The reciprocal relation between adolescent emotional inertia and psychopathology over time: The moderating role of parenting

Adolescence is marked by heightened emotional reactivity and rapidly fluctuating affect, creating unique challenges for emotion understanding and regulation (Maciejewski et al., 2016; Reitsema et al., 2021). Emotional dynamics provide a critical lens for understanding this period, which corresponds to the peak onset of many mood and anxiety disorders (Heller & Casey, 2015; Koval & Kuppens, 2024). Emotional inertia is a core component of emotional dynamics and has been identified as a prospective predictor of adolescent psychopathology (Koval & Kuppens, 2011). However, empirical findings remain inconsistent regarding whether emotional inertia in positive and negative emotional domains differentially predicts psychopathology (Koval et al., 2016; Koval et al., 2021). Moreover, the family is the primary interpersonal environment in which emotional dynamics are shaped (Mancini & Luebbe, 2016; Morris et al., 2007). Particularly, parenting may either buffer or amplify adolescents’ vulnerability to psychopathology through its influence on emotional processes (McKone & Silk, 2022; Yap et al., 2007). Therefore, this study will examine longitudinal and reciprocal associations between emotional inertia and youth psychopathology, as well as the potential moderating role of parenting, to better understand adolescent emotional development. Emotional Dynamics in Adolescence Adolescence is marked by heightened emotional reactivity and pronounced fluctuations in daily emotional experiences, making this period particularly informative for studying emotional dynamics (Reitsema et al., 2021). Emotional dynamics capture individual differences in how people respond to external situations and regulate their emotions (Houben et al., 2015; Reitsema et al., 2021). According to affect dynamics theory, emotional dynamics reflect the trajectories, patterns, and regularities of emotional processes as they unfold across time (Houben et al., 2015; Kuppens & Verduyn, 2017). Key indicators include emotional variability, instability, and inertia, which have been linked to psychopathology (Scott et al., 2020; Sperry et al., 2019). Specifically, analyses of adolescents’ daily emotions show that positive and negative affect are characterized by distinct dynamic patterns, such as differences in inertia, that relate differently to depressive symptoms and social experiences (Reitsema et al., 2022; Koval et al., 2021). Emotional Inertia and Psychopathology Emotional inertia reflects lower flexibility and reduced sensitivity to changing circumstances (Kuppens et al., 2010; Koval et al., 2016). Recent research suggests that emotional inertia is not a static trait but varies within individuals across positive and negative emotional domains (Koval et al., 2021; Koval & Kuppens, 2024). Negative emotional inertia is associated with depressive symptoms, impaired social functioning, and lower well-being (Bos et al., 2018; Fairbairn & Sayette, 2013; Koval et al., 2016). Findings for positive emotional inertia are more inconsistent, with evidence suggesting weaker and less stable associations with psychopathology across studies (Kuppens et al., 2010; Houben et al., 2015; Koval et al., 2021). Additionally, theoretical models of circular causality propose potential bidirectional associations, suggesting that psychopathology may also constrain emotional dynamics and increase emotional inertia (Hollenstein et al., 2013; Sameroff, 1975). However, longitudinal tests of such reciprocal relations remain scarce (Mancini & Luebbe, 2016). The Moderating Role of Parenting Family contexts play a central role in shaping adolescents’ emotional development (Chiang et al., 2024; Flook & Fuligni, 2008; Schulz et al., 2022). According to the enduring effects model, early caregiving does not merely serve as a foundation but continues to shape emotion regulation and adaptation indirectly and directly over time (Chiang et al., 2024). Prior work shows that parenting moderates associations between youths’ emotional or personality vulnerabilities and psychopathology. For instance, positive parenting such as warmth and autonomy support have been shown to mitigate the effects of emotional dysregulation on internalizing problems (De Clercq et al., 2008; Morris et al., 2017; Mancini & Luebbe, 2016). Negative parenting such as unsupportive parenting and negative emotional socialization have also been found to amplify the effects of emotional vulnerabilities across development. Such parenting intensified the progression of irritability from childhood to adolescence (Ravi et al., 2022), and magnified the impact of early behavioral inhibition on later emotion regulation difficulties in children (Suarez et al., 2021). Moreover, emotional inertia is a construct that heavily relies on environment influence, such as learned patterns of emotion functioning and coregulatory experiences over time (Mancini & Luebbe, 2016). Parenting may therefore shape the extent to which emotional inertia contributes to adolescent psychopathology. Current Study Negative emotional inertia has widely been identified as a critical predictor of psychopathology (Bos et al., 2018; Fairbairn & Sayette, 2013; Koval et al., 2016). However, these associations between positive emotional inertia and psychopathology are generally weaker and far less consistent (Koval et al., 2016; Houben et al., 2015). It is unclear whether positive and negative emotional inertia would both have enduring implications for adolescent psychopathology. By conducting an experience sampling method, this study extends previous research by capturing adolescents’ emotional inertia as it changes over time and examining the role of the family environment in shaping these dynamics. Specifically, this study will investigate longitudinal and reciprocal associations between emotional inertia (positive and negative) and adolescent psychopathology across four waves. Moreover, this study will examine whether parenting moderates these associations. Positive and negative parenting are conceptualized as time-invariant moderators assessed at Wave 1.