Longitudinal associations between food fussiness and parental feeding behaviors in Chinese children: between- and within-person effects

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: The directionality of longitudinal associations between children's food fussiness and parental feeding behaviors remains contested. This study aimed to assess the dynamic relationship between children's food fussiness and feeding behaviors. METHODS: To disentangle these effects, this study employed cross-lagged panel models (CLPMs) and random-intercept cross-lagged panel models (RI-CLPMs) using longitudinal data from 588 Chinese children (Mean age = 3.7 years, SD = 0.3, 51.7% boys) across three waves over two years. CLPMs capture between-person associations, while RI-CLPMs isolate within-person dynamics over time. Within-person effects represent how temporary deviations predict subsequent changes beyond stable traits, whereas between-person effects reflect enduring cross-family differences. RESULTS: Analyses revealed distinct patterns depending on the feeding behavior and model type: for restrictions, the CLPM showed parent-driven effects (restrictions at 3.7 years→ fussiness at 4.8 years, β = -0.104, p = 0.003), whereas the RI-CLPM identified child-driven effects (fussiness at 4.8 years → restrictions at 5.7 years, β = 0.179, p = 0.033). Both models consistently revealed child-driven effects for pressure to eat (CLPM: β = 0.151, p = 0.002; RI-CLPM: β = 0.218, p = 0.013). Food as a reward showed bidirectionality in CLPM (reward at 4.8 years → fussiness at 5.7 years: β = 0.112, p < 0.001; fussiness at 4.8 years→ reward at 5.7 years: β = 0.144, p = 0.005) but no significant cross-lagged paths in the RI-CLPM. Notably, the multi-group analysis revealed no moderating effect of child sex. CONCLUSIONS: After accounting for stable between-person differences, RI-CLPM findings reveal that child food fussiness prospectively drives increases in parental use of restriction and pressure to eat at the within-person level. This suggests that these specific feeding behaviors may function more as reactive responses to children's eating behaviors than as caregiver-initiated strategies.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.