2016 Gatlinburg Conference Poster
PS-83
Title: Parent Support Buffers Psychophysiological Risk for Externalizing Behaviors in Children with ASD
Authors: Jason Baker, Rachel Fenning, Jacquelyn Moffitt
Introduction: Externalizing behavior problems are common among children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), but significant
individual differences exist. Knowledge regarding the development of externalizing problems in populations with otherwise
typical development may inform our understanding of such heterogeneity in ASD. Under-arousal of the sympathetic nervous
system has been identified as a reliable biomarker of risk for externalizing behavior problems in children without ASD, and this
association may be particularly strong in the context of less optimal parenting (Cappadocia et al., 2009; El-Sheikh & Erath, 2011).
Although EDA has been examined in ASD (see Lydon et al., 2015), studies have tended to focus on status-group differences, with
investigations of individual differences in child functioning largely revealing conflicting and inconsistent results. To our
knowledge, no study has explored under-arousal theory as an explanatory mechanism for comorbid behavior problems in ASD.
The current study examined children's EDA responses during various laboratory tasks as a predictor of externalizing problems,
and considered parent support as a buffer of this association.
Methods: Participants included 34 children with ASD (82% male) between the ages of 4 and 11 years (M=6.85), and their
primary caregivers (two fathers). The sample was diverse with regard to race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, intellectual ability
(ABIQ from 47 to 139), and ASD symptom levels (ADOS Comparison M=7.27, SD=2.28). The dyads completed a laboratory visit
that included diagnostic testing as well as structured laboratory tasks that involved both parent and child (free play, problemsolving, prohibition, clean-up), and the child alone (frustration task). Children wore wireless wrist sensors that logged EDA levels
continuously at 8 hertz and also tracked movement (Baker et al., 2015). EDA responses were indexed by the frequency of nonspecific skin conductance responses (NSCRs; Beauchaine et al., 2015) in each task. Tasks were organized a priori into contexts
that were designed to specifically elicit child compliance to parent directives (prohibition and clean-up) and those that were not;
EDA composites were created by averaging relevant standardized scores. Parental support was coded from the joint problemsolving task, using the Parental Scaffolding Observational System, which has demonstrated reliability and validity for children
with developmental difficulties (Baker et al., 2007). Parents also completed questionnaires that included the Child Behavior
Checklist (CBCL).
Results: Missing data (4% overall) were handled through multiple imputation. Demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, family
income), child IQ and ASD symptom levels, and sensor movement were not related to the variables of interest in a manner that
would confound the findings. Two hierarchical multiple regressions predicting CBCL externalizing T-scores were conducted, with
child EDA and scaffolding entered on the first step, and the interaction term added at the second step. As predicted, child EDA
responses during the compliance tasks were inversely related to their externalizing scores, t= -2.90, p< .01, which is consistent
with the under-arousal theory. Scaffolding did not moderate this association. EDA responses during the other tasks did not
directly predict externalizing scores; however, the interaction between EDA and scaffolding was significant, t= 2.06, p< .05.
Follow-up analyses suggested that EDA under-arousal during these tasks only predicted higher externalizing problems in the
context of low-quality parental scaffolding, r= -.38.
Discussion: Findings suggest that the under-arousal theory, supported in research conducted with children without ASD, may
also inform our understanding of individual differences in the behavior problems of children with ASD. High quality parental
scaffolding may buffer this risk imparted by general sympathetic under-arousal, but seems to play a diminished role when underarousal is evidenced in compliance-oriented tasks. These findings have important implications for understanding heterogeneity
in ASD, and for identifying environmental supports to promote positive development in these children.