Family Functioning and Preschool Children’s Social–Emotional Competence: Sequential Mediation by Parent–Child and Sibling Relationships

Family Functioning and Preschool Children’s Social–Emotional Competence: Sequential Mediation by Parent–Child and Sibling Relationships | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Family Functioning and Preschool Children’s Social–Emotional Competence: Sequential Mediation by Parent–Child and Sibling Relationships Linhui Wang, Ching-Chih Tsai, Taisheng Fu This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9310983/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background This study examined whether family functioning is associated with preschool children’s social–emotional competence and whether parent–child and sibling relationship quality help explain this association, including a potential cascade across family subsystems. Methods Parents of 837 children aged 3 to 5 years from five kindergartens in southern China completed questionnaires assessing family functioning, parent–child relationship quality, sibling relationship quality, and children’s social–emotional competence. Regression and mediation analyses were conducted to test direct and indirect pathways, including a sequential pathway from parent–child relationship quality to sibling relationship quality. Results Stronger family functioning was associated with higher levels of children’s social–emotional competence. Parent–child relationship quality and sibling relationship quality were each positively associated with children’s social–emotional competence and each accounted for an indirect pathway linking family functioning to children’s outcomes. In addition, a sequential pathway was supported in which better family functioning was linked to a more positive parent–child relationship, which was in turn linked to a more positive sibling relationship and, ultimately, higher social–emotional competence. Conclusions Findings suggest that preschool children’s social–emotional development is related not only to the overall family climate but also to interconnected relationships within the family. Family-based efforts that strengthen communication and problem solving while supporting warm, responsive parent–child interactions and constructive sibling relationships may help promote social–emotional competence during the preschool years. family functioning parent–child relationship sibling relationship social–emotional competence preschool children Figures Figure 1 1. Introduction Social–emotional competence refers to the ability to understand and manage emotions, form positive relationships, and make responsible decisions in social contexts [ 1 ]. Alongside cognitive skills, social–emotional competence is a strong predictor of educational attainment, well-being, and long-term life outcomes [ 2 , 3 ]. Preschool is a particularly sensitive period for socio-emotional and behavioral development; thus, fostering social–emotional competence early can yield lasting benefits for later academic and social adjustment [ 4 ]. Prior research on preschool children’s social–emotional competence points to influences in three domains: individual, school, and family. Individual studies link temperament, age, and cognitive development to socio-emotional outcomes, although results are sometimes mixed [ 5 – 9 ]. School-based work emphasizes teachers, peers, and curricula in supporting socio-emotional learning [ 10 – 12 ]. However, the family remains the most foundational context for early socialization, providing children’s earliest and most enduring experiences of emotion understanding, interpersonal skills, and behavioral norms [ 13 ]. Family functioning captures the overall quality of family interactions, including communication, role clarity, problem solving, and emotional support [ 14 ]. Cohesive, adaptable families are associated with better social competence and adjustment, whereas dysfunction is linked to elevated behavioral and emotional risks [ 15 – 18 ]. Family functioning may influence children’s social–emotional competence through relational subsystems within the family. Warm, responsive parent–child interactions support emotion regulation and internalization of social norms [ 19 – 21 ], while sibling relationships provide frequent opportunities to practice cooperation, empathy, and perspective-taking [ 22 – 24 ]. These subsystems are also dynamically linked through spillover and modeling processes, such that emotions and behaviors in one relationship shape others [ 25 , 26 ]. Therefore, an integrative approach that considers both parent–child (vertical) and sibling (horizontal) ties is needed to clarify how family functioning relates to preschool children’s social–emotional competence. Accordingly, although prior research has linked family functioning to children’s socio-emotional outcomes and has examined parent–child or sibling relationships as correlates, fewer studies have integrated these two relational subsystems within a single family-systems pathway to test how the overall family climate cascades through both vertical (parent–child) and horizontal (sibling) relationships to shape preschool children’s social–emotional competence. To address this gap, the present study proposes and tests an integrative sequential mediation model in which family functioning influences social–emotional competence directly and indirectly via parent–child relationship quality and sibling relationship quality, including a hypothesized cascade from parent–child processes to sibling dynamics. By modeling interconnected family subsystems simultaneously, this study extends existing work that has often examined these links in isolation and provides a more integrated account of potential family-process pathways relevant to early social–emotional development. Grounded in family systems, attachment, and social learning perspectives, the following section details the theoretical framework and evidence supporting the proposed model (see Fig. 1). Figure 1 Sequential mediation model of family functioning and preschool children’s social–emotional competence Note Boxes represent measured variables, and arrows represent the hypothesized paths with standardized coefficients (β). The model is consistent with significant direct and indirect associations, including a sequential pathway linking family functioning, the parent–child relationship, the sibling relationship, and children’s social–emotional competence. 2. Theoretical Framework and Literature Review 2.1. Family Functioning and Social–Emotional Competence Family functioning represents the quality of interaction, communication, and role organization within the family system [ 14 ]. A well-functioning family provides warmth, emotional support, and clear expectations that foster children’s adjustment and self-regulation [ 15 , 16 ]. When families maintain effective communication and mutual trust, children learn to identify, express, and manage emotions appropriately, thereby strengthening their social–emotional competence. In contrast, dysfunctional family environments—marked by conflict, rigidity, or poor cohesion—can hinder children’s emotional security and elevate the risk of internalizing or externalizing problems [ 17 ]. According to ecological systems theory [ 27 ], family functioning constitutes the immediate microsystem that shapes child development. Attachment theory [ 19 ] likewise underscores the family’s role in providing a secure base for exploration and emotional growth. Thus, family functioning serves as both a contextual and dynamic foundation for children’s social–emotional competence. 2.2. Parent–Child Relationship as a Mediating Mechanism Within the family system, the parent–child relationship forms the core dyadic bond through which children internalize emotional experiences and interpersonal scripts. High-quality relationships—characterized by sensitivity, warmth, and responsiveness—promote empathy, cooperation, and emotional regulation [ 17 ]. Drawing on social learning theory [ 28 ], children observe and model parental behaviors; consequently, supportive parental communication and problem-solving styles are likely to be reproduced in their own interactions. Attachment theory further posits that secure parent–child bonds offer emotional safety, enabling children to manage stress and engage positively with peers. Conversely, inconsistent or harsh parenting disrupts emotional attunement and may impair the development of prosocial behaviors. Beyond its direct influence, the parent–child relationship affects other subsystems within the family. Parents’ communication patterns, conflict-resolution strategies, and emotional expressions often spill over into sibling dynamics, shaping the broader family climate [ 25 ]. 2.3. Sibling Relationship as a Complementary and Mediating Context Sibling relationships constitute a horizontal dimension of family interaction that provides unique opportunities for practicing cooperation, negotiation, and perspective-taking [ 22 , 23 ]. Supportive sibling bonds are associated with higher empathy, emotion regulation, and social competence, whereas persistent conflict predicts poorer adjustment [ 24 ]. Unlike vertical parent–child relations, sibling exchanges occur among equals, fostering reciprocal learning and emotion sharing that consolidate socio-emotional skills first acquired through parental modeling. However, the quality of sibling relationships depends heavily on the overall family atmosphere and parental guidance [ 29 ]. In well-functioning families characterized by cohesion and constructive communication, siblings are more likely to engage in cooperative exchanges that further strengthen children’s social–emotional competence. 2.4. Integrative Discussion of Constructs Taken together, these strands of evidence support a family-systems perspective in which family functioning, parent–child relationships, and sibling relationships are interdependent subsystems jointly shaping children’s socio-emotional development. Family functioning establishes the emotional climate that influences both vertical (parent–child) and horizontal (sibling) subsystems. Secure and nurturing parent–child relationships transmit emotional and behavioral models that guide sibling interactions, consistent with the spillover hypothesis [ 25 ] and social learning theory [ 28 ]. In turn, positive sibling interactions provide everyday contexts for rehearsing empathy, cooperation, and conflict resolution, thereby consolidating children’s social–emotional competence. This sequential process illustrates how the effects of family functioning cascade through the family system, influencing multiple relational layers and ultimately shaping socio-emotional adjustment. The integrative framework adopted here (see Fig. 1) therefore conceptualizes a unified developmental pathway linking family functioning, the parent–child relationship, the sibling relationship, and children’s social–emotional competence. 2.5. Summary and Hypotheses Guided by family systems theory [ 30 ], the present study proposes that: Family functioning exerts both direct and indirect effects on preschool children’s social–emotional competence. The parent–child relationship mediates this association by transmitting emotional security and behavioral models. The sibling relationship further mediates the link by providing opportunities to practice and reinforce socio-emotional skills. Parent–child and sibling relationships operate sequentially, reflecting the dynamic interdependence of family subsystems. This integrative model advances prior research by clarifying how and why family subsystems jointly contribute to preschool children’s social–emotional development, offering theoretical and practical insights for interventions that strengthen family functioning and promote children’s well-being. 3. Method 3.1. Participants Participants were 837 preschool children aged 3–5 years (M = 4.0, SD = 0.8; 53.1% boys, 46.9% girls) and their parents, recruited from five kindergartens in southern China. To maximize diversity, the sample included public and private institutions across urban and rural areas, and demonstration versus non-demonstration schools: one public rural provincial-level demonstration kindergarten, one public rural non-demonstration kindergarten, one public urban demonstration kindergarten, one public urban non-demonstration kindergarten, and one private urban non-demonstration kindergarten. Children were evenly distributed across lower, middle, and upper classes. Race or ethnicity was not assessed because more than 99% of the local population is Han Chinese, with minority groups very small and dispersed (see Table 1 ). Parental education, family structure, and household income are provided in Appendix A. Table 1 Demographic characteristics of participants (N = 837) Variable Category n % Child gender Male 444 53.05 Female 393 46.95 Kindergarten grade Lower 281 33.57 Middle 284 33.93 Upper 272 32.50 Note. Race or ethnicity was not assessed because the study region is overwhelmingly Han Chinese and minority populations are relatively small and geographically dispersed. The sample was drawn from five types of kindergartens to ensure institutional diversity. Because detailed counts by kindergarten type were not retained in the final dataset, frequencies and percentages for kindergarten type are not reported. 3.2. Measures Family Functioning Family functioning was assessed using the Family Assessment Device [ 14 ], revised for Chinese samples by Li et al. [ 31 ]. The instrument consists of 30 items across five dimensions: emotional communication (8 items), positive communication (5 items), egoism (6 items), problem solving (6 items), and family rules (5 items). Items were rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“not at all true”) to 4 (“completely true”). Scores for the dimensions of emotional communication, egoism, and family rules were reverse scored, and then summed with positive communication and problem solving. Higher total scores indicated better family functioning. In the present study, the scale demonstrated strong reliability, with an overall Cronbach’s α of .952. The Cronbach’s α coefficients for the five dimensions were .905, .880, .891, .894, and .840. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated an acceptable model fit ( χ² / df = 2.597, RMSEA = 0.044, GFI = 0.920, CFI = 0.957, NFI = 0.932), supporting the scale’s structural validity. Parent–Child Relationship The Child–Parent Relationship Scale [ 32 ] was used to evaluate the parent–child relationship. The scale contains 15 items rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = “not at all true,” 5 = “completely true”), covering two dimensions: intimacy (7 items) and conflict (8 items). The conflict dimension was reverse scored and then summed with the intimacy dimension, with higher scores reflecting higher-quality parent–child relationships. In this study, the scale demonstrated high reliability, with a Cronbach’s α of .914. The Cronbach’s α coefficients for the two dimensions were .878 and .891. CFA results showed an acceptable model fit ( χ² / df = 4.419, RMSEA = 0.064, GFI = 0.936, CFI = 0.949, NFI = 0.936), indicating good structural validity. Sibling Relationship Sibling relationship quality was measured using the Early Childhood Sibling Relationship Quality Questionnaire (Parent Version) [ 33 ]. The instrument includes 23 items rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = “never,” 5 = “always”), and covers three dimensions: sibling warmth, sibling conflict, and sibling jealousy. The conflict and jealousy dimensions were reverse scored and combined with the warmth dimension, with higher total scores representing better sibling relationships. In this study, the scale demonstrated high internal consistency, with an overall Cronbach’s α of .925. The Cronbach’s α coefficients for the three dimensions were .907, .860, and .880. CFA indicated an acceptable model fit ( χ² / df = 4.789, RMSEA = 0.067, GFI = 0.922, CFI = 0.942, NFI = 0.928), supporting its structural validity. Social – Emotional Competence Although a formal Chinese version of the Social-Emotional Assessment/Evaluation Measure (SEAM™), 36–66 months has been published, the present study used the original English version [ 34 ], which was translated into Chinese by the research team to better align with the study context. The instrument comprehensively assesses core components of social–emotional competence and has been validated in multiple countries, including the United States, Denmark, and Turkey. It consists of 41 items across 10 dimensions, such as interpersonal interaction, emotional expression, emotional regulation, and empathy. Each item is rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“not at all true”) to 4 (“very true”), with higher scores indicating more advanced social–emotional competence. The translated version employed in this study exhibited excellent internal consistency, with an overall Cronbach’s α of .965. Reliability coefficients for the ten dimensions were .868, .893, .854, .775, .903, .846, .868, .894, .895, and .907. CFA further supported the structural validity of the instrument, indicating an acceptable model fit ( χ² / df = 4.789, RMSEA = 0.067, GFI = 0.922, CFI = 0.942, NFI = 0.928). 3.3. Procedure and Data Analysis After receiving approval from the participating kindergartens, questionnaires were distributed to parents or legal guardians of eligible children. Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and written informed consent was obtained prior to data collection. Completed questionnaires were reviewed for completeness and eligibility before analysis. Descriptive statistics, reliability analyses, correlations, and mediation analyses were conducted in SPSS 29.0, including PROCESS Model 6 with 5,000 bootstrap resamples. AMOS 26.0 was used for CFA and as a supplementary robustness check of the mediation model. 4. Results 4.1. Common Method Bias Test Harman’s single-factor test was performed to assess common method bias [ 35 ]. The first factor explained 24.81% of the variance, which was below the critical threshold of 40% [ 36 , 37 ]. These results suggest that common method bias was not a serious issue in this study. 4.2. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis Descriptive and correlational analyses were performed on family functioning, parent–child relationships, sibling relationships, and children’s social–emotional competence (see Table 2 ). Table 2 Descriptive statistics and correlations for all variables (n = 837) Variable M SD 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. Fam. Func. 3.086 0.538 — 2. P–C Rel. 3.931 0.637 .389*** — 3. Sibling Rel. 3.483 0.627 .429*** .481*** — 4. SEC 3.279 0.442 .468*** .510*** .474*** — Note. Fam. Func. = family functioning; P–C Rel. = parent–child relationship; SEC = Social–emotional competence. *** p < .001. Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics and intercorrelations among the study variables (N = 837). All variables were significantly and positively correlated ( p < .001). Higher levels of family functioning were associated with better parent–child and sibling relationships as well as greater social–emotional competence. Both parent–child and sibling relationships were positively related to social–emotional competence, and parent–child relationships were also positively associated with sibling relationships. 4.3. Mediation Effect Test Mediation analyses were conducted using Model 6 of the PROCESS macro in SPSS [ 38 ]. Prior to testing, all variables were standardized, and a bootstrap procedure with 5,000 resamples was applied to generate 95% confidence intervals for assessing the significance of mediation effects. In addition, hierarchical regression analyses were performed to further examine the predictive contributions of family functioning, parent–child relationships, and sibling relationships to children’s social–emotional competence (see Table 3 ). Table 3 Regression analyses of family functioning, parent–child relationship, sibling relationship, and young children’s social–emotional competence Regression Equation Overall Fit Index Regression Coefficient Significance Outcome variable Predictor Variable R R 2 F β t P–C Rel. Fam. Func. 0.406 0.165 14.820 0.435 10.900*** Sibling Rel. Fam. Func. 0.561 0.315 31.576 0.349 9.189*** P–C Rel. 0.373 12.008*** Social–emotional competence Fam. Func. 0.623 0.389 40.251 0.213 8.023*** P–C Rel. 0.210 9.359*** Sibling Rel. 0.153 6.577*** Note. Fam. Func. = family functioning; P–C Rel. = parent–child relationship. *** p < .001. Table 3 presents the regression results for these models. These analyses examined the predictive roles of family functioning, parent–child relationships, and sibling relationships in children’s social–emotional competence. Family functioning significantly predicted both parent–child relationship quality ( β = .435, p < .001; R² = .165, F = 14.820) and sibling relationships ( β = .349, p < .001; R² = .315, F = 31.576). Parent–child relationships also significantly predicted sibling relationships ( β = .373, p < .001). In the final model, children’s social–emotional competence was significantly predicted by family functioning ( β = .213, p < .001), parent–child relationships ( β = .210, p < .001), and sibling relationships ( β = .153, p < .001). Collectively, these three predictors explained 38.9% of the variance in social–emotional competence ( R² = .389, F = 40.251, p < .001). The results of the mediation analysis (see Table 4 ) show that family functioning significantly predicted children’s social–emotional competence both directly and indirectly. The direct effect was significant, accounting for 55.76% of the total effect. In addition, the overall indirect effect was significant, explaining 44.24% of the total effect. Table 4 Bootstrap mediation analysis of the associations among family functioning, parent–child relationship, sibling relationship, and children’s social–emotional competence Effect Type Effect Estimate Boot SE 95% Boot CI Proportion of Total Effect Total Effect 0.382 0.026 [0.331, 0.434] 100% Direct Effect 0.213 0.027 [0.161, 0.265] 55.76% Indirect Effects 0.169 0.018 [0.136, 0.205] 44.24% 1. Via P–C Rel. 0.091 0.014 [0.065, 0.121] 23.82% 2. Via Sibling Rel. 0.053 0.013 [0.030, 0.080] 13.87% 3. Via P–C → Sibling Rel. 0.025 0.006 [0.014, 0.037] 6.54% Note. Boot SE = Bootstrap Standard Error. Boot CI = Bias-Corrected Bootstrap Confidence Interval (based on 5,000 resamples). Confidence intervals that do not include zero are statistically significant at p < .05. Minor discrepancies between the sum of sub-indirect effects and the total indirect effect are due to rounding. Fam. Func. = family functioning; P–C Rel. = parent–child relationship; SEC = Social–emotional competence. Among the specific indirect pathways, the parent–child relationship emerged as the strongest mediator, accounting for 23.82% of the total effect, followed by the sibling relationship, which accounted for 13.87%. A smaller yet significant sequential mediation pathway was also identified through the parent–child relationship leading to the sibling relationship, which explained 6.54% of the total effect. The direct effect of family functioning on children’s social–emotional competence was significant, with a 95% confidence interval of [0.161, 0.265], which did not include zero. This indicates the presence of a significant direct effect, showing that family functioning significantly predicted children’s social–emotional competence, with an effect size of 0.213, accounting for 55.76% of the total effect. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported. For the indirect effect of family functioning on children’s social–emotional competence through the parent–child relationship, the 95% confidence interval was [0.065, 0.121], excluding zero, indicating a significant mediation effect. The parent–child relationship significantly mediated the link between family functioning and children’s social–emotional competence, with an effect size of 0.091, accounting for 23.82% of the total effect. Accordingly, Hypothesis 2 was supported. For the indirect effect of family functioning on children’s social–emotional competence through the sibling relationship, the 95% confidence interval was [0.030, 0.080], which also excluded zero. This result indicates a significant mediation effect of the sibling relationship, with an effect size of 0.053, accounting for 13.87% of the total effect. Thus, Hypothesis 3 was supported. Finally, for the sequential mediation pathway from family functioning to children’s social–emotional competence through the parent–child relationship and the sibling relationship, the 95% confidence interval was [0.014, 0.037], excluding zero. This suggests that the parent–child and sibling relationships jointly exerted a significant sequential mediation effect between family functioning and children’s social–emotional competence, with an effect size of 0.025, accounting for 6.54% of the total effect. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 was supported. Detailed results are presented in Table 4 and Fig. 1. To examine the robustness of the mediation findings, an additional structural equation modeling analysis was conducted using AMOS. The overall pattern of results was consistent with the PROCESS analysis, showing significant direct and indirect associations from family functioning to children’s social–emotional competence through the parent–child relationship, the sibling relationship, and their sequential pathway. Because these findings converged with the primary mediation results, the PROCESS results are presented as the main evidence, while the AMOS analysis is treated as a supplementary robustness check. 5. Discussion This study examined how family functioning is associated with preschool children’s social–emotional competence, with particular attention to whether parent–child and sibling relationship quality help account for this association. The findings supported both direct and indirect pathways, highlighting that multiple family subsystems are interrelated and may jointly contribute to early social–emotional development. 5.1. Family Functioning Directly Predicts Preschool Children’s Social–Emotional Competence Consistent with Hypothesis 1, this study found that family functioning directly and positively predicted preschool children’s social–emotional competence. This finding aligns with prior research highlighting family functioning as a crucial environmental factor in children’s socio-emotional development [ 14 – 16 , 39 , 40 ]. Effective family environments provide emotional support, open communication, and clear role expectations that foster children’s emotional regulation and interpersonal skills [ 41 , 42 ]. The quality of mother–child interactions has also been shown to enhance emotional intelligence, strengthening social–emotional competence [ 43 ]. These findings are consistent with attachment theory [ 19 ] and ecological systems theory [ 27 ], both of which underscore the central role of the family in development. In contrast, dysfunctional family environments heighten risks for behavioral and emotional difficulties [ 17 ]. 5.2. Mediating Role of the Parent–Child Relationship Supporting Hypothesis 2, the parent–child relationship mediated the association between family functioning and preschool children’s social–emotional competence. This finding is consistent with the spillover hypothesis, which suggests that emotions and behaviors within one family subsystem, such as marital or overall functioning, extend to others, including parent–child interactions [ 25 ]. Families characterized by open communication and warmth foster secure and trusting parent–child bonds [ 19 ]. Within these bonds, children internalize parents’ emotional expressions and communication styles, acquiring skills in empathy, regulation, and social interaction [ 17 ]. Social learning theory highlights how children model parents’ interpersonal behaviors [ 28 ], while attachment theory emphasizes parents as secure bases offering emotional support that scaffolds social-emotional development [ 17 ]. Together, these perspectives underscore the parent–child relationship as a key mechanism linking family functioning to children’s social–emotional competence. 5.3. Mediating Role of the Sibling Relationship Consistent with Hypothesis 3, sibling relationships mediated the association between family functioning and preschool children’s social–emotional competence. This finding aligns with evidence that sibling interactions provide important contexts for developing empathy, cooperation, and conflict resolution skills [ 22 ]. In well-functioning families characterized by clear rules and constructive communication, siblings are more likely to form supportive and harmonious relationships [ 24 ]. During the preschool years, children acquire perspective-taking and emotional understanding abilities [ 23 ], which are often practiced and consolidated through sibling interactions such as sharing, negotiation, and joint play [ 22 ]. Importantly, sibling dynamics carry a dual potential: warm and cooperative relationships can serve as protective factors that foster social–emotional competence, whereas persistent conflict may act as a risk factor, undermining children’s socio-emotional development. 5.4. Sequential Mediating Role of Parent–Child and Sibling Relationships Finally, consistent with Hypothesis 4, parent–child and sibling relationships jointly exerted a sequential mediating effect between family functioning and preschool children’s social–emotional competence. High-quality parent–child relationships provide children with emotional security and behavioral models that foster more positive sibling interactions. This finding is in line with attachment theory and social learning theory, both of which emphasize that parental interactions shape children’s expectations and behaviors across different relational contexts [ 19 , 28 ]. The spillover hypothesis further suggests that emotions and behaviors expressed within the parent–child subsystem influence sibling dynamics [ 25 ]. Parents’ communication styles and conflict resolution strategies are often internalized by children and subsequently applied in sibling interactions [ 26 ]. In turn, positive sibling relationships provide daily opportunities for practicing prosocial skills such as empathy, cooperation, sharing, and problem-solving, thereby laying a foundation for broader social–emotional competence. 5.5. Practical Implications The findings suggest several implications for supporting preschool children’s social–emotional development. First, efforts to strengthen children’s social–emotional competence may benefit from addressing the broader family climate rather than focusing only on child-level skills. In practice, family-based programs that promote clear communication, shared routines, and emotional support may help create relational environments that are conducive to children’s emotion regulation and social learning. Second, because both parent–child and sibling relationship quality were linked to children’s social–emotional competence, interventions may be more effective when they target multiple family subsystems. For example, parenting programs can emphasize responsive communication and emotion coaching, while family guidance can include strategies for shaping constructive sibling interactions, such as structured cooperative play, fair rule setting, and parent-facilitated conflict resolution. Third, early-childhood educators and community practitioners may consider strengthening home–school collaboration by offering brief family workshops and practical resources that help parents translate supportive communication and relationship-building strategies into daily family routines. 5.6. Limitations and Future Research Several limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. First, the study relied on parent-reported measures, which may be influenced by shared method variance and social desirability. Future studies should incorporate multiple informants, such as teacher reports, caregiver–child observations, or child-appropriate assessments, to strengthen measurement validity. Second, the cross-sectional design does not allow conclusions about temporal ordering among family functioning, relationship processes, and children’s social–emotional competence. Longitudinal designs would be especially valuable for testing whether changes in family functioning precede changes in parent–child and sibling relationship quality and, in turn, children’s outcomes. Where feasible, intervention or quasi-experimental research could further evaluate whether enhancing family functioning and relational processes is followed by improvements in children’s social–emotional competence. Third, because the sample was drawn from one region and cultural context, generalizability may be limited. Replication across diverse communities and cross-cultural comparisons could clarify whether the observed family-process pathways operate similarly across sociocultural settings and family structures. 6. Conclusions This study found that family functioning, parent–child relationship quality, sibling relationship quality, and preschool children’s social–emotional competence were significantly and positively associated. Family functioning was associated with children’s social–emotional competence both directly and indirectly through three pathways involving relationship quality: the parent–child relationship, the sibling relationship, and a sequential pathway linking parent–child and sibling relationships. These findings extend our understanding of how interconnected family subsystems may relate to children’s social–emotional development. From a practical perspective, the results suggest that strengthening overall family functioning and supporting high-quality parent–child and sibling relationships may represent promising targets for family-based efforts aimed at supporting preschool children’s social–emotional competence. Abbreviations CFA Confirmatory factor analysis SEM Structural equation modeling SEAM Social-Emotional Assessment/Evaluation Measure SEC Social–emotional competence Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was approved by the Gannan Normal University Ethics Committee (No. 36_040105_CJ1220605002_汪林慧_LW). All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Written informed consent was obtained from all parents or legal guardians of the participating children prior to data collection. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Authors’ information Not applicable. Funding This research received no external funding. Authors’ contributions Linhui Wang contributed to the conceptualization and methodology of the study, conducted the investigation, curated and analyzed the data, and drafted the manuscript. Ching-Chih Tsai contributed to conceptualization, supervised the study, reviewed and edited the manuscript, and administered the project. Taisheng Fu contributed to methodology and validation and reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the participating kindergartens and the cooperation of the children and their parents or legal guardians. Availability of data and materials The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are available in the Figshare repository, https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30264388 . References Collaborative for Academic, Social, and, Learning E (2013) CASEL guide: Effective social and emotional learning programs—Preschool and elementary school edition. Chicago: CASEL; 2013. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED581699.pdf . Accessed 2026 Mar 14 Deming D, Silliman M (2025) Skills and human capital in the labor market. Handbook of labor economics, vol 6. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 247–327. doi: 10.1016/S1573-4463(25)06004-X . Heckman JJ, Stixrud J, Urzua S (2006) The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. J Labor Econ 24(3):411–482. 10.1086/504455 Huang Z (2022) Social and emotional competence: Theory, policy, and practice. East China Normal University, Shanghai. [in Chinese] Eiden RD, Colder C, Edwards EP, Leonard KE (2009) A longitudinal study of social competence among children of alcoholic and nonalcoholic fathers: Role of parent–child and sibling interactions. Child Dev 80(5):1558–1575. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01359.x Zinsser KM, Gordon RA, Jiang X (2021) Parents’ socialization of preschool-aged children’s emotion skills: A meta-analysis using an emotion-focused parenting practices framework. Early Child Res Q 55:377–390. 10.1016/j.ecresq.2021.02.001 Li J, Huang D, Zhao Y, Yang T, Zhu J, Li Y (2023) The development status and characteristics of social–emotional competence of preschool children in China. Stud Early Child Educ. ;(5):3–16. [in Chinese] Li S, Tang Y, Zheng Y (2023) How the home learning environment contributes to children’s social–emotional competence: A moderated mediation model. Child Youth Serv Rev 148:106886. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.106886 McTaggart V, McGill R, Stephens S (2022) Gender differences in the development of children’s social and emotional competencies during the first year of school: An observational study. Child Soc 36(2):267–282. 10.1111/chso.12487 Shen W, Wang J (2022) How preschool teachers teach SEL curriculum effectively? J Educational Sci Hunan Normal Univ 21(5):120–128 [in Chinese] Zhang S, Mao Y (2020) The mediating role of teachers' social-emotional beliefs and close teacher-student relationship. Global Educ 49(5):52–65 [in Chinese] Miller JS, Wanless SB, Weissberg RP (2018) Parenting for competence and parenting with competence: Essential connections between parenting and social and emotional learning. School Community J 28(2):9–28 Coleman JS (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am J Sociol 94(Suppl):S95–120. 10.1086/228943 Olson DH, Russell CS, Sprenkle DH (1983) Circumplex model of marital and family systems: VI. Theoretical update. Fam Process 22(1):69–83. 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1983.00069.x Cigala A, Venturelli E, Fruggeri L (2014) Family functioning in microtransition and socio-emotional competence in preschoolers. Early Child Dev Care 184(4):553–570. 10.1080/03004430.2013.800053 Hooper A, Hustedt JT, Slicker G, Hallam RA, Gaviria-Loaiza J (2023) Linking early head start children's social-emotional functioning with family functioning and parenting behavior. J Fam Psychol 37(7):970–980. 10.1037/fam0001118 Morris AS, Criss MM, Silk JS, Houltberg BJ (2017) The impact of parenting on emotion regulation during childhood and adolescence. Child Dev Perspect 11(4):233–238. 10.1111/cdep.12238 Wang Q, Peng S, Chi X (2021) The relationship between family functioning and internalizing problems in Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation model. Front Psychol 12:736389. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.736389 Bowlby J. Attachment and loss. Vol. 1, Attachment., Yan W, Wang T (2017) translators. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation; Original work published 1969. [in Chinese] Gee DG (2020) Caregiving influences on emotional learning and regulation: Applying a sensitive period model to understand psychopathology. Curr Opin Behav Sci 36:190–196. 10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.10.018 Xing S, Liang X, Yue J, Wang Z (2016) Multiple attachment relationships and their influence on preschool children’s social–emotional competence: A Chinese study. Infant Child Dev 25(5):438–454. 10.1002/icd.1940 Cox MJ (2010) Family systems and sibling relationships. Child Dev Perspect 4(2):95–96. 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00125.x Wellman HM, Cross D, Watson J (2001) Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Dev 72(3):655–684. 10.1111/1467-8624.00304 Hughes C, McHarg G, White N (2018) Sibling influences on prosocial behavior. Curr Opin Psychol 20:96–101. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.015 Erel O, Burman B (1995) Interrelatedness of marital relations and parent–child relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull 118(1):108–132. 10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.108 Qian J, Cao Y (2023) The effect of parent–child separation on students’ social emotional ability: Analysis of the mediation effect of parent–child relationship and sibling relationship. Chin J Special Educ. ;(6):75–82. [in Chinese] Bronfenbrenner U (1981) The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge Bandura A, Walters RH (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs Stormshak EA, Bullock BGM, Falkenstein CA (2009) Harnessing the power of sibling relationships as a tool for optimizing social-emotional development. New Dir Child Adolesc Dev 2009(126):61–77. 10.1002/cd.257 Cox MJ, Paley B (1997) Families as systems. Ann Rev Psychol 48(1):243–267. 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.243 Li R, Xu F, Ji L, Zhang W (2013) Revision of Family Assessment Device (FAD). China J Health Psychol 21(7):996–999 [in Chinese] Zhang X, Chen H, Zhang G (2008) A dynamic interaction model of parent–child relationships and problem behaviors: A longitudinal perspective. Psychol Dev Educ 24(3):49–54 [in Chinese] Li Y, Liu T, Zhao J, Li Y, Niu X (2019) The development of the Early Childhood Sibling Relationship Quality Questionnaire (Parent Form). Chin J Clin Psychol 27(6):1157–1160 [in Chinese] Squires J, Bricker D, Waddell M, Funk K, Clifford J, Hoselton R (2014) Social-emotional assessment/evaluation measure (SEAM™), research edition user’s guide. Brookes Publishing, Baltimore Xiong H, Zhang J, Ye B, Zheng X, Sun P (2012) The influence of common method variance and its statistical control. Adv Psychol Sci 20(5):757–769 [in Chinese] Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 Tang D, Wen Z (2020) Common method bias test: Problems and suggestions. Psychol Sci 43(1):215–223 [in Chinese] Hayes AF (2017) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, 2nd edn. Guilford Press, New York Crosnoe R, Prickett KC, Smith C, Cavanagh S (2014) Changes in young children's family structures and child care arrangements. Demography 51(2):459–483. 10.1007/s13524-013-0258-5 Tang Y, Li S, Ma L, Zheng Y, Li Y (2023) The effects of mother–father relationships on children’s social–emotional competence: Mediation by parent–child relationship and moderation by household chaos. J Child Fam stud 32(10):3009–3021. 10.1007/s10826-023-02657-y Zhang J, Chen R, Chen Q, Zuo X, Yu W, Tao F, Su T (2019) A study on the relationship between family factors and emotional and behavioral problems in preschool children. Chin J Child Health Care 27(8):833–837 [in Chinese] Ren L, Cheung RYM, Li Y, Jia Y (2024) The association between family relationship patterns and preschoolers’ social and behavioral competence in Chinese urban families. Early Child Res Q 68:159–168. 10.1016/j.ecresq.2024.05.003 Alegre A (2012) The relation between the time mothers and children spent together and the children’s trait emotional intelligence. Child Youth Care Forum 41(5):493–508. 10.1007/s10566-012-9185-0 Appendix A Additional sample information This appendix provides supplementary information on parental education, family structure, and household income to further contextualize the sample Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Supplementary Files AppendixA.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9310983","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":617043812,"identity":"1de6e8d9-c1bf-41c3-85db-3fd2d7bec0d8","order_by":0,"name":"Linhui Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Guangzhou Huashang College","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Linhui","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""},{"id":617043813,"identity":"4cd2940a-d020-44a6-9568-311d80c52aed","order_by":1,"name":"Ching-Chih Tsai","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2909-5594","institution":"Guangzhou Huashang College","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ching-Chih","middleName":"","lastName":"Tsai","suffix":""},{"id":617043814,"identity":"ee8e77bd-dcfc-416c-8fec-8353c3cf8a0c","order_by":2,"name":"Taisheng Fu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Gannan Normal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Taisheng","middleName":"","lastName":"Fu","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-03 08:55:58","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9310983/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9310983/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":106403280,"identity":"c88d64eb-c93e-4b25-9402-728b207b5496","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-08 09:14:00","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":21470,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSequential mediation model of family functioning and preschool children’s social–emotional competence\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Boxes represent measured variables, and arrows represent the hypothesized paths with standardized coefficients (β). The model is consistent with significant direct and indirect associations, including a sequential pathway linking family functioning, the parent–child relationship, the sibling relationship, and children’s social–emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9310983/v1/050a7b774c3b7bbc20605a0e.png"},{"id":106723748,"identity":"7ae49fe2-7695-45f5-8ac3-1897e0dc64e3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-12 18:13:22","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1125161,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9310983/v1/98964d0e-8dd4-4985-ad2b-235fbae2e065.pdf"},{"id":106206702,"identity":"a6e86d74-d955-4860-b318-501aeb731ad9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-06 05:51:36","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":17207,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AppendixA.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9310983/v1/61427bd04a266fd9e33b27d7.docx"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFamily Functioning and Preschool Children’s Social–Emotional Competence: Sequential Mediation by Parent–Child and Sibling Relationships\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eSocial\u0026ndash;emotional competence refers to the ability to understand and manage emotions, form positive relationships, and make responsible decisions in social contexts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. Alongside cognitive skills, social\u0026ndash;emotional competence is a strong predictor of educational attainment, well-being, and long-term life outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. Preschool is a particularly sensitive period for socio-emotional and behavioral development; thus, fostering social\u0026ndash;emotional competence early can yield lasting benefits for later academic and social adjustment [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrior research on preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence points to influences in three domains: individual, school, and family. Individual studies link temperament, age, and cognitive development to socio-emotional outcomes, although results are sometimes mixed [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR6 CR7 CR8\" citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. School-based work emphasizes teachers, peers, and curricula in supporting socio-emotional learning [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. However, the family remains the most foundational context for early socialization, providing children\u0026rsquo;s earliest and most enduring experiences of emotion understanding, interpersonal skills, and behavioral norms [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFamily functioning captures the overall quality of family interactions, including communication, role clarity, problem solving, and emotional support [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. Cohesive, adaptable families are associated with better social competence and adjustment, whereas dysfunction is linked to elevated behavioral and emotional risks [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR16 CR17\" citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]. Family functioning may influence children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence through relational subsystems within the family. Warm, responsive parent\u0026ndash;child interactions support emotion regulation and internalization of social norms [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR20\" citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e], while sibling relationships provide frequent opportunities to practice cooperation, empathy, and perspective-taking [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR23\" citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. These subsystems are also dynamically linked through spillover and modeling processes, such that emotions and behaviors in one relationship shape others [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. Therefore, an integrative approach that considers both parent\u0026ndash;child (vertical) and sibling (horizontal) ties is needed to clarify how family functioning relates to preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccordingly, although prior research has linked family functioning to children\u0026rsquo;s socio-emotional outcomes and has examined parent\u0026ndash;child or sibling relationships as correlates, fewer studies have integrated these two relational subsystems within a single family-systems pathway to test how the overall family climate cascades through both vertical (parent\u0026ndash;child) and horizontal (sibling) relationships to shape preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. To address this gap, the present study proposes and tests an integrative sequential mediation model in which family functioning influences social\u0026ndash;emotional competence directly and indirectly via parent\u0026ndash;child relationship quality and sibling relationship quality, including a hypothesized cascade from parent\u0026ndash;child processes to sibling dynamics. By modeling interconnected family subsystems simultaneously, this study extends existing work that has often examined these links in isolation and provides a more integrated account of potential family-process pathways relevant to early social\u0026ndash;emotional development. Grounded in family systems, attachment, and social learning perspectives, the following section details the theoretical framework and \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eevidence supporting the proposed model (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;1).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFigure\u0026nbsp;1\u003c/b\u003e Sequential mediation model of family functioning and preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eNote\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eBoxes represent measured variables, and arrows represent the hypothesized paths with standardized coefficients (β). The model is consistent with significant direct and indirect associations, including a sequential pathway linking family functioning, the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, the sibling relationship, and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Theoretical Framework and Literature Review","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Family Functioning and Social\u0026ndash;Emotional Competence\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFamily functioning represents the quality of interaction, communication, and role organization within the family system [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. A well-functioning family provides warmth, emotional support, and clear expectations that foster children\u0026rsquo;s adjustment and self-regulation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]. When families maintain effective communication and mutual trust, children learn to identify, express, and manage emotions appropriately, thereby strengthening their social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. In contrast, dysfunctional family environments\u0026mdash;marked by conflict, rigidity, or poor cohesion\u0026mdash;can hinder children\u0026rsquo;s emotional security and elevate the risk of internalizing or externalizing problems [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to ecological systems theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e], family functioning constitutes the immediate microsystem that shapes child development. Attachment theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e] likewise underscores the family\u0026rsquo;s role in providing a secure base for exploration and emotional growth. Thus, family functioning serves as both a contextual and dynamic foundation for children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Parent\u0026ndash;Child Relationship as a Mediating Mechanism\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWithin the family system, the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship forms the core dyadic bond through which children internalize emotional experiences and interpersonal scripts. High-quality relationships\u0026mdash;characterized by sensitivity, warmth, and responsiveness\u0026mdash;promote empathy, cooperation, and emotional regulation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. Drawing on social learning theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e], children observe and model parental behaviors; consequently, supportive parental communication and problem-solving styles are likely to be reproduced in their own interactions. Attachment theory further posits that secure parent\u0026ndash;child bonds offer emotional safety, enabling children to manage stress and engage positively with peers. Conversely, inconsistent or harsh parenting disrupts emotional attunement and may impair the development of prosocial behaviors. Beyond its direct influence, the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship affects other subsystems within the family. Parents\u0026rsquo; communication patterns, conflict-resolution strategies, and emotional expressions often spill over into sibling dynamics, shaping the broader family climate [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Sibling Relationship as a Complementary and Mediating Context\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSibling relationships constitute a horizontal dimension of family interaction that provides unique opportunities for practicing cooperation, negotiation, and perspective-taking [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. Supportive sibling bonds are associated with higher empathy, emotion regulation, and social competence, whereas persistent conflict predicts poorer adjustment [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. Unlike vertical parent\u0026ndash;child relations, sibling exchanges occur among equals, fostering reciprocal learning and emotion sharing that consolidate socio-emotional skills first acquired through parental modeling. However, the quality of sibling relationships depends heavily on the overall family atmosphere and parental guidance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e]. In well-functioning families characterized by cohesion and constructive communication, siblings are more likely to engage in cooperative exchanges that further strengthen children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Integrative Discussion of Constructs\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTaken together, these strands of evidence support a family-systems perspective in which family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationships, and sibling relationships are interdependent subsystems jointly shaping children\u0026rsquo;s socio-emotional development. Family functioning establishes the emotional climate that influences both vertical (parent\u0026ndash;child) and horizontal (sibling) subsystems. Secure and nurturing parent\u0026ndash;child relationships transmit emotional and behavioral models that guide sibling interactions, consistent with the spillover hypothesis [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e] and social learning theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. In turn, positive sibling interactions provide everyday contexts for rehearsing empathy, cooperation, and conflict resolution, thereby consolidating children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis sequential process illustrates how the effects of family functioning cascade through the family system, influencing multiple relational layers and ultimately shaping socio-emotional adjustment. The integrative framework adopted here (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;1) therefore conceptualizes a unified developmental pathway linking family functioning, the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, the sibling relationship, and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5. Summary and Hypotheses\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGuided by family systems theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e], the present study proposes that:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eFamily functioning exerts both direct and indirect effects on preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe parent\u0026ndash;child relationship mediates this association by transmitting emotional security and behavioral models.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sibling relationship further mediates the link by providing opportunities to practice and reinforce socio-emotional skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eParent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationships operate sequentially, reflecting the dynamic interdependence of family subsystems.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis integrative model advances prior research by clarifying how and why family subsystems jointly contribute to preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional development, offering theoretical and practical insights for interventions that strengthen family functioning and promote children\u0026rsquo;s well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Method","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants were 837 preschool children aged 3\u0026ndash;5 years (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.0, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.8; 53.1% boys, 46.9% girls) and their parents, recruited from five kindergartens in southern China. To maximize diversity, the sample included public and private institutions across urban and rural areas, and demonstration versus non-demonstration schools: one public rural provincial-level demonstration kindergarten, one public rural non-demonstration kindergarten, one public urban demonstration kindergarten, one public urban non-demonstration kindergarten, and one private urban non-demonstration kindergarten. Children were evenly distributed across lower, middle, and upper classes. Race or ethnicity was not assessed because more than 99% of the local population is Han Chinese, with minority groups very small and dispersed (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Parental education, family structure, and household income are provided in Appendix A.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDemographic characteristics of participants (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;837)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChild gender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e444\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e393\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKindergarten grade\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e281\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMiddle\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e284\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e272\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Race or ethnicity was not assessed because the study region is overwhelmingly Han Chinese and minority populations are relatively small and geographically dispersed. The sample was drawn from five types of kindergartens to ensure institutional diversity. Because detailed counts by kindergarten type were not retained in the final dataset, frequencies and percentages for kindergarten type are not reported.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFamily Functioning\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFamily functioning was assessed using the \u003cem\u003eFamily Assessment Device\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e], revised for Chinese samples by Li et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. The instrument consists of 30 items across five dimensions: emotional communication (8 items), positive communication (5 items), egoism (6 items), problem solving (6 items), and family rules (5 items). Items were rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (\u0026ldquo;not at all true\u0026rdquo;) to 4 (\u0026ldquo;completely true\u0026rdquo;).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eScores for the dimensions of emotional communication, egoism, and family rules were reverse scored, and then summed with positive communication and problem solving. Higher total scores indicated better family functioning. In the present study, the scale demonstrated strong reliability, with an overall Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e of .952. The Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e coefficients for the five dimensions were .905, .880, .891, .894, and .840. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated an acceptable model fit (\u003cem\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e/\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.597, RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.044, GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.920, CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.957, NFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.932), supporting the scale\u0026rsquo;s structural validity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eParent\u0026ndash;Child Relationship\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe \u003cem\u003eChild\u0026ndash;Parent Relationship Scale\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e] was used to evaluate the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship. The scale contains 15 items rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = \u0026ldquo;not at all true,\u0026rdquo; 5 = \u0026ldquo;completely true\u0026rdquo;), covering two dimensions: intimacy (7 items) and conflict (8 items). The conflict dimension was reverse scored and then summed with the intimacy dimension, with higher scores reflecting higher-quality parent\u0026ndash;child relationships. In this study, the scale demonstrated high reliability, with a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e of .914. The Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e coefficients for the two dimensions were .878 and .891. CFA results showed an acceptable model fit (\u003cem\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e/\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.419, RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.064, GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.936, CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.949, NFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.936), indicating good structural validity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSibling Relationship\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSibling relationship quality was measured using the \u003cem\u003eEarly Childhood Sibling Relationship Quality Questionnaire (Parent Version)\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e]. The instrument includes 23 items rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = \u0026ldquo;never,\u0026rdquo; 5 = \u0026ldquo;always\u0026rdquo;), and covers three dimensions: sibling warmth, sibling conflict, and sibling jealousy. The conflict and jealousy dimensions were reverse scored and combined with the warmth dimension, with higher total scores representing better sibling relationships. In this study, the scale demonstrated high internal consistency, with an overall Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e of .925. The Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e coefficients for the three dimensions were .907, .860, and .880. CFA indicated an acceptable model fit (\u003cem\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e/\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.789, RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.067, GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.922, CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.942, NFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.928), supporting its structural validity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSocial\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eEmotional Competence\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough a formal Chinese version of the \u003cem\u003eSocial-Emotional Assessment/Evaluation Measure (SEAM\u0026trade;), 36\u0026ndash;66 months\u003c/em\u003e has been published, the present study used the original English version [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e], which was translated into Chinese by the research team to better align with the study context. The instrument comprehensively assesses core components of social\u0026ndash;emotional competence and has been validated in multiple countries, including the United States, Denmark, and Turkey. It consists of 41 items across 10 dimensions, such as interpersonal interaction, emotional expression, emotional regulation, and empathy. Each item is rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (\u0026ldquo;not at all true\u0026rdquo;) to 4 (\u0026ldquo;very true\u0026rdquo;), with higher scores indicating more advanced social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. The translated version employed in this study exhibited excellent internal consistency, with an overall Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e of .965. Reliability coefficients for the ten dimensions were .868, .893, .854, .775, .903, .846, .868, .894, .895, and .907. CFA further supported the structural validity of the instrument, indicating an acceptable model fit (\u003cem\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e/\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.789, RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.067, GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.922, CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.942, NFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.928).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Procedure and Data Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e After receiving approval from the participating kindergartens, questionnaires were distributed to parents or legal guardians of eligible children. Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and written informed consent was obtained prior to data collection. Completed questionnaires were reviewed for completeness and eligibility before analysis. Descriptive statistics, reliability analyses, correlations, and mediation analyses were conducted in SPSS 29.0, including PROCESS Model 6 with 5,000 bootstrap resamples. AMOS 26.0 was used for CFA and as a supplementary robustness check of the mediation model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1. Common Method Bias Test\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHarman\u0026rsquo;s single-factor test was performed to assess common method bias [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. The first factor explained 24.81% of the variance, which was below the critical threshold of 40% [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e]. These results suggest that common method bias was not a serious issue in this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive and correlational analyses were performed on family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationships, sibling relationships, and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics and correlations for all variables (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;837)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. Fam. Func.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.086\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.538\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026mdash;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. P\u0026ndash;C Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.931\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.637\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.389***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026mdash;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Sibling Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.483\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.627\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.429***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.481***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026mdash;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. SEC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.279\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.442\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.468***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.510***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.474***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026mdash;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Fam. Func. = family functioning; P\u0026ndash;C Rel. = parent\u0026ndash;child relationship; SEC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*** \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e presents the descriptive statistics and intercorrelations among the study variables (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;837). All variables were significantly and positively correlated (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). Higher levels of family functioning were associated with better parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationships as well as greater social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. Both parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationships were positively related to social\u0026ndash;emotional competence, and parent\u0026ndash;child relationships were also positively associated with sibling relationships.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3. Mediation Effect Test\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMediation analyses were conducted using Model 6 of the PROCESS macro in SPSS [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]. Prior to testing, all variables were standardized, and a bootstrap procedure with 5,000 resamples was applied to generate 95% confidence intervals for assessing the significance of mediation effects. In addition, hierarchical regression analyses were performed to further examine the predictive contributions of family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationships, and sibling relationships to children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression analyses of family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, sibling relationship, and young children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Equation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall Fit Index\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Coefficient Significance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOutcome variable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredictor Variable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u0026ndash;C Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFam. Func.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.406\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.165\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.820\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.435\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.900***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSibling Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFam. Func.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.561\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.315\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31.576\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.349\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.189***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u0026ndash;C Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.373\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.008***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial\u0026ndash;emotional competence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFam. Func.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.623\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.389\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.251\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.213\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.023***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u0026ndash;C Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.210\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.359***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSibling Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.153\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.577***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Fam. Func. = family functioning; P\u0026ndash;C Rel. = parent\u0026ndash;child relationship.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*** \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e presents the regression results for these models. These analyses examined the predictive roles of family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationships, and sibling relationships in children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. Family functioning significantly predicted both parent\u0026ndash;child relationship quality (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.435, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001; \u003cem\u003eR\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .165, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.820) and sibling relationships (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.349, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001; \u003cem\u003eR\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .315, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;31.576). Parent\u0026ndash;child relationships also significantly predicted sibling relationships (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.373, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). In the final model, children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence was significantly predicted by family functioning (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.213, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), parent\u0026ndash;child relationships (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.210, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), and sibling relationships (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.153, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). Collectively, these three predictors explained 38.9% of the variance in social\u0026ndash;emotional competence (\u003cem\u003eR\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .389, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;40.251, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of the mediation analysis (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) show that family functioning significantly predicted children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence both directly and indirectly. The direct effect was significant, accounting for 55.76% of the total effect. In addition, the overall indirect effect was significant, explaining 44.24% of the total effect.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootstrap mediation analysis of the associations among family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, sibling relationship, and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffect Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffect Estimate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBoot \u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% Boot \u003cem\u003eCI\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProportion of Total Effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.382\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.026\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.331, 0.434]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDirect Effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.213\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.027\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.161, 0.265]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e55.76%\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndirect Effects\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.169\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.018\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.136, 0.205]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e44.24%\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. Via P\u0026ndash;C Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.091\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.014\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.065, 0.121]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.82%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. Via Sibling Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.053\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.030, 0.080]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.87%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Via P\u0026ndash;C \u0026rarr; Sibling Rel.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.025\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.014, 0.037]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.54%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Boot \u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Bootstrap Standard Error. Boot \u003cem\u003eCI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Bias-Corrected Bootstrap Confidence Interval (based on 5,000 resamples). Confidence intervals that do not include zero are statistically significant at \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05. Minor discrepancies between the sum of sub-indirect effects and the total indirect effect are due to rounding. Fam. Func. = family functioning; P\u0026ndash;C Rel. = parent\u0026ndash;child relationship; SEC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the specific indirect pathways, the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship emerged as the strongest mediator, accounting for 23.82% of the total effect, followed by the sibling relationship, which accounted for 13.87%. A smaller yet significant sequential mediation pathway was also identified through the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship leading to the sibling relationship, which explained 6.54% of the total effect.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe direct effect of family functioning on children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence was significant, with a 95% confidence interval of [0.161, 0.265], which did not include zero. This indicates the presence of a significant direct effect, showing that family functioning significantly predicted children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence, with an effect size of 0.213, accounting for 55.76% of the total effect. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the indirect effect of family functioning on children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence through the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, the 95% confidence interval was [0.065, 0.121], excluding zero, indicating a significant mediation effect. The parent\u0026ndash;child relationship significantly mediated the link between family functioning and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence, with an effect size of 0.091, accounting for 23.82% of the total effect. Accordingly, Hypothesis 2 was supported.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the indirect effect of family functioning on children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence through the sibling relationship, the 95% confidence interval was [0.030, 0.080], which also excluded zero. This result indicates a significant mediation effect of the sibling relationship, with an effect size of 0.053, accounting for 13.87% of the total effect. Thus, Hypothesis 3 was supported.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, for the sequential mediation pathway from family functioning to children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence through the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship and the sibling relationship, the 95% confidence interval was [0.014, 0.037], excluding zero. This suggests that the parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationships jointly exerted a significant sequential mediation effect between family functioning and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence, with an effect size of 0.025, accounting for 6.54% of the total effect. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 was supported. Detailed results are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e and Fig.\u0026nbsp;1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo examine the robustness of the mediation findings, an additional structural equation modeling analysis was conducted using AMOS. The overall pattern of results was consistent with the PROCESS analysis, showing significant direct and indirect associations from family functioning to children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence through the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, the sibling relationship, and their sequential pathway. Because these findings converged with the primary mediation results, the PROCESS results are presented as the main evidence, while the AMOS analysis is treated as a supplementary robustness check.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study examined how family functioning is associated with preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence, with particular attention to whether parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationship quality help account for this association. The findings supported both direct and indirect pathways, highlighting that multiple family subsystems are interrelated and may jointly contribute to early social\u0026ndash;emotional development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.1. Family Functioning Directly Predicts Preschool Children\u0026rsquo;s Social\u0026ndash;Emotional Competence\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsistent with Hypothesis 1, this study found that family functioning directly and positively predicted preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. This finding aligns with prior research highlighting family functioning as a crucial environmental factor in children\u0026rsquo;s socio-emotional development [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR15\" citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. Effective family environments provide emotional support, open communication, and clear role expectations that foster children\u0026rsquo;s emotional regulation and interpersonal skills [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e]. The quality of mother\u0026ndash;child interactions has also been shown to enhance emotional intelligence, strengthening social\u0026ndash;emotional competence [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e]. These findings are consistent with attachment theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e] and ecological systems theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e], both of which underscore the central role of the family in development. In contrast, dysfunctional family environments heighten risks for behavioral and emotional difficulties [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2. Mediating Role of the Parent\u0026ndash;Child Relationship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupporting Hypothesis 2, the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship mediated the association between family functioning and preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. This finding is consistent with the spillover hypothesis, which suggests that emotions and behaviors within one family subsystem, such as marital or overall functioning, extend to others, including parent\u0026ndash;child interactions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Families characterized by open communication and warmth foster secure and trusting parent\u0026ndash;child bonds [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. Within these bonds, children internalize parents\u0026rsquo; emotional expressions and communication styles, acquiring skills in empathy, regulation, and social interaction [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. Social learning theory highlights how children model parents\u0026rsquo; interpersonal behaviors [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e], while attachment theory emphasizes parents as secure bases offering emotional support that scaffolds social-emotional development [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. Together, these perspectives underscore the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship as a key mechanism linking family functioning to children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3. Mediating Role of the Sibling Relationship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsistent with Hypothesis 3, sibling relationships mediated the association between family functioning and preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. This finding aligns with evidence that sibling interactions provide important contexts for developing empathy, cooperation, and conflict resolution skills [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. In well-functioning families characterized by clear rules and constructive communication, siblings are more likely to form supportive and harmonious relationships [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. During the preschool years, children acquire perspective-taking and emotional understanding abilities [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e], which are often practiced and consolidated through sibling interactions such as sharing, negotiation, and joint play [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. Importantly, sibling dynamics carry a dual potential: warm and cooperative relationships can serve as protective factors that foster social\u0026ndash;emotional competence, whereas persistent conflict may act as a risk factor, undermining children\u0026rsquo;s socio-emotional development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.4. Sequential Mediating Role of Parent\u0026ndash;Child and Sibling Relationships\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, consistent with Hypothesis 4, parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationships jointly exerted a sequential mediating effect between family functioning and preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. High-quality parent\u0026ndash;child relationships provide children with emotional security and behavioral models that foster more positive sibling interactions. This finding is in line with attachment theory and social learning theory, both of which emphasize that parental interactions shape children\u0026rsquo;s expectations and behaviors across different relational contexts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. The spillover hypothesis further suggests that emotions and behaviors expressed within the parent\u0026ndash;child subsystem influence sibling dynamics [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Parents\u0026rsquo; communication styles and conflict resolution strategies are often internalized by children and subsequently applied in sibling interactions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. In turn, positive sibling relationships provide daily opportunities for practicing prosocial skills such as empathy, cooperation, sharing, and problem-solving, thereby laying a foundation for broader social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.5. Practical Implications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings suggest several implications for supporting preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional development. First, efforts to strengthen children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence may benefit from addressing the broader family climate rather than focusing only on child-level skills. In practice, family-based programs that promote clear communication, shared routines, and emotional support may help create relational environments that are conducive to children\u0026rsquo;s emotion regulation and social learning. Second, because both parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationship quality were linked to children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence, interventions may be more effective when they target multiple family subsystems. For example, parenting programs can emphasize responsive communication and emotion coaching, while family guidance can include strategies for shaping constructive sibling interactions, such as structured cooperative play, fair rule setting, and parent-facilitated conflict resolution. Third, early-childhood educators and community practitioners may consider strengthening home\u0026ndash;school collaboration by offering brief family workshops and practical resources that help parents translate supportive communication and relationship-building strategies into daily family routines.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.6. Limitations and Future Research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. First, the study relied on parent-reported measures, which may be influenced by shared method variance and social desirability. Future studies should incorporate multiple informants, such as teacher reports, caregiver\u0026ndash;child observations, or child-appropriate assessments, to strengthen measurement validity. Second, the cross-sectional design does not allow conclusions about temporal ordering among family functioning, relationship processes, and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. Longitudinal designs would be especially valuable for testing whether changes in family functioning precede changes in parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationship quality and, in turn, children\u0026rsquo;s outcomes. Where feasible, intervention or quasi-experimental research could further evaluate whether enhancing family functioning and relational processes is followed by improvements in children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. Third, because the sample was drawn from one region and cultural context, generalizability may be limited. Replication across diverse communities and cross-cultural comparisons could clarify whether the observed family-process pathways operate similarly across sociocultural settings and family structures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study found that family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationship quality, sibling relationship quality, and preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence were significantly and positively associated. Family functioning was associated with children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence both directly and indirectly through three pathways involving relationship quality: the parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, the sibling relationship, and a sequential pathway linking parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationships. These findings extend our understanding of how interconnected family subsystems may relate to children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional development. From a practical perspective, the results suggest that strengthening overall family functioning and supporting high-quality parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationships may represent promising targets for family-based efforts aimed at supporting preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionList\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eCFA\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConfirmatory factor analysis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eSEM\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStructural equation modeling\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eSEAM\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial-Emotional Assessment/Evaluation Measure\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eSEC\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial\u0026ndash;emotional competence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study was approved by the Gannan Normal University Ethics Committee (No. 36_040105_CJ1220605002_汪林慧_LW). All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Written informed consent was obtained from all parents or legal guardians of the participating children prior to data collection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; information\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research received no external funding.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; contributions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eLinhui Wang contributed to the conceptualization and methodology of the study, conducted the investigation, curated and analyzed the data, and drafted the manuscript. Ching-Chih Tsai contributed to conceptualization, supervised the study, reviewed and edited the manuscript, and administered the project. Taisheng Fu contributed to methodology and validation and reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the participating kindergartens and the cooperation of the children and their parents or legal guardians.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are available in the Figshare repository, \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30264388\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.6084/m9.figshare.30264388\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCollaborative for Academic, Social, and, Learning E (2013) CASEL guide: Effective social and emotional learning programs\u0026mdash;Preschool and elementary school edition. Chicago: CASEL; 2013. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED581699.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED581699.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed 2026 Mar 14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeming D, Silliman M (2025) Skills and human capital in the labor market. Handbook of labor economics, vol 6. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 247\u0026ndash;327. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/S1573-4463(25)06004-X\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S1573-4463(25)06004-X\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHeckman JJ, Stixrud J, Urzua S (2006) The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. J Labor Econ 24(3):411\u0026ndash;482. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1086/504455\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1086/504455\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuang Z (2022) Social and emotional competence: Theory, policy, and practice. East China Normal University, Shanghai. [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEiden RD, Colder C, Edwards EP, Leonard KE (2009) A longitudinal study of social competence among children of alcoholic and nonalcoholic fathers: Role of parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling interactions. Child Dev 80(5):1558\u0026ndash;1575. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01359.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01359.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZinsser KM, Gordon RA, Jiang X (2021) Parents\u0026rsquo; socialization of preschool-aged children\u0026rsquo;s emotion skills: A meta-analysis using an emotion-focused parenting practices framework. Early Child Res Q 55:377\u0026ndash;390. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ecresq.2021.02.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ecresq.2021.02.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi J, Huang D, Zhao Y, Yang T, Zhu J, Li Y (2023) The development status and characteristics of social\u0026ndash;emotional competence of preschool children in China. Stud Early Child Educ. ;(5):3\u0026ndash;16. [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi S, Tang Y, Zheng Y (2023) How the home learning environment contributes to children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence: A moderated mediation model. Child Youth Serv Rev 148:106886. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.106886\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.106886\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcTaggart V, McGill R, Stephens S (2022) Gender differences in the development of children\u0026rsquo;s social and emotional competencies during the first year of school: An observational study. Child Soc 36(2):267\u0026ndash;282. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/chso.12487\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/chso.12487\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShen W, Wang J (2022) How preschool teachers teach SEL curriculum effectively? J Educational Sci Hunan Normal Univ 21(5):120\u0026ndash;128 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang S, Mao Y (2020) The mediating role of teachers' social-emotional beliefs and close teacher-student relationship. Global Educ 49(5):52\u0026ndash;65 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiller JS, Wanless SB, Weissberg RP (2018) Parenting for competence and parenting with competence: Essential connections between parenting and social and emotional learning. School Community J 28(2):9\u0026ndash;28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eColeman JS (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am J Sociol 94(Suppl):S95\u0026ndash;120. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1086/228943\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1086/228943\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOlson DH, Russell CS, Sprenkle DH (1983) Circumplex model of marital and family systems: VI. Theoretical update. Fam Process 22(1):69\u0026ndash;83. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/j.1545-5300.1983.00069.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1545-5300.1983.00069.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCigala A, Venturelli E, Fruggeri L (2014) Family functioning in microtransition and socio-emotional competence in preschoolers. Early Child Dev Care 184(4):553\u0026ndash;570. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/03004430.2013.800053\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03004430.2013.800053\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHooper A, Hustedt JT, Slicker G, Hallam RA, Gaviria-Loaiza J (2023) Linking early head start children's social-emotional functioning with family functioning and parenting behavior. J Fam Psychol 37(7):970\u0026ndash;980. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1037/fam0001118\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/fam0001118\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMorris AS, Criss MM, Silk JS, Houltberg BJ (2017) The impact of parenting on emotion regulation during childhood and adolescence. Child Dev Perspect 11(4):233\u0026ndash;238. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/cdep.12238\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/cdep.12238\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Q, Peng S, Chi X (2021) The relationship between family functioning and internalizing problems in Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation model. Front Psychol 12:736389. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3389/fpsyg.2021.736389\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2021.736389\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBowlby J. Attachment and loss. Vol. 1, Attachment., Yan W, Wang T (2017) translators. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation; Original work published 1969. [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGee DG (2020) Caregiving influences on emotional learning and regulation: Applying a sensitive period model to understand psychopathology. Curr Opin Behav Sci 36:190\u0026ndash;196. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.10.018\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.10.018\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXing S, Liang X, Yue J, Wang Z (2016) Multiple attachment relationships and their influence on preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence: A Chinese study. Infant Child Dev 25(5):438\u0026ndash;454. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/icd.1940\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/icd.1940\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCox MJ (2010) Family systems and sibling relationships. Child Dev Perspect 4(2):95\u0026ndash;96. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00125.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00125.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWellman HM, Cross D, Watson J (2001) Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Dev 72(3):655\u0026ndash;684. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/1467-8624.00304\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1467-8624.00304\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHughes C, McHarg G, White N (2018) Sibling influences on prosocial behavior. Curr Opin Psychol 20:96\u0026ndash;101. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.015\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.015\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eErel O, Burman B (1995) Interrelatedness of marital relations and parent\u0026ndash;child relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull 118(1):108\u0026ndash;132. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.108\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.108\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQian J, Cao Y (2023) The effect of parent\u0026ndash;child separation on students\u0026rsquo; social emotional ability: Analysis of the mediation effect of parent\u0026ndash;child relationship and sibling relationship. Chin J Special Educ. ;(6):75\u0026ndash;82. [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBronfenbrenner U (1981) The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBandura A, Walters RH (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStormshak EA, Bullock BGM, Falkenstein CA (2009) Harnessing the power of sibling relationships as a tool for optimizing social-emotional development. New Dir Child Adolesc Dev 2009(126):61\u0026ndash;77. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/cd.257\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/cd.257\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCox MJ, Paley B (1997) Families as systems. Ann Rev Psychol 48(1):243\u0026ndash;267. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.243\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.243\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi R, Xu F, Ji L, Zhang W (2013) Revision of Family Assessment Device (FAD). China J Health Psychol 21(7):996\u0026ndash;999 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang X, Chen H, Zhang G (2008) A dynamic interaction model of parent\u0026ndash;child relationships and problem behaviors: A longitudinal perspective. Psychol Dev Educ 24(3):49\u0026ndash;54 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi Y, Liu T, Zhao J, Li Y, Niu X (2019) The development of the Early Childhood Sibling Relationship Quality Questionnaire (Parent Form). Chin J Clin Psychol 27(6):1157\u0026ndash;1160 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSquires J, Bricker D, Waddell M, Funk K, Clifford J, Hoselton R (2014) Social-emotional assessment/evaluation measure (SEAM\u0026trade;), research edition user\u0026rsquo;s guide. Brookes Publishing, Baltimore\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXiong H, Zhang J, Ye B, Zheng X, Sun P (2012) The influence of common method variance and its statistical control. Adv Psychol Sci 20(5):757\u0026ndash;769 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePodsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879\u0026ndash;903. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTang D, Wen Z (2020) Common method bias test: Problems and suggestions. Psychol Sci 43(1):215\u0026ndash;223 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHayes AF (2017) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, 2nd edn. Guilford Press, New York\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCrosnoe R, Prickett KC, Smith C, Cavanagh S (2014) Changes in young children's family structures and child care arrangements. Demography 51(2):459\u0026ndash;483. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s13524-013-0258-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s13524-013-0258-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTang Y, Li S, Ma L, Zheng Y, Li Y (2023) The effects of mother\u0026ndash;father relationships on children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence: Mediation by parent\u0026ndash;child relationship and moderation by household chaos. J Child Fam stud 32(10):3009\u0026ndash;3021. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10826-023-02657-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10826-023-02657-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang J, Chen R, Chen Q, Zuo X, Yu W, Tao F, Su T (2019) A study on the relationship between family factors and emotional and behavioral problems in preschool children. Chin J Child Health Care 27(8):833\u0026ndash;837 [in Chinese]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRen L, Cheung RYM, Li Y, Jia Y (2024) The association between family relationship patterns and preschoolers\u0026rsquo; social and behavioral competence in Chinese urban families. Early Child Res Q 68:159\u0026ndash;168. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ecresq.2024.05.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ecresq.2024.05.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlegre A (2012) The relation between the time mothers and children spent together and the children\u0026rsquo;s trait emotional intelligence. Child Youth Care Forum 41(5):493\u0026ndash;508. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10566-012-9185-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10566-012-9185-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAppendix A Additional sample information\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThis appendix provides supplementary information on parental education, family structure, and household income to further contextualize the sample\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Guangzhou Huashang College","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"family functioning, parent–child relationship, sibling relationship, social–emotional competence, preschool children","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9310983/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9310983/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study examined whether family functioning is associated with preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence and whether parent\u0026ndash;child and sibling relationship quality help explain this association, including a potential cascade across family subsystems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eParents of 837 children aged 3 to 5 years from five kindergartens in southern China completed questionnaires assessing family functioning, parent\u0026ndash;child relationship quality, sibling relationship quality, and children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. Regression and mediation analyses were conducted to test direct and indirect pathways, including a sequential pathway from parent\u0026ndash;child relationship quality to sibling relationship quality.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStronger family functioning was associated with higher levels of children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence. Parent\u0026ndash;child relationship quality and sibling relationship quality were each positively associated with children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional competence and each accounted for an indirect pathway linking family functioning to children\u0026rsquo;s outcomes. In addition, a sequential pathway was supported in which better family functioning was linked to a more positive parent\u0026ndash;child relationship, which was in turn linked to a more positive sibling relationship and, ultimately, higher social\u0026ndash;emotional competence.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFindings suggest that preschool children\u0026rsquo;s social\u0026ndash;emotional development is related not only to the overall family climate but also to interconnected relationships within the family. Family-based efforts that strengthen communication and problem solving while supporting warm, responsive parent\u0026ndash;child interactions and constructive sibling relationships may help promote social\u0026ndash;emotional competence during the preschool years.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Family Functioning and Preschool Children’s Social–Emotional Competence: Sequential Mediation by Parent–Child and Sibling Relationships","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-06 05:51:32","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9310983/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"82eacaa6-2e22-4d59-a236-0597b061c6df","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 6th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-06T05:51:32+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-06 05:51:32","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9310983","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9310983","identity":"rs-9310983","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}