title: Changes in marital conflict and youths' responses across childhood and adolescence: a test of sensitization.
abstract: Although the sensitization hypothesis is fundamental to process-oriented explanations of the effects of marital conflict on children, few longitudinal tests of the theory's propositions have been conducted. Hierarchical linear modeling was used in this prospective, longitudinal study (n = 297 families) to assess changes in the dimensions of responding to conflict (i.e., emotional, cognitive, and behavioral) for 3 consecutive years in youths between the ages of 8 and 19 years. Moreover, to test the notion of sensitization, analyses were conducted to examine whether change in marital conflict predicted change in children's responding across middle childhood and adolescence. Supporting the sensitization hypothesis, increases in exposure to hostile marital conflict were associated with increases in children's negative emotionality, threat, self-blame, and skepticism about resolution. With a few exceptions, the effects were largely consistent for boys and girls and for younger and older children.
authors: Department of Psychology, Catholic University of America, Washington, DC 20064, USA. goekemorey@cua.edu
authors: Marcie C
authors: MC
authors: Goeke-Morey
authors: Lauren M
authors: LM
authors: Papp
authors: E Mark
authors: EM
authors: Cummings
mesh_terms: D000223:Adaptation, Psychological; D000293:Adolescent; D000294:Adolescent Behavior / Q000523:psychology*; D000328:Adult; D002648:Child; D002652:Child Behavior / Q000523:psychology*; D004644:Emotions; D054541:Family Conflict / Q000523:psychology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008297:Male; D008393:Marriage / Q000523:psychology*; D008960:Models, Psychological; D010290:Parents / Q000523:psychology*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
references: J Fam Psychol. 2007 Jun;21(2):259-69
references: 17605548
references: J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1980 Sep;8(3):287-95
references: 7410730
references: Child Dev. 2008 Nov-Dec;79(6):1942-56
references: 19037959
references: Child Dev. 1992 Jun;63(3):558-72
references: 1600822
references: J Fam Psychol. 2007 Sep;21(3):416-425
references: 17874927
references: Child Dev. 2006 Jan-Feb;77(1):132-52
references: 16460530
references: J Fam Psychol. 2006 Mar;20(1):88-99
references: 16569093
references: Soc Forces. 2005 Sep;84(1):493-511
references: 21833152
references: J Fam Psychol. 2004 Mar;18(1):160-70
references: 14992618
references: Child Dev. 2007 May-Jun;78(3):775-89
references: 17517004
references: Psychol Bull. 1994 Nov;116(3):387-411
references: 7809306
references: J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000 Oct;68(5):782-7
references: 11068964
references: Adv Child Dev Behav. 2007;35:87-137
references: 17682324
references: Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2002;67(3):i-v, vii-viii, 1-115
references: 12528424
references: Child Dev. 2008 Nov-Dec;79(6):1693-706
references: 19037943
references: Child Dev. 2001 Jul-Aug;72(4):1163-78
references: 11480940
references: J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2002 Jan;43(1):31-63
references: 11848336
references: Child Dev. 2006 Jan-Feb;77(1):218-33
references: 16460535
references: J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1996 Oct;24(5):665-79
references: 8956090
references: Psychol Bull. 1990 Sep;108(2):267-90
references: 2236384
references: Dev Psychol. 2010 Jul;46(4):869-85
references: 20604608
references: J Abnorm Psychol. 2011 Feb;120(1):16-32
references: 20919788