ArticleDevelopmental science2026
Developing Context-Appropriate Emotions: Longitudinal Changes in Emotion Reactivity and Emotion Regulation From 6 to 12 Months.
Article in Developmental science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Theories of emotion development propose that negative affect decreases over time as attention control and emotion regulation improve. Yet, research on infancy suggests that the first year of life can be characterised by a different developmental pattern: increased negative affect as infants age. Implementing an emotion-eliciting task, we measured infants' observed emotion reactivity and regulation, and physiological arousal (heart rate) during the challenge (toy retraction) and recovery (toy play) conditions at age 6 months (n = 82, 43 boys) and age 12 months (n = 68, 36 boys) continuously on a second-by-second basis. We first measured mean intensity of reactivity, regulation, and arousal by calculating within-person averages. Then, we measured three temporal dynamics: estimates of variability by calculating variance, lability by calculating root mean square of successive differences, and persistence of changes by calculating autocorrelation. Intensity, variability, and lability in negative reactivity increased from 6 to 12 months with no change in persistence, indicating a larger and quicker negative reaction to toy retraction with age. Regulatory strategy use increased from 6 to 12 months during challenge, whereas during recovery, it reduced and became more stable. Heart rate decreased from challenge to recovery at 12 months but not at 6 months. We then examined how the temporal associations between reactivity, regulation and arousal change over time. Cross-correlation analyses revealed stronger temporal associations between reactivity, regulation, and heart rate at 12 months, suggesting increased coherence between behavioural and physiological responses with age. We discuss these developmental changes in emotion dynamics and behaviour-physiology associations in the context of functionalist perspectives on emotion. SUMMARY: This study employs momentary recordings of emotional expressions, regulatory behaviours, and physiological arousal, focusing on two key aspects: within-task context and temporal dynamics. As they grow, infants show stronger negative reactions and greater regulatory efforts during stress but calmer reactions and reduced use of regulation once stressor ends. Temporal associations between emotional behaviours and physiology (heart rate) increased from 6 to 12 months, suggesting stronger emotional coherence with age in infancy. Together, these patterns may reflect improved emotional flexibility, with older infants showing more context-appropriate emotion responses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.