亲子关系、感觉加工敏感性与COMT Val158Met多态性对学前儿童亲社会行为的交互影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00711

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

基于个体多重敏感性因素与环境交互的视角, 本研究探讨了亲子关系、感觉加工敏感性(Sensory Processing Sensitivity, SPS)与COMT Val158Met多态性的交互作用对学前儿童亲社会行为的影响。研究以507名学前儿童为被试(M_年龄 = 4.83岁, SD = 0.90岁), 分别采用父母报告的亲子关系量表、高敏感儿童量表、长处与困难问卷中的亲社会分问卷测量了亲子关系、儿童的SPS和亲社会行为, 采集唾液样本进行基因位点的分型。研究结果发现, 亲子冲突、SPS与COMT Val158Met多态性的三重交互作用对儿童亲社会行为影响显著。在携带Val/Val基因型的儿童中, 高SPS儿童比低SPS儿童在低亲子冲突条件下表现更多的亲社会行为, 但在高亲子冲突条件下表现更少的亲社会行为; 在携带Met等位基因的儿童中, 亲子冲突与SPS的交互作用对儿童亲社会行为的影响不显著。研究结果表明同时具有高气质敏感性和高基因敏感性儿童的亲社会行为更容易受到亲子冲突的影响, 这为深入理解个体多重敏感性因素与家庭环境交互影响儿童发展提供了证据。

关键词: 亲子关系, 感觉加工敏感性, COMT基因, 学前儿童, 亲社会行为, 个体−环境交互

Abstract:

Prosocial behaviors are voluntary behaviors aimed at benefiting others, which develop rapidly during preschool and provide a foundation for children’s social competence and moral development. According to the person-environment interaction (P×E) framework, children’s traits may interact with the family environment, affecting their prosocial behaviors. Numerous studies have established that parent-child relationship is a crucial component of family psychosocial environments in predicting children’s prosocial behaviors. Sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) is a temperament trait that reflects children’s sensitivity to environmental and social stimuli. Children with high SPS are more susceptible to environmental factors. Furthermore, previous research has suggested that the Val/Val genotype of the COMT Val158Met polymorphism may be a sensitive genotype for prosociality, interacting with environmental factors to influence individuals’ prosocial behaviors. In particular, prior research has proposed that different types of environmental sensitivities, such as temperamental, physiological, and genetic sensitivities, may have a multiplicative effect on social development. Parent-child relationship is an important family psychosocial environmental stimulus. More importantly, two distinct aspects of parent-child relationship, that is, closeness and conflict, may have different functions. Closeness emphasizes the parent-child connection and is characterized by emotional closeness and the sharing of private thoughts and feelings. Conversely, conflict refers to stressful experiences between parents and children that are accompanied by anger or irritation. Therefore, the present study investigated three-way interactive effects of closeness or conflict, SPS, and the COMT Val158Met polymorphism on preschoolers’ prosocial behaviors. Specifically, other hypotheses regarding potential differences in closeness and conflict were formulated.

A total of 507 preschoolers (M_age = 4.83, SD = 0.90; 236 girls) were recruited through advertisements at two local kindergartens. Saliva samples for DNA extraction were obtained from preschoolers. Their parents completed questionnaires on parent-child relationship, children’s SPS, and prosocial behaviors. Statistical analyses were performed in SPSS 24, Mplus 8.3, and R statistical software. First, a test for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium and preliminary analyses were conducted. Moreover, linear regression models were conducted, with prosocial behaviors as the dependent variable to test for the main and interactive effects of closeness or conflict, SPS, and genotypes. Sex, age, and family socioeconomic status were included as covariates. The effects of parent-child closeness and parent-child conflict were examined in separate models, but the other dimension of parent-child relationship was controlled in each model. Finally, region of significance and reparameterization regression analyses were employed to examine the optimal shape of the P×E effect.

The results indicated that both parent-child closeness and SPS positively affected preschoolers’ prosocial behaviors (ps< 0.01), while parent-child conflict was negatively associated with prosocial behaviors (p< 0.001). The two-way interaction terms (closeness/conflict × SPS; closeness/conflict × the COMT Val158Met polymorphism; SPS × the COMT Val158Met polymorphism) and the three-way interactive effect of parent-child closeness, SPS, and the COMT Val158Met polymorphism on prosocial behaviors were not significant. However, the effect of parent-child conflict × SPS × the COMT Val158Met polymorphism on prosocial behaviors was significant. We conducted further analyses to compare the interactive effect of parent-child conflict and SPS in preschoolers with the Val/Val and Met+ genotypes on the COMTVal158Met polymorphism. A significant interaction term was observed in Val/Val genotype carriers (b= −0.18, p = 0.002, 95% CI [−0.304, −0.069]) but not Met carriers (b= 0.06, p = 0.286, 95% CI [−0.052, 0.167]). The region of significance test indicated that Val/Val genotype carriers with high SPS showed significantly more prosocial behaviors under a low level of parent-child conflict and fewer prosocial behaviors under a high level of parent-child conflict, which supports the differential susceptibility model. The results of the re-parameterized regression models further verified the shape of the interaction effect of parent-child conflict and SPS on preschoolers’ prosocial behaviors.

In summary, the present study signified that different types of sensitivities (temperament and genes) to family stressful environments may have a multiplicative effect on preschoolers’ prosocial behaviors. Furthermore, it suggested that preschoolers with both the sensitive genotype (Val/Val) and sensitive temperament trait (high SPS) were more affected by parent-child conflict and developed prosocial behaviors in a ‘‘for better and for worse’’ manner. The findings provide evidence for the differential susceptibility model and contribute to a further understanding of children’s prosocial behaviors based on the P×E approach, especially from the perspective of children’s multiple sensitivities.

Key words: parent-child relationship, sensory processing sensitivity, COMT gene, preschoolers, prosocial behaviors, person × environment interaction

中图分类号:

B844
B845

刘倩文, 王振宏. (2023). 亲子关系、感觉加工敏感性与COMT Val158Met多态性对学前儿童亲社会行为的交互影响. 心理学报, 55(5), 711-725.

LIU Qianwen, WANG Zhenhong. (2023). The interactive effects of parent-child relationship, sensory processing sensitivity, and the COMT Val158Met polymorphism on preschoolers’ prosocial behaviors. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(5), 711-725.

图/表 8

参考文献 85

[1]	Acar, I. H., Evans, M. Y. Q., Rudasill, K. M., & Yildiz, S. (2018). The contributions of relationships with parents and teachers to Turkish children’s antisocial behavior. Educational Psychology, 38(7), 877-897. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2018.1441377 URL
[2]	Acevedo, B. P. (2020). The highly sensitive brain: Research, assessment, and treatment of sensory processing sensitivity. Academic Press.
[3]	Acevedo, B. P., Aron, E. N., Aron, A., Sangster, M. D., Collins, N., & Brown, L. L. (2014). The highly sensitive brain: An fMRI study of sensory processing sensitivity and response to others’ emotions. Brain and Behavior, 4(4), 580-594. doi: 10.1002/brb3.242 pmid: 25161824
[4]	Acevedo, B., Aron, E., Pospos, S., & Jessen, D. (2018). The functional highly sensitive brain: A review of the brain circuits underlying sensory processing sensitivity and seemingly related disorders. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 373(1744), 20170161.
[5]	Andersen, S. L., & Teicher, M. H. (2008). Stress, sensitive periods and maturational events in adolescent depression. Trends in Neurosciences, 31(4), 183-191. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2008.01.004 pmid: 18329735
[6]	Aron, E. N., & Aron, A. (1997). Sensory processing sensitivity and its relation to introversion and emotionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(2), 345-368. pmid: 9248053
[7]	Aron, E. N., Aron, A., & Jagiellowicz, J. (2012). Sensory processing sensitivity: A review in the light of the evolution of biological responsivity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(3), 262-282. doi: 10.1177/1088868311434213 pmid: 22291044
[8]	Assary, E., Zavos, H. M. S., Krapohl, E., Keers, R., & Pluess, M. (2020). Genetic architecture of environmental sensitivity reflects multiple heritable components: A twin study with adolescents. Molecular Psychiatry, 26 (9), 4896-4904. doi: 10.1038/s41380-020-0783-8
[9]	Belsky, J., & Pluess, M. (2009). Beyond diathesis stress: Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Psychological Bulletin, 135(6), 885-908. doi: 10.1037/a0017376 pmid: 19883141
[10]	Belsky, J., Jonassaint, C., Pluess, M., Stanton, M., Brummett, B., & Williams, R. (2009). Vulnerability genes or plasticity genes? Molecular Psychiatry, 14(8), 746-754. doi: 10.1038/mp.2009.44 pmid: 19455150
[11]	Berke, J. D. (2018). What does dopamine mean? Nature Neuroscience, 21(6), 787-793. doi: 10.1038/s41593-018-0152-y pmid: 29760524
[12]	Brett, B. E., Stern, J. A., Gross, J. T., & Cassidy, J. (2020). Maternal depressive symptoms and preschoolers' helping, sharing, and comforting: The moderating role of child attachment. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 51(5), 623-636. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2020.1738235 URL
[13]	Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes.In: Handbook of child psychology(Vol. 1, pp. 563-634, pp. 563-634). Wiley.
[14]	Cao, C., Wang, M., Cao, Y., Ji, L., & Zhang, W. (2017). The interactive effects of monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene and peer victimization on depressive symptoms in early adolescent boys: The moderating role of catechol-O- methyltransferase (COMT) gene. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(2), 206-218. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00206 URL
	[曹丛, 王美萍, 曹衍淼, 纪林芹, 张文新. (2017). MAOA基因T941G多态性与同伴侵害对男青少年早期抑郁的交互作用: COMT基因Val158Met多态性的调节效应. 心理学报, 49(2), 206-218.]
[15]	Cao, Y., Lin, X., Ji, L., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, W. (2017). The interaction between Val158Met polymorphism in the COMT gene and peer relationship on adolescents’ depression. Psychological Development and Education, 33(2), 216-227.
	[曹衍淼, 林小楠, 纪林芹, 张粤萍, 张文新. (2017). COMT基因Val158Met多态性与同伴关系对青少年抑郁的影响. 心理发展与教育, 33(2), 216-227. ]
[16]	Cao, Y., & Zhang, W. (2019). The influence of dopaminergic genetic variants and maternal parenting on adolescent depressive symptoms: A multilocus genetic study. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(10), 1102-1115. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01102
	[曹衍淼, 张文新. (2019). 多巴胺系统基因与母亲教养行为对青少年抑郁的影响:一项多基因研究. 心理学报, 51(10), 1102-1115.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01102
[17]	Cohen, S., Doyle, W. J., & Baum, A. (2006). Socioeconomic status is associated with stress hormones. Psychosomatic Medicine, 68(3), 414-420. doi: 10.1097/01.psy.0000221236.37158.b9 pmid: 16738073
[18]	Cowell, J. M., Lee, K., Malcolm-Smith, S., Selcuk, B., Zhou, X., & Decety, J. (2017). The development of generosity and moral cognition across five cultures. Developmental Science, 20(4), e12403.
[19]	Drabant, E. M., Hariri, A. R., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., Munoz, K. E., Mattay, V S., Kolachana, B. S., … Weinberger, D. R. (2006). Catechol-O-methyltransferase ValI58Met genotype and neural mechanisms related to affective arousal and regulation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63(12), 1396-1406. pmid: 17146014
[20]	Driscoll, K., & Pianta, R. C. (2011). Mothers' and fathers' perceptions of conflict and closeness in parent-child relationships during early childhood. Journal of Early Childhood & Infant Psychology, 7, 1-24.
[21]	Drury, S. S., Gleason, M. M., Theall, K. P., Smyke, A. T., Nelson, C. A., Fox, N. A., & Zeanah, C. H. (2012). Genetic sensitivity to the caregiving context: The influence of 5HTTLPR and BDNF Val66Met on indiscriminate social behavior. Physiology & Behavior, 106(5), 728-735. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.11.014 URL
[22]	Drury, S. S., Theall, K. P., Smyke, A. T., Keats, B. J. B., Egger, H. L., Nelson, C. A., … Zeanah, C. H. (2010). Modification of depression by COMT Val158Met polymorphism in children exposed to early severe psychosocial deprivation. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34(6), 387-395. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.09.021 URL
[23]	Ellis, B. J., Boyce, W. T., Belsky, J., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (2011). Differential susceptibility to the environment: An evolutionary- neurodevelopmental theory. Development and Psychopathology, 23(1), 7-28. doi: 10.1017/S0954579410000611 URL
[24]	Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101(1), 91-119. pmid: 3562705
[25]	Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Knafo-Noam, A. (2015). Prosocial development. In M. E. Lamb & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (Vol. 3, pp. 610-656). Wiley
[26]	Eivers, A. R., Brendgen, M., Vitaro, F., & Borge, A. (2012). Concurrent and longitudinal links between children's and their friends' antisocial and prosocial behavior in preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(1), 137-146. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.05.001 URL
[27]	Fang, S., Galambos, N. L., & Johnson, M. D. (2021). Parent-child contact, closeness, and conflict across the transition to adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 83(4), 1176-1193. doi: 10.1111/jomf.v83.4 URL
[28]	Flouri, E., & Sarmadi, Z. (2016). Prosocial behavior and childhood trajectories of internalizing and externalizing problems: The role of neighborhood and school contexts. Developmental Psychology, 52(2), 253-258. doi: 10.1037/dev0000076 pmid: 26619321
[29]	Gao, X., Shi, W., Zhai, Y., He, L., & Shi, X. (2013). Results of the parent-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 22, 108 primary school students from 8 provinces of China. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 25(6), 364-374.
	[高欣, 石文惠, 翟屹, 何柳, 施小明. (2013). 长处与困难问卷(父母版)在中国8个省份22, 108名小学生中的调查结果(英文). 上海精神医学, 25(6), 364-374.]
[30]	Goodman, R. (1999). The extended version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire as a guide to child psychiatric caseness and consequent burden. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40(5), 791-799. pmid: 10433412
[31]	Greven, C. U., Lionetti, F., Booth, C., Aron, E. N., Fox, E., Schendan, H. E., ... Homberg, J. (2019). Sensory processing sensitivity in the context of environmental sensitivity: A critical review and development of research agenda. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 98, 287-305. doi: S0149-7634(18)30625-0 pmid: 30639671
[32]	Hoffman, M. L. (2007). The origins of empathic morality in toddlerhood. In C. A.Brownell & C. B.Kopp (Eds.), Socioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations (pp. 132-145). The Guilford Press.
[33]	Holland, A. S., & McElwain, N. L. (2013). Maternal and paternal perceptions of coparenting as a link between marital quality and the parent-toddler relationship. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(1), 117-126. doi: 10.1037/a0031427 pmid: 23421839
[34]	Hygen, B. W., Belsky, J., Stenseng, F., Lydersen, S., Guzey, I. C., & Wichstrøm, L. (2015). Child exposure to serious life events, COMT, and aggression: Testing differential susceptibility theory. Developmental Psychology, 51(8), 1098-1104. doi: 10.1037/dev0000020 pmid: 26053146
[35]	Hygen, B. W., Guzey, I. C., Belsky, J., Berg-Nielsen, T. S., & Wichstrøm, L. (2014). Catechol-O-methyltransferase Val158Met genotype moderates the effect of disorganized attachment on social development in young children. Development and Psychopathology, 26(4), 947-961. doi: 10.1017/S0954579414000492 URL
[36]	Iimura, S., & Kibe, C. (2020). Highly sensitive adolescent benefits in positive school transitions: Evidence for vantage sensitivity in Japanese high-schoolers. Developmental Psychology, 56(8), 1565-1581. doi: 10.1037/dev0000991 pmid: 32525329
[37]	Knafo, A., Israel, S., & Ebstein, R. P. (2011). Heritability of children's prosocial behavior and differential susceptibility to parenting by variation in the dopamine receptor D4 gene. Development and Psychopathology, 23(1), 53-67. doi: 10.1017/S0954579410000647 pmid: 21262039
[38]	Knafo, A., & Plomin, R. (2006). Prosocial behavior from early to middle childhood: Genetic and environmental influences on stability and change. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 771-786. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.771 pmid: 16953685
[39]	Kwon, A., Min, D., Kim, Y., Jin, M. J., & Lee, S. H. (2019). Interaction between catechol-O-methyltransferase polymorphism and childhood trauma in suicidal ideation of patients with post-traumatic stress disorder. Brain and Behavior, 10(8), e01733.
[40]	Lachman, H. M., Papolos, D. F., Saito, T., Yu, Y. M., Szumlanski, C. L., & Weinshilboum, R. M. (1996). Human catechol-O-methyltransferase pharmacogenetics: Description of a functional polymorphism and its potential application to neuropsychiatric disorders. Pharmacogenetics, 6(3), 243-250. doi: 10.1097/00008571-199606000-00007 pmid: 8807664
[41]	Laursen, B., & Collins, W. A. (2009). Parent-child relationships during adolescence. In R. M.Lerner & L.Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 3-42). Wiley.
[42]	Lester, K. J., Hudson, J. L., Tropeano, M., Creswell, C., Collier, D. A., Farmer, A., … Eley, T. C. (2012). Neurotrophic gene polymorphisms and response to psychological therapy. Translational Psychiatry, 2, e108.
[43]	Li, Z., Sturge-Apple, M. L., & Davies, P. T. (2021). Family context in association with the development of child sensory processing sensitivity. Developmental Psychology, 57(12), 2165-2178. doi: 10.1037/dev0001256 pmid: 34928666
[44]	Li, Z., Sturge-Apple, M. L., Jones-Gordils, H. R., & Davies, P. T. (2022). Sensory processing sensitivity behavior moderates the association between environmental harshness, unpredictability, and child socioemotional functioning. Development and Psychopathology, 34 (2), 675-688. doi: 10.1017/S0954579421001188 URL
[45]	Licht, C. L., Mortensen, E. L., & Knudsen, G. M. (2011). Association between sensory processing sensitivity and the serotonin transporter polymorphism 5-HTTLPR short/short genotype. Biological Psychiatry, 69(9), 152S-153S.
[46]	Li, X. (2021). The moderating role of sensory processing sensitivity in the influence of parenting behavior on children’s prosocial behaviors (Unpublished master’s thesis). Southwest University, China.
	[李喜乐. (2021). 教养行为对儿童亲社会行为的影响:感觉加工敏感性的调节作用 (硕士学位论文). 西南大学.]
[47]	Lionetti, F., Aron, E. N., Aron, A., Klein, D. N., & Pluess, M. (2019). Observer-rated environmental sensitivity moderates children’s response to parenting quality in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 55(11), 2389-2402. doi: 10.1037/dev0000795 URL
[48]	Lionetti, F., Spinelli, M., Moscardino, U., Ponzetti, S., Garito, M., Dellagiulia, A., ... Pluess, M. (2022). The interplay between parenting and environmental sensitivity in the prediction of children’s externalizing and internalizing behaviors during COVID-19. Development and Psychopathology.
[49]	Meyer, B. M., Huemer, J., Rabl, U., Boubela, R. N., Kalcher, K., Berger, A., ... Pezawas, L. (2016). Oppositional COMT Val158Met effects on resting state functional connectivity in adolescents and adults. Brain Structure & Function, 221(1), 103-114.
[50]	Monroe, S. M., & Simons, A. D. (1991). Diathesis-stress theories in the context of life stress research: Implications for the depressive disorders. Psychological Bulletin, 110(3), 406-425. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.406 pmid: 1758917
[51]	Moore, S. R., & Depue, R. A. (2016). Neurobehavioral foundation of environmental reactivity. Psychological Bulletin, 142(2), 107-164. doi: 10.1037/bul0000028 pmid: 26479069
[52]	Nava-Gonzalez, E. J., Gallegos-Cabriales, E. C., Leal- Berumen, I., & Bastarrachea, R. A. (2017). Mini-review: The contribution of intermediate phenotypes to G×E effects on disorders of body composition in the new omics era. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(9), 1079.
[53]	Obradović, J., & Boyce, W. T. (2009). Individual differences in behavioral, physiological, and genetic sensitivities to contexts: Implications for development and adaptation. Developmental Neuroscience, 31(4), 300-308. doi: 10.1159/000216541 pmid: 19546567
[54]	O’Brien, T. C., Mustanski, B. S., Skol, A., Cook, E. H., & Wakschlag, L. S. (2013). Do dopamine gene variants and prenatal smoking interactively predict youth externalizing behavior? Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 40, 67-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ntt.2013.09.002 pmid: 24064458
[55]	Pianta, R. C. (1992). Child-Parent Relationship Scale. Unpublished measure, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
[56]	Pianta, R. C., & Lothman, D. J. (1994). Predicting behavior problems in children with epilepsy: Child factors, disease factors, family stress, and child-mother interaction. Child Development, 65(5), 1415-1428. pmid: 7982359
[57]	Pluess, M. (2015). Individual differences in environmental sensitivity. Child Development Perspectives, 9(3), 138-143. doi: 10.1111/cdep.2015.9.issue-3 URL
[58]	Pluess, M., Assary, E., Lionetti, F., Lester, K. J., Krapohl, E., Aron, E. N., & Aron, A. (2018). Environmental sensitivity in children: Development of the Highly Sensitive Child Scale and identification of sensitivity groups. Developmental Psychology, 54(1), 51-70. doi: 10.1037/dev0000406 pmid: 28933890
[59]	Pluess, M., & Belsky, J. (2013). Vantage sensitivity: Individual differences in response to positive experiences. Psychological Bulletin, 139(4), 901-916. doi: 10.1037/a0030196 pmid: 23025924
[60]	Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 pmid: 14516251
[61]	Poletti, S., Radaelli, D., Cavallaro, R., Bosia, M., Lorenzi, C., Pirovano, A., ... Benedetti, F. (2013). Catechol-O- methyltransferase (COMT) genotype biases neural correlates of empathy and perceived personal distress in schizophrenia. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 54(2), 181-186. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2012.06.008 pmid: 22901597
[62]	Reuter, M., Frenzel, C., Walter, N. T., Markett, S., & Montag, C. (2011). Investigating the genetic basis of altruism: The role of the COMT Val158Met polymorphism. Social Cognitive Affect Neuroscience, 6(5), 662-668. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsq083 URL
[63]	Roisman, G. I., Newman, D. A., Fraley, R. C., Haltigan, J. D., Groh, A. M., & Haydon, K. C. (2012). Distinguishing differential susceptibility from diathesis-stress: Recommendations for evaluating interaction effects. Development and Psychopathology, 24(2), 389-409. doi: 10.1017/S0954579412000065 pmid: 22559121
[64]	Ru, W., Fang, P., Wang, B., Yang, X., Zhu, X., Xue, M., ... Gong, P. (2017). The impacts of Val158Met in catechol-o-methyltransferase (COMT) gene on moral permissibility and empathic concern. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 52-56. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.041 URL
[65]	Sáez, I., Zhu, L., Set, E., Kayser, A., & Hsu M. (2015). Dopamine modulates egalitarian behavior in humans. Current Biology. 25(7), 912-919. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.01.071 pmid: 25802148
[66]	Slagt, M., Dubas, J. S., van Aken, M. A., Ellis, B. J., & Dekovic, M. (2018). Sensory processing sensitivity as a marker of differential susceptibility to parenting. Developmental Psychology, 54(3), 543-558. doi: 10.1037/dev0000431 pmid: 29154642
[67]	Smolka, M. N., Gunter, S., Jana, W., Sabine, M., Grüsser, H. F., Karl, M., ... Heinz, A. (2005). Catechol-o-methyltransferase Val158Met genotype affects processing of emotional stimuli in the amygdala and prefrontal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 25(4), 836-842. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1792-04.2005 pmid: 15673663
[68]	Starr, L. R., Hammen, C., Conway, C. C., Raposa, E., & Brennan, P. A. (2014). Sensitizing effect of early adversity on depressive reactions to later proximal stress: Moderation by polymorphisms in serotonin transporter and corticotropin releasing hormone receptor genes in a 20-year longitudinal study. Development and Psychopathology, 26(4), 1241-1254. doi: 10.1017/S0954579414000996 URL
[69]	Stein, D. J., Newman, T. K., Savitz, J., & Ramesar, R. (2006). Warriors versus worriers: The role of COMT gene variants. CNS Spectr, 11(10), 745-748. doi: 10.1017/S1092852900014863 URL
[70]	Wang, M., & Zhang, W. (2010). Association between aggressive behavior and a functional polymorphism in the COMT gene. Advances in Psychological Science, 18(8), 1256-1262.
	[王美萍, 张文新. (2010). COMT基因多态性与攻击行为的关系. 心理科学进展, 18(8), 1256-1262.]
[71]	Wang, M., Zheng, X., Xia, G., Liu, D., Chen, P., & Zhang, W. (2019). Association between negative life events and early adolescents’ depression: The moderating effects of Catechol- O-methyltransferase (COMT) Gene Val158Met polymorphism and parenting behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(8), 903-913. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00903 URL
	[王美萍, 郑晓洁, 夏桂芝, 刘迪迪, 陈翩, 张文新. (2019). 负性生活事件与青少年早期抑郁的关系:COMT基因Val158Met多态性与父母教养行为的调节作用. 心理学报, 51(8), 903-913.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00903
[72]	Wang, Z. (2022). Environmental sensitivity model on child development: An integrated view. Journal of Psychological Science, 45(6), 1367-1374.
	[王振宏. (2022). 儿童发展的环境敏感性模型:一种整合的观点. 心理科学, 45(6), 1367-1374.]
[73]	Wang, Z., Wang, X., & Li, C. (2020). Different environmental sensitivity of children: Developmental theory and empirical evidence. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Social Sciences), 4, 36-47.
	[王振宏, 王笑笑, 李彩娜. (2020). 儿童发展的不同环境敏感性: 理论与实证. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), 4, 36-47.]
[74]	Weinshilboum, R. (1988). Pharmacogenetics of methylation: Relationship to drug metabolism. Clinical Biochemistry, 21(4), 201-210. pmid: 3044645
[75]	Widaman, K. F., Helm, J. L., Castro-Schilo, L., Pluess, M., Stallings, M. C., & Belsky, J. (2012). Distinguishing ordinal and disordinal interactions. Psychological Methods, 17(4), 615-622. doi: 10.1037/a0030003 pmid: 22984788
[76]	Wilson, S., Stroud, C. B., & Durbin, C. E. (2017). Interpersonal dysfunction in personality disorders: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 143(7), 677-734. doi: 10.1037/bul0000101 pmid: 28447827
[77]	Wise, R. A. (2004). Dopamine, learning and motivation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(6), 483-494. doi: 10.1038/nrn1406 pmid: 15152198
[78]	Yan, J., Schoppe-Sullivan, S., & Feng, X. (2019). Trajectories of mother-child and father-child relationships across middle childhood and associations with depressive symptoms. Development and Psychopathology, 31(4), 1381-1393. doi: 10.1017/S0954579418000809 pmid: 30556510
[79]	Zhang, W., Cao, C., Wang, M., Ji, L. Q., & Cao, Y. (2016). Monoamine oxidase a (MAOA) and catechol-o-methyltransferase (COMT) gene polymorphisms interact with maternal parenting in association with adolescent reactive aggression but not proactive aggression: Evidence of differential susceptibility. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 45(4), 812-829.
[80]	Zhang, R., & Wang, Z. (2020). Inhibitory control moderates the quadratic association between resting respiratory sinus arrhythmia and prosocial behaviors in children. Psychophysiology, 57(4), e13491.
[81]	Zhang, W., Li, X., Chen, G., & Cao, Y. (2021). The relationship between positive parenting and adolescent prosocial behaviour: The mediating role of empathy and the moderating role of the oxytocin receptor gene. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(9), 976-991. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00976
	[张文新, 李曦, 陈光辉, 曹衍淼. (2021). 母亲积极教养与青少年亲社会行为:共情的中介作用与OXTR基因的调节作用. 心理学报, 53(9), 976-991.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00976
[82]	Zhang, X. (2011). Parent-child and teacher-child relationships in Chinese preschoolers: The moderating role of preschool experiences and the mediating role of social competence. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(2), 192-204. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.09.001 URL
[83]	Zhang, X., Chen, H., Zhang, G., Zhou, B., & Wu, W. (2008). A longitudinal study of parent-child relationships and problem behaviors in early childhood: Transactional models. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 40(5), 571-582. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2008.00571 URL
	[张晓, 陈会昌, 张桂芳, 周博芳, 吴巍. (2008). 亲子关系与问题行为的动态相互作用模型: 对儿童早期的追踪研究. 心理学报, 40(5), 571-582.]
[84]	Zhang, Y., Yang, X., & Wang, Z. (2021). The COMT rs4680 polymorphism, family functioning and preschoolers' attentional control indexed by intraindividual reaction time variability. Developmental Psychobiology, 63(4), 713-724. doi: 10.1002/dev.v63.4 URL
[85]	Zeng, S., & Wang, Z. (2022). Revision of the parent reported Highly Sensitive Child Scale-Chinese version. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 20(1), 101-107.
	[ 曾思瑶, 王振宏. (2022). 中文版父母报告高敏感儿童量表的修订. 心理与行为研究, 20(1), 101-107.]

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1 性别	−
2 年龄	0.01	−
3 家庭社会经济地位	−0.02	−0.01	−
4 亲子亲密	−0.08	0.09^*	0.02	−
5 亲子冲突	0.03	0.02	−0.05	−0.16^***	−
6 SPS	−0.06	−0.01	−0.02	0.13^**	0.01	−
7 COMT Val158Met多态性	0.07	−0.06	−0.04	0.01	−0.04	0.02	−
8 亲社会行为	−0.11^*	0.16^***	−0.09^*	0.35^***	−0.23^***	0.15^**	−0.01	−
M	−	4.83	0.00	43.35	24.92	63.74	−	7.39
SD	−	0.90	2.27	3.70	6.82	7.39	−	1.95

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1 性别	−
2 年龄	0.01	−
3 家庭社会经济地位	−0.02	−0.01	−
4 亲子亲密	−0.08	0.09^*	0.02	−
5 亲子冲突	0.03	0.02	−0.05	−0.16^***	−
6 SPS	−0.06	−0.01	−0.02	0.13^**	0.01	−
7 COMT Val158Met多态性	0.07	−0.06	−0.04	0.01	−0.04	0.02	−
8 亲社会行为	−0.11^*	0.16^***	−0.09^*	0.35^***	−0.23^***	0.15^**	−0.01	−
M	−	4.83	0.00	43.35	24.92	63.74	−	7.39
SD	−	0.90	2.27	3.70	6.82	7.39	−	1.95

变量	亲社会行为
				Bootstrap 95% CI
		b	SE	p	下限	上限
第一步 (ΔR²= 0.10)
性别	−0.21	0.09	0.012	−0.375	−0.043
年龄	0.16	0.05	<0.001	0.078	0.252
家庭社会经济地位	−0.05	0.02	0.018	−0.081	−0.008
亲子冲突	−0.23	0.05	<0.001	−0.324	−0.142
第二步 (ΔR²= 0.10)
亲子亲密	0.29	0.04	<0.001	0.206	0.380
SPS	0.11	0.04	0.009	0.027	0.191
COMT Val158Met多态性	−0.04	0.08	0.664	−0.192	0.122
第三步(ΔR²= 0.01)
亲子亲密×SPS	0.06	0.04	0.095	−0.008	0.147
亲子亲密×COMT Val158Met多态性	0.05	0.09	0.604	−0.131	0.217
SPS×COMT Val158Met多态性	0.01	0.09	0.922	−0.163	0.181
第四步(ΔR²= 0.001)
亲子亲密×SPS×COMT Val158Met多态性	0.06	0.08	0.412	−0.113	0.211

变量	亲社会行为
				Bootstrap 95% CI
		b	SE	p	下限	上限
第一步 (ΔR²= 0.10)
性别	−0.21	0.09	0.012	−0.375	−0.043
年龄	0.16	0.05	<0.001	0.078	0.252
家庭社会经济地位	−0.05	0.02	0.018	−0.081	−0.008
亲子冲突	−0.23	0.05	<0.001	−0.324	−0.142
第二步 (ΔR²= 0.10)
亲子亲密	0.29	0.04	<0.001	0.206	0.380
SPS	0.11	0.04	0.009	0.027	0.191
COMT Val158Met多态性	−0.04	0.08	0.664	−0.192	0.122
第三步(ΔR²= 0.01)
亲子亲密×SPS	0.06	0.04	0.095	−0.008	0.147
亲子亲密×COMT Val158Met多态性	0.05	0.09	0.604	−0.131	0.217
SPS×COMT Val158Met多态性	0.01	0.09	0.922	−0.163	0.181
第四步(ΔR²= 0.001)
亲子亲密×SPS×COMT Val158Met多态性	0.06	0.08	0.412	−0.113	0.211

变量	亲社会行为
				Bootstrap 95% CI
		b	SE	p	下限	上限
第一步 (ΔR²= 0.16)
性别	−0.17	0.08	0.041	−0.328	−0.008
年龄	0.13	0.04	0.002	0.047	0.213
家庭社会经济地位	−0.04	0.02	0.013	−0.075	−0.009
亲子亲密	0.34	0.04	<0.001	0.253	0.421
第二步 (ΔR²= 0.05)
亲子冲突	−0.19	0.04	<0.001	−0.272	−0.102
SPS	0.11	0.04	0.010	0.026	0.193
COMT Val158Met多态性	−0.04	0.08	0.660	−0.191	0.126
第三步(ΔR²= 0.01)
亲子冲突×SPS	−0.06	0.04	0.200	−0.144	0.024
亲子冲突×COMT Val158Met多态性	−0.11	0.09	0.213	−0.287	0.066
SPS×COMT Val158Met多态性	0.01	0.08	0.953	−0.156	0.171
第四步(ΔR²= 0.02)
亲子冲突×SPS×COMT Val158Met多态性	−0.24	0.08	0.003	−0.399	−0.076