Parental emotion regulation is crucial for parent–child interactions and child psychological outcomes. However, limited research has examined whether the Regulation of Emotions in Parenting Scale (REPS) functions equivalently across ethnoracial groups, raising concerns about measurement bias. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the REPS, including measurement invariance, reliability, and differential validity, across an ethnically diverse sample of n = 1,408 parents. Using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, we tested configural, metric, and scalar invariance. While configural and metric invariance were supported, full scalar invariance was not. A partial scalar invariance model, allowing three item intercepts to vary, showed acceptable fit. McDonald’s omega coefficients indicated strong internal reliability across all subscales and racial groups. Multiple regression analyses tested differential validity and found no significant interaction effects, supporting consistent predictive validity. These findings confirm the REPS as a reliable tool for diverse populations. Future research should explore REPS applicability across sociocultural contexts.
AguinisH.GottfredsonR. K. (2010). Best-practice recommendations for estimating interaction effects using moderated multiple regression. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(6), 776–786. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.686
2.
ByrneB. M.ShavelsonR. J.MuthénB. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456
3.
CalzadaE. J.HuangK. Y.AnicamaC.FernandezY.BrotmanL. M. (2012). Test of a cultural framework of parenting with Latino families of young children. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 18(3), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028694
4.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.
5.
DixT. (1991). The affective organization of parenting: Adaptive and maladaptive processes. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.3
6.
DunbarA. S.LeerkesE. M.CoardS. I.SuppleA. J.CalkinsS. (2015). An integrative conceptual model of parental racial/ethnic and emotion socialization and links to children’s social-emotional development among African American families. Child Development Perspectives, 9(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12104
GrossJ. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.1.224
9.
GratzK. L.RoemerL. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(1), 41–54.
10.
HalgunsethL. C.IspaJ. M.RudyD. (2006). Parental control in Latino families: An integrated review of the literature. Child Development, 77(5), 1282–1297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00934.x
11.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
12.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
13.
MatsumotoD.YooS. H.FontaineJ. (2008). Mapping expressive differences around the world: The relationship between emotional display rules and individualism versus collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022107311854
14.
McDonaldR. P. (1999). Test theory. A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15.
McDonaldR. P. (2013). Test theory: A unified treatment. Psychology Press.
MorrisA. S.CrissM. M.SilkJ. S.HoultbergB. J. (2017). The impact of parenting on emotion regulation during childhood and adolescence. Child Development Perspectives, 11(4), 233–238.
19.
NelsonJ. A.LeerkesE. M.PerryN. B.O’BrienM.CalkinsS. D.MarcovitchS. (2013). European-American and African-American mothers’ emotion socialization practices relate differently to their children’s academic and social-emotional competence. Social Development, 22(3), 485–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2012.00673.x
20.
NyeC. D.DrasgowF. (2011). Effect size indices for analyses of measurement equivalence: Understanding the practical importance of differences between groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 966–980.
21.
PutnickD. L.BornsteinM. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90.
22.
RevelleW.ZinbargR. E. (2009). Coefficients alpha, beta, omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma. Psychometrika, 74(1), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9102-z
23.
RhemtullaM.Brosseau-LiardP. É.SavaleiV. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373.
24.
RodriguezJ.ShafferA. (2021). Development and validation of the Regulation of Emotions in Parenting Scale (REPS). Journal of Family Psychology, 35(3), 330–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000782
25.
RodriguezV. J.La BarrieD. L.ZegaracM. C.ShafferA. (2023). A systematic review of parenting scales measurement invariance/equivalence by race and ethnicity: Recommendations for inclusive parenting research. Assessment, 30(1), 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911211038630
26.
RodriguezV. J.ShafferA. E.ParentJ. (2025). Revision of the Multidimensional Assessment of Parenting Scale (MAPS) in an ethnoracially diverse national sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 39(1), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001271
27.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
28.
RutherfordH. J. V.WallaceN. S.LaurentH. K.MayesL. C. (2015). Emotion regulation in parenthood. Developmental Review, 36, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2014.12.008
29.
VandenbergR. J.LanceC. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.
30.
Van de SchootR.LugtigP.HoxJ. (2015). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12(5), 541–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2015.1046111
31.
WeissN. H.ThomasE. D.SchickM. R.ReyesM. E.ContractorA. A. (2022). Racial and ethnic differences in emotion regulation: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 78(5), 785–808.
32.
ZeileisA. (2004). Econometric computing with HC and HAC covariance matrix estimators. Journal of Statistical Software, 11(10), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v011.i10
33.
ZeileisA.HothornT. (2002). Diagnostic checking in regression relationships. R News, 2(3), 7–10.
34.
ZeileisA.KöllS.GrahamN. (2020). Various versatile variances: An object-oriented implementation of clustered covariances in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 95(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v095.i01
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
