Metacognition and Learning (2019) 14:229–238

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-019-09211-w

Self-regulation and co-regulation in early childhood –

development, assessment and supporting factors

Kim Angeles Erdmann 1 & Silke Hertel

1

Received: 26 August 2019 / Accepted: 30 September 2019 / Published online: 4 November 2019
# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
felmielprobe
The development of self-regulation represents one of the hallmarks in early child-
hood. This special issue addresses important questions regarding the assessment and
development of self-regulation, as well as influencing factors in early childhood: (1)
How can self-regulation be assessed in early childhood? (2) How can parents
support the development of self-regulation at this age? (3) How do parent and child
beliefs contribute to the development of self-regulation in young children? Targeting
the first question, Mulder et al., Metacognition and Learning (2019) explore the
dynamics of self-control strategies during delay of gratification in two- and three-
year-old children. Neale and Whitebread, Metacognition and Learning (2019) em-
phasize the second question by analysing the stability of maternal scaffolding across
toys and time with 12 to 24 month old infants and its relation to effortful control.
Gärtner et al., Metacognition and Learning, 13(3), 241-264 (2018) contribute to the
second and third question with their work on the relation of parents’ self-efficacy
beliefs and co-regulation behaviour to child inhibitory control in two-year-old
toddlers. The third question is also addressed by Compagnoni et al., Metacognition
and Learning (2019), who report on the validation of a self-report instrument for
assessing mindsets in kindergartners and its relation to self-regulation. The com-
monalities and differences among the four papers, and their empirical and theoretical
contributions to the rising field of self-regulation research in early childhood are
discussed by Claire Hughes, Metacognition and Learning (2019) and Nancy Perry,
Metacognition and Learning (2019). This special issue constitutes an important step
towards an understanding of the interplay of self-regulation with child and parent
characteristics in early childhood.

Keywords Self-regulation . Co-regulation . Early childhood

* Kim Angeles Erdmann

[email protected]

1
Institute of Education Studies, Heidelberg University, Akademiestr. 3, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany
230 K.A. Erdmann and S. Hertel

Introduction

It is widely acknowledged that the development of self-regulation, meaning Bthe ability of

controlling or directing one’s attention, thoughts, emotions, and actions^ (McClelland and
Cameron 2012, p. 136), represents one of the hallmarks in early childhood. Self-regulatory
abilities evolve early in life and improve rapidly during toddlerhood and preschool, with
progress observable even beyond adolescence (Best and Miller 2010; Carlson 2005; Garon
et al. 2008; Hendry et al. 2016; Hughes 2011; Kloo and Sodian 2017; Kochanska et al. 2000).
There is a general consensus that self-regulatory and metacognitive skills, among them
executive functions, are key requirements for successful problem-solving and adaptation to
the environment (Zelazo et al. 1997). They are key predictors for academic achievement, social
competences, and adjustment (Eisenberg et al. 2011; Liew 2012; Raaijmakers et al. 2008;
Valiente et al. 2013), and even more important than socio-economic status (SES) or IQ in
predicting adult’s physical health, wealth, life satisfaction, substance dependence, criminal
offending outcomes, and parenting of the next generation more than 30 years later (Fergusson
et al. 2013; Moffitt et al. 2011; Poulton et al. 2015). Hence, getting a deeper understanding of
how these skills emerge and develop, as well as identifying factors that may influence and
promote self-regulation development in early childhood, is fundamental.
Researchers who are interested in the development of self-regulation, however, are faced
with several challenges. Apart from the diversity of measures (Duckworth and Kern 2011), one
of the most demanding is the lack of conceptual clarity. Over the last decades, the development
of self-regulation has been studied from a temperamental (effortful control; Rothbart 1989),
neuropsychological (executive functions; Barkley 2001; Diamond 2006, 2013), affective
(emotion regulation; Gross 2014), and motivational (self-control; Baumeister and Vohs
2007) perspective. As a consequence, self-regulation has become an umbrella term, making
the consolidation of findings across fields difficult (Nigg 2017). Calls for and attempts to
formulate an integrative framework have multiplied in recent years (Bridgett et al. 2013;
Diamond 2013; Liew 2012; McClelland and Cameron 2012; Nigg 2017; Welsh and Peterson
2014; Zhou et al. 2012), yet no consensus has been reached.
In addition, while extensive research in the past years has focused on self-regulation, and
especially executive functions (EF), in preschoolers aged between three and five years (Garon
et al. 2008; Wiebe et al. 2008; Wiebe et al. 2011), still relatively little is known about the
development of these skills in infancy and toddlerhood (Garon et al. 2008). One potential
reason for this gap in the literature is the relative difficulty of testing infants and toddlers
(Hughes and Ensor 2005; Mulder et al. 2014). Children at this young age generally have
limited motor and language skills, as well as short attention spans. Hence, self-regulation
measures designed for pre-schoolers tend to be too challenging for toddlers. In recent years,
there is growing effort in developing age-appropriate self-regulation and EF tasks that allow
assessing these skills in infancy and toddlerhood (Mulder et al. 2014; Neale et al. 2018; Pauen
and Bechtel-Kuehne 2016).
Among the most commonly applied tasks in this age group are delay of gratification tasks.
These require children to refrain from touching a reward in front of them, such as a wrapped
gift, snack, or attractive toy, for a limited period of time (Kochanska et al. 1996; Vaughn et al.
1986). There is robust evidence that children successfully manage to delay the reward by two
to three years of age (Kochanska et al. 2000; Mulder et al. 2014). In addition, many studies on
self-regulation in early childhood rely on parent report, such as the Early Childhood Behavior
Questionnaire (ECBQ) (Putnam et al. 2006) or the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive
Self-regulation and co-regulation in early childhood – development,... 231

Functions Preschool Version (BRIEF-P) (Gioia et al. 2003; Isquith et al. 2004). However, as
Toplak et al. (2013) pointed out in a recent review comparing performance-based to rating-
based measures of EF, these methods might capture different aspects of self-regulation (i.e.,
optimal vs. typical performance). Thus, they may provide distinct information on children’s
regulatory abilities and should be treated complementary rather than interchangeably. This
underscores the importance of collecting data using a multi-methodological approach to get a
more thorough picture of young children’s self-regulatory abilities (Duckworth and Kern
2011). Furthermore, recent research suggests that micro-analytic observation represents a
promising approach in order to explore the underlying behaviours and strategies that allow
and enhance self-regulation in early childhood (Manfra et al. 2014).
With regard to the factors that contribute and support the development of self-regulation in
the early years, it is assumed that children highly depend upon external support to regulate
their internal states and behaviours, for instance, parents’ or preschool teachers’ co-regulation
(Bernier et al. 2010; Kopp 1982).
This co-regulation behaviour, respectively parents’ or teachers’ attempts to modify chil-
dren’s thoughts, behavior or emotions according to the expectations and values of a particular
context (Colman et al. 2006; Kurki et al. 2016; Pauen 2016; Volet et al. 2009), allows children
to gradually internalize the experienced co-regulatory strategies and to become more and more
capable of regulating themselves. Internalization is considered to be the main mechanism that
transforms co-regulation into self-regulation (Demetriou 2000).
Research with school aged children shows that parents may effectively support their child’s
self-regulation by encouraging autonomy, providing an adequate level of challenge and
responding contingently to the child’s instructional and emotional needs (Pino-Pasternak and
Whitebread 2010). However, less is known about the contributions of parenting variables to
children’s developing self-regulation and EF from infancy to preschool (Fay-Stammbach et al.
2014). In a recent meta-analysis, Valcan et al. (2017) systematically analysed the role of
positive (i.e., responsivity, sensitivity), negative (i.e., intrusiveness, control), and cognitive
(i.e., scaffolding, cognitive stimulation) parental behaviours in the development of EF in
children aged 0 to 8 years. The authors found significant associations in the expected direction:
while positive and cognitive parental behaviours predicted better EF, negative parenting
practices were associated with lower EF. Notably, associations between cognitive parental
behaviours and EF were significantly moderated by child age, with a stronger effect size in
young children.
Early childhood thus represents a critical period during which parenting practices seem
especially influential. Although research in this field has advanced over the last decade (Fay-
Stammbach et al. 2014; Hughes 2011; Hughes and Devine 2019; Valcan et al. 2017), many
questions remain unanswered. For instance, little is known on how consistent parents’ support
is across context and time, or how parental beliefs shape the interplay of co- and self-
regulation.
In addition, it is of major interest how children’s own characteristics contribute to individual
differences in their self-regulation development. Besides biological risk factors, like preterm
birth (Brydges et al. 2018; Mulder et al. 2009), school aged children’s motivational beliefs, for
instance, whether they believe that human attributes are stable or malleable, and whether they
show a mastery or performance orientation, have been shown to play an important role in their
self-regulation development and achievement (Dweck 2006). Whether and how these beliefs
interact with and influence kindergarten children’s self-regulation, however, has not been
studied yet.
232 K.A. Erdmann and S. Hertel

In order to answer these open questions, the development of self-regulation and EF in early
childhood needs to be studied more thoroughly. A special emphasis should be put on infancy
and the toddler and preschool years (Johansson et al. 2016), as well as environmental
influences, such as parenting practices.

The contribution of this special issue for the study of self-regulation

in early childhood

This special issue addresses important questions regarding the assessment and development of
self-regulation, as well as influencing factors in early childhood (i.e. from infancy to
preschool):

(1) How can self-regulation be assessed in early childhood?

(2) How can parents support the development of self-regulation at this age?
(3) How do parent and child beliefs contribute to the development of self-regulation in
young children?

Focusing on the first major question, Mulder et al. (2019) investigate how two- and three-year-
old children manage to exert self-control. Precisely, they explore the dynamics of self-control
strategies during delay of gratification using a newly developed micro-analytic coding scheme.
Their findings indicate that the percentage of time that children look away and withhold their
hands from the reward positively predicts task success. The authors interpret this as a sign for
strategic behaviour present already in toddlerhood. They further show that teacher-rated (but
not parent-rated) self-control relates to both the timing and co-occurrence of these behaviours.
Neale and Whitebread (2019) put a special emphasis on the second major question by
analysing the stability of maternal scaffolding across toys and time with 12 to 24 month old
infants and its relation to effortful control (delay of gratification tasks) at 24 months. Applying
a micro-genetic, utterance-by-utterance coding approach, the authors distinguish three features
of maternal scaffolding: propensity to scaffold, directiveness, and contingency. Their findings
indicate stability over time and/or across toys for parents’ propensity to scaffold and their
contingency, but little evidence of consistency in parents’ directiveness. In addition, maternal
contingency at 12 months predicts child effortful control at 24 months.
Gärtner et al. (2018)1 contribute especially to the second and third question with their work
on the relation of parents’ self-efficacy beliefs and co-regulation behaviour to child inhibitory
control in two-year-old toddlers. In their study, children between 24 to 36 months participate.
Parents report on their positive and negative co-regulation behaviours, as well as their domain-
specific and domain-general self-efficacy beliefs using questionnaires. Child inhibitory control
is assessed six weeks later with a delay of gratification task as well as the BRIEF-P inhibition
scale (parent rating). Results of multiple linear regression analyses reveal that parents’ negative
(but not positive) co-regulation behaviours and domain-specific (but not domain-general) self-
efficacy beliefs predict child inhibitory control (parent report) six weeks later. A mediation
analysis indicates no indirect effect from parents’ domain-specific self-efficacy to child
inhibitory control via parents’ negative co-regulation behaviour, but independent direct effects.

1
Although part of the special issue, this paper has accidentally been published in Metacognition and Learning,
13(3), 2018. Therefore, an extended summary is included in this section.
Self-regulation and co-regulation in early childhood – development,... 233

No effects are found for the observation data of child inhibitory control (delay of gratification
task), possibly due to a ceiling effect.
Gärtner et al. (2018) conclude that investigating the role of parenting beliefs, such as self-
efficacy, may contribute further to the understanding of how parents effect children’s devel-
opment of self-regulation. To identify mechanisms and factors that underlie and influence the
interplay of parenting variables and child self-regulation is a key requisite in order to plan and
design interventions that promote young children’s self-regulation development at an early
stage.
The third question of this special issue is also targeted by Compagnoni et al. (2019). The
authors report on the validation of a self-report instrument for assessing mindsets (i.e., trait
beliefs and goal orientations) in kindergartners (five to seven years of age), and its relation to
self-regulation measures (Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulder-task and teacher report). Their findings
suggest that children’s trait beliefs and goal orientations represent two different but related
beliefs that show differential effects on children’s EF and classroom behavioural self-
regulation.
Claire Hughes (2019) and Nancy Perry (2019) discuss in their commentaries the common-
alities and differences among the four papers, focusing on conceptual and measurement issues,
as well as their empirical and theoretical contributions to the rising field of self-regulation
research in early childhood.
Table 1 outlines the main aspects of the empirical contributions in this special issue. With
regard to the assessment of self-regulation in early childhood (question 1), three papers apply a
delay of gratification paradigm in order to measure child self-regulation in toddlerhood. It
could be argued that this only captures a limited aspect of children’s self-regulation. However,
in most of the reported studies in this special issue, behavioural observations were combined
with parent and/or teacher report in order to gain a broader and more valid picture of young
children’s self-regulatory skills (Duckworth and Kern 2011; Toplak et al. 2013). In addition, in
Mulder et al.’ (2019) study, the authors developed and applied a micro-analytic coding scheme
to further investigate the temporal and sequential characteristics and dynamics of children’s
behaviour during these delay of gratification tasks. Hence, combining behavioural observation
with parent or teacher report, as well as including macro- and micro-level coding and analyses,
provides a promising venue for the study of self-regulation in early childhood.
Neale and Whitebread (2019) and Gärtner et al. (2018) put a special emphasis on parents’
co-regulation practices and how these relate to toddler’s self-regulation (question 2). In order to
analyse parents’ scaffolding behaviour in detail, Neale and Whitebread (2019) adapt a micro-
genetic approach. These fine-grain analyses provide important information on the consistency
of parental support and the findings highlight the role of parents’ contingent behaviour for
toddlers’ self-regulation development. Micro-analytic coding thus constitutes a promising
venue and may advance our understanding of the processes and dynamics that underlie co-
and self-regulation in early childhood.
As Compagnoni et al. (2019) and Gärtner et al. (2018) show, child and parent beliefs are
significantly related to child self-regulation (question 3). Although the findings do not allow
causal inferences due to the predominantly cross-sectional designs of the two studies, promot-
ing favourable beliefs in parents and children may nevertheless be important to foster self-
regulation development at an early stage.
To conclude, this special issue gives new insights into the development and assessment of
self- and co-regulation in early childhood by (1) building on cross-sectional and longitudinal
research, (2) taking into account multiple perspectives (e.g. child, parent, preschool teachers),
 234

Table 1 Overview of the main aspects of the studies in this special issue

Paper Sample Questions addressed Study Variables Methods Findings

Mulder et al. 62 children How does the occurrence of children’s Self-control Observation data, parent • The percentage of time that children look away
(child age: visual attention, verbal, and motor Visual attention, and teacher report, and withhold their hands from the reward
24–43 months) behaviours predict DoG task success? verbal, and micro-level coding positively predicts task success (evidence for
motor Measures: strategic behaviour)
behaviours DoG (snack and gift delay) • Teacher-rated (but not parent-rated) self-control
ECBQ (parent and teacher relates to both the timing and co-occurrence of
report) these behaviours
Neale & 36 mother-child How consistent are features of maternal Effortful control Observation data, • Consistency over time and/or across toys for
Whitebread dyads (assessed scaffolding across toys and over Scaffolding micro-level coding of parents’ propensity to scaffold and their
at child age: 12, time? (propensity to maternal scaffolding and contingency, no consistency in parents’
18, 24 months) How do these predict children’s effortful scaffold, child task performance directiveness.
control at 24 months? contingency, Measures: • Maternal contingency at 12 months predicts
directiveness) Grasping task child effortful control at 24 months.
DoG (snack and gift delay)
Dyadic play (ring toy,
stacking cups)
Gärtner et al. 90 parent-child How do parents’ co-regulation behaviors Inhibitory control Observation data, parent • Parents’ negative co-regulation and
dyads (child age: and self-efficacy beliefs predict child Positive and report domain-specific self-efficacy predict child
24–35 months; inhibitory control? negative Measures: inhibitory control (parent-report)
86.5% mothers) co-regulation DoG (snack delay) • No indirect effect from parents’ domain-specific
Parental BRIEF-P Inhibition Scale self-efficacy on child inhibitory control via
self-efficacy IMMA 1–6 (parent report) parents’ negative co-regulation.
Self-efficacy scales (parent
report)
Compagnoni 147 children (range: Do children’s trait beliefs and goal Executive Observation data, • Differential effects of children’s trait beliefs and
et al. 5–7 years) orientations have differing relations functions, self-report, teacher report goal orientations on their executive functions
with executive functions and behavioural Measures: and behavioural self-regulation
behavioural self-regulation? self-regulation Head-toes-knees-shoulder • Children’s trait beliefs and goal orientations
Belief mindsets task relate to achievement via executive functions
(goal orientation Child behavior rating scale and behavioral self-regulation as mediators.
and trait beliefs) (teacher report)
Verbal and maths Berkeley Puppet Interview
achievement (self-report)
Achievement scores
(verbal and maths)

DoG Delay of gratification, ECBQ Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire, BRIEF-P Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functions Preschool Version
K.A. Erdmann and S. Hertel
Self-regulation and co-regulation in early childhood – development,... 235

(3) and combining different conceptual and methodological approaches for studying the
development of self-regulation and the interplay with co-regulation. As such, this special issue
adds to the rising field of self-regulation research in early childhood and constitutes an
important step towards an understanding of the interplay of self-regulation with child and
parent characteristics in early childhood. Theoretical and practical implications regarding
conceptual and methodological issues as well as opportunities to foster self- and co-
regulation are discussed with a focus on early childhood.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/ or animals This paper does not contain any studies with human
participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent Since this paper does not contain any studies with human participants or animals, no
informed consent was required.

References

Barkley, R. A. (2001). The executive functions and self-regulation: An evolutionary neuropsychological

perspective. Neuropsychology Review, 11(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009085417776.
Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2007). Self-regulation, ego depletion, and motivation. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass, 1(1), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00001.x.
Bernier, A., Carlson, S. M., & Whipple, N. (2010). From external regulation to self-regulation: Early parenting
precursors of young children’s executive functioning. Child Development, 81(1), 326–339. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01397.x.
Best, J. R., & Miller, P. H. (2010). A developmental perspective on executive function. Child Development,
81(6), 1641–1660. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01499.x.
Bridgett, D. J., Oddi, K. B., Laake, L. M., Murdock, K. W., & Bachmann, M. N. (2013). Integrating and
differentiating aspects of self-regulation: Effortful control, executive functioning, and links to negative
affectivity. Emotion, 13(1), 47. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029536.
Brydges, C. R., Landes, J. K., Reid, C. L., Campbell, C., French, N., & Anderson, M. (2018). Cognitive
outcomes in children and adolescents born very preterm: A meta-analysis. Developmental Medicine and
Child Neurology, 60(5), 452–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.13685.
Carlson, S. M. (2005). Developmentally sensitive measures of executive function in preschool children.
Developmental Neuropsychology, 28(2), 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2802_3.
Colman, R. A., Hardy, S. A., Albert, M., Raffaelli, M., & Crockett, L. (2006). Early predictors of self-regulation
in middle childhood. Infant and Child Development, 15(4), 421–437. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.469.
Compagnoni, M., Karlen, Y., & Maag Merki, K. (2019). Play it safe or play to learn: Mindsets and behavioral
self-regulation in kindergarten. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-019-09190-y.
Demetriou, A. (2000). Organization and development of self-understanding and self-regulation: Toward a general
theory. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 209-251).
San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press.
Diamond, A. (2006). The early development of executive functions. In E. Bialystok & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.),
Lifespan cognition: Mechanisms of change (pp. 70–95). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146
/annurev-psych-113011-143750.
Duckworth, A. L., & Kern, M. L. (2011). A meta-analysis of the convergent validity of self-control measures.
Journal of Research in Personality, 45(3), 259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.02.004.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success (1st ed.). New York: Random House.
Eisenberg, N., Smith, C. L., & Spinrad, T. L. (2011). Effortful control – relations with emotion regulation,
adjustment, and socialization in childhood. In K. D. Vohs & R. F. Baumeister (Eds.), Handbook of self-
regulation (pp. 263–283). New York: Guilford Press.
236 K.A. Erdmann and S. Hertel

Fay-Stammbach, T., Hawes, D. J., & Meredith, P. (2014). Parenting influences on executive function in
early childhood: A review. Child Development Perspectives, 8(4), 258–264. https://doi.org/10.1111
/cdep.12095.
Fergusson, D. M., Boden, J. M., & Horwood, L. J. (2013). Childhood self-control and adult outcomes: Results
from a 30-year longitudinal study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
52(7), 709–717.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2013.04.008.
Garon, N., Bryson, S. E., & Smith, I. M. (2008). Executive function in preschoolers: A review using an
integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31.
Gärtner, K. A., Vetter, V. C., Schäferling, M., Reuner, G., & Hertel, S. (2018). Inhibitory control in toddlerhood –
The role of parental co-regulation and self-efficacy beliefs. Metacognition and Learning, 13(3), 241–264.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-018-9184-7.
Gioia, G. A., Espy, K. A., & Isquith, P. K. (2003). BRIEF-P: Behavior rating inventory of executive function -
preschool version: Professional manual. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Gross, J. J. (2014). Emotion regulation: Conceptual and empirical foundations. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of
emotion regulation (Vol. 2, 2nd ed., pp. 3–20). New York: Guilford Press.
Hendry, A., Jones, E. J. H., & Charman, T. (2016). Executive function in the first three years of life:
Precursors, predictors and patterns. Developmental Review, 42, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
dr.2016.06.005.
Hughes, C. (2011). Changes and challenges in 20 years of research into the development of executive functions.
Infant and Child Development, 20(3), 251–271. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.736.
Hughes, C. (2019). How do parents guide children towards ‘playing to learn’? Reflections on four studies in a
special issue on self- and co-regulation in early childhood. Metacognition and Learning (this issue).
Hughes, C., & Devine, R. T. (2019). For better or for worse? Positive and vegative parental influences on young
children's executive function. Child Development, 90, 593–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12915.
Hughes, C., & Ensor, R. (2005). Executive function and theory of mind in 2 year olds: A family affair?
Developmental Neuropsychology, 28(2), 645–668. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2802_5.
Isquith, P. K., Gioia, G. A., & Espy, K. A. (2004). Executive function in preschool children: Examination through
everyday behavior. Developmental Neuropsychology, 26(1), 403–422. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942
dn2601_3.
Johansson, M., Marciszko, C., Brocki, K., & Bohlin, G. (2016). Individual differences in early executive
functions: A longitudinal study from 12 to 36 months. Infant and Child Development, 25(6), 533–549.
https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.1952.
Kloo, D., & Sodian, B. (2017). The developmental stability of inhibition from 2 to 5 years. British Journal of
Developmental Psychology, 35, 582–595. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12197.
Kochanska, G., Murray, K. T., Jacques, T. Y., Koenig, A. L., & Vandegeest, K. A. (1996). Inhibitory control in
young children and its role in emerging internalization. Child Development, 67(2), 490–507. https://doi.
org/10.2307/1131828.
Kochanska, G., Murray, K. T., & Harlan, E. T. (2000). Effortful control in early childhood: Continuity and
change, antecedents, and implications for social development. Developmental Psychology, 36(2), 220–232.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.36.2.220.
Kopp, C. B. (1982). Antecedents of self-regulation: A developmental perspective. Developmental Psychology,
18(2), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.18.2.199.
Kurki, K., Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., & Mykkänen, A. (2016). How teachers co-regulate children’s emotions and
behaviour in socio-emotionally challenging situations in day-care settings. International Journal of
Educational Research, 76, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.02.002.
Liew, J. (2012). Effortful control, executive functions, and education: Bringing self-regulatory and social-
emotional competencies to the table. Child Development Perspectives, 6(2), 105–111. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00196.x.
Manfra, L., Davis, K. D., Ducenne, L., & Winsler, A. (2014). Preschoolers’ motor and verbal self-control
strategies during a resistance-to-temptation task. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 175(4), 332–345.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.2014.917067.
McClelland, M. M., & Cameron, C. E. (2012). Self-regulation in early childhood: Improving conceptual clarity
and developing ecologically valid measures. Child Development Perspectives, 6(2), 136–142. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00191.x.
Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., et al. (2011). A gradient of
childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 108(7), 2693–2698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108.
Self-regulation and co-regulation in early childhood – development,... 237

Mulder, H., Pitchford, N. J., Hagger, M. S., & Marlow, N. (2009). Development of executive function and
attention in preterm children: A systematic review. Developmental Neuropsychology, 34(4), 393–421.
https://doi.org/10.1080/87565640902964524.
Mulder, H., Hoofs, H., Verhagen, J., van der Veen, I., & Leseman, P. P. M. (2014). Psychometric properties and
convergent and predictive validity of an executive function test battery for two-year-olds. Frontiers in
Psychology, 5(733). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00733.
Mulder, H., van Ravenswaaij, H., Verhagen, J., Moerbeek, M., & Leseman, P. P. M. (2019). The process of early
self-control: An observational study in two- and three-year-olds. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11409-019-09199-3.
Neale, D., & Whitebread, D. (2019). Maternal scaffolding during play with 12- to 24-month-old infants: Stability
over time and relations with emerging effortful control. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007
/s11409-019-09196-6.
Neale, D., Basilio, M., & Whitebread, D. (2018). The grasping task: A 12-month predictor of 24-month delay
task performance and BRIEF-P inhibition scores. Infant and Child Development, e2092. https://doi.
org/10.1002/icd.2092.
Nigg, J. T. (2017). Annual research review: On the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive
functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental
psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58(4), 361–383. https://doi.org/10.1111
/jcpp.12675.
Pauen, S. (2016). Understanding early development of self-regulation and co-regulation: EDOS and PROSECO.
Journal of Self-Regulation and Regulation, 2, 2–16. https://doi.org/10.11588/josar.2016.2.34350.
Pauen, S., & Bechtel-Kuehne, S. (2016). How toddlers acquire and transfer tool knowledge: Developmental
changes and the role of executive functions. Child Development, 87(4), 1233–1249. https://doi.org/10.1111
/cdev.12532.
Perry, N. (2019). Recognizing early childhood as a critical time for developing and supporting self-regulation.
Metacognition and Learning (this issue).
Pino-Pasternak, D., & Whitebread, D. (2010). The role of parenting in children's self-regulated learning.
Educational Research Review, 5(3), 220–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.001.
Poulton, R., Moffitt, T. E., & Silva, P. A. (2015). The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study:
Overview of the first 40 years, with an eye to the future. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology,
50(5), 679–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-015-1048-8.
Putnam, S. P., Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Measurement of fine-grained aspects of toddler
temperament: The early childhood behavior questionnaire. Infant Behavior and Development, 29(3), 386–
401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.01.004.
Raaijmakers, M. A. J., Smidts, D. P., Sergeant, J. A., Maassen, G. H., Posthumus, J. A., van Engeland, H., &
Matthys, W. (2008). Executive functions in preschool children with aggressive behavior: Impairments in
inhibitory control. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(7), 1097–1107. https://doi.org/10.1007
/s10802-008-9235-7.
Rothbart, M. K. (1989). Temperament in childhood: A framework. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates & M. K.
Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 59-73). Chichester: Wiley.
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Practitioner review: Do performance-based measures and
ratings of executive function assess the same construct? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(2),
131–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12001.
Valcan, D. S., Davis, H., & Pino-Pasternak, D. (2017). Parental behaviours predicting early childhood
executive functions: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007
/s10648-017-9411-9.
Valiente, C., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Haugen, R., Thompson, M. S., & Kupfer, A. (2013). Effortful control
and impulsivity as concurrent and longitudinal predictors of academic achievement. The Journal of Early
Adolescence, 33(7), 946–972. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431613477239.
Vaughn, B. E., Kopp, C. B., Krakow, J. B., Johnson, K., & Schwartz, S. S. (1986). Process analyses of the
behavior of very young children in delay tasks. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 752–759. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.752.
Volet, S., Summers, M., & Thurman, J. (2009). High-level co-regulation in collaborative learning: How does it
emerge and how is it sustained? Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
learninstruc.2008.03.001.
Welsh, M., & Peterson, E. (2014). Issues in the conceptualization and assessment of hot executive functions in
childhood. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 20(2), 152–156. https://doi.org/10.1017
/S1355617713001379.
238 K.A. Erdmann and S. Hertel

Wiebe, S. A., Espy, K. A., & Charak, D. (2008). Using confirmatory factor analysis to understand executive
control in preschool children: I. latent structure. Developmental Psychology, 44(2), 575–587. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.2.575.
Wiebe, S. A., Sheffield, T., Nelson, J. M., Clark, C. A. C., Chevalier, N., & Espy, K. A. (2011). The structure of
executive function in 3-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108(3), 436–452. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jecp.2010.08.008.
Zelazo, P. D., Carter, A., Reznick, J. S., & Frye, D. (1997). Early development of executive function: A problem-
solving framework. Review of General Psychology, 1(2), 198–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-
2680.1.2.198.
Zhou, Q., Chen, S. H., & Main, A. (2012). Commonalities and differences in the research on children’s effortful
control and executive function: A call for an integrated model of self-regulation. Child Development
Perspectives, 6(2), 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00176.x.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.