Chapter 1

Problems of Self-Regulation in Children and Adolescents

Abstract

Parents and professionals have often puzzled over the importance of early regulatory problems in young children and their impact on the developing child. Most normal young infants show irregularities in negotiating sleep cycles, digestion, and self-calming which usually resolve around 6 months of age. However, some infants and children show persistent problems in sleep, self-consoling, feeding, and mood regulation (i.e., fussiness, irritability) which don’t resolve and may continue through life. As the infant grows into the toddler and childhood years, problems often become more evident. Difficulties with self-consoling, sleep, eating, attention, sensory processing, intolerance for change, a hyper-alert state of arousal, and mood regulation (i.e., irritability, anxiety, and depression) often occur. Children experiencing these symptoms have been termed as regulatory disordered (Greenspan, 1989, 1992; Zero to Three, 1994). When the regulatory disorder persists over time, the child may become diagnosed with disorders including bipolar or mood disorder, anxiety, obsessive–compulsive disorder, Asperger’s syndrome, eating or sleep disorder, attention deficit disorder, and sometimes, posttraumatic stress disorder. Since children with these behaviors are commonly observed in clinical practice, it is important to understand the symptoms underlying the regulatory disorder and how early problems with self-regulation impact later development, adaptive behaviors, and interpersonal relationships.

Keywords

self-regulation
mood regulation
sensory processing
regulatory disorder
interpersonal relationships
image
Parents and professionals have often puzzled over the importance of early regulatory problems in young children and their impact on the developing child. Most normal young infants show irregularities in negotiating sleep cycles, digestion, and self-calming which usually resolve around 6 months of age. However, some infants and children show persistent problems in sleep, self-consoling, feeding, and mood regulation (i.e., fussiness, irritability) which don’t resolve and may continue through life. As the infant grows into the toddler and childhood years, problems often become more evident. Difficulties with self-consoling, sleep, eating, attention, sensory processing, intolerance for change, a hyper-alert state of arousal, and mood regulation (i.e., irritability, anxiety, and depression) often occur. Children experiencing these symptoms have been termed as regulatory disordered (Greenspan, 1989 1992; Zero to Three, 1994). When the regulatory disorder persists over time, the child may become diagnosed with disorders including bipolar or mood disorder, anxiety, obsessive–compulsive disorder, Asperger’s syndrome, eating or sleep disorder, attention deficit disorder, and sometimes, posttraumatic stress disorder. Since children with these behaviors are commonly observed in clinical practice, it is important to understand the symptoms underlying the regulatory disorder and how early problems with self-regulation impact later development, adaptive behaviors, and interpersonal relationships.
Poor self-regulation is a process deficit that impacts the person’s everyday functioning and interpersonal relationships. Oftentimes problems of self-regulation are life-long and have roots in the person’s early childhood development. As problems with self-regulation become entrenched, the person struggles with self-soothing and mood regulation. It impacts the capacity to modulate arousal for sustained attention, to be motivated for purposeful activities, to process and tolerate a range of sensory stimulation, and to tolerate change and handle everyday stress. Frequently the child struggles with coping skills, impulsivity, and self-control, especially as they grow older. As a result of the regulatory disorder, the child is apt to have difficulty developing a clear sense of identity, purpose in life, and self-efficacy.
An overview of regulatory processes in infants and children is presented and a conceptual model of self-regulation is proposed. The symptoms that constitute a regulatory disorder in children are described. The outcomes of preschool children who had regulatory disorders during infancy are described and how early symptoms may lead to these outcomes. Finally, the different types of regulatory disorders that have been proposed by the Diagnostic Classification: 0–3 are described. Case examples are presented to depict the symptomatology of the different subtypes. Checklists are provided to assist the clinician in diagnosing children with problems of self-regulation. The Infant-Child Symptom Checklist can be used in helping parents and clinicians to understand the child’s regulatory profile. In addition, a version of the Functional Emotional Observation Scale is presented for use by therapists to better understand the child’s capacity for self-regulation and to serve as a guide for treatment.

1. The concept of self-regulation and its development

1.1. Overview

The early regulation of arousal and physiological state is critical for successful adaptation to the environment. The development of homeostasis is important in the modulation of physiological states including sleep–wake cycles, hunger and satiety, body temperature, and states of arousal and alertness. It is needed for mastery of sensory functions, self-calming, and emotional responsivity. It is also important for regulation of attentional capacities (Als, Lester, Tronick, & Brazelton, 1982; Brazelton, Koslowski, & Main, 1974; Field, 1981; Sroufe, 1979 2005; Sroufe, Coffino, & Carlson, 2010; Tronick, 1989; Tronick & Beeghly, 2011). The foundations of self-regulation lie in the infant’s capacity to develop homeostasis in the first few months of life when the infant learns to take interest in the world while simultaneously regulating arousal and responses to sensory stimulation (Greenspan, 1992; Lachmann & Beebe, 1997). As the infant matures, self-regulation depends on the capacity to read and give gestural and vocal signals, to internalize everyday routines, and to respond contingently to expectations from others (Kopp, 1987 1989; Tronick, 1989). Although there are individual differences, the child must learn to adapt to changing family and parental expectations to master self-regulation.
Self-regulatory mechanisms develop and refine early in the person’s life. Some of the important milestones include the formation of affective relationships and attachments, reciprocal communication and language, the use of self and others to control internal states, an understanding of causal relationships in human behavior, and the development of self-initiated organized behaviors. It is generally recognized that self-regulatory mechanisms are complex and develop as a result of physiological maturation, caregiver responsivity, and the person’s adaptation to environmental demands (Lyons-Ruth & Zeanah, 1993, Rothbart & Derryberry, 1981). If these essential processes are not in place early in life, it impacts the person life-long, compromising their ability to develop self-control, and mindful behavior.

1.2. Fundamental skills needed for self-regulation

1.2.1. Level 1: Homeostasis

1.2.1.1. Reading and interpreting one’s body signals:
The foundations of self-regulation lie in the child’s capacity to develop homeostasis early in life. This is especially important for self-soothing and the ability to read one’s own physiological responses and bodily rhythms (e.g., body temperature, sleep–wake cycles, and hunger-satiety). In a normally developing individual, the child regulates internal arousal states and attentional focus for learning and processing information. To accurately read bodily states, the person needs clear internal feedback from the body, the ability to differentiate and interpret body states (i.e., “I’m hungry and it’s time to eat”), and the ability of the mind to control the body under different environmental demands or situations (i.e., “I’m tired but it’s not time to sleep”; “I need to find a way to increase my arousal to stay awake and alert”).
There is a complex interplay between the person’s psychological experience and internal physiological state which makes self-regulation possible (Porges, 2003 2009). A dynamic bidirectional communication occurs between the peripheral nervous system and the brain, providing a feedback loop between the vagal system and the brain. For example, increased changes in heart rate help support fight or flight behaviors while decreased heart rate supports social interactions and affective and communicative signaling. Specific cues in the environment elicit physiological states associated with safety or danger (e.g., high piercing scream). Internal feedback between the vagus nerve, a primary component of the autonomic nervous system, and the brain help the person with breath control, physiological relaxation, and achieving an overall state of calmness when self-regulation is needed. This is accomplished through the vagus nerve’s influences on the heart and breath control. The polyvagal system also provides feedback to the body to prepare it for flight or fight when physical threat is imminent. In the polyvagal theory, the autonomic nervous system responds to social interactions, environmental demands, and sensory stimulation. It also provides feedback to the brain to modulate how the nervous system should react to real world challenges.
1.2.1.2. Processing sensory stimulation:
Self-regulation depends upon the person’s capacity to observe and process sensory stimulation from the outside world (DeGangi & Greenspan, 1988; Greenspan, 1989 1992; Lachmann & Beebe, 1997). This includes the child’s ability to process and tolerate a range of sensory stimulations, such as touch, movement, visual, auditory, and olfactory inputs. Greenspan (1992) described the infant’s first task as learning to regulate him or herself and to take interest in the world. Modulation and processing of the range of sensory experiences allows for social engagement and attachment to others. A child who is easily overwhelmed by sounds, touch, movement, or visual stimulation may avoid interactions with persons or situations that are highly stimulating. Or in contrast, the child who does not process sensory input unless it is very intense may develop a pattern of thrill seeking, high stimulation, and risky behavior.
Distortions in the sensory systems can cause a child to misconstrue or misinterpret attempts at soothing from caregivers. For example, a child who cannot stand to be touched or held because of tactile sensitivities may arch, pull away, or cry when touched. A responsive caregiver may develop a hands-off approach to soothing a tactually defensive child, using movement or visual or auditory stimulation as a means to soothe their baby. This can have wide-reaching implications for later development. Karena cried constantly as a baby and wanted to be held, yet she couldn’t stand to be stroked or rocked by her parents. The only way they could soothe her was to hold her in a bear hug and stand still. Because no other soothing techniques worked, her mother construed Karena’s screams as a rejection and she consequently hated to be alone with her baby. There seemed to be no solution—either to hold her for long periods of time while she screamed, or listening to her scream from her crib while she clawed at the air. As Karena developed into the preschool and school age years, she often yelled at children from across the room, “You’re hurting me!” and “Don’t touch me!” when there was no contact whatsoever. By the school-age years, Karena sat stiffly at the lunch table at school and preferred to be left alone. Over time, Karena wanted friends, but didn’t know how to be with them in play, conversations, or learning experiences. She continued to perceive touch in ways that felt disorganizing and intrusive.
1.2.1.3. Internalizing self-soothing from others
In early development, self-regulation depends upon the responsiveness of caregivers. In a young infant, the caregiver soothes the infant when distressed and facilitates state organization (Als, 1982). As the child develops, they internalize the soothing role of the caregiver, learning to recognize signs of internal distress and finding suitable ways to self-soothe and modulate states of arousal and alertness for everyday tasks. To facilitate sensorimotor modulation, parents normally provide sensory input through play and caretaking experiences, such as dressing and bathing. Touch and movement, together with auditory and visual stimulation are integrated in a range of experiences in the context of the parent–child interaction. The infant learns how to self-soothe early in life by sucking, holding onto one’s hands or feet, or by looking at sights or listening to pleasant sounds. As children develop, they find a range of sensory experiences that are organizing. The more attuned the child is to understanding what helps them stay calm, the more able they are to access these sensory systems for self-regulation. Most individuals are soothed by a collection of senses (i.e., sound, movement, touch, scents, visual, or auditory), but need to learn which ones are calming versus arousing.
The neural mechanisms that allow for self-soothing also include the polyvagal system. This system provides a feedback loop between the autonomic nervous system and the brain, and the hypothalamus and reticular activating system which help the person develop an internal awareness of physical self-states (i.e., arousal levels, fatigue, hunger, agitation, or stress reactions). Children who are unable to take in the soothing of a caregiver, who have unreliable internal feedback mechanisms of self-states, or who cannot plan and organize their own soothing activities will be highly compromised in self-regulation.
Just as the baby learns how to self-soothe early in life by sucking, holding onto one’s hands or feet, or by looking at sights or listening to pleasant sounds, the child must engage in self-soothing activities to maintain a well-balanced nervous system. This may take many forms—sitting in a rocking chair and reading, taking a long run in the park with the dog, or playing music on the piano. Frequently children who are over-scheduled with activities or overloaded with things like homework become highly stressed and have no time for self-soothing activities. Without daily self-soothing activities, a child can quickly deregulate into high irritability, impulsive actions, withdrawal, explosive or anger reactions, and high stress or overwhelming feelings.
In normal development, a caregiver who is responsive to the young infant’s distress helps the child learn to self-soothe. The child internalizes these self-soothing activities and gradually learns to apply these soothing activities for himself. As the person matures, they learn to self-observe, to read their own bodily cues, and to predict what strategies will work for them in different situations. Without a responsive caregiver, the child may never learn this task or they may develop extreme dependency on others to do basic tasks for them. It can also impact their internal emotional life in a negative way. For example, Hannah was an 11-year-old girl who was born 10 years after her three older siblings. One of these children was 24 years old and was severely impaired, wheelchair bound, unable to speak or feed himself, and required intensive care. Hannah felt overlooked and was expected to be the “good” child, not causing any extra demands or problems for the family. She remembered staring at her dinner plate full of food, wanting to tell her parents about her good report card, but being put off by them as they struggled to feed her older brother. Hannah felt invisible, that she did not deserve to be nurtured, and that she was a person unworthy of attention from others. Her regulatory adaptation was to shut down and withdraw from the world.
Even in a well-regulated person, times of high stress, trauma, or exceptionally unpleasant or devastating life experiences can induce dysregulation by elevating stress hormones (e.g., cortisol levels). The person who is overwhelmed may stop taking care of himself, not eating or sleeping right which in turn compromises his ability to function at near optimal levels at school or home life. The child may cope by spending long hours on video games or sitting in front of the computer; or the child may be overscheduled, starting projects, but not completing any of them are examples of how high stress may dysregulate a person. Trauma can exist in many forms and result in extreme dysregulation. A child may live with a disabled or depressed parent, or the child may witness something terrible, such as seeing their house burn down. For example, Elise was a 12-year-old girl who was frightened that someone might come to her school and shoot her and her classmates. Getting her to school and to feel safe throughout the school day was very difficult. When she was only 5 years old, there were two snipers who randomly shot people in the Washington, DC area. One of the victims was a woman vacuuming her car at a gas station near her house. Elise would lie down in the back seat of the car, hiding under a blanket as they drove past the gas station to her school. Many children exposed to these kinds of things never get over worries for personal safety. Each one of these situations can cause a person to dysregulate and if the parent and child do not pay extra attention to their need for self-regulation, they may remain in a state of dysregulation for years to come.
1.2.1.4. Signaling communication about one’s own needs for self-soothing
Self-regulation is dynamic and requires that the child take in feedback from others while also communicating effectively through gestures and words to signal information about their internal state of being and physiological needs. Mirror neurons in the brain help the person take in and process models of self-soothing or other adaptive behaviors for use in a variety of situations. Mirror neurons are located in the frontal and parietal lobes and are activated when one person sees another doing a specific action. Neurons in the motor cortex fire to create an imitative response in the observer (Rizzolatti & Arbib, 1998; Rizzolatti, Fabbri-Destro, & Cattaneo, 2009; Rizzolatti & Fabbri-Destro, 2008). The baby cries in distress when uncomfortable, the mother places her hand on the baby’s abdomen and soothingly talks to her baby. Her smiling and loving face is processed in combination with the tactile and vocal input and soon, the baby mirrors her soothing, modulating from a scream to a content and calm state. In this way, the child adapts to incoming signals from others and the environment to help modulate a regulatory response. Mirror neurons play a vital role in facilitating mutual reciprocity and signaling between persons during self-regulation (Solms & Turnbull, 2002).
Lucy was a 10-year-old girl with autistic spectrum disorder who had difficulty in taking in verbal, affective, or gestural communication from me and other persons in her life. She usually paced back and forth in my therapy room, talking at rapid speed about Pokemon and video game characters. On a few occasions she would glance fleetingly at my face but clearly had difficulty processing facial cues and was often overwhelmed by the facial expressions of others. On one particular day, I greeted her and as we entered my therapy room, she noticed that I had on a light shade of green eye shadow. She put her face close to mine and exclaimed, “There’s something wrong with your eyes!” I replied, “Let’s look in the mirror, Lucy. What could be wrong?” As we gazed at our faces in the mirror, I said, “I see what it is! It’s the green eye shadow. Should I rub it off?” Lucy looked puzzled as she gazed back and forth between our eyes in the mirror. I said, “Let me see your eyes. What a pretty blue they are! So different from my brown eyes. Is there anything else you notice about our faces?” This began a series of mirror experiments of us comparing funny or interesting attributes about our faces while we wore sunglasses, hats, clip-on earrings, and other accessories. Once we started the mirror experiment, Lucy became much better at maintaining eye contact with me and surprisingly, her pacing diminished. It seemed to calm her down and in the upcoming years, she would often sit cross-legged on the floor in front of me, looking directly at my face as we talked or played games.

1.2.2. Level 2: Purposeful communication and planning of thoughts and actions

1.2.2.1. Planning and organizing thoughts and behaviors
In the typically developing child, the next level of self-regulation involves the capacity to process and generate effective gestural and verbal language to communicate intentions, the ability to adapt to a range of everyday routines, and the ability to respond contingently to the expectations from others (Kopp, 1987 1989 2009 2011; Tronick, 1989). This stage occurs between 8 and 18 months of age and is important for the development of intentionality, reciprocal interactions, and organized affects. Kopp (1987) further elaborates that during this time the infant learns to modify actions in relation to events and object characteristics. Around 9 months of age, the infant becomes intentional in actions and becomes aware of situational meanings. For example, the baby learns to distinguish between when daddy is putting on his coat to go to work or to take them for a stroller ride based on verbal and contextual cues.
The prefrontal lobe plays an important role in planning and organizing behavioral schemes. The language cortex and associated areas (temporal lobe, Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas) help the person communicate thoughts through verbal and gestural language. Likewise, the parietal lobe, basal ganglia, and cerebellum engage in planning and execution of motor actions. It is a complex neurological process for the individual that can be derailed if basic homeostasis is not accomplished at the prior stage of development.
As the child develops the capacity to plan and organize thoughts and behaviors, he learns to adapt to changing interpersonal and learning expectations and to plan for future actions. We see this in the individual who can control his body and mind for a specific purpose or goal without becoming distracted. Individuals who have learned to meditate, slowing their active minds and bodies down to concentrate on a precise, single stimulus is one example of how this is accomplished.
This level of self-regulation requires the development of intentionality, reciprocal interactions, organized affects, and an awareness of situational meanings. This stage is critical for the child to learn how to modify actions, thoughts, or feelings in relation to events in his life. It is accomplished through the child learning to initiate, stop, modify, or change responses as situations occur, thus allowing them to engage in more adaptive behavior (Zimmermann, 2005). The child may need to inhibit the desire to leave the dinner table before finishing the meal or the urge to grab a toy when waiting is required. This ability to inhibit actions may prevent the child from fleeing from a stressful situation when staying and coping is required. It can also help a growing child to stop himself from yelling at his parent for doing something upsetting like grounding them for doing something they shouldn’t have done. Or it can help the child inhibit doing or saying things that pop into their mind while playing with peers. For instance, when Terry would get agitated in a group situation, she would poke the other children or do things like throw the game dice around the room, disrupting the fun of the other children.
At this stage of self-regulation, the person learns to initiate, maintain, and inhibit physical actions or impulses. This is the basis for problem solving, intentionality, and awareness that actions lead to a goal. On a neurophysiological level, higher cortical control (e.g., prefrontal lobe) overrides lower brain centers (e.g., reticular activating system and hypothalamus) that control basic bodily functions. Feedback loops between the reticular activating system, deep limbic structures to the cortex, and the prefrontal lobe help the child to develop intentionality, purpose, and motivation. The prefrontal lobe plays an especially important role in self-stopping, in generating ideas and maintaining motivation for adaptive behavior. It is this dynamic feedback loop that helps the child evaluate his internal bodily state, to self-observe readiness to respond, to read external situational demands, and to integrate past learning and responses to apply to the current situation. There are three main components that go into the ability to plan and organize thoughts and actions. These will be described in the sequence in which they occur in behavior.
1.2.2.1.1. Developing ideation
This is the first step—to develop a clear thought, desire, or target behavior. It is a function of the prefrontal lobe and involves turning the search light on a particular idea and making it clear for execution. If the idea is not well formed, as often occurs with attention deficit disorder or executive functioning disorder, the child may be aimless, disorganized, and restless. Even when there are clear environmental cues, the child may not register the importance of the goal and the need to act. For example, many children are not phased by a messy bedroom overflowing with toys, clothes on the floor, or food wrappers scattered about. They may not even experience distress when an important, unfound object is frustratingly hidden away. Sometimes the child exists in a constant state of competing ideas and cannot act on an idea, or they start things never to finish anything. Taylor was a 6-year-old child who was in constant motion. Within 2 minutes of her entering my play room, toys were pulled off shelves, cabinets hurled open, and toys strewn about. She had great difficulty containing her urge to touch everything in sight and resisting the impulse to begin yet another play idea. She never finished even a simple sequence of a project, pretend play scenario, or game. When I showed her that the sand-filled hour glass was almost finished indicating that our session was about to end, she started even more things—expressing her wish to paint a bowl, to sew an apron for her doll, or play a long involved game in the remaining 3 minutes. In children like Taylor, the inability to resist acting on a new thought is a typical problem that occurs when the lower brain centers prevail over the executive planning frontal lobe.
Another common problem when a child cannot develop a clear idea and goal-directed focus is cognitive indecisiveness. This is common among children with high anxiety or obsessive–compulsive disorder. They may ruminate over and over again about when to start, what to do, will it be right, how to do it, etc. Often they have multiple ideas in their mind, but cannot focus on one or prioritize them in proper sequence. Isabella was a 7-year-old child who would compulsively clean my doll house, setting up the furniture, and placing dolls in the beds. The process was repeated exactly 3 times. Isabella was unable to make anything happen in the story and was stuck in a state of constant set-up. This spilled over to her needing to eat food in multiples of three, washing her hands three times after using the bathroom, and repeating things under her breathe three times. She was in a constant state of frustration, stuck in time.
1.2.2.1.2. Self-control and self-monitoring
The emergence of self-control is the next level of planning and organizing thoughts and behaviors, beginning at 18 months of age. The child of this age can create mental images that can be manipulated through his or her pretend play and functional use of language. Because of these skills, the infant is able to internalize routines and requests made by others. Kopp describes the toddler as learning to delay his or her actions and to comply with social expectations without needing external cues. The development of representational thought and recall memory is central to this stage. Volitional control requires self-monitoring, self-control, and self-limiting behavior. The child must be self-aware and mindful of his own actions while engaged in doing a task. Verbal mediation of thoughts and actions helps the child organize self-regulatory behavior (Kopp, Krakow, & Vaughn, 1983; Kopp, 2009). As the child begins to differentiate emotions and his or her sense of self from others, expressions of negative affects and aggression are apt to occur. The caregiver attaches affective meanings to situations and provides social expectations and values related to specific emotional responses, which helps the infant to label and understand emotions (Kopp, 1987). The development of action schemes (e.g., vocalizations, self-talk, self-distractions, or other motor responses), cognitive organization (e.g., representational thinking, self-monitoring), motivation, and external support from caregivers (i.e., list making, timing devices, and other prompts) appear to be key elements in attainment of emotional regulation (Kopp, 1989 2011). If a child is derailed at this stage of development, he is apt to be constantly frustrated, explosive, and aggressive toward others.
As the person develops self-control, he learns to internalize routines and requests made by others. These routines are established early in life—a set bedtime, meals at certain times or doing certain activities, such as exercise at specific times. There are considerable individual and cultural differences that influence these schedules and routines, but what is important is that there is an established rhythm and pattern to the person’s daily activities that allows them to function well in life. Many children with severe ADHD live moment-to-moment with no capacity to plan for a regular schedule. Jason was a 9-year-old boy who went to bed at different times each night, often awakening in the wee hours because he wanted to play video games or read. His parents tried to establish bedtime rituals for Jason, but sometimes let him do whatever he wished to avoid a huge tantrum that followed their limit setting. Jason was in a constant state of sleep deprivation and irritability as a result.
In the process of planning and organizing actions, the child needs to attend to relevant details, gather important information for the task at hand, then engage in proper actions for task achievement. The child needs to be mindful of their actions and self-monitor as they engage in the task. Allocating attentional resources is critical for self-monitoring. Many children think they can multitask efficiently, but often they allocate only part of their attentional resources for each task (i.e., doing homework, surfing internet, and watching TV at the same time). Often they don’t complete any of the tasks optimally unless the activities are rote or habitual in nature (i.e., reading a book while eating). Self-monitoring requires that the child resist urges to respond to off-task or impulsive wishes. They need to delay gratification and stay focused and intent on their goal. Children who struggle with self-monitoring have poor self-control, poor self-awareness, restlessness, and usually cannot delay gratification. This is often seen in children who are chronically stressed and have poor mood modulation. Living with them is overwhelming to parents and siblings because they blow up easily. A child may have poor self-awareness and not read that they are about to lose it before it is too late (i.e., the child who insists on jumping wildly near the edge of a trampoline, then injures himself seriously).
An important aspect of this phase of development is the learning to delay one’s own actions and to comply with social expectations without needing external cues. Self-control relies upon the person’s development of forethought, planfulness, volitional control, and self-reflection (Zimmermann, 2005). In forethought, the person analyses the task before him, sets goals, and plans a strategy to accomplish his goal. If the idea is not well formed in his mind which is often the case with children with attention deficit disorder or executive functioning problems, they may struggle to get started. The child needs to be able to attend to relevant information about the task and feel motivated to do it. Self-control depends on being able to sustain effort, manage time, remain focused on the goal, and resist distractions that might divert them from their goal. Common problems at the ideation or forethought stage might be aimlessness, disorganized or risky behaviors, procrastination, or conflicting or ambivalent goals (Baumeister, 1991a,b). The child is apt to feel indecisive, emotional distress, or confused about his own identity because he lacks purposefulness.
Breakdowns in self-control are commonly observed in clinical practice. Hostility, aggression, irritability, high frustration, and violence may be manifested in persons with poor self-control. The ability to resist temptation, to resist the urge to respond when it is inappropriate, and to delay gratification are central to self-control. To develop better self-control, the child needs to be able to evaluate himself while in the process of doing a task or engaging in an interaction, all things that require mindfulness of self and others. Lev was a child adopted at age 4 years from an institution in an Eastern block country. Despite nurturing and good parenting, he never learned to control his impulses and from the age of 4 through adolescence, he would demand that his parents buy him toys or video games every day. If they did not give in to his demands, he would become very violent, ripping out a banister or a bathroom sink, smashing holes in the walls and even the car windshield with his feet, or punching his parents on the head and arms. He was completely unable to delay gratification and the only thing that eventually worked for him was to place him in a residential school where he had to earn the simplest of rewards like getting dessert for doing learning activities and chores and showing respectful behavior. After several years at the residential school, Lev developed much better self-control and was able to return and live with his family.
Finally, the capacity to self-stop or self-limit is important to self-control. It involves both mental and physical exertion and control to override the impulse to act when the task or situation requires them to inhibit or stop. Some persons cannot resist temptation as in the case of overeating, video gaming for long hours, or other addictive behaviors. There may be extreme peer pressure or external forces that urge a person to act when he shouldn’t. In addition, internal states of fatigue or high stress may break a person down and cause poor self-control.
1.2.2.1.3. Planning and organizing adaptive responses
This is the last observable step in the planning sequence. It is when we see the child engage in purposeful actions for task completion, adjusting his behavior as the task unfolds. The child gathers feedback as he does the task and receives internal feedback to allow for motor or cognitive adjustments for errors, mistakes, and performance standards (i.e., go faster, make smaller movements, etc.). Self-discipline and the capacity to stop oneself are important features to organized behavior. For example, the child may feel fatigued and wish to stop performing, knowing that it is time for a break or he will fail in the task. He may feel highly stressed by the situation (i.e., performing on stage or in front of the classroom) and a wish to escape. There may be outside pressures to do something else such as peer pressure that distracts the child from their primary goal. The child may derail himself by engaging in a behavior that impairs his cognition (i.e., sleep problems, overuse of electronics) or may be unable to resist sensory pleasures—eating sweets, random movement activities, etc. at times when they need to focus efforts on more purposeful, goal-directed activity. For example, William was a 16-year-old boy adopted from Ethiopia at age 9 who had extreme problems with self-control. He couldn’t stop his urge to go on the internet and surf porn sites and even broke into other people’s homes to use their computers for this purpose. He had a sugar addiction and stole candy from stores, leaving candy wrappers jammed under his bed. The lack of impulse control that William experienced resulted in lying behavior, sneaking around, and delinquency from school. To make a difference in William’s life, we used a combination of treatment strategies that focused on behavioral inhibition, developing healthy and fulfilling attachments with others, as well as minimizing stimuli in the environment that could trigger William’s urges.
Emotional dysregulation can cause a child to lose the capacity to plan and organize the daily tasks of life from home to school activities. However, there are also instances of short-acting emotional dysregulation, such as when a child has a frustrating event, such as a toy breaks on him, a limit is placed on him by his parents that he feels is unfair, or he’s working on the computer and the power shuts off from a thunderstorm, thus losing what project or game he was working on. The child may tantrum, take a break to regain composure by moving or other activity, then return to begin the task all over again. In contrast, a child can have long-standing, chronic stress, such as a mother who is very depressed, abusive, or who makes nasty comments to them all the time. The rage that is elicited is apt to persist for quite some time and become part of the person’s behavioral repertoire. Distinguishing the source of the dysregulation is important in understanding the problem as well as guiding next steps for treatment.
In clinical practice we often hear examples of how poor inhibition and problems with self-initiation impact the entire family. In one family, the mother complained that when she would walk in the door after a long day at work, she would find her 2-year-old child hungry and crying for attention. Her husband, Curt, was unemployed and depressed by his plight at staying at home with the toddler. As soon as Stacey would see her husband lying on the sofa reading a magazine, still in his pajamas and oblivious to their child’s distress, she was instantly triggered. Within moments, Stacey would begin shrieking at her husband for not starting the dinner for their child, raving that the house was a complete mess, and that he was clueless to her work exhaustion. Curt’s lack of intentionality and awareness of the situation not only led him to being dysregulated in a withdrawn—shut down state, but the whole family was pitched into a state of dysregulation. The child spent long hours parked in front of the TV with no purposeful activities or outings. She had started engaging in masturbation as a means of self-soothing and looked tuned-out, almost autistic in her presentation. Stacey’s dysregulation went to rage and was in opposite action to Curt’s withdrawal, but both felt distress, frustration, and irritability at their terrible situation. Support was provided for the parents and child, and in particular the little girl was placed in a nurturing and stimulating day care that helped her develop skills, motivation, and socialization. The self-stimulatory behaviors that the little girl had been engaging in stopped shortly after the parents learned better ways of providing structure, routines, and nurturing activities for the child. An important aspect of the treatment was helping the parents learn to engage in interactive play with their toddler during a range of routines and activities and providing ongoing support for both parents—father’s depression and mother’s level of stress.
1.2.2.2. Differentiating one’s own thoughts and actions from others: theory of mind
A growing awareness of self as a separate identity contributes to the child’s ability to differentiate his responses from the actions of others. Brianna, a young mother with a history of emotional and physical abuse, could not see herself as separate from her 30-month-old child. At our multifamily group therapy session, we asked Brianna if we could serve her child some cottage cheese during snack time. She replied, “Oh, he won’t like it. I don’t like it, so he won’t like it.” When we further inquired if he had ever eaten cottage cheese, she replied, “Of course not.” It is a simple example, but this spilled over into many activities for Brianna who could not tolerate her young child exploring new things. When playing with her child, she was very controlling of what he was allowed to play with and how, often introducing play ideas that were nowhere near what a 30-month-old could do. For example, she might tell him, “Count the pieces. Now tell me the colors. Don’t touch that. Do as I say. Let’s start over and count them right this time.” Unlike most 30-month-olds, the boy stood frozen in fear, staring at the colored puzzle pieces and not knowing what to do or say. In our work with Brianna, she frequently expressed how she was raised with an iron hand that she never grew up to know who she really was. “It was like I was invisible, even when my mother looked at me. I had to do what she wanted me to do and never could do anything I wanted to try.” Now she was doing the same thing with her young child and we were trying to stop the cycle and allow both Brianna and her young son to blossom.
The ability to mentalize affective experiences first develops through the child exploring the many meanings of their own actions and the actions of others. In this process, the child becomes increasingly aware of his own emotions as he interacts with objects and persons (Fonagy, Gergely, Jurist, & Target, 2004). Two key processes help the person construct an internal experience of affective experiences. One way is through the symbolization of experiences or pretend play expressed in young children. The child picks up a little acorn, animates it in her hand, bobbing it up and down on top of a piece of bark. The child then exclaims, “Look. It’s a fairy. She’s going on a magic carpet ride.” And off the bark and acorn fly into the air. The symbolization allows the child to express a range of emotions- pleasure and excitement, separation and individuation, assertion and aggression, as well as negative emotions of frustration, fear, anger, or sadness. As the child enacts emotions through play, he begins to make sense verbally and nonverbally of his internal emotional life.
As the child grows older, they continue to do this through expressive arts like dance, art, music, and story writing. Sometimes it is only after a person has symbolized a story that he truly begins to understand what might have been troubling them in early childhood. Sam was a very intelligent 10-year-old child with a strong desire for friends, but lived in a chronic state of isolation because he didn’t know how to engage in social interchanges. Sam was an avid reader and loved to dream up stories, but his narratives were difficult to follow by others. When Sam would become distraught, he would go off by himself and do odd things like smell mulch on the playground or twiddle leaves in his fingers while composing a song in his head. One day in his therapy session, he wrote a story about Flippity-Floppity Fish who was a rare breed of fish that no one had ever seen before. He did amazing tricks in the water that caught the other fish’s eyes, but soon they lost interest and swam away. A pelican flying above noticed Flippity-Floppity and alighted on a rock to watch. Flippity-Floppity paused his beautiful swim among the coral reef and looked at the pelican. He said, “You’re the first one to really notice me and know I’m here.” Sam turned to me with tears in his eyes and said to me, “I want you to have my story. You know what I live with all the time.” Through the symbolization of the written narrative, Sam helped gain a new perspective and insight into his life experience.
A second major way that we mentalize symbolic experiences is through empathic affective-mirroring. It is very powerful to experience the reflective mirror of another’s face and voice attunement, response, and reflection as we express our own internal emotional experience. Emma, who was a highly anxious child, repeatedly played that she was injured and had to go in the ambulance to the hospital, then once healed, she could finally feel free, riding the horses at the stables with abandon. Her attuned father joined her play, reflecting on the overwhelming fear that Emma felt. Emma was a selective mute and was paralyzed by new situations and places, not being able to speak or move. As her father reflected on her worries that something dangerous would happen to her and validated her fear that something was seriously wrong with her, Emma began to relax more, gain her voice, and feel heard by others.
Below is a summary of the conceptual model for self-regulation in children.

Summary of the Self-Regulatory Process

1 Level 1: homeostasis

1. Read and interpret one’s own body signals: Basic physiological readiness.
2. Process sensory stimulation from the environment and others: Take interest in the world.
3. Internalize self-soothing from others.
4. Signal communication to others about one’s own needs for self-soothing.

2 Level 2: purposeful communication and the planning of thoughts and actions

1. Plan and organize thoughts and behaviors
a. Develop ideation.
b. Self-control and self-monitoring.
c. Plan and organize goals and future actions.
2. Differentiate one’s own thoughts and actions from others: Theory of mind
d. Symbolization of experiences.
e. Empathic affective mirroring.

2. What is a regulatory disorder?

There are a number of etiologies that can cause problems of self-regulation in infants and children. In most individuals with a regulatory disorder, the problem is life-long and is often constitutionally based (Thelen, 1989), while others are not. For example, infants frequently display sleep disturbances and/or colic which resolve spontaneously by 5 or 6 months of age. If however, early signs of irritability do not resolve by 6 months, the fussiness experienced by the infant persists and is coupled with other symptoms, such as poor self-calming, intolerance for change, and a hyper-alert state of arousal, then it is likely that the child has a problem with self-regulation. Using Greenspan’s clinical constructs, these children have become recognized as regulatory disordered. The diagnostic criteria for regulatory disorders are provided in the Diagnostic Classification of Mental Health and Developmental Disorders of Infancy and Early Childhood (Zero to Three, 1994). A regulatory disorder is one in which problems exist in both behavioral regulation and sensorimotor organization. Typically the regulatory disordered child displays problems in sleep, self-consoling, feeding, attention and arousal, mood regulation, and/or transitions. Often these children are hyper-or hypo-sensitive to sensory stimuli including auditory, tactile, visual, and vestibular stimulation (DeGangi & Greenspan, 1988). Because the diagnostic category of regulatory disorder is a relatively new one, there are few studies documenting the various clinical diagnoses associated with this problem.
Some persons are born with a difficult temperament and struggle with irritability since they were a baby. Hereditary mental illness, such as bipolar illness, anxiety, and depression become evident in early to middle childhood and have a major impact on personality formation, mood stability, attachment relationships, coping skills, and adaptation to change. When these problems are accompanied by sensory hypersensitivities which is often the case, the child often reacts in maladaptive ways to overstimulation from others and the environment, misinterpreting soothing sensory experiences as aversive, and associating anxiety with certain types of sensory stimulation (e.g., certain types of touch, movement, sights or sounds).
In other children, the problem may be secondary to exposure to high stress, trauma, or other distressing external events. If the child has been traumatized or subjected to overwhelming levels of stress, the stress hormone, cortisol, elevates and induces a state of high alert and arousal in the individual which is highly deregulating. Often children who have been traumatized develop a learned helplessness which can lead them to feel that they are a failure and unable to tackle what they perceive as unsolvable problems (Baumeister, Heatherton, & Tice, 1994; Mikulincer, 1989). Likewise, dissociated states of mind can occur when a person has been traumatized, providing the brain with an escape mechanism and a way to cope with the unspeakable.
Whether the regulatory problem is hard-wired biologically or related to traumatic events, the child struggles with a combination of symptoms including high irritability, poor self-calming, an intolerance for change, a hyper-alert state of arousal, as well as an inability to regulate the mind. Problems of self-regulation often cause the child to have poor self-control, impulsivity, low distress tolerance, inadequate coping skills, impaired judgment, ineffective problem solving, and negative self-esteem. It appears that the problem of poor self-regulation is related to a neural instability in the deep limbic regions of the brain (Siegel, 1999). Dysfunction in the limbic system can have a profound effect on the brain’s overall capacity to process information, focus attention, regulate mood and affect, and engage in interpersonal relationships.

2.1. Criteria for regulatory disorders in children:

The criteria for infants and children with regulatory disorders include the following:
high irritability with very poor self-calming capacities,
significant sleep and/or eating problems,
cognitive disorganization, motivational problems, ineffective problem solving abilities, and poor attention,
mood regulation problems that may result in bipolar disorder, depression, and/or anxiety,
sensory processing deficits usually with hypersensitivities to touch, movement, sights, or sounds,
coping deficits with poor distress tolerance.
Below follows a brief overview of symptoms of poor self-regulation in children. Each of these is discussed in detail in specific chapters of this book.

3. Clinical significance of regulatory problems in children

The clinical significance of poor regulation of arousal and state is demonstrated by the high incidence of children with sleep disturbances who have behavioral disturbances, attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity, and depression (Mattison, Handford, & Vela-Bueno, 1987). Infants with problems associated with regulating sensorimotor systems (i.e., hypersensitivity to stimulation) tend to develop emotional difficulties in the school-aged years (Fish & Dixon, 1978; Walker & Emory, 1983). Similar consistencies have been reported between negative temperamental characteristics assessed during infancy (e.g., distractiblity, difficult temperament) and poor behavioral control, dependency, and aggressive behaviors in the preschool years (Forsyth & Canny, 1991; Himmelfarb, Hock, & Wenar, 1985; Oberklaid, Sanson, Pedlow, & Prior, 1993; Rai, Malik, & Sharma, 1993; Sroufe, Fox, & Pancake, 1983), reactive depression in late adolescence (Chess, Thomas, & Hassibi, 1983), and later learning disabilities and psychopathology (Rutter, 1977).
In a 15 year longitudinal study, infants with difficult temperaments were more likely to have psychiatric symptoms in adolescence, although demanding children whose families received mental health interventions were less likely to develop these problems (Teerikangas, Aronen, Martin, & Huttunen, 1998). Children with difficult temperament in high conflict families are at greater risk for developing aggression in the preschool years than children with easy temperament from similar families (Tschann, Kaiser, Chesney, Alkon, & Boyce, 1996). In addition, children with psychiatric disorders were more likely to have temperamental difficulties and their parents showed a higher level of psychopathology than those without disorders which supports the relationship between parent and child as well as temperament on child psychopathology (Kashani, Ezpeleta, Dandoy, Doi, & Reid, 1991).
Children with regulatory disorders are very similar to those who experience a difficult temperament. Poor self-regulation and difficult temperament clearly overlap, however a child may have a regulatory disorder but not have a difficult temperament and vice versa. Our research suggests that many children with difficult temperament also have a regulatory disorder. It is also important to distinguish children who have sensory integration dysfunction from those with regulatory disorders. Although many children with regulatory disorders also have poor sensory processing and motor planning problems, not all children with sensory integrative dysfunction have a regulatory disorder. It is important for clinicians to examine the symptoms that underlie a regulatory disorder in making a differential diagnosis. The criteria for children with moderate to severe regulatory disorders are ones that experience at least three of the following symptoms: poor self-calming with high irritability, sleep problems, feeding problems, inattention, mood regulation problems, and sensory processing problems. These symptoms are described in more detail later in the chapter.

4. Outcomes of regulatory disordered infants

As can be seen by this review of the literature, children with early features of regulatory disorders are at high risk for developing long-term emotional and developmental problems. Since these studies focused on children with difficult temperament, we conducted a longitudinal study to investigate the long-term significance of fussy babies who were diagnosed as regulatory disordered at 8–11 months of age. These infants exhibited sleep disturbances, hyper-sensitivities to sensory stimulation, irritability and poor self-calming, and mood and state deregulation (DeGangi, Porges, Sickel, & Greenspan, 1993). When we looked at group differences, we found that children initially identified as regulatory disordered differed significantly from their normal peers in perceptual, language, and general cognitive skills at 4 years of age. Although the regulatory disordered sample did not differ from their normal counterparts in developmental parameters during infancy, at 4 years of age, five of the nine regulatory disordered infants had either motor or overall developmental delays. There was a high incidence of vestibular-based sensory integrative deficits (e.g., poor bilateral coordination and postural control), tactile defensiveness, motor planning problems, hyperactivity, and emotional/behavioral difficulties in the sample as well. These preliminary findings implied that regulatory disordered infants were at high risk for later perceptual, language, sensory integrative, and behavioral difficulties in the preschool years. Further follow-up studies on 39 infants with mild to moderate regulatory disorders showed that at age 3-years they differed from their normal peers in sensory integration, mood regulation, attention, motor control, sleep, and behavioral control (DeGangi, Sickel, Wiener, & Kaplan, 1996).
In another study examining diagnostic outcome, we compared the performance of infants ranging in age from 7 to 30 months who were normally developing (n = 38), and 32 infants with regulatory disorders (10 mild and 22 with moderate to severe regulatory disorders) (DeGangi, Breinbauer, Roosevelt, Porges, & Greenspan, 2000). Two child psychiatrists unfamiliar with the subjects’ diagnostic classification during infancy reviewed the 3 year data and videotapes of parent–child interactions. Diagnoses were made by them using the DSM-IV and Diagnostic Classification: 0–3. Children who were initially in the normal sample were highly likely to be normal at age 3 years (97.5%). One of the 38 subjects in this group (2.5%) was rated as having a regulatory disorder using the Diagnostic Classification: 0–3.
Six of the ten infants and toddlers with mild regulatory disorders were found to be normal at 3 years. The remaining 40% had regulatory disorders in addition to a DSM-IV diagnosis. These diagnoses included developmental coordination disorder (10%), expressive/receptive language disorder (20%), sleep disorder (20%), or a parent–child relational problem (10%) (e.g., score in clinical range on the Child Behavior Checklist and also exhibited significant emotional problems). In addition, half of the 40% with diagnoses were found to have sensory integrative problems. None of these diagnoses except regulatory disorder reached the level of significance in discriminating children in the mild RD group from the normative sample.
The group that was most at risk for later developmental problems were the infants and toddlers who had moderate to severe regulatory disorders. These were infants who had three or more symptoms (i.e., sleep problems, irritability, sensory hypersensitivities). All but one subject had a DSM-IV diagnosis (95.5%) and 86% had two or more diagnoses. The most predominant diagnoses included regulatory disorder (50%), developmental coordination disorder (40.9%), cognitive delay (40.9%), parent–child relational problems (40.9%), and expressive/receptive language disorder (36%). In addition, 59% were rated as having sensory integrative problems. We also found that children who were more apt to develop parent–child relational problems at 3 years had feeding problems during infancy.

5. Early symptoms and their relationship to later diagnostic outcomes

In this next section, the early symptoms of children with moderate regulatory disorders will be described as they relate to later diagnostic problems. The data, presented in this section, are based on our study of 155 normal and 77 infants who had regulatory disorders from 7 to 30 months. Parents completed a comprehensive checklist of symptoms related to regulatory functioning. Findings on the checklist were confirmed through an intake interview and clinical observations. The Infant-Toddler Symptom Checklist is a parent report measure for infants ranging in age from 7 to 30 months and focuses on the infant’s responses in the following domains: (1) self-regulation, (2) attention, (3) sleep, (4) feeding, (5) dressing, bathing, and touch, (6) movement, (7) listening, language and sound, (8) looking and sight, and (9) attachment/emotional functioning. A modified version of this checklist is presented at the end of this chapter.
In our studies of regulatory disordered infants, we found certain symptoms between 7 and 30 months of age that were likely to lead to later developmental and behavioral problems. However, we found that the symptoms tend to evolve and may have different meanings at different ages. In the first year of life, the symptoms that are likely to be meaningful included irritability, inconsolability, demandingness, poor self-calming, sleep problems. The infants also showed sensory hypersensitivities to touch and light, a high need for movement, fear of novelty, problems giving clear gestural and vocal signals, and severe separation anxiety. These symptoms are related to the capacity to develop basic homeostasis (e.g., self-calming, regulation of arousal states, and physiological regulation) and early sensory processing.
Many of these symptoms persisted in the second year of life; however, other symptoms emerged. Attentional problems were seen in some infants who were distractible and overstimulated by busy environments. Sensory problems were manifested by a dislike for restraint (e.g., car seats, being dressed), a dislike for new food textures, distress with loud sounds, and a fear of movement. In addition, interactive problems were demonstrated by a lack of reciprocal interactions, difficulties with limit setting, need for total control of the environment, and problems giving clear gestural signals emerged. Persistent problems with basic homeostasis occurred in conjunction with difficulties with gestural communication (e.g., signal reading and giving), affective expression, attentional capacities, reciprocal play, and negotiating autonomy and control. These symptoms may be the early warning signs of later attentional, emotional, and behavioral problems.
Although it would be expected that symptoms of poor self-regulation would be greatest in the first year of life, the data suggest that infants between 10 and 24 months experience the most symptoms when a regulatory disorder is present under 30 months of age. The mean percent of symptoms displayed in Table 1.1 demonstrates this point. It is important to note that the changing distributions of symptoms observed reflect the developmental challenges presented to the child over time. For example, as more cognitive demands are placed upon the child, more attentional difficulties begin to emerge in the second year of life. Likewise, feeding problems at 13–24 months become exacerbated when food textures are introduced.

Table 1.1

Prevalence of overall problems in regulatory disordered (RD) sample versus normal sample (N)

Domain Age range (in months)
7–9 10–12 13–18 19–24 25–30
RD(%) N(%) RD(%) N(%) RD(%) N(%) RD(%) N(%) RD(%) N(%)
Self-regulation 89 3 85 7 94 16 92 13 67 6
Sleep 37 3 54 7 35 3 15 3 20 3
Feeding 0 0 31 0 0 0 38 3 0 0
Attention 0 0 0 0 24 3 31 13 40 3
Movement 16 0 14 0 41 12 54 3 33 3
Listening 0 0 46 3 47 6 62 6 0 0
Visual 11 0 46 17 41 0 23 6 20 0
Tactile 52 0 69 7 82 12 85 10 60 23
Emotional 26 0 69 7 82 16 38 3 27 3
Mean Percent 25 0.6 46 5 50 7 49 7 30 5

Frequencies that reached the level of significant (p<0.05) are indicated in boldface.

The findings from this study support the notion that children with regulatory disorders have underlying deficits in self-regulation, attention and arousal, sensory processing, and emotion regulation. However, different symptoms occur at different ages based upon the developmental level of the child. Understanding how these symptoms change over time is important to developing a working definition of what constitutes a regulatory disorder. In the next section, a developmental profile was constructed for each category of behavior measured by the Infant-Toddler Symptom Checklist (DeGangi, Poisson, Sickel, & Wiener, 1995). Only the more prevalent behaviors are described.

6. Impact of early symptoms on later developmental outcome

A number of symptoms differentiated the performance of normal and regulatory disordered infants (DeGangi & Breinbauer, 1997). Although some normal infants display these symptoms at times in their development, it is the number and intensity of the symptoms that differentiates the typically developing child from one with regulatory disorders. For infants and toddlers with regulatory disorders, we found developmental differences across ages for different symptoms. These will be described next.

6.1. Self-regulation

The process of self-regulation involves the capacity to modulate mood, self-calm, delay gratification, and tolerate change or transitions in activity. These behaviors are often unavailable to infants and children with regulatory disorders. Once upset the infant requires extreme efforts to calm down. The caregiver may spend from 2 to 4 hours a day attempting to calm his or her infant or child. They often find that once upset, it is very difficult for them to calm down. Frequently the person does not engage in soothing activities that help them self-calm and they may depend on others to help them achieve a more calm place. Many children with regulatory disorders have severe temper outbursts, poor anger management, and become irritated at the simplest upset in their life. They may escalate quickly from a pleasant mood to intense anger with no warning whatsoever. In adolescents with regulatory disorders, the problem of irritability becomes compounded by problems tolerating change and demandingness of others, a strong reliance on others to resolve their distress, and significant problems taking in requests from others, to delay gratification, and to control their impulses. It is very important for the individual with poor self-calming to learn how to develop internal controls to be better able to tolerate changes, modulate their distress, and understand the impact their irritability has on their relationships with others.
The most pervasive trait of infants with regulatory disorders is that of fussiness. Up to 54% of the infants in the regulatory disordered sample had problems with irritability. Their caregivers described them as escalating quickly from a pleasant mood to an intense cry and to have difficulty with self-calming. Maternal perception of difficultness may be confirmed through the use of temperament scales (e.g., Bates’ Infant Characteristics Questionnaire, fussy-difficult subscale) (Bates, 1984). When the parents do not view their child as difficult despite clinical evidence of mood deregulation, further investigation is needed to determine if such problems as parental inexperience, denial, maternal depression, or other problems exist. In many cases, the fussiness and irritability are very disruptive to the family and result in a high degree of family stress.
In our study examining the symptomatology of infants and toddlers with regulatory disorders (DeGangi & Breinbauer, 1997), we found that a high percent of these infants had irritability, inconsolability, demandingness, and poor self-calming in the first year of life. Although it would be expected that symptoms of poor self-regulation would be greatest in the first year of life, we found that infants between 10 and 24 months experienced more symptoms when a regulatory disorder was present under 30 months of age. Problems with irritability, crying, and self-calming persisted through 24 months. When these behaviors diminished at 25–30 months, problems tolerating change, and demandingness then emerged. When the regulatory problems decrease, they usually reflect a developing capacity to resolve distress without help from others, to comply with requests, to delay gratification, and to anticipate social routines. The development of internal control and related cognitive abilities may help the child with regulatory disorders to be better able to tolerate changes and modulate distress. These abilities have been described by Kopp (1987,  1989) as important to the development of emotion regulation. Difficulties with the basic task of self-regulation seems to have a negative impact on the development of cognition, language, skilled movement, behavioral and emotional control, and sensorimotor modulation at 3 years.
Sleep problems: Persistent sleep disorders have been found to result in biochemical changes in stress hormones and biological rhythms, and states of arousal (Weissbluth, 1989). Fussy and irritable behaviors may occur during the day because the infant is overtired and unable to fall and stay asleep. Children with sleep deficits often exhibit a high state of arousal and are unable to inhibit their alert state to allow for sleep. Sometimes the child is not able to fall into a deep REM sleep and wakes frequently throughout the night. When a sleep disturbance is present, the infant has difficulty regulating sleep–wake cycles and has difficulty falling and staying asleep. High caffeine intake, lack of exercise, and eating sweets or spicy foods can increase arousal and interrupt sleep. Some children also suffer from sleep apnea, snoring, reflux or digestive problems, or allergies that prevent a refreshing night sleep.
Between 15 to 38% of the children with regulatory disorders under two years wake frequently in the night. Between 32 to 47% of 7–18 month olds need extensive help to fall asleep at night (e.g., over an hour of preparatory activities). Sleep problems were more prevalent among children with mild regulatory disordered infants. The problems typically affecting these infants included frequent waking in the night and difficulties falling asleep. Our research also showed that many children with sleep problems often have hypersensitivities to touch, a strong craving for movement, and high separation anxiety. In our study examining the symptomatology of regulatory disordered infants (DeGangi & Breinbauer, 1997), we found that sleep problems tended to improve with maturity with no significant differences between regulatory disordered infants and the normative group after 25 months of age. This may be why infants who showed a sleep disorder early in life were more likely to resolve in their problems if their regulatory disorder was mild and they did not experience other developmental challenges.
Our data suggest that different problems are associated with sleep disturbances at different ages which supports the notion that sleep problems are related to both biological and social regulation, and the ability to form a secure attachment to the caregiver (Anders, 1994). In young children, we found that sleep problems were often associated with a high need for vestibular stimulation (DeGangi & Breinbauer, 1997). The caregiver might bounce or rock her baby for a long period of time to help her fall asleep. As the child gets older, vigorous movement or exercise in the afternoon often supports a peak period of high arousal which enables the body to arc into a lower arousal state about 6–8 hours later, allowing the person to feel tired and wish for sleep. This is why physical exercise is so helpful to solving sleep problems in children. Separation anxiety and fears may compound the sleep disturbance. Many parents report that their infant is clingy during their waking hours and can only fall asleep in their arms rather than falling asleep on their own. Many adolescents do not speak about their own worries or fears at nighttime, but if the door is opened to discuss this, it is often found that the person is uncomfortable with their own aloneness or they experience overwhelming fears or worries at night that they can’t control.
Hypersensitivities to sounds in the environment is often a culprit with sleep problems. Many persons find that they need to screen environmental sounds by using white noise (i.e., oscillating fans, white noise audiotapes) to help themselves fall asleep.
Feeding: The eating problems exhibited by children with regulatory disorders usually include difficulty establishing a regular mealtime schedule, reflux, problems with appetite (over or undereating), and aversions to food textures. Some children cannot tolerate certain food textures and refuse to eat anything but a few preferred foods, usually consisting of firm, crunchy textures or pureed foods. This problem may relate to tactile hypersensitivities that cause the person to prefer certain food textures. Some infants spit out lumpy food textures or refuse to eat anything but a few preferred foods, usually consisting of firm, crunchy textures or pureed foods. This problem may relate to tactile hypersensitivities that cause the child to prefer certain food textures. Occasionally growth retardation or failure to thrive may be diagnosed secondary to the feeding disturbance. Craving certain foods is seen in up to 46% of 13–24 month olds with regulatory disorders. In addition, reflux is a problem sometimes experienced by children with regulatory disorders. Michael had always hated any foods with uneven textures (i.e., brownie with nuts, yogurt with berries, or tomato sauce with mushrooms). His extreme preference for evenly textured foods resulted in him eating only a few foods life-long. These included macaroni and cheese, plain chicken, fish sticks with catsup, and perhaps an apple or banana. Despite his limited eating repertoire, he was a healthy sized boy, but his eating habits created extreme problems for the family, especially in their mealtime choices, ability to travel, eating in restaurants, or participate in family gatherings.
Eating problems may be related to reflux, oral tactile sensitivities, rejecting certain food textures, or a strong craving for certain kinds of foods. Because eating originates as a relationship (e.g., being fed and nurtured by others), it is very common for a person with eating problems to have significant attachment and relational problems in their life. In our studies of infants with eating disorders, we found long-term emotional problems in children who initially had feeding disorders (DeGangi et al., 1996). Depression was apt to occur in the mothers and poor attachment between mother and child when an eating disorder was present. This is also the case in children who overeat to nurture themselves or the anorexic adolescent who starves herself of food and emotional sustenance from others.
Problems of over or undereating are characteristic of eating disorders in children. Because eating is often a soothing activity for some children, the regulatory problem becomes associated with a weight problem. The child may lack internal signals of hunger and satiety. Psychiatric medications for mood regulation and attention often impact appetite and desire for food. Body image becomes quickly distorted, especially in the anorexic who no matter how thin she is, she perceives herself as fat. Whether the person is over- or under-weight, emotional issues develop associated with body appearance.
Attention: Problems with attention have been underestimated in infants and young children because of the difficulties encountered in measuring attention in infancy. Our data suggests that between 13 and 30 months, there is a steady increase in the number of symptoms associated with attentional problems. These range from being overstimulated by busy environments, distractibility, and problems shifting or engaging attention. Parents often describe their baby with regulatory problems as being intense, wide-eyed, or “hyper.” Frequently the child will go from one toy to another, often not playing with any toy long enough to develop a toy preference.
Problems with inattention are very common to the regulatory disordered child. These difficulties range from being easily overstimulated by busy environments, hyperactivity or restlessness, impulsivity, poor self-control, distractibility, and problems shifting or engaging attention in purposeful activities. Frequently the child flits from one activity to another, often not staying long enough to finish the task at hand. The child is often highly distracted by auditory and visual stimulation in the environment. Most children with attentional problems also suffer from severe organizational or executive planning problems that impact their ability to start and finish projects and to organize and focus their ideas.
Attentional problems commonly observed in our sample included distractibility to sights and sounds, becoming overly excited by busy environments, and difficulties shifting attention to something new. We found that children with regulatory disorders experiencing these symptoms early in life were more apt to develop cognitive problems and motor delays at 3 years.
Sensory processing: Many infants with regulatory problems respond by crying, withdrawal, aggression, or other negative behaviors when confronted with normal everyday sensory stimulation involving touch (i.e., being held by parent), movement (i.e., rough housing with parent), or sights and sounds (i.e., busy environment such as supermarket). The child may become distressed by loud sounds, such as the door bell, a vacuum cleaner, or sirens. Some individuals are highly sensitive to light. In regard to touch, the person may dislike wearing certain kinds of clothing, resist being cuddled, touched, hate bathing or showering, or dislike being stroked on the body as in a massage or affectionate touch. Less commonly, the child may be undersensitive to touch and not notice painful experiences, such as receiving certain medical procedures or getting injured. Finally, the child may be fearful of body movement, or the child may be the opposite, craving movement. Usually the latter is accompanied by daredevil or risky behavior (i.e., jumping off high walls or riding scooters recklessly on precarious surfaces). Persons who back away from movement activities are usually clumsy, awkward, and have poor balance.
The common sensorimotor challenges experienced by infants and children with regulatory disorders are described as:
1. Over-reactivity to loud noises: Infants and young children with regulatory disorders often become distressed by loud sounds such as the door bell, a vacuum cleaner, or a siren. As the child grows older, the child may also become reactive to noisy environments like playgrounds, echoing halls, or busy restaurants.
2. Hypersensitivity to light and visual stimulation: It was not uncommon for infants with regulatory disorders to be highly sensitive to light. Many children with regulatory disorders were also overly excited when in busy environments, such as shopping malls. For children with pervasive developmental disorders (PDD), visual problems seemed to be a major aspect of their problem. For example, children with PDD often overlook important visual information in the environment but may over-focus on a particular visual features (i.e., selecting out all the red colored toys).
3. Tactile defensiveness or underreactivity to touch: Tactile hypersensitivities may be exhibited in a number of ways in the young child with regulatory problems (DeGangi & Breinbauer, 1997). The child may dislike wearing clothing, resist cuddling, hate having their face washed, or dislike being stroked on the body. These problems relate to the phenomenon of tactile defensiveness, an aversion to being touched by others and distress when touching textured objects (Fisher, Murray, & Bundy, 1991). A few children with regulatory disorders are undersensitive to touch and don’t notice pain as in painful experiences like receiving a shot or when falling down. Tactile defensiveness can have profound effects on the relational experience of a child who resists contact with their caregiver and as he grows older, withdraws from contact with peers. Caregivers and friends often experience the child’s physical withdrawal as rejecting which results in a “hands-off” relational experience. In contrast, the child who craves touch often bumps roughly into peers or his caregiver. Aggressive actions can develop as a way of making contact with others. As the child grows older into adolescence, sexual problems may develop. The tactually defensive child usually avoids intimate contact and may develop a pattern of social isolation. When there is the opposite problem where the adolescent craves touch, indiscriminate sexual contact can sometimes occur.
4. Gravitational insecurity or underreactivity to movement: Responses to movement stimulation can vary from fear of movement to craving of movement in regulatory disordered children with many children showing a combination of the two. Oftentimes the child would crave linear movement such as swinging, rocking, or bouncing and preferred upright body postures, but also showed fear when moved in movement planes that involved neck and trunk rotation or quick unexpected movement. In contrast, some children showed an underreactivity to movement (e.g., craving of movement activity, need to be in constant motion). Clumsiness and poor balance were also reported especially as the child develops more skilled motor patterns. Problems with the vestibular sense were related to later problems with self-regulation, motor and language delays, and social–emotional problems (DeGangi & Breinbauer, 1997). Hypersensitivities to movement or a craving for movement activities was apt to relate to social–emotional problems. For children who are fearful of movement, they can become clingy toward caregivers or peers, fearful of being alone or separating from caregivers, and resist trying new activities. In contrast the child who craves movement often seen in ADHD can relate to poor impulse control and difficulty understanding physical and emotional boundaries.
5. Motor planning problems: Difficulty sequencing and organizing purposeful movement is common to children with regulatory problems. The child is frequently very clumsy, has difficulty planning and sequencing skilled movements like skipping or moving through obstacle courses, and has instability in balance. As the child grows older, these problems usually morph into problems with executive functioning.
Attachment/Emotional functioning: Children with regulatory problems often suffer from problems with interpersonal relationships. They may have poor eye contact, somber affect, difficulties initiating and sustaining reciprocal interactions, and difficulty reading another person’s cues. Sometimes they show aggressive behavior, have difficulties responding to other person’s limits, and may have a need to dominate and “run the show.” Many of these children have a very high need to control others and the environment and are inflexible in tolerating change and new situations. Their inability to adapt to the demands placed on them by persons or situations is common. Some children have a fear of being alone or a fearfulness of new people and situations. It is not uncommon for caregivers and peers to report that it is very difficult to read and understand the facial and gestural cues in children with dysregulation. It seems that the nonverbal communication or gestural system is poorly developed. They often have difficulty organizing reciprocal interactions, interrupt others, and don’t wait for others to finish what they are saying. Their affect may appear flat or somber or, the opposite, show extreme anger and irritation. These emotional displays coincide with comorbid diagnoses that the child with dysregulation experiences—depression, anxiety, and mood disorders.
In a systematic study examining the play interactions of 94 children who were regulatory disordered and 154 controls ranging in age from 7 to 30 months, we found that infants with regulatory disorders showed more noncontingent responses, more aggression, less tactile exploration, and flat affect especially when engaged in play with textured toys (DeGangi, Sickel, Kaplan, & Wiener, 1997). These differences were less observable when the toys were symbolic (i.e., dolls, tableware, toy cars) or movement oriented (spinning disc, bolster). It appears that children with regulatory disorders are easily distressed by everyday sensory experiences which affects their capacity to organize social interchanges.

7. Types of regulatory problems

Three main types of regulatory disorders have been described in the Diagnostic Classification: 0–3. Through systematic reporting of cases from various centers, the Zero to Three task force developed a database which served as the foundation for identifying recurring patterns in children with regulatory disorders. The three subtypes that they proposed are empirical and have not been validated. The attributes underlying each type are based upon different behavioral and sensorimotor profiles. A brief description of each of these types of regulatory problems are presented. Several brief case vignettes are provided to illustrate the symptoms of each type of regulatory disorder.
1. The hypersensitive type: The child with hypersensitivities is overwhelmed by sensory stimulation and reacts in two ways—by becoming fearful and cautious in overwhelming situations or by becoming negative and defiant. These behaviors are adaptations for the child and provide a means of fending off overwhelming stimuli.
a. The fearful and cautious type has the following symptoms: inflexibility or rigidity in adapting to change, fearful of new people and situations, and severe separation anxiety. This type of child becomes easily upset and irritable and has difficulty self-calming. Sometimes the child develops obsessive or ritualistic behavior as an adaptation to stay calm and organized. The sensory profile that may accompany these characteristics is an overreactivity to touch, movement, loud noises, and bright lights. Motor planning problems may also be evident.
b. The negative and defiant type also has difficulty tolerating change, is highly irritable, and is usually very controlling of the environment or “runs the show.” These children may be overreactive to touch and sound with motor planning problems.
2. The under-reactive type: Children who are underreactive are undersensitive to sensory stimulation and have a tendency to become withdrawn, difficult to engage, or self-absorbed. Children who are withdrawn and difficult to engage may appear depressed and avoid eye contact. Infants with this pattern may engage in repetitive sensory activities. They may tend to be under-reactive to movement, yet have either an over or underreactivity to touch. When the child is self-absorbed, he or she may tend to tune into his or her own thoughts or play rather than being responsive to others in reciprocal interactions or conversations. They tend to play by themselves when others do not actively join into their play and may seek isolated play. Since withdrawn or self-absorbed behavior is frequently a hallmark of children with autistic spectrum disorder or those who have pervasive developmental disorder, it is possible that children with more global developmental delays are more likely to show this pattern. Likewise, children with severe depression are apt to show this type of regulatory disorder.
3. The motorically disorganized type: This profile is one in which the child is extremely disorganized and unable to focus attention. The child may have a high activity level and may be aggressive as well. This type of child may show a pattern of craving sensory input. The child may be unable to wait for food, toy, or activity, and may be destructive. As the child grows older, they typically cannot plan and organize future actions, struggle to self-limit or control themselves, are highly impulsive, and they frequently lack insight into their own behavior. Often their relationships with others are highly disorganized, impulsive, lack foresight and planning. Frequently individuals with the disorganized type have poor social relationships because they cannot sustain interactions in meaningful ways. Often they are diagnosed with attention deficit disorder and executive functioning problems.

8. Case illustrations of the different subtypes of regulatory disorders

8.1. Case example of hypersensitive, fearful, and cautious type

Gabriella was a sweet 5 year old with an amazing vocabulary who talked like a much older child. She had taught herself to read and was already writing sentences on the computer. She frequently had her head in a book, but she also loved picking out tunes by ear on the piano. Her parents were not concerned about her until she went to kindergarten when it became apparent how socially withdrawn she was. She was a very kind child, but she was never seen approaching other children and she usually sat on the outskirts of any group activity. Gabriella was small for her age and passed for a much younger child. As a baby she seemed rather floppy. She sat with a slouch and when she ran, her arms flailed in the air.
At school Gabriella needed considerable help to draw her out. She often seemed in a “trance” and didn’t seemed tuned into what the group was doing. She tended to engage in solitary play with books, puzzles, or baby dolls, often humming to herself and oblivious to others. If an adult spoke to her, she usually would not answer back. During circle time the teacher needed to repeat her name several times and touching her on the arm to get her attention. When interacting with other children, Gabriella tended to use scripts and rituals from TV shows or videos, reciting them precisely from memory. Gabriella’s pretend play consisted of holding and snuggling a doll if it had a “boo-boo” or putting the baby doll to sleep. She also liked to act out Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz, wanting other children or adults to be the witch or other characters.
Gabriella was very precise about how things were done. For example, she insisted that her parents walk in front of her about 10 feet ahead up the pathway to their front door. If they looked back at her, she wanted to begin from the curb all over again. She was still drinking from a bottle and wanted it offered to her only by her mother with a certain tone of voice while holding the bottle in midline. Gabriella had other rituals that involved her mother, such as being carried like an airplane under mom’s arm into her bedroom at night, being bathed with the shower head covered by a towel, and wishing her stuffed animals to be lined up a certain way on the bed before she would go to sleep. Whenever walking down the upstairs hall, she insisted upon touching certain flowers on the wallpaper in a set way.
Gabriella had troubles falling asleep, taking almost an hour to settle, and awakening multiple times in the night. Her mother would lie down with her to help her fall asleep during which time Gabriella would twirl her mother’s hair over and over again before she would finally drift off to sleep. Gabriella was a restless sleeper, thrashing about in bed and usually awakening several times in the night. Her parents had tried a behavioral sleep program (e.g., the Ferber method), but Gabriella was very anxious about separating from her mother. Mrs. C. found that the only way she would tolerate the bedtime situation was to sleep with Gabriella, then she wouldn’t have to go into her bedroom several times a night to calm her.
When watching Gabriella play, it was notable how cautious she was in exploring toys. Her cautiousness seemed related to motor planning problems in organizing new play activities, but also being overwhelmed by novelty. It was very difficult for Gabriella to play interactively with others. Usually she turned her back toward others, even when playing with her mother. The toys she liked best were ones that offered sensory feedback (e.g., plastic tubes that could be pulled to make a funny noise, large foam blocks that she could stack). It seemed that toys that offered her movement and body contact provided her with more sensory support for social engagement.
Gabriella had a complicated sensory profile. She avoided swings, but loved slides. She hated hair washing and preferred wearing as little clothing as possible. Getting her dressed in the morning was a major production since she hated wearing pants, leggings, or socks and shoes. Her sensory shutdown in the classroom also suggested auditory processing problems. In addition, motor planning and coordination problems coupled with low muscle tone affected her ability to dress herself, to ride a tricycle, and catch a ball with two hands.
Gabriella is an example of a child who is hypersensitive to sensory stimulation with motor planning problems. Her fearful and cautious behavior impacted her ability to explore the environment and interact with others. She needed help in learning to be better at self-calming when distressed. Her ritualistic and obsessive-like behaviors were also part of her disorder.
Gabriella was very responsive to therapy that focused on self-calming, tolerating new social and play experiences, sleep and separation anxiety, reciprocal play interactions, and flexibility in trying new things. Within the first year of our work together, Gabriella was able to sleep by herself, approach other children in play, and let go of some of her ritualistic behavior. She needed ongoing occupational and speech therapy to address her sensory defensiveness and motor planning needs. We also provided individual psychotherapy that included helping Gabriella learn to be more interactive, less anxious, and more flexible.

8.2. Case example of hypersensitive, negative, and defiant type

Myles was referred for therapy at 3 years of age because of his extreme aggressive behavior. He had been kicked out of numerous preschool settings because of his hitting and biting teachers and other children. His parents reported that Myles was prone to extreme temper tantrums, acting as if “the devil possessed him.” His behavior was so difficult to manage that his parents often found that they got locked in a bad interaction cycle of screaming at him or trying to hold him down. Myles appeared to be a very bright child, but seemed to have problems with expressive language. It seemed that he had difficulty understanding directions from others and needed adults to speak slowly and in short utterances in order for him to understand. When Myles wanted something, he would scream, gesture wildly, then hit his parents to get attention. Although Myles could speak in short sentences, he didn’t use language to express his needs.
As a baby, Myles was extremely irritable and couldn’t self-calm. He craved movement stimulation and the only things that seemed to calm him was swinging in an infant swing, riding in the stroller, or car for long periods of time, or rough housing with Dad. Mrs. N. reported that Myles was happiest when she took him to a baby swim class or Gymboree to play on the slides and equipment. He did not engage in vocal play or try to make his wants understood through pointing or sounds. When he wanted something, he would resort to tantrums. Myles also had troubles settling for sleep, usually taking more than an hour to get him to fall asleep.
When taken places, Myles was easily overstimulated. He was known to run up and down the aisles of supermarkets or the drug store, pulling things off shelves and creating spills. Several times the store managers would ask Mrs. N. to leave with her child. After any type of outing, the family would return to the house and Myles would be overwhelmingly active, running up and down the stairs and yelling, throwing toys, or hitting his parents and older brother. Myles needed to be constantly occupied or structured, otherwise he would become destructive, breaking toys or tearing papers into shreds. He was constantly climbing onto furniture and getting into things that he shouldn’t have. Despite child proofing the house, his parents found that they were constantly exhausted watching Myles, wondering what disaster might befall them next. He would be found playing with a can of bug spray or holding a kitchen knife in his hand while running across the room.
The only play activities that seemed to organize Myles were watching videos, playing with Legos and puzzles, or running outside and climbing on playground equipment. When engaged in movement activities, Myles would be happy, but he would quickly become overly excited, usually resulting in him shuddering throughout his body or biting his own hand. In addition to Myles’ language problems and a high tendency to becoming overstimulated, he had tactile hypersensitivities. It was impossible to wash his face or brush his teeth. Diapering him was a nightmare as a baby and as he grew older, dressing him was a huge struggle with him screaming the whole time. Myles was very sensitive to sounds and would scream if mother tried to use any kitchen appliances, if his older brother played his trumpet or would laugh or make noise while playing, or when there were everyday noises such as the doorbell ringing or the vacuum running. Myles was also a very picky eater, eating only Chicken McNuggets, crunchy cereal, and macaroni and cheese.
Mr. and Mrs. N. were at the end of their rope. They claimed that they couldn’t set any limits on Myles because he would hit or bite them as soon as they said “No.” Myles would scream and cry most of the day unless occupied with videos, outdoor play, or Legos. Mrs. N. was especially exhausted and Mr. N. dreaded coming home from work because of Myles’ behavior. Mrs. N. felt that she was neglecting their older son. She found that she was constantly telling the older son to be quiet so that Myles would not be set off. No matter what they did, Myles was always going after them to hit or bite or he was off destroying something in the house. Because they were often screaming at Myles, Mr. and Mrs. N. worried that neighbors would call child protective services, accusing them of abusing their son.
Myles is an example of a child who experienced sensory hypersensitivities, communication problems, and severe regulatory problems that caused him to disorganize and become impulsive, destructive, negative, and defiant. Interventions needed to address the underlying causes of his problem and to help him to become better able to tolerate a range of sensory experiences while interacting with objects and people. He also received speech and language therapy to help him with his expressive language.
As Myles grew older, his language problems resolved for the most part, but he continued to have problems in high school whenever he had to write papers or express his ideas verbally in class. He continually loved high contact movement activities and especially thrilled, even as a young adult in doing daredevil movement courses with zip lines, trampolines, and climbing walls. He preferred wearing very tight bicycle shorts and neoprene shirts that clung to his body. His sensory thrill-seeking behavior resulted in dangerous behaviors in high school and college including substance abuse, gambling, dealing drugs, and racing sports cars. Several times Myles had car accidents and got in trouble with the police for drug abuse.
Myles’ aggressive behavior did not abate, even with psychological help, and by the time he was in high school, he continued to get into trouble for both physical and verbal aggressive behavior. He was diagnosed with ADHD and bipolar disorder with manic-depressive features.
Although I was only involved in Myles’ care during the preschool years, then briefly when he was a young adult, Myles spoke poignantly about how it was very helpful to him to speak with someone who knew him as a young child and understood how his sensory profile and problems with self-regulation impacted his behaviors life-long. This insight propelled him to seek psychological treatment which included proper medication management to stabilize his mood.

8.3. Case example of under-reactive, withdrawn, and self-absorbed type

Jared was a 7.5 year old who was gifted intellectually with exceptional skills in reading and math. He did well in school but was having difficulties attending to questions during reading activities. He could not finish his homework without considerable help, and at home and school, he was very distracted, particularly at mealtimes. During classroom lessons, Jared frequently daydreamed. Although attentional problems were the main focus of the parents’ concerns, they reported that Jared often tuned out when spoken to, seemed overwhelmed in busy settings like a shopping mall, and would be content to play alone for long periods of time since he was very young.
Jared’s favorite activities were drawing pictures of things like the solar system, and playing computer games. He liked to play by himself and did not seem to have a desire to play with other children, yet he would speak warmly of other children and they seemed to like him. He liked to play tag with other children and enjoyed wrestling with his older brother. When Jared did not know what to do in social situations, he would usually resort to silly behavior. At times Jared would engage in long monologues that he recited from memory from movies that he had seen, passages in books that he had read, or he would recall a past event in excessive detail. His parents found that they often had to go up to his face and speak loudly, repeating several times their request, before they could get his attention.
Jared was very sensitive to touch and hated to be hugged. When he approached other people to show affection, he would nuzzle against them or he would pinch them with the back of his fingers. He hated bathing and washing his hair, often complained that other people were bumping into him, and needed the tags cut out of his clothing. Occasionally he engaged in repetitive licking of his lips or pulling at his shirt in a peculiar manner. Sometimes he would exclaim “Ouch” out of the blue, saying “I hurt myself”, seeming uncomfortable with the contact of clothing against his body. Jared liked movement activities and liked to rock, swing, jump about, or skip, but often flapping his arms and smiling while he did these things.
One of Jared’s favorite things to do was draw elaborate pictures of a castle with a boy standing outside the castle that related to a video game that he loved. He tended to self-absorb in whatever activity he was involved in, overlooking other people or interesting toys and activities in the room around him.
Jared is an example of a child with regulatory problems who is under-reactive, withdrawn, and self-absorbed. Despite his tactile hypersensitivities, he needed proprioceptive and movement stimulation to increase his arousal for social engagement. He also had significant problems in exploring the environment effectively, particularly in using his vision. His rigid interactive style, fixation on particular thoughts, and problems reading social cues make Jared similar in many ways to children who suffer from autism-spectrum disorder. Although it is likely that he had Asperger’s syndrome, he certainly showed many features of children with the under-reactive type of regulatory disorder.

8.4. Case example of hypersensitive, motorically disorganized type

Juan was a 3-year-old child with significant motor delays and regulatory problems. His mother was concerned about his difficulties with sleep, self-calming, and auditory hypersensitivities. She also reported that he had delays in motor planning and control, and communication. He had been receiving early intervention services including occupational and physical therapy and speech and language therapy since he was 8 months old to help him develop better muscle tone, posture and balance, gross and fine motor skills, and communication skills.
Juan loved banging objects together, looking at books and interesting toys, playing in water and listening to music. He liked movement activities such as swinging and enjoyed having his arms and legs massaged. He enjoyed singing and action games like ring around the rosey or peek-a-boo, brightening and smiling as he played these games with his parents. He had just begun to walk but tended to crawl as his main mode of ambulation.
Juan was often very fussy and irritable which often related to being overstimulated by sensory stimulation. He would become very upset if his parents were talking together. If he wasn’t engaged in a sensory activity or a singing game with his parents, he would become purposeless in his explorations. If he became frustrated, he would shake his head side-to-side, bang his legs vigorously, and flap his hands. If anybody touched his hands, he would grind his teeth. A novel interaction, especially with a stranger would cause Juan to blink his eyes, seemingly to modulate the amount of visual stimulation that he was receiving. Juan could often be found burrowing his body into corners of the room, head butting people, or tackling his brother as a means of getting deep proprioceptive input to his body.
Juan’s repertoire of soothing devices was limited to looking at videotapes, listening to music, rough house play, or being massaged. He responded better when the lights were dimmed or his parents spoke in a soft voice. Once upset, Juan would often tantrum and needed his parents to divert him to something right away or the crying would last up to one hour.
Eating and sleep were also challenging areas for Juan. He did not mouth objects, tended to drool, and ate a pureed diet. He was not yet self-feeding and seemed to have difficulty tolerating objects or textures in his mouth. Since feeding and sucking are major ways to self-soothe, helping Juan to be less hypersensitive to touch in the mouth was considered important. Juan needed help in falling and staying asleep and usually slept with his parents, relying upon contact from their bodies and stroking his mother’s face to console him for sleep. Helping Juan to sleep next to large body pillows under a weighted blanket helped to organize him at bedtime. Since he liked to stroke his mother’s face, a soft doll with hair was introduced at bedtime.
It was important for Juan to learn ways of soothing himself that did not depend upon his parents consoling him. The environment was set up with things such as a pup tent filled with pillows, vibrating toys, weighted blankets, and music boxes that he could seek out on his own. Encouraging him to explore his environment and find things that were organizing for him was important. When his parents engaged in floor time with him, they selected materials that provided organizing sensory input, then encouraged him to self-initiate exploration of the environment while they remained engaged in interacting with him. During this floor time, objects that were most successful were ones that provided opportunities for both tactile-proprioceptive (i.e., bin of dried beans with cups and utensils inside), and movement experiences (i.e, inner tube to bounce on). Because of Juan’s sound sensitivities, it was useful to encourage play with toys that made noises that he could activate in play (i.e., push cart that made music when pushed; musical ball toy).
Juan needed to learn how to broaden his range of play experiences and to tolerate novel sensory experiences. This would give him the opportunity to broaden his play repertoire and interest in the world and make caretaking of him easier to do. To begin working on this process, his parents put out a variety of toys that Juan enjoyed, then waited for him to indicate which one he wished to play with. At first Juan selected only toys that he was most comfortable playing with, but the mere exposure to new things helped. It was also useful to combine a new toy with a medium that he enjoyed such as water, thus increasing his tolerance for novelty. Juan also responded well to having new movement opportunities that he could do by himself (i.e., rocking himself in small chair, moving on a water bed or large foam “cloud”).
As Juan learned ways to self-calm, his parents tried talking to him from across the room so that he could learn to be soothed by their voices from a distance rather than relying solely on proximal modes of comforting (e.g., holding). Routines and structure were stressed so that Juan could learn to anticipate events. However, a goal was to help Juan learn to tolerate new things. New experiences were introduced by varying slightly familiar situations or activities or by pairing something familiar with a new stimulus.
Juan showed a clear attachment and warmth toward his parents in how he related to them (i.e., wishing to be held, reaching toward them, occasional glances in their direction). He was affectionate toward them, loving to be held and he showed pleasure in the activities that they did with him. He also understood that different persons had different meanings (e.g., play rough house games with dad, other games with brother or mother). Juan had strengths in forming relationships with familiar persons, but was overly dependent on his parents to soothe him. Developing a special relationship with a few important people in his life (e.g., favorite family friend, therapist, babysitter) and learning how to sooth himself with a range of persons would help him. He also needed to learn how to seek out interactions with persons rather than relying on others to come to him and organize his play. For instance, his parents were prompted by me to sit near him on the floor. When I began to play ring around the rosey with Juan’s brother, he came over to play with us. Juan needed to see others doing interesting things, then join in with them.
Juan had difficulty initiating intentional interactions through actions or vocalizations except for a few activities (i.e., banging objects, pushing a cause-effect toy). Motor planning issues seemed to compound his difficulties in organizing gestural and vocal signals. When sufficiently motivated, he could go up to his parents and indicate that he wanted to play by tugging on their hands. For the most part, Juan’s communication skills were limited, thus requiring his parents to put forth considerable effort to be attuned to what he needed. Juan had the elements of intentional two-way communication but had problems initiating new actions on his own without structure from others. He needed to develop a better capacity to engage in spontaneous reciprocal interchanges in new and unfamiliar activities (e.g., taking turns back and forth in a range of activities). He also needed to develop skills in communicating to others about his needs and wishes. It appeared that his limitations in movement and language were a great source of frustration to him and some of his crying may have related to this. He needed opportunities to express himself and to learn new activities that he could find rewarding. To begin this process, activities stressed learning how to take turns and to self-initiate what he wished to do. In this floor time approach, his parents learned when to structure the activity and when to wait for Juan to show a response. In order for Juan to progress in his skills and to decrease the amount of distress he experienced, he needed to develop a sense of mastery and accomplishment that he could do things on his own.
Juan was a complex 3-year-old child who had needs in the areas of self-regulation, sensory processing, motor skills, and communication. His problems fall within the realm of regulatory disorder, hypersensitive, and motorically disorganized type. He was very responsive to the therapy that focused on him learning how to self-initiate interest in activities, to master new skills, to console himself, and resolve frustration without depending solely on his parents’ comforting. Developing relationships with others, learning how to communicate in close and far space (i.e., across room) with his parents, and learning to self-feed and sleep by himself were also addressed.

9. Identifying problems of self-regulation in infants and children

To assist in clinical assessment of infants and children with problems of self-regulation, two checklists are provided. The first is a self-report measure, the Infant/Child Symptom Checklist (DeGangi et al., 1995) which is administered to the caregiver. The second tool is the Functional Emotional Observation Scale (Greenspan, DeGangi, & Wieder, 2001). Below follows a description of each of these scales and how they are scored and interpreted.

9.1. The infant/child symptom checklist

The Infant/Child Symptom Checklist is a parent-report measure that contains questions related to self-regulation, attention, sleep, eating, sensory processing including touch, movement, listening and sound sensitivities, and visual sensitivities, as well as attachment and emotional functioning. The checklist is structured in such a way that it is possible to determine if problems exist for the person in each of these areas. It is self-administered by the caregiver, but can also be used in a clinical interview format. The areas tapped by the checklist include the following:
1. Self-regulation: irritability, anger responses, poor self-calming, inability to delay gratification, difficulties with transitions and change, and dependence on others to help them stay organized and calm.
2. Attention: distractibility, difficulty organizing and finishing tasks, restlessness, and impulsivity.
3. Sleep: difficulty staying and falling asleep.
4. Eating: appetite problems, overeating, binging, and eating mindlessly.
5. Touch system: tactile hypersensitivities related to clothing, bathing, comfort at handling textures, and tolerating physical contact with others.
6. Movement system: high activity level and craving of movement, motor planning and balance problems, and insecurity in movement in space.
7. Listening and sound sensitivities: hypersensitivities to sound, auditory distractibility, auditory processing problems, and difficulties listening during conversations.
8. Visual sensitivities: sensitivities to light and visual distractibility.
9. Attachment/emotional functioning: mood dysregulation, flat affect, avoiding eye contact, relationships with others, self-discipline, fears, self-abusive behaviors, and needs for control.
All of the questions can be answered with “most times,” “sometimes,” “past,” or “never.” Zero points are assigned to never, one point for sometimes and past behavior, and two points for most times. In order to make clinical judgments regarding the child’s functioning on each domain, items are totaled and the cutoff scores for each category are used to determine if scores fall in the at-risk or typical range. A score falling at or above the cutoff score is considered at risk.
False-normal and false-delayed error rates of the Infant-Toddler Symptom Checklist were very low, ranging from 0% to 14% depending upon the age group. In addition, we found that 78% of infants initially identified as having problems on the Infant-Toddler Symptom Checklist were diagnosed as having developmental or behavioral problems at 3 years, thus showing good predictive validity.

9.2. Functional emotional observation scale

The Functional Emotional Observation Scale (Greenspan et al., 2001) is an instrument that may be used by the clinician to evaluate the child’s emotional functioning in two categories and six domains of behavior. The child should be observed for at least 2–3 sessions before rating the responses on the scale. It is suggested to observe the parent and child as they play with three different types of toys: symbolic toys, textured toys, and movement equipment. Symbolic play materials consist of age-appropriate toys, such as a toy telephone, dolls, bottle, toy cars, plastic tableware, and a toy store. Textured toys may include textured balls, furry puppets, sand with small Lego figures, and a heavy musical toy with balls on spokes. Movement equipment may include an inflatable bolster, swings, scooter board, or a rotating spinning board. Some items may be gleaned through interview with the caregiver when appropriate. The areas assessed by the scale include the following:
1. Homeostasis
a. Reading and interpreting one’s own body signals: Basic physiological readiness: Items in this category measure arousal states, calmness, affect, eating, and activity level.
b. Processing sensory stimulation: Taking interest in the world: Items measure the capacity to self-soothe, to interact calmly with others, to remain focused in activity or conversation without distractibility, and to tolerate sensory stimulation in everyday life.
c. Internalizing self-soothing from others: Items assess the child’s capacity to take in gestures of soothing when distressed, to remain emotionally interested and connected to others, and eye contact.
d. Signaling others about one’s own needs for self-soothing: Items measure the ability to recognize one’s own symptoms of distress and to alert others of these needs.
2. Purposeful communication: Planning of thoughts and actions
a. Planning and organizing thoughts and behaviors: Items measure the ability to initiate and maintain interactions with others through conversation and gestures, self-control, purposeful activity in life, and time management.
b. Differentiating one’s own thoughts and actions from others: Theory of mind and problem solving: Items measure self-assertion, limit setting on self and others, problem solving, understanding consequences for one’s own behaviors, expressing feelings without becoming emotionally flooded, empathy, flexibility, and conflict resolution.
Scoring is on a two-point scale. Zero points are assigned to not at all or very briefly observed; one point for present some of the time or observed in the past; and two points for consistently present, observed many times. Some scores are converted (i.e., 0 becomes a 2 and 2 becomes a 0) in order to weight the score in the proper direction for interpretation. Cutoff scores are presented to interpret the child’s behavior in each category which can be used to guide the therapy process. Extensive validity and reliability studies were conducted on the FEAS on typically developing children ranging in age from 7 months to 4 years as well as clinical populations including infants and children with regulatory disorders, pervasive developmental disorders, and children from multiproblem high-risk families. These studies are reported in the test manual (Greenspan et al., 2001).

10. Summary

Children with regulatory disorders are those who seem to have underlying deficits in self-regulation, attention and arousal, sensory processing, and emotion regulation. Regulatory disordered infants may be normal in their developmental skills in the first two years of life, however, their symptoms seem to evolve over time and eventually involve other process domains that build upon problems with basic homeostasis and sensory regulation. Evaluation of symptoms and how they affect functional performance is important.
The importance of identifying infants and children with regulatory difficulties is crucial in light of our research. Infants initially diagnosed with moderate to severe regulatory disorders are at high risk for later perceptual, language, sensory integrative, and emotional/behavioral difficulties in the preschool years. Through early detection of regulatory disorders, it may be possible to prevent more serious, long-term perceptual, language, sensory integrative, attachment, and behavioral difficulties. Continued research is needed with larger samples to further explore the clinical significance of regulatory disorders.

References

Als H. Patterns of infant behavior: analogs of later organizational difficulties?. In: Duffy FH, Geschwind N, eds. Dyslexia: a neuroscientific approach to clinical evaluation. Boston: Little, Brown, & Co; 1982:6792.

Als H, Lester BM, Tronick EZ, Brazelton TB. Towards a research instrument for the Assessment of Preterm Infants’ Behavior (APIB). In: Fitzgerald H, Lester BM, Yogman MW, eds. Theory and research in behavioral pediatrics. New York: Plenum Press; 1982:35132.

Anders TF. Infant sleep, nighttime relationships, and attachment. Psychiatry. 1994;57:1121.

Bates JE. Infant characteristics questionnaire, revised. Bloomington: Indiana University; 1984.

Baumeister RF. Escaping the self: alcoholism, spirituality, masochism, and other flights from the burden of selfhood. New York: Basic Books; 1991.

Baumeister RF. Meanings of life. New York: Guildford; 1991.

Baumeister RF, Heatherton TF, Tice DM. Losing control: how and why people fail at self-regulation. New York: Academic Press; 1994.

Brazelton T, Koslowski B, Main M. The origins of reciprocity: the early mother-infant interaction. In: Lewis M, Rosenblum L, eds. The effect of the infant on its caregiver. New York: Wiley & Sons; 1974.

Chess S, Thomas A, Hassibi M. Depression in childhood and adolescence: a prospective study of six cases. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 1983;171:411420.

DeGangi GA, Breinbauer C. The symptomatology of infants and toddlers with regulatory disorders. Journal of Developmental and Learning Disorders. 1997;1(1):183215.

DeGangi GA, Greenspan SI. The development of sensory functioning in infants. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics. 1988;8(3):2133.

DeGangi GA, Porges SW, Sickel R, Greenspan SI. Four-year follow-up of a sample of regulatory disordered infants. Infant Mental Health Journal. 1993;14(4):330343.

DeGangi GA, Poisson S, Sickel RZ, Wiener AS. The infant-toddler symptom checklist. Tucson, AZ: Therapy Skill Builders; 1995.

DeGangi GA, Sickel RZ, Wiener AS, Kaplan EP. Fussy babies: to treat or not to treat?. British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1996;59(10):457464.

DeGangi GA, Sickel RZ, Kaplan EP, Wiener AS. Mother-infant interactions in infants with disorders of self-regulation. Physical & Occupaional Therapy in Pediatrics. 1997;17(1):1744.

DeGangi GA, Breinbauer C, Roosevelt J, Porges S, Greenspan S. Prediction of childhood problems at 36 months in children experiencing disorders of regulation during infancy. Infant Mental Health Journal. 2000;21(3):156175.

Field T. Gaze behavior of normal and high-risk infants and during early interactions. Infant Mental Health Journal. 1981;20:308317.

Fish B, Dixon WJ. Vestibular hyporeactivity in infants at risk for schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry. 1978;35:963971.

Fisher AG, Murray CA, Bundy AC. Sensory integration: Theory and practice. Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Company; 1991: 137-170.

Fonagy P, Gergely G, Jurist E, Target M. Affect regulation, mentalization, and the development of the self. New York: Other press; 2004.

Forsyth BW, Canny PF. Perceptions of vulnerability 3-1/2 years after problems of feeding and crying behavior in early infancy. Pediatrics. 1991;88:757763.

Greenspan SI. The development of the ego: implications for personality theory, psychopathology, and the psychotherapeutic process. Madison, CT: International Universities Press; 1989.

Greenspan SI. Infancy and early childhood: the practice of clinical assessment and intervention with emotional and developmental challenges. Madison, CT: International Universities Press; 1992.

Greenspan SI, DeGangi G, Wieder S. The functional emotional assessment scale (FEAS) for infancy & early childhood. Bethesda, MD: Interdisciplinary Council on Developmental and Learning Disorders; 2001.

Himmelfarb S, Hock E, Wenar C. Infant temperament and noncompliant behavior at four years: a longitudinal study. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs. 1985;111:721.

Kashani JH, Ezpeleta L, Dandoy AC, Doi S, Reid JC. Psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents: the contribution of the child’s temperament and the parents’ psychopathology and attitudes. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 1991;36(8):569573.

Kopp CB. The growth of self-regulation: parents and children. In: Eisenberg N, ed. Perspectives in developmental psychology. New York: Wiley; 1987:3455.

Kopp CB. Regulation of distress and negative emotions: a developmental view. Developmental Psychology. 1989;25:343354.

Kopp CB. Emotion-focused coping in young children: self and self-regulatory processes. New Directions in Child and Adolescent Development. 2009;124:3346: Summer.

Kopp CB. Development in the early years: socialization, motor development, and consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology. 2011;62:165187.

Kopp CB, Krakow JB, Vaughn B. Patterns of self-control in young handicapped children. Minnesota Symposium on Child Development. 1983;16:93128.

Lachmann FM, Beebe B. The contribution of self- and mutual regulation to therapeutic action: a case illustration. In: Moskowitz M, Monk C, Kaye C, Ellman S, eds. The Neurobiological and Developmental Basis for Psychotherapeutic Intervention. Northvale, N.J.: Jason Aronson, Inc; 1997:91121.

Lyons-Ruth K, Zeanah CH. The family context of infant mental health: I. Affective development in the primary caregiving relationship. In: Zeanah CH, ed. Handbook of Infant Mental Health. New York: Guilford Press; 1993:1437.

Mattison RE, Handford HA, Vela-Bueno A. Sleep disorders in children. Psychiatric Medicine. 1987;4:149164.

Mikulincer M. Cognitive interference and learned helplessness: the effects of off-task cognitions on performance following unsolvable problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1989;57:129135.

Oberklaid F, Sanson A, Pedlow R, Prior M. Predicting preschool behavior problems from temperament and other variables in infancy. Pediatrics. 1993;91(1):113120.

Porges S. Social engagement and attachment: a phylogenetic perspective. Annual New York Academy of Science. 2003;1008:3147: Dec.

Porges S. Reciprocal influences between body and brain in the perception and expression of affect: a polyvagal perspective. In: Fosha D, Siegel DJ, Solomon MF, eds. The healing power of emotion: affective neuroscience, development, clinical practice. New York: Norton; 2009.

Rai S, Malik SC, Sharma D. Behavior problems among preschool children. Indian Pediatrics. 1993;30(4):475478.

Rizzolatti G, Arbib MA. Language within our grasp. Trends in Neuroscience. 1998;21:188194.

Rizzolatti G, Fabbri-Destro M. The mirror system and its role in social cognition. Current Opinions in Neurobiology. 2008;18(2):179184.

Rizzolatti G, Fabbri-Destro M, Cattaneo L. Mirror neurons and their clinical relevance. National Clinical Practice of Neurology. 2009;5(1):2434.

Rothbart MK, Derryberry D, Development of individual differences in temperament. Lamb ME, Brown AL, eds. Advances in developmental psychology, Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1981:1981.

Rutter M. Individual differences. In: Rutter M, Hersov L, eds. Child psychiatry: modern approaches. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1977:321.

Siegel DJ. The developing mind: how relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are. New York: Guilford Press; 1999.

Solms M, Turnbull O. The brain and the inner world. New York: Other Press; 2002.

Sroufe LA. Socioemotional development. In: Osofsky J, ed. Handbook of infant development. New York: Wiley & Sons; 1979.

Sroufe LA. Attachment and development: a prospective, longitudinal study from birth to adulthood. Attachment in Human Development. 2005;7(4):349367: Dec.

Sroufe LA, Fox NE, Pancake VR. Attachment and dependency in developmental perspective. Child Development. 1983;54:16151627.

Sroufe LA, Coffino B, Carlson EA. Conceptualizing the role of early experience: lessons from the minnesota longitudinal study. Developmental review. 2010;30(1):3651.

Teerikangas OM, Aronen ET, Martin RP, Huttunen MO. Effects of infant temperament and early intervention on the psychiatric symptoms of adolescents. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 1998;37(10):10701076.

Thelen E, Self-organization in developmental processes: can systems approaches work?. Gunnar M, ed. Systems in development: the Minnesota symposium in child psychology, Vol. 22. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum; 1989:77117.

Tronick EZ. Emotions and emotional communication in infants. American Psychologist. 1989;44(2):112119.

Tronick E, Beeghly M. Infants’ meaning-making and the development of mental health problems. American Psychology. 2011;66(2):107119.

Tschann JM, Kaiser P, Chesney MA, Aldon A, Boyce WT. Resilience and vulnerability among preschool children: family functioning, temperament, and behavior problems. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 1996;35(2):184192.

Walker E, Emory E. Infants at risk for psychopathology: offspring of schizophrenic parents. Child Development. 1983;54:12691285.

Weissbluth M. Sleep-loss stress and temperamental difficultness: psychobiological processes and practical considerations. In: Kohnstamm GA, Bates JE, Rothbart MK, eds. Temperament in Childhood. New York: Wiley & Sons; 1969.

Zero to Three. Diagnostic classification of mental health and developmental disorders of infancy and early childhood. Arlington, VA: National Center for Clinical Infant Programs; 1994.

Zimmermann BJ. Attaining self-regulation: a social cognitive perspective. In: Boekaerts M, Pintrich PR, Zeidner M, eds. Handbook of self-regulation. New York: Academic Press; 2005:1341: Chapter 2.

image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset
18.219.95.244