Child & Youth Care Forum

, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 111–125 | Cite as

Parenting Practices in Vietnam: An Investigation of the Psychometric Properties of the PBS-S and PCS

  • Martijn Van HeelEmail author
  • Ba Tuan Vu
  • Guy Bosmans
  • Katja Petry
  • Dung Tien Hoang
  • Karla Van Leeuwen
Original Paper



There has been an increase in externalizing problem behaviour in Vietnam over the last decade and parenting has been considered an important factor in the development of problem behaviour in adolescents in Western countries. However, few studies addressed parenting in a Vietnamese context, which may be due to the lack of a validated questionnaire.


The present study aims to translate and validate a Vietnamese version of the Parental Behavior Scale-Short form (PBS-S) and the Psychological Control Scale (PCS).


We collected data from 529 Vietnamese parents (60% mothers; Mage = 39.50, SD = 5.25), who have children from 10 to 14 years old. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to investigate the factor structure of the combined parenting questionnaires. Afterwards, the subscales Emotional Symptoms, Conduct Problems, and Prosocial Behavior from the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire were used to establish criterion (i.e., convergent and divergent) validity.


The combination of items of the PBS-S and PCS resulted in a six-factor structure representing the original six scales (PBS-S: Positive Parenting, Discipline, Punishment, Material Reward and Rule Setting; PCS: Psychological Control).


The Vietnamese version of the PBS-S and PCS proved to be valid and will be useful to investigate the perception of Vietnamese parents on their parenting behaviour and the association with psychosocial outcome measures in Vietnamese adolescents.


Parenting Vietnam Validation study 


Author Contributions

Martijn Van Heel and Ba Tuan Vu were involved in the conceptualization of the study. Dung Tien Hoang collected the data. Martijn Van Heel drafted the article and Ba Tuan Vu, Guy Bosmans, Katja Petry, and Karla Van Leeuwen revised the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Access to Data

The corresponding author takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.


  1. Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child Development, 67, 3296–3319. Scholar
  2. Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11, 56–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bornstein, M. H. (1989). Between caretakers and their young: Two models of interaction and their consequences for cognitive growth. In M. H. Bornstein & J. S. Bruner (Eds.), Interaction in human development (pp. 197–214). Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). The bioecological theory of human development. In U. Bronfenbrenner (Ed.), Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development (pp. 3–15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21, 230–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, F. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1005–1018. Scholar
  7. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Del Vecchio, T., Jersualmi, D., & Terjesen, M. D. (2017). Psychometric characteristics of the Parenting Scale in a Vietnamese sample. International Journal of Psychology, 52, 482–490. Scholar
  9. Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2006). Prosocial development. In N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 646–718). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  11. Gershoff, E. T., & Grogan-Kaylor, A. (2016). Spanking and child outcomes: Old controversies and new meta-analyses. Journal of Family Psychology, 30, 453–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gershoff, E. T., Grogan-Kaylor, A., Lansford, J. E., Chang, L., Zelli, A., Deater-Deckard, K., et al. (2010). Parent discipline practices in an international sample: Assocations with child behaviours and moderation by perceived normativeness. Child Development, 81, 487–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goodman, R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hang, N. T. T., & Tam, T. N. T. M. (2013). School violence evidence from young lives in Vietnam. Vietnam Policy Paper, 1. Google Scholar
  15. Ho, C., Bluestein, D. N., & Jenkins, J. M. (2008). Cultural differences in the relationship between parenting and children’s behaviour. Developmental Psychology, 44, 507–522. Scholar
  16. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. Scholar
  17. IBM Corp. (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.Google Scholar
  18. Janssens, A., Goossens, L., Van Den Noortgate, W., Colpin, H., Verschueren, K., & Van Leeuwen, K. (2015). Parents’ and adolescents’ perspectives on parenting: Evaluating conceptual structure, measurement invariance, and criterion validity. Assessment, 22, 473–489. Scholar
  19. Janssens, A., Van Den Noortgate, W., Goossens, L., Verschueren, K., Colpin, H., Claes, S., et al. (2017). Adolescent externalizing behaviour, psychological control, and peer rejection: Transactional links and dopaminergic moderation. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 35, 420–438. Scholar
  20. Kenny, D. (2015). Measuring model fit.
  21. Leung, J. T. Y., & Shek, D. T. L. (2014). Parent-adolescent discrepancies in perceived parenting characteristics in adolescent developmental outcomes in poor Chinese families. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23, 200–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Manrique Millones, D. L., Ghesquière, P., & Van Leeuwen, K. (2014). Evaluation of a parental behaviour scale in a Peruvian context. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23, 885–894. Scholar
  23. Meunier, J.-C., & Roskam, I. (2007). Psychometric properties of a parental childrearing behaviour scale for French-speaking parents, children, and adolescents. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 113–124. Scholar
  24. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide, 7th edn. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & MuthénGoogle Scholar
  25. Pastorelli, C., Lansford, J. E., Kanacri, B. P., Malone, P. S., Di Giunta, L., Bacchini, D., et al. (2016). Positive parenting and children’s prosocial behaviour in eight countries. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57, 824–834. Scholar
  26. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioural research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. Scholar
  27. Reid, J. B., Patterson, G. R., & Snyder, J. (2002). Antisocial behaviour in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  28. Sorkhabi, N. (2012). Parent socialization effects in different cultures: Significance of directive parenting. Psychological Reports, 110, 854–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stevens, J. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C. M. E., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssens, J. M. A. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire for 4- to 12-year-olds: A review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 13, 254–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Leeuwen, K. G., & Vermulst, A. A. (2004). Some psychometric properties of the Ghent parental behaviour scale. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20, 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Van Leeuwen, K., & Vermulst, A. (2010). De verkorte versie van de Schaal voor Ouderlijk Gedrag. [Shortened version of the Parental Behaviour Scale]. Internal report, not published. Leuven: Katholieke UniversiteitGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Widenfelt, B. M., Treffers, P. D. A., de Beurs, E., Siebelink, B. M., & Koudijs, E. (2005). Translation of cross-cultural adaptation of assessment instruments used in psychological research with children and families. Clincial Child and Family Psychology Review, 8, 135–147. Scholar
  34. Vu, B. T., Petry, K., & Bosmans, G. (2016). Peer victimization and emotional problems in Vietnamese children: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Indian Psychology, 3, 143–154. ISSN 2348-5396Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Psychology and Educational SciencesKU LeuvenLouvainBelgium
  2. 2.Faculty of Psychology and PedagogyHanoi National University of EducationHanoiVietnam
  3. 3.Hai Duong Continued Education CentreHải DươngVietnam

Personalised recommendations