Generalized Expectancies for Negative Mood Regulation Among Youth in Grades 4 to 8

Abstract

Negative mood regulation expectancies (NMRE) represent people’s beliefs that they can use behaviors and cognitions to alleviate unpleasant emotional states. The relationship between NMRE and measures of affect, coping, depression, and anxiety with youth in Grades 4 through 8 (N = 539) was examined. In hierarchical regressions, scores on an NMRE scale predicted depression, but not anxiety, independent of positive affect, negative affect, adaptive coping, and avoidant coping. Results were consistent with those found with college students and adults, suggesting the NMRE construct can add to our understanding of how youth deal with negative moods. Assessing NMRE in youth may help identify those at risk for developing affective symptoms, and provide a useful index of progress in therapeutic interventions.

Keywords

negative mood regulation expectancies youth depression anxiety

Anxiety and depression are among the most prevalent psychological disorders in childhood. The 1-year prevalence rate for clinical depression ranges from 2.7% to 3.3% for youth ages 8 to 15 (Hankin et al., 2015; Merikangas et al., 2010). Costello, Egger, Copeland, Erkanli, and Angold (2011) reported that 12.3% of children and 11% of adolescents met criteria for an anxiety disorder using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-4th ed. (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Alone or in combination, anxiety and depression are associated with a host of negative consequences for children’s academic and social lives (Mychailyszyn, Mendez, & Kendall, 2010; National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2005). Furthermore, emotional distress that does not rise to the level of a diagnosable mood or anxiety disorder is associated with other diagnosable conditions and can have a negative impact on children’s well-being (Gallerani, Garber, & Martin, 2010; Suveg, Jacob, & Thomassin, 2009; Wolff & Ollendick, 2006). Thus, it is important to understand risk and protective factors for different aspects of emotional distress, depression, and anxiety in children and adolescents, because doing so will facilitate development of more effective prevention and treatment programs.

Psychopathology is associated with deficits in the ability to self-regulate behavior, cognition, and emotional states (Baumeister & Vohs, 2004; Gross & Munoz, 1995; Tough, 2012). Generalized expectancies for negative mood regulation—people’s confidence in their ability to alleviate or terminate unpleasant emotional states—are important predictors of mood and emotion regulation processes (e.g., coping responses) and their outcomes (e.g., depression) (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1990, 1999). Negative mood regulation expectancies (NMRE) are conceptualized as a component of the broader process of affect regulation, which includes coping, emotion regulation, mood regulation, and psychological defenses (Gross, 1998, 2014). More than 25 years of research on college students and adults has documented beneficial effects of strong NMRE using the Negative Mood Regulation (NMR) Scale developed by Catanzaro and Mearns (1990).

Aspects of affect regulation, especially emotion regulation, have garnered attention in the child literature (e.g., Braet et al., 2014; Siener & Kerns, 2012; Suveg, Hoffman, Zeman, & Thomassin, 2009). An area drawing less attention with regard to children has been NMRE. Eisenberg, Spinrad, and Eggum (2010) noted that emotion regulation and its component skills can contribute to either typical (or even positive) or atypical developmental outcomes, depending on several variables (e.g., social and biological resources). Kovacs, Joormann, and Gotlib (2008) suggested that an impaired ability to regulate sadness represents a clinically meaningful link between stress and the development of depressed mood and depressive disorders among children. Kovacs and colleagues further noted the need for conceptual approaches to help characterize self-regulatory responses to sadness that might inform treatment strategies for children vulnerable to depression. The construct of NMRE (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1990), which are people’s beliefs in their ability to alleviate negative moods, is embedded in Rotter’s (1954, 1982) social learning theory, a comprehensive theoretical framework for conceptualizing the role of self-relevant beliefs as predictors of behavior. A rich conceptual and empirical literature on NMRE provide a basis for understanding self-regulatory responses to sadness and other forms of emotional distress that has informed treatment of depression and anxiety among adults (see Catanzaro & Mearns, 2016, for a recent review). The present article reports an initial examination of NMRE as a correlate of coping, depression, and anxiety in youth.

NMRE

The concept of NMRE has its genesis in Rotter’s (1954) expectancy construct, which has some similarities to and differences from Bandura’s (1977, 1986) self-efficacy construct. The constructs are similar in that they both relate to people’s confidence about the outcomes of their behavior. The distinction is that Bandura divided the two elements of expectancy into separate constructs. Self-efficacy represents people’s estimates of their ability to enact a certain behavior. Outcome expectancy represents their confidence that this behavior will result in reinforcement. According to Bandura, self-efficacy causally influences expected outcomes of behavior, but outcome expectancies do not causally influence self-efficacy. Rotter’s expectancy construct entails both a belief that one can enact a behavior and that the behavior will be rewarded.

Soon after Bandura defined self-efficacy, critics began noting conceptual, measurement, and methodological problems with this construct. In particular, they cited frequent implicit confounding of self-efficacy with outcome expectancy (Corcoran, 1991; Kirsch, 1985b). For example, measuring self-efficacy as people’s belief that they can successfully enact a behavior produces judgments about outcomes, not just about ability. Schwarzer and Warner (2013) noted that self-efficacy is not the same as the expectation of certain outcomes. These authors further state that outcome expectancies are the perception of the possible consequences of one’s actions, whereas perceived self-efficacy pertains to personal control over one’s own acts to achieve future outcomes. Kirsch (1985b) noted that much research purporting to measure self-efficacy is in fact measuring expectancy. These concerns continue today. Williams (2010) noted that self-efficacy research still suffers from serious contradictions between how the construct is conceptualized and how it is operationalized.

Catanzaro and Mearns (1990) defined NMRE as a generalized expectancy within Rotter’s (1954, 1982) social learning theory, based on seminal work by Franko, Powers, Zuroff, and Moskowitz (1985), who first studied generalized expectancies for regulation of emotional states. They created the NMR Scale to measure NMRE, which represent people’s beliefs that they can ameliorate their negative emotional experiences. Catanzaro and Mearns followed Rotter’s social learning theory in postulating that NMRE (a set of cognitions) would predict coping behaviors, because the probability of a behavior is a function of the expectancy that it will result in reinforcement (i.e., executing a given coping response will lead to feeling better or less distressed) and the value of that reinforcement (the assumption that more hedonically positive emotional states are, in general, strongly valued outcomes).

NMRE influence mood via two pathways. As NMRE are stimulus expectancies (i.e., expectancies for outcomes that individuals consider when choosing how to act; Kirsch, 1997), there is an indirect path mediated by coping; greater confidence in one’s mood regulation abilities results in more effort toward adaptive coping, which in turn results in better mood outcomes. In addition, because NMRE are response expectancies (Kirsch, 1985a), there is a direct effect. Response expectancies are beliefs about nonvolitional responses, such as the placebo effect, that are conceptually distinct from self-efficacy. In the case of NMRE, believing that one will experience improved affect directly results in lessening of negative mood, independent of behavior, because response expectancies are self-confirming (Kirsch, 1985a, 1997). In other words, people start feeling better when merely thinking about what they can do to improve their mood, regardless of whether they actually carry out the behaviors or if the behaviors they choose would improve mood when used by other people.

Based on theory and research indicating that expectancies about emotional outcomes are self-confirming response expectancies (Kirsch, 1985a), Catanzaro and Mearns (1990) hypothesized that NMRE should predict emotional outcomes, such as symptoms of depression and anxiety, directly—independent of and unmediated by coping responses. These hypotheses have been supported in multiple studies in a wide variety of age groups and in several languages. Research has also consistently shown NMRE are positively correlated with adaptive, active coping responses, and negatively correlated with maladaptive, avoidant coping responses in samples ranging from college students to the elderly (Catanzaro & Mearns, 2016; Shepherd-McMullen, Mearns, Stokes, & Mechanic, 2015). Research has also demonstrated discriminant validity of NMRE from coping, from depression, and from trait positive affect (PA) and trait negative affect (NA) (Catanzaro et al., 2014; Catanzaro, Wasch, Kirsch, & Mearns, 2000). Inverse correlations between NMRE and anxiety, depression, and other negative emotions are well-documented in clinical and nonclinical samples of college students and adults (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1999; Gilboa-Schechtman, Avnon, Zubery, & Jeczmien, 2006; Marquart, Overholser, & Peak, 2009; Mearns & Mauch, 1998).

Longitudinal studies show that NMRE predict subsequent affect, independent of current affect and coping. For example, Kassel, Bornovalova, and Mehta (2006) found that scores on the NMR Scale predicted change in both depression and anxiety in college students over an 8-week period, even when baseline levels of depression, anxiety, and coping were statistically controlled. Also, Davis, Andresen, Trosko, Massman, and Lovejoy (2005) reported that NMRE and trait negative affectivity were related, though distinct constructs, both accounting for specific variance in concurrently assessed depressed mood; at 1-year follow-up, only NMRE predicted change in depressed mood. Finally, Catanzaro et al. (2014; Study 3) found that scores on the NMR Scale predicted changes on symptom scores on measures of general emotional distress, anhedonia, and anxious arousal 4 to 8 weeks after initial assessment independent of affective traits.

NMRE also predict behavioral outcomes when people are under stress. For example, Catanzaro (1996) showed that NMRE interacted with state anxiety to predict exam performance among college students: Anxiety disrupted performance only among those with relatively weak NMRE. NMRE moderate the dynamic between mood and cognition. For example, Rusting and DeHart (2000) induced a negative mood and instructed participants either to dwell on their negative mood or to engage in cognitive reappraisal; only participants with high NMRE successfully used positive reappraisal. Participants had to believe in their mood regulation abilities to benefit from mood repair strategies. Thus, mood repair efforts are likely to be unsuccessful unless individuals have strong NMRE. This research has implications for psychotherapy; enhancement of NMRE early in therapy is associated with greater symptom relief at the end of treatment (Backenstrass et al., 2006; Cloitre, Koenen, Cohen, & Han, 2002; Cloitre et al., 2010).

Unfortunately, there is little research on NMRE in youth. Christiansen, Copeland, and Stapert (2008) investigated the links between psychological and somatic symptoms in middle/junior high school students in rural communities. They found that scores on the NMR Scale moderated the relationship between coping and somatic complaints for girls; however, scores were not related to somatic symptoms among boys. Howell, Shapiro, Layne, and Kaplow (2015) reported higher scores on a measure of NMRE for a group of parentally bereaved children who were exhibiting adaptive functioning compared with those who demonstrated maladaptive functioning. Similar to research with adults, these few studies suggest that the NMRE construct has value for understanding how children deal with negative mood.

The Present Study

The goal of the present research was to determine whether considering the NMRE construct enhanced understanding of anxiety and depression among children and adolescents younger than those who have typically been studied in the NMRE literature. Our sample of students in Grades 4 to 8 was selected because this age range represents a transitional period in the development of academic and emotional functioning (McLaughlin & King, 2015; Romero, Master, Paunesku, Dweck, & Gross, 2014; Zimmer-Gembeck & Skinner, 2011). For example, Costello, Erkanli, and Angold (2006) found that prevalence estimates for depression doubled across the age ranges below 13 (2.8%) to 13 through 18 (5.6%). Furthermore, Silvers et al. (2012) reported differences in the ability to implement emotion regulation reappraisal strategies for youth between 10 and 16 years of age. Students in Grades 4 to 8 also were selected because they mirrored the grades used in the development of the Positive and Negative Affect Scale for Children (PANAS-C; Laurent et al., 1999), were available, and represented an age range that had not been extensively examined with the NMR Scale.

Kovacs et al. (2008) noted that one of the important developmental tasks of childhood is to learn to adaptively self-regulate sadness so that it does not adversely influence functioning. Finding that the NMRE construct can be extended to children and adolescents would answer, at least in part, the call of Kovacs et al. (2008) for conceptual approaches to help characterize self-regulatory responses to sadness that might inform treatment strategies for children vulnerable to depression. Adult studies (Backenstrass et al., 2006; Cloitre et al., 2002; Cloitre et al., 2010) show that mood repair efforts are more likely to be successful with individuals who have strong NMRE. Understanding the nature of NMRE in younger samples than previously studied may guide interventions used with students who experience anxiety and depression.

We expected to observe similar relationships to those that have been documented in adults between NMRE, coping, and affect. Specifically, the relationships among NMRE, PA, NA, coping, depression, and anxiety were examined. It was expected that scores on a measure of NMRE would be positively correlated with scores on measures of PA and adaptive coping, and negatively correlated with scores on measures of NA, avoidant coping, anxiety, and depression (Catanzaro et al., 2014; Catanzaro & Mearns, 1999).

Furthermore, it was expected that scores on a measure of NMRE would predict scores on depression and anxiety scales, above and beyond that predicted by coping (Catanzaro et al., 2000; Kassel et al., 2006). Such findings are consistent with the conceptualization of NMRE as response expectancies that are associated with how people feel, irrespective of their coping responses, and would replicate research with college students and adults. As gender and age differences have been reported in the child anxiety and depression literatures (e.g., Keenan, Feng, Hipwell, & Klostermann, 2009; Martel, 2013; Maughan, Collishaw, & Stringaris, 2013; Weems & Costa, 2005; Wilson, Pritchard, & Revalee, 2005), these demographic variables also were included in the analyses. Generally, adolescent girls are more prone to depression than boys (Maughan et al., 2013). The picture is less clear for anxiety because of the way anxiety is conceptualized or defined and measured (Weems, 2008). As a result, findings have been mixed as to whether younger or older students experience more anxiety; however, typically, girls report experiencing more anxiety than boys (Fox, Halpern, & Forsyth, 2008).

Method

Participants

A total of 563 youth participated in the study. Participants were students in Grades 4 to 8 who attended five elementary (fourth and fifth grades; ages 8.99-11.62 years), two intermediate (fifth and sixth grades; ages 10.37-12.78 years), one middle (sixth-eighth grades; ages 11.55-14.67 years), and two junior high (seventh and eighth grades; ages 12.49-14.86 years) schools in three rural Midwestern U.S. districts. More girls (53.9%) than boys participated. More fourth (22.4%), fifth (23.3%), and sixth (22.4%) graders participated than seventh (17.4%) or eighth (14.6%) graders. Consistent with the communities in which the schools were located, most participants were White/Caucasian (95.6%) in ethnicity. Students in regular education classes composed 91.5% of the sample. The remaining 8.5% of students received special education support services for a variety of disabilities, with the majority eligible under the learning disabilities category (6.2%). Other special education categories represented were emotional/behavior disorder (0.7%), speech/language disorder (0.5%), other health impaired (0.4%), intellectual disability (0.4%), hearing impaired (0.2%), and orthopedically impaired (0.2%). The mean age for the sample was 11.79 years (SD = 1.44).

Measures

NMR Scale modified for youth

The adult NMR Scale (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1990) is a 30-item self-report measure that assesses beliefs about one’s ability to alleviate a negative mood. For the current study, the wording of some NMR Scale items was modified so students would understand them more easily. For example, adult NMR item “Wallowing in it is all I can do” was modified for youth to “Thinking about being upset is all I can do,” and the item “Planning how I will deal with things will help” became “It will help to make a plan to solve my problem.” Each item still completed the stem, “When I’m upset, I believe that . . .” Individuals respond with a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). High scores indicate strong beliefs in one’s ability to improve a negative mood.

Over 25 years of research supports the reliability and validity of the NMR Scale as a measure of NMRE in college students and adults (e.g., Mearns, Patchett, & Catanzaro, 2009). Catanzaro and Mearns (1990) reported alpha coefficients that ranged from .86 to .92 for groups of university undergraduate students. Although the psychometric properties of the NMR Scale modified for youth were not the primary focus of the current study, data are presented to document the psychometric adequacy of the scale for use with students. The alpha coefficient for the current sample was .88. Item-total correlations for 26 of the 30 items exceeded the common standard of ≥.30 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), three items had item-total correlations of .27, and one item-total correlation was .22. Principal axis factoring (PAF) with an oblique rotation was conducted. Using criteria presented by Gorsuch (1997), three of the resulting six factors would be considered trivial. Items appeared to be assigned to the three remaining factors based on how they were worded rather than substantive content of the items. As a result, we concluded that the NMR Scale modified for youth was essentially unidimensional with respect to content (cf. Slocum-Gori, Zumbo, Michalos, & Diener, 2009), consistent with the original version of the scale. Interested readers may contact the authors for more details regarding the PAF results.

PANAS-C

The PANAS-C (Laurent et al., 1999) is a 27-item measure of positive (12 items) and negative (15 items) affect. PA is pleasurable engagement with the environment. NA is a state of emotional distress. On the PANAS-C, children are instructed to indicate how often they have felt “interested,” “sad,” and so forth during the past few weeks using a 5-point scale (1 = not much or not at all to 5 = a lot). The PANAS-C was developed for students in Grades 4 to 8 (Laurent et al., 1999) but has been used with children as young as Grade 3 (Bushman & Crowley, 2010) and as old as Grade 12 (Laurent, Joiner, & Catanzaro, 2011).

Clark and Watson (1991; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) found that individuals with depression exhibit low levels of PA and high levels of NA, whereas individuals with anxiety disorders exhibit high levels of NA without depletion of PA. Research supports the utility of PA and NA for clinical and nonclinical samples of children (Cannon & Weems, 2006; Joiner, Catanzaro, & Laurent, 1996; Joiner & Lonigan, 2000; Lambert, McCreary, Joiner, Schmidt, & Ialongo, 2004). Laurent et al. (1999) reported alpha coefficients ranging from .89 to .92 for the PA and NA scales. In the current sample, the alpha coefficients were .88 for the PA scale and .90 for the NA scale.

Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS)

The RCADS (Chorpita, Yim, Moffitt, Umemoto, & Francis, 2000) is a 47-item measure of anxiety and depression in youth. Children rate how often they have experienced each symptom on a scale from 0 (never) to 3 (always). Items include “worrying about things” and “having trouble sleeping.” Recently, Ebesutani et al. (2012) proposed a short version of the RCADS consisting of 10 items measuring depression and 15 items assessing anxiety. The 25-item short form of the RCADS was used in the current study. Ebesutani et al. reported alpha coefficients for this short form ranging from .86 to .91 in school and clinical samples. Alpha coefficients for the RCADS depression and anxiety scales in the current study were .83 and .86, respectively.

Self-Report Coping Scale (SRCS)

The SRCS (Causey & Dubow, 1992) is a 34-item measure of children’s coping strategies developed for use with students in Grades 4 to 6. The SRCS consists of five subscales. The Seeking Social Support (SSS; for example, “ask a friend for advice”) and Self-Reliance/Problem-Solving (SRPS; for example, “try to think of different ways to solve it”) scales measure adaptive coping. The Distancing (e.g., “refuse to think about it”), Internalizing (e.g., “worry too much about it”), and Externalizing (e.g., “yell to let off steam”) scales assess avoidant coping. Causey and Dubow created two stems to which students respond, one dealing with a bad grade in school, the other to conflict with a peer. Crook, Beaver, and Bell (1998) modified the stem that each item completes to “When something goes wrong or something bad happens; when I feel under stress, I usually . . . ” The adaptation by Crook et al. was used in the current study. Items are scored on a 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = always).

Adaptive coping scales are positively related to PA, whereas avoidant coping subscales are positively related to NA (Crook et al., 1998). SRCS subscales demonstrate moderate to strong internal consistency, with alphas ranging from .68 to .90 (Causey & Dubow, 1992). In the current sample, alpha coefficients ranged from .66 to .88.

Procedure

After approval from the institutional review board was obtained, letters were distributed to parents and guardians of the 1,543 students in Grades 4 to 8 inviting them to allow their child to participate in a study about mood and coping; letters went home with students. Overall, the rate for students returning permission forms was 68.3% (compared with 60.2% reported by Blom-Hoffman et al., 2009, when using letter-only solicitation of parental consent in school settings) with 64.7% of parents granting consent. Students for whom parental consent was obtained received a packet that included an assent form, a demographic sheet, and these measures in random order: NMR Scale modified for youth, PANAS-C, RCADS, and SRCS. Students who assented completed the questionnaires in groups of 10 to 75 in their classrooms or other, larger rooms at school, typically taking 30 minutes to 45 minutes to finish. Some assistants helped children having difficulty reading by presenting items to them and having students indicate their responses as they followed along on a separate copy of the measures. Other assistants monitored the room and responded to various questions regarding the meaning of words (simple definitions were provided), what to do if they were not sure how to answer (provide the best answer you can), whether they could skip an answer if they did not feel comfortable with an item (restated the instructions that told them they could skip items, but encouraged them to try to answer every item), and so on. Afterward, participants were debriefed. Of the 682 possible participants, 119 students did not participate because they did not assent or were absent, resulting in the sample of 563.

Results

After inspection, the data of 24 students were eliminated from analyses. Of these students, three received incomplete packets of measures (i.e., one measure was missing), seven did not complete any items on one of the measures, and 14 students skipped sections or significant numbers of items on a measure. If students were missing only a few items (i.e., 1-3) on a measure, these values were imputed using the expectation-maximization method found in the IBM SPSS Missing Values Add-On program; less than 1% (i.e., 0.96%) of the data were imputed. Comparisons between the original (N = 563) and final (N = 539) samples revealed no significant differences on demographic variables: age, t = −0.35, p = .36; gender, χ² = 0.00, p = .99; grade, χ² = 0.23, p = .99; and ethnicity, χ² = 0.02, p = .99.

Correlations among measures, along with means, standard deviations, and alpha coefficients were calculated. These data are presented in Table 1. The correlations were nearly all consistent with expectations. Scores for NMRE showed moderate positive correlations with PA (r = .47) and adaptive coping (r = .36 with SSS, and .32 with SRPS). NMRE correlated negatively with NA (r = −.43), avoidant coping (r = −.42 with SRCS Internalizing and –.33 with SRCS Externalizing scores), anxiety (r = −.38), and depression (r = −.50). These results were consistent with previous findings (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1990, 1999, 2016; D’Alessandro & Burton, 2006).

Table 1.

Correlations and Descriptive Statistics for Scales.

	NMRE	PA	NA	SSS	SRPS	DIST	INT	EXT	DEP	ANX
NMR	(.88)
PA	.47***	(.88)
NA	−.43***	−.28***	(.90)
SSS	.36***	.30***	−.08	(.88)
SRPS	.32***	.32***	−.04	.63***	(.79)
DIST	.10*	.02	.15***	.08	.28***	(.66)
INT	−.42**	−.21***	.50***	.07	.19***	.20***	(.76)
EXT	−.33**	−.12**	.34***	−.15***	−.06	.22***	.45***	(.72)
DEP	−.50**	−.36***	.67***	−.14***	−.07	.14***	.53***	.36***	(.83)
ANX	−.38**	−.23***	.65***	.04	.09*	.13**	.58***	.32***	.71***	(.86)
$\bar{X}$	101.69	43.59	28.97	22.19	23.24	14.23	16.42	7.95	7.48	10.60
SD	18.67	9.47	10.84	7.41	6.00	4.21	5.60	3.59	5.02	7.44

Note. N = 539. Alpha coefficients are listed on the diagonal. NMR = Negative Mood Regulation Scale modified for youth; PA = Positive Affect Scale of PANAS-C; NA = Negative Affect Scale of PANAS-C; SSS = Seeking Social Support Scale of SRCS; SRPS = Self-Reliance/Problem-Solving Scale of SRCS; DIST = Distancing Scale of SRCS; INT = Internalizing Scale of SRCS; EXT = Externalizing Scale of SRCS; DEP = Depression Scale of RCADS; ANX = Anxiety Scale of RCADS; PANAS-C = Positive and Negative Affect Scale for Children; SRCS = Self-Report Coping Scale; RCADS = Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Next, gender and grade differences on the NMR Scale modified for youth and other scales employed in the study were evaluated using MANOVA. Two grade groups were formed, with students in Grades 4 to 5 composing one group and students in Grades 6 to 8 forming the other. Table 2 presents the means and standard deviations by gender and by group for the scales. There was a significant main effect for gender, Wilks’ lambda = .84, F(10, 526) = 10.15, p < .001, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .16. There also was a main effect for group, Wilks’ lambda = .93, F(10, 526) = 4.04, p < .001, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .07. The gender-by-group interaction was not significant, Wilks’ lambda = .97, F(10, 526) = 1.41, p = .17, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .03.

Table 2.

Means and Standard Deviations by Gender and Grade for the PANAS-C, SRCS, RCADS, and NMR Scales.

	Gender		Grade		Gender X Grade
	Malesn = 250	Femalesn = 289	Grades 4-5n = 244	Grades 6-8n = 295	Male/Grades 4-5n = 118	Female/Grades 4-5n = 126	Male/Grades 6-8n = 132	Female/Grades 6-8n = 163
PANAS-C PA	43.45 (9.20)	43.71 (9.70)	42.69 (10.10)	44.34 (8.05)	42.14 (9.69)	43.20 (10.48)	44.63 (8.62)	44.11 (9.06)
PANAS-C NA	27.39 (9.90)	30.34 (11.44)	29.79 (11.37)	28.29 (10.36)	27.50 (10.07)	31.94 (12.11)	27.29 (9.79)	29.01 (10.77)
SRCS SSS	20.33 (7.02)	23.80 (7.37)	22.26 (7.30)	22.14 (7.51)	21.17 (6.97)	23.33 (7.47)	19.63 (7.01)	24.16 (7.30)
SRCS SRPS	22.85 (6.05)	23.58 (5.95)	23.12 (6.07)	23.34 (5.96)	23.09 (5.95)	23.153 (6.20)	22.63 (6.16)	23.92 (5.75)
SRCS DIST	14.45 (4.38)	14.04 (4.07)	14.18 (4.10)	14.28 (4.30)	14.49 (4.25)	13.88 (3.96)	14.42 (4.50)	14.17 (4.15)
SRCS INT	15.70 (5.30)	17.04 (5.78)	16.63 (5.61)	16.24 (5.59)	16.21 (5.40)	17.02 (5.79)	15.25 (5.18)	17.05 (5.79)
SRCS EXT	8.41 (3.75)	7.54 (3.39)	7.59 (3.53)	8.24 (3.61)	8.08 (3.65)	7.13 (3.36)	8.71 (3.83)	7.86 (3.38)
RCADS DEP	7.17 (4.60)	7.75 (5.35)	8.41 (4.87)	6.71 (5.02)	7.90 (4.30)	8.89 (5.32)	6.51 (4.77)	6.87 (5.22)
RCADS ANX	9.11 (6.65)	11.89 (7.86)	11.86 (7.63)	9.56 (7.13)	10.06 (6.49)	13.54 (8.24)	8.26 (6.69)	10.62 (7.32)
NMR	103.53 (17.47)	100.11 (19.55)	100.90 (19.54)	102.35 (17.93)	102.23 (18.79)	99.65 (20.22)	104.69 (16.17)	100.46 (19.07)

Note. N = 539. Underlined pairs indicate statistically significant differences. PANAS-C = Positive and Negative Affect Scale for Children; SRCS = Self-Report Coping Scale; RCADS = Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale; NMR = Negative Mood Regulation Scale modified for youth; PA = Positive Affect Scale; NA = Negative Affect Scale; SSS = Seeking Social Support Scale; SRPS = Self-Reliance/Problem-Solving Scale; DIST = Distancing Scale; INT = Internalizing Scale; EXT = Externalizing Scale; DEP = Depression Scale; ANX = Anxiety Scale.

An examination of scores on the individual scales revealed significant differences existed between males and females on the NA scale of the PANAS-C and RCADS Anxiety scale, F(1, 535) = 11.32, p = .001, d = .27, and F(1, 535) = 21.73, p < .001, d = .38., respectively. On both scales, females obtained higher scores than males. Similarly, significant differences in scores on the SSS, Internalizing, and Externalizing scales of the SRCS existed, F(1, 535) = 29.24, p < .001, d = .48; F(1, 535) = 7.32, p < .01, d = .24; and F(1, 535) = 8.50, p < .01, d = −.24, respectively. The pattern of females obtaining higher scores than males was repeated on the SRCS SSS and Internalizing scales. On the SRCS Externalizing scale, males obtained higher scores than females. Finally, significant differences existed between scores for males and females on the NMR Scale modified for youth, F(1, 535) = 4.44, p < .05, d = −.18, with males obtaining higher scores than females. The difference in NMRE between males and females parallels findings with adults (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1990, 1999).

With respect to those in Grades 4 to 5 versus those in Grades 6 to 8, an examination of scores on the individuals scales revealed significant differences existed between students on the PA scale of the PANAS-C, F(1, 535) = 4.30, p < .05, d = .18. Students in Grades 6 to 8 obtained higher scores on the PA scale than those in Grades 4 to 5. Significant differences in scores on the RCADS Depression and Anxiety scales also existed, F(1, 535) = 15.77, p < .001, d = −.34, and F(1, 535) = 14.18, p < .001, d = −.31. For both scales, those in Grades 4 to 5 reported higher scores than those in Grades 6 to 8. Finally, significant differences existed between scores for those in Grades 4 to 5 versus those in Grades 6 to 8 on the SRCS Externalizing scale, F(1, 535) = 4.82, p < .05, d = .18, with older students obtaining higher scores than younger students.

To test the incremental validity of scores on the NMR Scale modified for youth as a predictor of symptoms of distress, we conducted two hierarchical regression analyses, separately predicting depression and anxiety. As our goal was to evaluate whether NMRE predicted variance in symptoms beyond that predicted by other known correlates (i.e., PA, NA, and coping), we entered variables into the model in four steps: at Step 1, age and gender; at Step 2, PA and NA; at Step 3, the five coping dimensions; and at Step 4, NMRE. Research cited previously and the results of our MANOVA suggested relationships of age, gender, affect, and coping with symptoms of distress. This analytical approach allowed for the isolation of the incremental improvement (i.e., incremental validity; Cohen & Cohen, 1983; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001) of the NMRE construct in predicting childhood depression and anxiety scores. Regression results are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3.

Hierarchical Multiple Regressions Predicting Depression and Anxiety With Age, Gender, PA, NA, Coping, and Negative Mood Regulation Expectancies.

Predictor	Depression		Anxiety
Predictor	ΔR²	β	ΔR²	β
Step 1	.01*		.05***
Age		−.11**		−.11**
Gender		.06		.19***
Step 2	.47***		.39***
PA		−.19***		−.05
NA		.61***		.61***
Step 3	.06***		.09***
Seeking Social Support		−.07		.02
Problem-Solving		.00		.06
Distancing		.02		−.02
Internalizing		.23***		.29***
Externalizing		.08*		.07
Step 4	.02***		.00
Negative Mood Regulation Expectancies		−.17***		−.06

Note. N = 539. PA = positive affect; NA = negative affect.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

For depression, the overall model was significant, R² = .55, F(10, 528) = 65.88, p < .001. The demographic variables of age and gender accounted for a small, but significant, amount of variance, R² = .01 (p = .02), that was due to age (β = −.11, p < .01). Affect accounted for a large amount of variance in depression, change in R² = .47 (p < .001). This was largely due to NA (β = .61, p < .001), although PA also had an influence (β = −.19, p < .001). The addition of the coping variables accounted for a change in R² of .06 (p < .001), with scores on SRCS Internalizing (β = .23, p < .001) and Externalizing (β = .08, p < .05) scales being the strongest predictors. In Step 4, adding NMRE resulted in a small, but significant, change in R² of .02 (β = −.17, p < .001). This effect size is somewhat smaller than that reported by Catanzaro et al. (2014, Study 3) in cross-sectional analyses that controlled for trait PA, NA, and PH (i.e., physiological hyperarousal), but not coping (∆R² = .04 for general distress and .10 for anhedonic depression). Kassel et al. (2006) reported similar effect sizes (∆R² = .01) in analyses of change in symptoms that controlled for maladaptive and adaptive coping, but not affect.

For anxiety, the overall model also was significant, R² = .53, F(8, 530) = 59.19, p < .001. Once again, the demographic variables of age and gender account for a small, but significant, amount of variance, R² = .05 (p < .001). In this case, both age (β = −.11, p < .01) and gender (β = .19, p < .001) accounted for a portion of the variance. PA and NA, again, accounted for a large amount of variance, change in R² = .39 (p < .001). Again, this was almost entirely due to NA (β = .61, p < .001), with PA contributing little. The addition of the coping variables accounted for a change in R² of .09 (p < .001), with scores on SRCS Internalizing scale, again, being the strongest predictor (β = .29, p < .001). In Step 4, adding NMRE did not result in a noticeable change in R² (∆R² = .003, β = −.06, p = .16). This effect size is similar to those reported by Catanzaro et al. (2014, Study 3): ∆R² = .01 for anxious arousal, and by Kassel et al. (2006): ∆R² = .01.

Discussion

NMRE, that is, the belief that one can do something to alleviate an unpleasant emotional state, have garnered considerable support as important predictors of coping and adaptation among college students and adults (Catanzaro & Mearns, 2016). Little attention has been paid to this construct in the child/early adolescent literature. The current study attempted to address this situation by examining the utility of NMRE in the context of anxiety and depression among youth in Grades 4 to 8. Specifically, a modified youth version of the NMR Scale, a commonly used measure in studies of college students and adults, was used to examine relationships between NMRE and affect, coping, anxiety, and depression among students.

Scores on the NMR Scale modified for youth demonstrated patterns of correlations in hypothesized directions with measures of affect and coping—positively with PA and adaptive coping, and negatively with NA and avoidant coping. In multivariate analyses, NMRE predicted symptoms of depression, but not anxiety, above and beyond those predicted by affect and coping. As the predictors entered at earlier steps in these regressions, especially PA and NA, had such strong relations with the criterion measures of depression and anxiety, these analyses provided stringent tests of the concurrent incremental validity of NMRE by demonstrating statistical uniqueness from affect and coping measures. Our findings parallel those reported in college student and adult samples using the NMR Scale (e.g., Catanzaro & Mearns, 2016; Davis et al., 2005; Kassel et al., 2006; Mearns et al., 2009; Shepherd-McMullin et al., 2015). This suggests that the NMRE construct can be extended downward to include children and adolescents in Grades 4 to 8. The fact that no significant differences existed in scores obtained by younger (Grades 4-5) versus older (Grades 6-8) students provides preliminary evidence that the NMRE construct is consistent across these age groups. At the same time, gender differences were found in our sample, with boys obtaining higher scores than girls on the NMR Scale modified for youth, similar to those reported in college student/adult samples (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1990, 1999). These gender differences are consistent with research suggesting differences between boys and girls with respect to depression.

Our findings are bolstered by the fact that relations among scores on the other measures in our study (i.e., PA, NA, coping, anxiety, depression; see Table 2) also were consistent with theory and previous research (e.g., Clark & Watson, 1991; Lambert et al., 2004). Regression results were consistent with the tripartite model that states depression is characterized by high levels of NA and low levels of PA, whereas anxiety, although also characterized by high levels of NA, is not systematically associated with PA (Clark & Watson, 1991).

Gender differences witnessed were consistent with previous research with respect to NA and anxiety (Jacques & Mash, 2004) and coping (Causey & Dubow, 1992; Eschenbeck, Kohlmann, & Lohaus, 2007; Roecker-Phelps, 2001). Relations of scores on coping measures and anxiety and depression symptoms were consistent with previous findings. For example, internalizing, an avoidant coping strategy often used by females (Compas, Connor-Smith, Saltzman, Thomsen, & Wadsworth, 2001; Schäfer, Naumann, Holmes, Tuschen-Caffier, & Samson, 2017), was strongly associated with both depression and anxiety. Our sample of females obtained higher scores on the SRCS Internalizing scale than did the males.

An unanticipated finding in the current study concerned the scores obtained on the depression measure for the different age groups. Typically, depression is more strongly associated with adolescence than childhood (Hankin et al., 2015; Kuperminc, Leadbeater, & Blatt, 2001; Thapar, Collishaw, Pine, & Thapar, 2012), so our finding that the mean scores on the RCADS Depression scale for students in Grades 4 to 5 were statistically higher than scores for students in Grades 6 to 8 was unexpected. However, an examination of scores on the Depression scale for students in Grades 3 to 4, Grades 5 to 6, and Grades 7 to 8 in the scale development studies for the original RCADS (Chorpita et al., 2000) and the short version (Ebesutani et al., 2012) revealed a similar pattern. Students in Grades 3 to 4 obtained higher scores than students in Grades 5 to 6 and Grades 7 to 8.

A similar pattern for scores on the RCADS Total Anxiety scale (i.e., the younger group obtaining higher scores than the older group) is more easily explained as a function of the nature of the scale. The RCADS Total Anxiety scale is a more generic measure that consists of a mix of items from the various RCADS anxiety scales. Research suggests that certain types of anxiety are more common in children and others are more frequently reported in adolescents (e.g., Waite & Creswell, 2014; Weems, 2008). The fact that younger students in our sample obtained higher scores on the RCADS Total Anxiety scale than older students, a finding similar to that revealed by Ebesutani et al. (2012), may reflect a measurement artifact that might be addressed by using the individual anxiety scales. However, high cormobidity among RCADS anxiety scales led Ferdinand, van Lang, Ormel, and Verhulst (2006) to question their usefulness in attempting to distinguish children with different types of anxiety disorders.

Age group differences regarding scores on the PA scale of the PANAS-C, where those in Grades 4 to 5 reported lower scores than those in Grades 6 to 8, have been observed previously (e.g., Bushman & Crowley, 2010). Similarly, the grade group differences in scores on the SRCS Externalizing scale (Grades 4-5 < Grades 6-8) have been reported in other studies (e.g., Vierhaus, Lohaus, & Ball, 2007).

Our findings come at an opportune time in the study of emotion regulation. Cole (2014) emphasized the importance of examining emotion regulation across the life span. At the same time, Zimmermann and Iwanski (2014) noted that emotion regulation develops in an emotion-specific manner. These researchers state that there is “the danger of flawed estimate of the development of emotion regulation during adolescence and emerging adulthood when it is not assessed emotion-specific” (p. 191). The NMR Scale modified for youth contributes to the development of a life span perspective by including information from childhood/early adolescence. By focusing on negative moods, the NMR Scale also answers the call for emotion-specific assessment (Kovacs et al., 2008; Zimmermann & Iwanski, 2014).

The results from the current study have applications for both research and practice. For researchers interested in studying affect regulation in younger samples, the NMR Scale modified for youth provides a developmentally appropriate instrument to assess an important individual difference variable influencing this process. The scale displayed psychometric characteristics similar to the adult measure from which it was adapted, which suggests it can be used in longitudinal designs. Results from the current study, along with findings from previous studies, suggest it is now possible to assess NMRE with individuals from elementary school through college and beyond. Researchers can use the NMR Scale to examine the developmental trajectory of NMRE and its associations with symptoms and other aspects of well-being, facilitating direct comparisons of the strength and direction of relationships that might lead to the discovery of critical periods at which NMRE become more (or less) significant in the development of different symptoms.

With respect to practice, in studies with college student samples, NMRE predicted changes in symptoms of emotional distress over time better than measures of trait PA and NA (Catanzaro et al., 2014; Davis et al., 2005). Furthermore, research indicates that changes in NMRE mediate treatment effectiveness (Cloitre et al., 2010; Cloitre, Stovall-McClough, Miranda, & Chemtob, 2004; Hemenover, Augustine, Shulman, Tran, & Barlett, 2008; Stasiewicz et al., 2013). If future research with youth replicates these findings, then the NMR Scale modified for youth may have a role to play in the assessment of the treatment of child/adolescent emotional distress. In other words, the NMR Scale modified for youth could be used to assess changes in NMRE as a function of experience, how NMRE come to be associated with depression, and other aspects of mental health. Understanding how much a child believes he or she can do something to change his or her mood can provide a target for intervention.

There is convincing research that emotion regulation ability in children is an important predictor of their distress. For example, Suveg and Zeman (2004) found that children diagnosed with an anxiety disorder were rated as having poor self-regulation skills. Specific treatment programs developed to target deficits in emotion regulation for children suffering from anxiety have reported increased anxiety self-efficacy and emotional awareness, improved coping, and reduction in anxiety (Suveg, Kendall, Comer, & Robin, 2006; Suveg, Sood, Comer, & Kendall, 2009). Kendall et al. (2016) reported that gains in coping efficacy mediated symptom reduction in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for anxiety disorders among children. These results parallel those of Cloitre and colleagues (2004) and Backenstrass et al. (2006) for adults with anxiety disorders and depression, demonstrating that improvement in NMRE early in CBT is associated with greater symptom reduction at the end of treatment and at follow-up.

With respect to depression, Kovacs and colleagues (Kovacs & Lopez-Duran, 2012; Kovacs et al., 2006) developed contextual emotion regulation therapy (CERT) for childhood depression. CERT emphasizes the adaptive, age-appropriate regulation of dysphoria and mood repair strategies. Recently, transdiagnostic treatment approaches have been implemented to help students develop skills to regulate negative emotions like worry, sadness, and anger that often co-occur (e.g., Ehrenreich-May, Queen, Bilek, Remmes, & Marciel, 2014; Kendall et al., 2014). As just noted, changes in NMRE mediate treatment effectiveness, suggesting that incorporating this element into existing programs may increase their potency.

Rief et al. (2015) stated that expectancies are a core feature of mental disorders, and Beck has included expectancies in his revised cognitive model of psychological disorders (Beck, 1996; Beck & Haigh, 2014). Tamir, Bigman, Rhodes, Salerno, and Schreier (2015) have proposed an expectancy-value model of emotion regulation influenced by Rotter (1954) and others that states that the expected outcome of an emotion (i.e., an emotion-outcome expectancy) directly influences motivation to experience the emotion, even in the absence of emotion-related appraisals or goals. Bigman, Mauss, Gross, and Tamir (2016) provided evidence for the causal effects of expected success in emotion regulation on actual success in emotion regulation in a group of college students; their findings reinforced the idea that emotion regulation can be influenced by beliefs and expectancies. This position is well supported by the extensive literature on NMRE; the NMR Scale modified for youth provides a means to evaluate whether the ideas of Tamir, Bigman and colleagues are applicable to childhood/early adolescence.

The current study also contributes to the ongoing discussion of the nature of self-efficacy and expectancies and their relation to emotion regulation. If Kirsch’s (1985b) observation that many studies that claim to be measuring self-efficacy are actually assessing expectancies is accepted, then our NMRE study is relevant to work concerned with emotional or affective self-efficacy. In fact, a closer examination of existing self-efficacy measures supports Kirsch’s observation. For instance, the 14-item scale assessing self-efficacy for multiple aspects of affect regulation developed by Bandura, Caprara, and colleagues (Bandura, Caprara, Barbaranelli, Gerbino, & Pastorelli, 2003; Caprara et al., 2008) has some conceptual overlap with the NMR Scale modified for youth. The subset of items on the Bandura et al. (2003) scale that addresses amelioration of NA appear to be expectancy items rather than self-efficacy items. For example, the sample item provided by Bandura et al. (2003), “I can calm myself in stressful situations,” like several NMR Scale items, refers to no specific behavior (as a self-efficacy item should), but instead taps beliefs about the outcome of becoming calmer. Likewise, the Coping Questionnaire–Child (Kendall, 1994), a measure of children’s perceived ability to cope with self-identified anxiety-causing situations, seems to be measuring expectancy rather than self-efficacy in that it asks children, “Are you able to help yourself feel less upset?”

Catanzaro et al. (2014) noted that NMRE reflect a blend of self-efficacy expectancies regarding the ability to execute a mood regulation behavior and outcome expectancies regarding the effectiveness of such behavior. In addition, self-efficacy expectancies for behaviors leading to emotional consequences, which are nonvolitional responses, are equivalent to outcome expectancies. Furthermore, Catanzaro and Mearns (1999) summarized evidence that self-efficacy expectancies are equivalent to outcome expectancies when the anticipated consequences are nonvolitional responses, such as changes in mood state. That is, any scale designed to measure self-efficacy for mood- or emotion-regulating behaviors is functionally indistinguishable from measures of response expectancy for the outcomes of those behaviors, and should show the same pattern of relations with coping responses and measures of relevant emotional states or related symptoms that we showed for the NMR Scale modified for youth in the present work.

There were several limitations to the current study. First, the participants were predominantly White/Caucasian from one geographic region of the United States. Thus, more research is necessary to generalize findings to other ethnic groups and geographic areas. In addition, this study was cross-sectional and self-report. Therefore, no conclusions may be drawn about causality. Future longitudinal research should include behavioral observations or reports of knowledgeable adults as correlates of NMRE. Also, students below Grade 4 and above Grade 8 were not included in the current research. Future studies that include these age groups would lend further support for the usefulness of the NMRE construct with youth.

Our sample size was fairly large, but future studies should explore methods to increase the number of participants. NMRE were more strongly associated with depressed mood than with anxiety in our sample. Historically, the association of the NMR Scale with measures of depression has been more consistent across studies than its association with measures of anxiety (cf. Catanzaro et al., 2014). Notably, studies document a link between NMRE and anxiety symptoms in clinical populations (e.g., Cloitre et al., 2002; Sung et al., 2012). Understanding the role of NMRE in children’s experience of anxiety should be an important goal for future research, in light of findings showing that NMRE are associated with anxiety in adults, at least under some circumstances, and findings of Suveg et al. (2006; Suveg, Sood, et al., 2009) and Kendall et al. (2016) showing that enhancing anxious children’s beliefs in their ability to regulate (or cope with) that anxiety is associated with positive outcomes. More generally, future studies employing large, diverse samples are needed to replicate our findings, reexamine the relationship between NMRE and anxiety among youth, and explore relationships with other variables over time.

In sum, the NMR Scale modified for youth is conceptually and operationally distinct from measures intended to assess self-efficacy related to affect regulation in children. The addition of the NMR Scale modified for youth to the literature, at a minimum, provides a complement to current methods of assessing beliefs about affect regulation among youth. It also provides a measure that lends itself to a more systematic and general framework for understanding mood regulation difficulties and their amelioration. Overall, the results from the current study suggest that NMRE have similar associations with measures of affect and distress in older children and younger adolescents to those demonstrated in college students and adults. NMRE have been a focus of intervention with adults in psychotherapy for symptoms of anxiety and depression. Scores on the NMR Scale modified for youth have the potential to identify children/adolescents in both clinical and educational settings who would benefit from similar interventions, and to monitor the effectiveness of providing social-emotional support to enhance regulation of negative mood.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Jaclyn Barton, Kelly Bauer, Anne Borgertpoepping, Caitlin Kryder, Brian Mendoza, Ruth Neagle, Paul Roome, and Rachel Stahl for their assistance in data collection and entry.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Jeff Laurent earned his PhD in educational psychology from the University of Texas at Austin. His current position is as a professor in the School Psychology Program at Western Illinois University. His research interests are related to anxiety and depression in children and adolescents.

Aaron Roome earned his specialist in school psychology (SSP) degree from Western Illinois University. He is currently employed as a school psychologist with Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency. His interests include response to intervention and evidence-based practice in schools.

Salvatore J. Catanzaro earned his PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Connecticut. He is currently Associate Vice President for Academic Administration, Policy, and Faculty Affairs at Illinois State University. Prior to this appointment, he was a professor in the Department of Psychology. His primary research interest is negative mood regulation.

Jack Mearns earned his PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Connecticut. A former chair of the Department of Psychology at California State University Fullerton, his current position is as a professor affiliated with the Clinical Psychology Program. His primary research interest is negative mood regulation expectancies.

Colin Harbke earned his PhD in experimental psychology from Washington State University. He is currently a professor in the Department of Psychology at Western Illinois University. He specializes in research methods and quantitative analysis. His research interests include a variety of subjects in psychology, education, substance use, public health, and medicine.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Backenstrass

Schwarz

Fiedler

Joest

Reck

Mundt

Kronmueller

K.-T.

(2006). Negative mood regulation expectancies, self-efficacy beliefs, and locus of control orientation: Moderators or mediators of change in the treatment of depression? Psychotherapy Research, 16, 250-258. doi:10.1080/10503300500485474

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of theory and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura

Caprara

G. V.

Barbaranelli

Gerbino

Pastorelli

(2003). Role of affective self-regulatory efficacy in diverse spheres of psychological functioning. Child Development, 74, 769-782. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00567

Baumeister

R. F.

Vohs

K. D.

(Eds.). (2004). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications. New York, NY: Guilford.

Beck

A. T.

(1996). Beyond belief: A theory of modes, personality, and psychopathology. In Salkovskis

P. M.

(Ed.), Frontiers of cognitive therapy (pp. 1-25). New York, NY: Guilford.

Beck

A. T.

Haigh

E. A.

(2014). Advances in cognitive theory and therapy: The generic cognitive model. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 1-24. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153734

Bigman

Y. E.

Mauss

I. B.

Gross

J. J.

Tamir

(2016). Yes I can: Expected success promotes actual success in emotion regulation. Cognition and Emotion, 30, 1380-1387. doi:10.1080/02699931.2015.1067188

10.

Blom-Hoffman

Leff

S. S.

Franko

D. L.

Weinstein

Beakley

Power

T. J.

(2009). Consent procedures and participation rates in school-based intervention and prevention research: Using a multi-component, partnership-based approach to recruit participants. School Mental Health, 1, 3-15. doi:10.1007/s12310-008-9000-7

11.

Braet

Theuwis

Van Durme

Vandewalle

Vandevivere

Wante

. . . Goossens

(2014). Emotion regulation in children with emotional problems. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 38, 493-504. doi:10.1007/s10608-014-9616-x

12.

Bushman

B. B.

Crowley

S. L.

(2010). Is the structure of affect similar for younger and older children? Cross-sectional differences in negative and positive affectivity. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28, 31-39. doi:10.1177/0734282909337584

13.

Cannon

M. F.

Weems

C. F.

(2006). Do anxiety and depression cluster into distinct groups? A test of tripartite model predictions in a community sample of youth. Depression and Anxiety, 23, 453-460. doi:10.1002/da.20215

14.

Caprara

G. V.

Di Giunta

Eisenberg

Gerbino

Pastorelli

Tramontano

(2008). Assessing regulatory emotional self-efficacy in three countries. Psychological Assessment, 20, 227-237. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.20.3.227

15.

Catanzaro

S. J.

(1996). Negative mood regulation expectancies, emotional distress, and examination performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1023-1029. doi:10.1177/01461672962210005

16.

Catanzaro

S. J.

Backenstrass

Miller

S. A.

Mearns

Pfeiffer

Brendalen

(2014). Predication of symptoms of emotional distress by mood regulation expectancies and affective traits. International Journal of Psychology, 49, 471-479. doi:10.1002/ijop.12062

17.

Catanzaro

S. J.

Mearns

(1990). Measuring generalized expectancies for negative mood regulation: Initial scale development and implications. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54, 546-563. doi:10.1080/00223891.1990.9674019

18.

Catanzaro

S. J.

Mearns

(1999). Mood-related expectancy, emotional experience, and coping behavior. In Kirsch

(Ed.), Expectancy, experience, and behavior (pp. 67-91). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10332-003

19.

Catanzaro

S. J.

Mearns

(2016). Generalized expectancies for negative mood regulation: Development, assessment, and implications of a construct. In Trusz

Babel

(Eds.), Interpersonal and intrapersonal expectancies: Research, applications and future directions (pp. 52-61). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

20.

Catanzaro

S. J.

Wasch

H. H.

Kirsch

Mearns

(2000). Coping-related expectancies and dispositions as prospective predictors of coping responses and symptoms. Journal of Personality, 68, 757-788. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00115

21.

Causey

D. L.

Dubow

E. F.

(1992). Development of a self-report coping measure for elementary school children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 47-59. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2101_8

22.

Chorpita

B. F.

Yim

Moffitt

Umemoto

L. A.

Francis

S. E.

(2000). Assessment of symptoms of DSM-IV anxiety and depression in children: A Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38, 835-855. doi:10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00130-8

23.

Christiansen

L. M.

Copeland

E. P.

Stapert

E. B.

(2008). Predictors of somatic symptoms in younger rural adolescents. Adolescence, 43, 791-806.

24.

Clark

L. A.

Watson

(1991). Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: Psychometric evidence and taxonomic implications. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 316-336. doi:10.1037//0021-843X.100.3.316

25.

Cloitre

Koenen

K. C.

Cohen

L. R.

Han

(2002). Skills training in affective and interpersonal regulation followed by exposure: A phase-based treatment for PTSD related to childhood abuse. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 1067-1074. doi:10.1037//0022-006X.70.5.1067

26.

Cloitre

Stovall-McClough

K. C.

Miranda

Chemtob

C. M.

(2004). Therapeutic alliance, negative mood regulation, and treatment outcome in child abuse-related posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 411-416. doi:10.1037/0022-006x.72.3.411

27.

Cloitre

Stovall-McClough

K. C.

Nooner

Zorbas

Cherry

Jackson

C. L.

. . . Petkova

(2010). Treatment for PTSD related to childhood abuse: A randomized controlled trial. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 915-924. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.09081247

28.

Cohen

(1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

29.

Cole

P. M.

(2014). Moving ahead in the study of the development of emotion regulation. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38, 203-207. doi:10.1177/0165025414522170

30.

Compas

B. E.

Connor-Smith

J. K.

Saltzman

Thomsen

A. H.

Wadsworth

M. E.

(2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: Problems, progress, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 87-127. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.87

31.

Corcoran

K. J.

(1991). Efficacy, “skills,” reinforcement, and choice behavior. American Psychologist, 46, 155-157. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.46.2.155

32.

Costello

E. J.

Egger

H. L.

Copeland

Erkanli

Angold

(2011). The developmental epidemiology of anxiety disorders: Phenomenology, prevalence, and comorbidity. In Silverman

W. K.

Field

A. P.

(Eds.), Anxiety disorders in children and adolescents (2nd ed., pp. 56-75). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

33.

Costello

E. J.

Erkanli

Angold

. (2006). Is there an epidemic of child or adolescent depression? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 1263-1271. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01682.x

34.

Crook

Beaver

B. R.

Bell

(1998). Anxiety and depression in children: A preliminary examination of the utility of the PANAS-C. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 20, 333-350. doi:10.1023/A:1021967623139

35.

D’Alessandro

D. U.

Burton

K. D.

(2006). Development and validation of the Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale for children: Tests of Beck’s cognitive diathesis-stress theory of depression, of its causal mediation component, and of developmental effects. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 30, 335-353. doi:10.1007/s10608-006-9046-5

36.

Davis

R. N.

Andresen

E. N.

Trosko

Massman

P. J.

Lovejoy

M. C.

(2005). Negative Mood Regulation (NMR) expectancies: A test of incremental validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 263-270. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.002

37.

Ebesutani

Reise

S. P.

Chorpita

B. F.

Ale

Regan

Young

. . . Weisz

J. R.

(2012). The Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale-short version: Scale reduction via exploratory bifactor modeling of the broad anxiety factor. Psychological Assessment, 24, 833-845. doi:10.1037/a0027283

38.

Ehrenreich-May

Queen

A. H.

Bilek

E. L.

Remmes

C. S.

Marciel

K. K.

(2014). The unified protocols for the treatment of emotional disorders in children and adolescents. In Ehrenreich-May

Chu

B. C.

(Eds.), Transdiagnostic treatments for children and adolescents: Principles and practices (pp. 267-292). New York, NY: Guilford.

39.

Eisenberg

Spinrad

T. L.

Eggum

N. D.

(2010). Emotion-related self-regulation and its relation to children’s maladjustment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 495-525. doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131208

40.

Eschenbeck

Kohlmann

C.-W.

Lohaus

(2007). Gender differences in coping strategies in children and adolescents. Journal of Individual Differences, 28, 18-26. doi:10.1027/1614-0001.28.1.18

41.

Ferdinand

R. F.

van Lang

N. D. J.

Ormel

Verhulst

F. C.

(2006). No distinctions between different types of anxiety symptoms in pre-adolescents from the general population. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 20, 207-221. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2004.12.003

42.

Fox

J. K.

Halpern

L. F.

Forsyth

J. P.

(2008). Mental health checkups for children and adolescents: A means to identify, prevent, and minimize suffering associated with anxiety and mood disorders. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 15, 182-211. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.2008.00129.x

43.

Franko

D. L.

Powers

T. A.

Zuroff

D. C.

Moskowitz

D. S.

(1985). Children and affect: Strategies for self-regulation and sex differences in sadness. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 55, 210-219. doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1985.tb03435.x

44.

Gallerani

C. M.

Garber

Martin

N. C.

(2010). The temporal relation between depression and comorbid psychopathology in adolescents at varied risk for depression. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 242-249. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02155.x

45.

Gilboa-Schechtman

Avnon

Zubery

Jeczmien

(2006). Emotional processing in eating disorders: Specific impairment of general distress related deficiency? Depression and Anxiety, 23, 331-339. doi:10.1002/da.20163

46.

Gorsuch

R. L.

(1997). Exploratory factor analysis: Its role in item analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 532-560. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6803_5

47.

Gross

J. J.

(1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271-299. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271

48.

Gross

J. J.

(2014). Emotion regulation: Conceptual and empirical foundations. In Gross

J. J.

(Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (2nd ed., pp. 3-20). New York, NY: Guilford.

49.

Gross

J. J.

Muñoz

R. F.

(1995). Emotion regulation and mental health. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 2, 151-164. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.1995.tb00036.x

50.

Hankin

B. L.

Young

J. F.

Abela

J. R.

Smolen

Jenness

J. L.

Gulley

L. D.

. . . Oppenheimer

C. W.

(2015). Depression from childhood into late adolescence: Influence of gender, development, genetic susceptibility, and peer stress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124, 803-816. doi:10.1037/abn0000089

51.

Hemenover

S. H.

Augustine

A. A.

Shulman

Tran

T. Q.

Barlett

C. P.

(2008). Individual differences in negative affect repair. Emotion, 8, 468-478. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.8.4.468

52.

Howell

K. H.

Shapiro

D. N.

Layne

C. M.

Kaplow

J. B.

(2015). Individual and psychosocial mechanisms of adaptive functioning in parentally bereaved children. Death Studies, 39, 296-306. doi:10.1080/07481187.2014.951497

53.

Jacques

H. A.

Mash

E. J.

(2004). A test of the tripartite model of anxiety and depression in elementary and high school boys and girls. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 13-25. doi:10.1023/B:JACP.0000007577.38802.18

54.

Joiner

T. E.

Jr. Catanzaro

Laurent

(1996). The tripartite structure of positive and negative affect, depression, and anxiety in child and adolescent psychiatric inpatients. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 401-409. doi:10.1037//0021-843X.105.3.401

55.

Joiner

T. E.

Jr. Lonigan

C. J.

(2000). Tripartite model of depression and anxiety in youth psychiatric inpatients: Relations with diagnostic statues and future symptoms. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29, 372-382. doi:10.1207/S15374424JCCP2903_8

56.

Kassel

J. D.

Bornovalova

Mehta

(2007). Generalized expectancies for negative mood regulation predict change in anxiety and depression among college students. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45, 939-950. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2006.07.014

57.

Keenan

Feng

Hipwell

Klostermann

(2009). Depression begets depression: Comparing the predictive utility of depression and anxiety symptoms to later depression. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 1167-1175. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02080.x

58.

Kendall

P. C.

(1994). Treating anxiety disorders in children: Results of a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 100-110. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.62.1.100

59.

Kendall

P. C.

Cummings

C. M.

Villabo

M. A.

Narayanan

M. K.

Treadwell

Birmaher

. . . Albano

A. M.

(2016). Mediators of change in the child-adolescent anxiety multimodel treatment study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84, 1-14. doi:10.103/a0039773

60.

Kendall

P. C.

Rodriguez

K. A. O.

Villabo

M. A.

Martinsen

K. D.

Stark

K. D.

Banneyer

(2014). Cognitive-behavior therapy with children and adolescents. In Ehrenreich-May

Chu

B. C.

(Eds.), Transdiagnostic treatments for children and adolescents: Principles and practices (pp. 161-182). New York, NY: Guilford.

61.

Kirsch

(1985a). Response expectancy as a determinant of experience and behavior. American Psychologist, 40, 1189-1202. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.40.11.1189

62.

Kirsch

(1985b). Self-efficacy and expectancy: Old wine with new labels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 824-830. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.824

63.

Kirsch

(1997). Response expectancy theory and application: A decennial review. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 6(2), 69-79. doi:10.1016/S0962-1849(05)80012-5

64.

Kovacs

Joormann

Gotlib

I. H.

(2008). Emotion (dys)regulation and links to depressive disorders. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 2, 149-155. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00057.x

65.

Kovacs

Lopez-Duran

N. L.

(2012). Contextual emotion regulation therapy: A developmentally-based intervention for pediatric depression. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 21, 327-343. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2012.01.002

66.

Kovacs

Sherrill

George

C. J.

Pollock

Tumuluru

R. V.

(2006). Contextual emotion-regulation therapy for childhood depression: Description and pilot testing of a new intervention. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 45, 892-903. doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000222878.74162.5a

67.

Kuperminc

G. P.

Leadbeater

B. J.

Blatt

S. J.

(2001). School social climate and individual differences in vulnerability to psychopathology among middle school students. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 141-159. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00059-0

68.

Lambert

S. F.

McCreary

B. T.

Joiner

T. E.

Schmidt

N. B.

Ialongo

N. S.

(2004). Structure of anxiety and depression in urban youth: An examination of the tripartite model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 904-908. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.72.5.904

69.

Laurent

Catanzaro

S. J.

Joiner

T. E.

Jr. Rudolph

K. D.

Potter

K. I.

Lambert

. . . Gathright

(1999). A measure of positive and negative affect for children: Scale development and preliminary validation. Psychological Assessment, 11, 326-338. doi:10.1037//1040-3590.11.3.326

70.

Laurent

Joiner

T. E.

Jr. Catanzaro

S. J.

(2011). Positive affect, negative affect and physiological hyperarousal among referred and non-referred youth. Psychological Assessment, 23, 945-957. doi:10.1037/a0024080

71.

Marquart

A. L.

Overholser

J. C.

Peak

N. J.

(2009). Mood regulation beliefs in depressed psychiatric inpatients: Examining affect, behavior, cognitive, and social strategies. International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice, 13, 265-272. doi:10.3109/13651500902898331

72.

Martel

M. M.

(2013). Sexual selection and sex differences in the prevalence of childhood externalizing and adolescent internalizing disorders. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 1221-1259. doi:10.1037/a0032247

73.

Maughan

Collishaw

Stringaris

(2013). Depression in childhood and adolescence. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 22, 35-40.

74.

McLaughlin

K. A.

King

(2015). Developmental trajectories of anxiety and depression in early adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43, 311-323. doi:10.1007/s10802-014-9898-1

75.

Mearns

Mauch

T. G.

(1998). Negative mood regulation expectancies predict anger among police officers and buffer the effects of job stress. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 186, 120-125. doi:10.1097/00005053-199802000-00008

76.

Mearns

Patchett

Catanzaro

S. J.

(2009). Multitrait–multimethod matrix validation of the Negative Mood Regulation Scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 910-913. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.05.003

77.

Merikangas

K. R.

J. P.

Brody

Fisher

P. W.

Bourdon

Koretz

D. S.

(2010). Prevalence and treatment of mental disorders among US children in the 2001-2004 NHANES. Pediatrics, 125, 75-81.

78.

Mychailyszyn

M. P.

Mendez

J. L.

Kendall

P. C.

(2010). School functioning in youth with and without anxiety disorders: Comparisons by diagnosis and comorbidity. School Psychology Review, 39, 106-121.

79.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. (2005). Depression in children and young people: Identification and management in primary, community and secondary care (National Clinical Practice Guideline No. 28). Leicester, UK: The British Psychological Society.

80.

Nunnally

J. C.

Bernstein

I. H.

(1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

81.

Rief

Glombiewski

J. A.

Gollwitzer

Schubö

Schwarting

Thorwart

(2015). Expectancies as core features of mental disorders. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 28, 378-385. doi:10.1097/YCO.0000000000000184

82.

Roecker-Phelps

C. E.

(2001). Children’s responses to overt and relational aggression. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 240-252. doi:10.1207/S15374424JCCP3002_11

83.

Romero

Master

Paunesku

Dweck

C. S.

Gross

J. J.

(2014). Academic and emotional functioning in middle school: The role of implicit theories. Emotion, 14, 227-234. doi:10.1037/a0035490

84.

Rotter

J. B.

(1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. New York, NY: Prentice-Hall. doi:10.1037/10788-005

85.

Rotter

J. B.

(1982). The development and application of social learning theory. New York, NY: Praeger.

86.

Rusting

C. L.

DeHart

(2000). Retrieving positive memories to regulate negative mood: Consequences for mood-congruent memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 737-752. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.78.4.737

87.

Schäfer

J. Ö.

Naumann

Holmes

E. A.

Tuschen-Caffier

Samson

A. C.

(2017). Emotion regulation strategies in depressive and anxiety symptoms in youth: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 261-276. doi:10.1007/s10964-016-0585-0

88.

Schwarzer

Warner

L. M.

(2013). Perceived self-efficacy and its relationship to resilience. In Prince-Embury

Saklofske

D. H.

(Eds.), Resilience in children, adolescents, and adults: Translating research into practice (pp. 139-150). New York, NY: Springer.

89.

Shepherd-McMullen

Mearns

Stokes

J. E.

Mechanic

M. B.

(2015). Negative mood regulation expectancies moderate the relationship between psychological abuse and avoidant coping. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30, 1553-1566. doi:10.1177/0886260514540805

90.

Siener

Kerns

K. A.

(2012). Emotion regulation and depressive symptoms in preadolescence. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 43, 414-430. doi:10.1007/s10578-011-0274-x

91.

Silvers

J. A.

McRae

Gabrieli

J. D.

Gross

J. J.

Remy

K. A.

Ochsner

K. N.

(2012). Age-related differences in emotional reactivity, regulation, and rejection sensitivity in adolescence. Emotion, 12, 1235-1247. doi:10.1037/a0028297

92.

Slocum-Gori

S. L.

Zumbo

B. D.

Michalos

A. C.

Diener

(2009). A note on the dimensionality of quality of life scales: An illustration with the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). Social Indicators Research, 92, 489-496. doi:10.1007/s11205-008-9303-y

93.

Stasiewicz

P. R.

Bradizza

C. M.

Schlauch

R. C.

Coffey

S. F.

Gulliver

S. B.

Gudleski

G. D.

Bole

C. W.

(2013). Affect Regulation Training (ART) for alcohol use disorders: Development of a novel intervention for negative affect drinkers. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 45, 433-443. doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2013.05.012

94.

Sung

S. C.

Porter

Robinaugh

D. J.

Marks

E. H.

Marques

L. M.

Otto

M. W.

. . . Simon

N. M.

(2012). Mood regulation and quality of life in social anxiety disorder: An examination of generalized expectancies for negative mood regulation. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 26, 435-441. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2012.01.004

95.

Suveg

Hoffman

Zeman

J. L.

Thomassin

(2009). Common and specific emotion-related predictors of anxious and depressive symptoms in youth. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 40, 223-239. doi:10.1007/s10578-008-0121-x

96.

Suveg

Jacob

M. L.

Thomassin

(2009). Generalized anxiety disorder in youth. Behavioral Psychology/psicologia Conductual, 17, 41-66.

97.

Suveg

Kendall

P. C.

Comer

J. S.

Robin

(2006). Emotion-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy for anxious youth: A multiple-baseline evaluation. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 36, 77-85. doi:10.1007/s10879-006-9010-4

98.

Suveg

Sood

Comer

J. S.

Kendall

P. C.

(2009). Changes in emotion regulation following cognitive-behavioral therapy for anxious youth. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology: The Official Journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, 38, 390-401. doi:10.1080/15374410902851721

99.

Suveg

Zeman

(2004). Emotion regulation in children with anxiety disorders. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology: The Official Journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33, 750-759. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3304_10

100.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

101.

Tamir

Bigman

Y. E.

Rhodes

Salerno

Schreier

(2015). An expectancy-value model of emotion regulation: Implications for motivation, emotional experience, and decision making. Emotion, 15, 90-103. doi:10.1037/emo0000021

102.

Thapar

Collishaw

Pine

D. S.

Thapar

A. K.

(2012). Depression in adolescence. The Lancet, 379, 1056-1067. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60871-4

103.

Tough

(2012). How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

104.

Vierhaus

Lohaus

Ball

(2007). Developmental changes in coping: Situational and methodological influences. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping: An International Journal, 20, 267-282. doi:10.1080/10615800701330242

105.

Waite

Creswell

(2014). Children and adolescents referred for treatment of anxiety disorders: Differences in clinical characteristics. Journal of Affective Disorders, 167, 326-332. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2014.06.028

106.

Watson

Clark

L. A.

Tellegen

(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063

107.

Weems

C. F.

(2008). Developmental trajectories of childhood anxiety: Identifying continuity and change in anxious emotion. Developmental Review, 28, 488-502. doi:10.1016/h.dr.2008.01.001

108.

Weems

C. F.

Costa

N. M.

(2005). Developmental differences in the expression of childhood anxiety symptoms and fears. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 44, 656-663. doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000162583.25829.4b

109.

Williams

D. M.

(2010). Outcome expectancy and self-efficacy: Theoretical implications of an unresolved contradiction. Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 417-425. doi:10.1177/1088868310368802

110.

Wilson

G. S.

Pritchard

M. E.

Revalee

(2005). Individual differences in adolescent health symptoms: The effect of gender and coping. Journal of Adolescence, 28, 369-379. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.08.004

111.

Wolff

J. C.

Ollendick

T. H.

(2006). The comorbidity of conduct problems and depression in childhood and adolescence. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 9, 201-220. doi:10.1007/s10567-006-0011-3

112.

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

Skinner

E. A.

(2011). The development of coping across childhood and adolescence: An integrative review and critique of research. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35, 1-17. doi:10.1177/0165025410384923

113.

Zimmermann

Iwanski

(2014). Emotion regulation from early adolescence to emerging adulthood and middle adulthood: Age differences, gender differences, and emotion-specific developmental variations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38, 182-194.