Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-vt8vv Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-08-27T13:00:57.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relationship between parental reflective function, cognitive emotion regulation and parental perception of the infant

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2024

K. Hunyadi ,
M. Miklósi  and
B. Szabó
K. Hunyadi
Affiliation:
1Department of Developmental and Clinical Child Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Lóránd University Institute of Psychology
M. Miklósi
Affiliation:
2Department of Developmental and Clinical Child Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Lóránd Tudományegyetem University Institute of Psychology 3Department of Clinical Psychology, Semmelweis University Faculty of Medicine 4Heim Pál National Pediatric Institute, Centre of Mental Health
B. Szabó*
Affiliation:
2Department of Developmental and Clinical Child Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Lóránd Tudományegyetem University Institute of Psychology 3Department of Clinical Psychology, Semmelweis University Faculty of Medicine 5ELTE Eötvös Lóránd Tudományegyetem University, Doctoral School of Psychology, Budapest, Hungary
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

The literature indicates that parental reflective functioning (PRF) is crucial to a good parent-child relationship. Furthermore, genuine parental mentalizing also promotes adaptive emotion regulation in attachment relationships. However, no prior study assessed the relationship between parental mentalizing, emotion regulation and object relation in the early years.

Objectives

We examined the relationship between PRF, cognitive emotion regulation and perception of the infant among parents of children up to five years old.

Methods

In our cross-sectional, non-clinical study, 136 parents completed the Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire, the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire and the Mother’s Object Relationship Scale - short form. In our 12 moderator models, we chose the subscales of the parental perception of the infant (invasiveness and warmth) as dependent variables, the subscales of adaptive and non-adaptive strategies of cognitive emotion regulation as independent variables, and the three subscales of PRF (pre-mentalization, interest and curiosity, certainty about mental states) as moderators.

Results

Warmth had a positive, weak correlation with adaptive strategies (r(134) = 0.27, p < 0.007), with certainty in mental states (r(134) = 0.24, p < 0.007) and interest and curiosity (r(134) = 0.23, p < 0.007); the correlation between interest and curiosity and non-adaptive strategies was moderate and positive (r(134) = 0.32, p < 0.007). None of the subscales of PRF moderated the relationship between the subscales of emotion regulation and the perception of the infant. The use of adaptive emotion regulation strategies was more likely to affect the perception of warmth (B = 0.05 (t = 2.0584, p = 0.0415), B = 0.04 (t = 1.7887, p = 0.0760)), and the use of non-adaptive strategies was more likely to affect the perception of invasiveness (B = 0.08 (t = 2.1333, p = 0.0348), B = 0.09 (t = 2.3164, p = 0,0221).

Conclusions

Our results suggest that cognitive emotion regulation plays a role in object relation; therefore, we recommend promoting adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies among mothers in the early years.

Disclosure of Interest

None Declared

Type
Abstract
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 67 , Special Issue S1: Abstracts of the 32nd European Congress of Psychiatry , April 2024 , pp. S208
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of European Psychiatric Association
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.