and mediated through other factors. Highly extraverted parents are likely to be intensively engaged not

only in parenting but also in various other social activities (Watson & Clark, 1997). Although these

parents may consider themselves to be nurturant child-carers, their other commitments may distract

their attention away from their children, leading to a more negative perception of the family

atmosphere by the latter. Alternatively, Belsky and Barends (2002) suggested that the sociable nature

of extraverts might be at odds with the low amount of social exchange experienced, in particular, by

those parents who stay at home all day with children. This may, in turn, cause tension in the family

atmosphere. Overall, our results called into question the uniformly positive image of extraverts that

pervades many writings in the field of personality.

Beyond the associations moderated by parental extraversion, measures on acceptance-involvement

obtained from different informants (the parents themselves, the children, and the observers) did not

correlate and thus failed to provide a coherent account of the quality of parenting. This finding was in line

with the earlier suggestion that parents’ self-reports and behavioral observations tend to provide different

kinds of information about child-rearing (Bornstein et al., 2001; Goodnow, 1984, 1995). It is noteworthy

that our goal was to examine the correlational associations between multiple measures on parenting and

parents’ personality characteristics rather than to test a specific directional hypothesis, that is, whether

parental cognitions, as reflected in self-reports, or personality characteristics would produce certain

parental behaviors. In view of our findings and much previous research, the arguments in favor of causal

linkages between parental cognitions and behavior seem less persuasive, as any effort to establish causality

would imply an association between the constructs. As long as the causality between parental cognitions

and behavior remains unclear, the data collection method and the informant should be carefully considered

when seeking to determine the quality of parenting.

4.2. Limitations

The limitations of the study deserve a comment. Although the longitudinal nature of our data

allowed the combination of two data waves to compute a robust composite score for self-reported

parenting, it is possible that the association with observed child-centeredness would have been

stronger had all sets of data been collected at the same time. Similarly, the moderator effects found are

to be taken as underestimations. In spite of the considerable stability of self-reported nurturance and

extraversion in adulthood (Aunola & Nurmi, 2004; McCrae & Costa, 1990), the fact that the measures

were drawn from different data waves may have attenuated some of the associations. On the other

hand, the use of data collected in different waves reduced the method variance in self-reported

nurturance and extraversion and showed a more robust connection between self-reported and observed

behavior.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384382

The present study was focused on the relation between parents’ self-reported nurturance and observed

child-centeredness, and on the influence on this relation of one personality trait, extraversion. Given the

scope of the study, our findings cannot be generalized beyond the acceptance-involvement dimension of

parenting. Moreover, we had no information about the behavior of the parents towards their children

outside the laboratory to confirm the ecological validity of our observations. Some support was provided

by the negative correlation found between parents’ observed child-centeredness and teachers’ assessments

of the children’s externalizing problem behaviors, and the positive correlation found between parent’s

observed child-centeredness and children’s cognitive capacity for inhibition measured with a test battery

(see Lehto, Juujarvi, Kooistra, & Pulkkinen, 2003). Laboratory observations continue to be frequently used

in studies on parent–child relations, and our study contributes to the validity of these measurements. An

alternative approach might be to conduct observations at home or simulated settings. It should,

furthermore, be noted that the self-report measure did not assess nurturance in relation to the particular

child the parent was interacting with, which raises the question of whether characteristics of the child alter

the degree of observed child-centeredness. The number of participants used to test the interaction effects

was limited and the same applies to the analysis involving children. In the light of these limitations, the

results of this study can only be considered tentative and future analysis should be conducted to confirm the

findings.

4.3. Conclusions

In conclusion, the present study was one attempt to shed light on the much debated issue of multi-

method measurement of parenting. Our results indicate that it is important to consider carefully the

source of information to be used in seeking to determine the quality of parenting and to bear in mind

that the information obtained may need to be tempered by information about parental personality

characteristics. The association between parental personality characteristics and quality of parenting is

possibly more complex than generally believed. Our findings in relation to parental extraversion lead

us to suggest that the associations may be different according to whether one focuses on self-reports

gathered from parents themselves or on parental behaviors as experienced by children and perceived

by observers.

Acknowledgement

The Jyvaskyla Longitudinal Study of Personality and Social Development, started in 1968, is a

continuing research project being conducted at the Department of Psychology, University of Jvvaskyla,

Finland. This paper was prepared as a part of the project (44858) bHuman Development and Its Risk

FactorsQ financed by the Academy of Finland (Finnish Centre of Excellence Programme, 2000–2005).

We thank Asko Tolvanen for his valuable help in the statistical analysis.

References

Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J. -E. (2004). Maternal affection moderates the impact of psychological control on a child’s mathematical

performance. Developmental Psychology, 40, 965–978.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384 383

Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J. -E. (submitted for publication). The role of parenting styles in children’s problem behavior.

Aunola, K., Nurmi, J. -E., Onatsu-Arvilommi, T., & Pulkkinen, L. (1999). The role of parents’ self-esteem, mastery-orientation,

and social background in their parenting styles. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 40, 307–317.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual,

strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

Belsky, J., & Barends, N. (2002). Personality and parenting. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting, Vol. 3. Being and

becoming a parent (2nd ed., pp. 415–438). Mahwah, NJ7 Erlbaum.

Berry, D. S., & Hansen, J. S. (1996). Positive affect, negative affect, and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 71, 796–809.

Bornstein, M. H., Cote, L. R., & Venuti, P. (2001). Parenting beliefs and behaviors in northern and southern groups of Italian

mothers of young infants. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 663–675.

Clark, L. A., Kochanska, G., & Ready, R. (2000). Mothers’ personality and its interaction with child temperament as predictors

of parenting behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 274–285.

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO personality inventory manual. Odessa, FL7 Psychological Assessment

Resources.

Cote, L. R., & Bornstein, M. H. (2000). Social and didactic parenting behaviors and beliefs among Japanese American and

South American mothers of infants. Infancy, 1, 363–374.

Dekovic, M., Janssens, J. M. A. M., & Gerris, J. R. M. (1991). Factor structure and construct validity of the Block Child Rearing

Practices Report (CRPR). Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3, 182–187.

Dix, T. (1992). Parenting on behalf of the child: Empathic goals in the regulation of responsive parenting. In I. E. Sigel,

A. V. McGillicuddy-DeLisi, & J. J. Goodnow (Eds.), Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences for

children (2nd ed., pp. 319–346). Hillsdale, NJ7 Erlbaum.

Eaton, L. G., & Funder, D. C. (2003). The creation and consequences of the social world: An interactional analysis of

extraversion. European Journal of Personality, 17, 375–395.

Funder, D. C., & Dobroth, K. M. (1987). Differences between traits: Properties associated with interjudge agreement. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 409–418.

Gerris, J. R. M., Vermulst, A. A., van Boxtel, D. A. A. M., Janssens, J. M. A. M, van Zutphen, R. A. H., & Felling, A. J. A.

(1993). Parenting in Dutch families: A representative description of Dutch family life in terms of validated concepts

representing characteristics of parents, children, the family as a system and parental socio-cultural value orientations.

Institute of Family Studies, University of Nijmegen.

Goodnow, J. J. (1984). Parents’ ideas about parenting and development: A review of issues and recent work. In M. E.

Lamb, A. L. Brown, & B. Rogoff (Eds.), Advances in developmental psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 193–242) Hillsdale, NJ7

Erlbaum.

Goodnow, J. J. (1988). Parents’ ideas, actions, and feelings: Models and methods from developmental and social psychology.

Child Development, 59, 286–320.

Goodnow, J. J. (1995). Parents’ knowledge and expectations. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting, Vol. 3. Status

and social conditions of parenting (2nd ed., pp. 305–332). Mahwah, NJ7 Erlbaum.

Gray, M. R., & Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal of

Marriage and the Family, 61, 574–587.

Holden, G., Ritchie, K. L., & Coleman, S. D. (1992). The accuracy of maternal self-reports: Agreement between reports on

a computer simulation compared with observed behaviour in the supermarket. Early Development and Parenting, 1,

109–119.

Holden, G. W. (1990). Parenthood. In J. Touliatos, B. F. Perlmutter, & M. A. Straus (Eds.), Handbook of family measurement

techniques (pp. 285–308). Thousand Oaks, CA7 Sage.

Janssens, J. M. A. M., & Dekovic, M. (1997). Child rearing, prosocial moral reasoning, and prosocial behavior. International

Journal of Behavioural Development, 20, 509–527.

Kettunen, N., & Krats, S. (1996). Parisuhteen laadun ja perheilmapiirin yhteys lastenkasvatuskaytantoihin [Marital relationship

and family atmosphere and their association with child rearing practices]. Master’s thesis. University of Jyvaskyla.

Kinnunen, U., & Pulkkinen, L. (2001). Linking job characteristics to parenting behavior via job-related affect. In J. R. M. Gerris

(Ed.), Dynamics of parenting (pp. 233–249). Leuven, Belgium7 Garant-Uitgevers.

Kochanska, G. (1990). Maternal beliefs as long-term predictors of mother–child interaction and report. Child Development, 61,

1934–1943.

R.-L. Metsapelto, L. Pulkkinen / Applied Developmental Psychology 26 (2005) 371–384384

Kochanska, G., Clark, L. A., & Goldman, M. S. (1997). Implications of mothers’ personality for their parenting and their young

children’s developmental outcomes. Journal of Personality, 65, 389–420.

Kochanska, G., Kuczynski, L., & Radke-Yarrow, M. (1989). Correspondence between mothers’ self-reported and observed

child-rearing practices. Child Development, 60, 56–63.

Kornhaber, M., & Marcos, H. (2000). Young children’s communication with mothers and fathers: Functions and contents.

British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18, 187–210.

Lehto, J., Juujarvi, P., Kooistra, L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2003). Dimensions of executive functioning: Evidence from children.

British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21, 59–80.

Leyendecker, B., Lamb, M. E., Scholmerich, A., & Fricke, D. M. (1997). Contexts as moderators of observed interactions: A

study of Costa Rican mothers and infants from differing socioeconomic backgrounds. International Journal of Behavioural

Development, 21, 15–34.

Mannikko, K., & Pulkkinen, L. (2001). Parenting and personality styles: A long-term longitudinal approach. In J. R. M. Gerris

(Ed.), Dynamics of parenting (pp. 179–195). Leuven, Belgium7 Garant-Uitgevers.

McCall, R. B., & Appelbaum, M. I. (1991). Some issues of conducting secondary analyses. Developmental Psychology, 27,

911–917.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York7 Guilford Press.

McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the Five-Factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60,

175–215.

Metsapelto, R. -L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2003). Personality traits and parenting: Neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to

experience as discriminative factors. European Journal of Personality, 17, 59–78.

Metsapelto, R. -L., Pulkkinen, L., & Poikkeus, A. -M. (2001). A search for parenting style: A cross-situational analysis of

parental behavior. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 127, 169–192.

Olberz, P., & Steiner, J. (1969). Order of self-disclosure and the attribution of dispositional characteristics. Journal of Social

Psychology, 79, 287–288.

Pulkkinen, L. (1982). Self-control and continuity from childhood to adolescence. In P. B. Baltes, & O. G. Brim (Eds.), Life-span

development and behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 64–105) Orlando, FL7 Academic Press.

Pulkkinen, L. (1998). Levels of longitudinal data differing in complexity and the study of continuity in per-

sonality characteristics. In R. B. Cairns, L. R. Bergman, & J. Kagan (Eds.), Methods and models for studying the individual

(pp. 161–184). Thousand Oaks, CA7 Sage.

Pulkkinen, L., Fyrsten, S., Kinnunen, U., Kinnunen, M. -L., Pitkanen, T., & Kokko, K. (2003). 40+ Eraan ikaluokan

selviytymistarina [40+ A successful transition to middle adulthood in a cohort of Finns]. Reports from the Department of

Psychology, Vol. 349. Thousand Oaks, CA7 University of Jyvaskyla.

Pulver, A., Allik, J., Pulkkinen, L., & Hamalainen, M. (1995). A Big Five personality inventory in two non-Indo-European

languages. European Journal of Personality, 9, 109–124.

Rickel, A. U., & Biasatti, L. L. (1982). Modification of the Block Child Rearing Practices Report. Journal of Clinical

Psychology, 38, 129–134.

Roberts, G. C., Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1984). Continuity and change in parents’ child-rearing practices. Child Development,

55, 586–597.

Schumm,W. R. (1990). Evolution in the family field: Measurement principles and techniques. In J. Touliatos, B. F. Perlmutter, &

M. A. Straus (Eds.), Handbook of family measurement techniques (pp. 23–36). Thousand Oaks, CA7 Sage.

Sigel, I. E. (1986). Reflections of the belief–behavior connection: Lessons learned from a research program on parental belief

systems and teaching strategies. In R. D. Ashmore, & D. M. Brodzinsky (Eds.), Thinking about the family: Views of parents

and children (pp. 35–65). Hillsdale, NJ7 Erlbaum.

Sinkkonen, M., & Pulkkinen, L. (1996). Elamanrakenne parhaassa aikuisiassa [Life structure in the best years of adulthood].

Reports from the Department of Psychology, Vol. 333. Hillsdale, NJ7 University of Jyvaskyla.

Slade, A., Belsky, J., Aber, J. L., & Phelps, J. L. (1999). Mothers’ representations of their relationships with their toddlers:

Links to adult attachment and observed mothering. Developmental Psychology, 35, 611–619.

Wachs, T. (1987). Short-term stability of aggregated and nonaggregated measures of parental behavior. Child Development, 58,

796–797.

Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.),

Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767–793). San Diego, CA7 Academic Press.