Advertisement

Portuguese version of the Partner Support for Father Involvement Scale: Preliminary Validation

  • Natália AntunesEmail author
  • Salomé Vieira-Santos
  • Maria-Teresa Ribeiro
  • Magda S. Roberto
Original Paper

Abstract

Objectives

Partner support in the performance of the parenting role is critical, as it increases father involvement in the care of the child. However, the measures to assess this type of support are scarce. This study presents the preliminary validation of the Portuguese version of the Partner Support for Father Involvement (PSFI) scale (confirmatory factor analysis, measurement invariance models, reliability, and concurrent and discriminant validity).

Methods

The participants were 486 independent (unrelated) parents, 243 fathers (Mage = 42.13, SD = 5.57) and 243 mothers (Mage = 39.67, SD = 4.78), who completed the PSFI (translated version), the EMBU and the Co-parenting Questionnaire.

Results

Confirmatory factor analyses showed that the Portuguese PSFI had a three factor structure, in line with the original version of the scale (χ2 = 208.690, p < .001, CFI = .949, TLI = .931, SRMR = .040, RMSEA = .083, 90% CI [.072, .095]). An invariance analysis across mothers and fathers revealed the same structure for both. Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities were acceptable. Additionally, preliminary evidence of the scale’s concurrent and discriminant validity was found.

Conclusions

The results point to the suitability of the measure for the Portuguese population, namely in research contexts examining one partner’s perspective of the other partner’s involvement in parenting, and to its potential applicability for cross-cultural research. The measure will also be useful in clinical settings, namely as a tool in pre and post-intervention assessment, however further studies are needed to test this type of applicability.

Keywords

Father involvement Partner support Validation study Psychometric properties PSFI 

Notes

Author Contributions

Conceptualization and design of the study were done by N.A., S.V-S., M-T.R.; data collection was done by N.A.; statistical analysis was done by M.-S.R.; Writing, Revision and Editing were done by N.A., S.V.-S., M.-T.R., M.S.R.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee (Faculty of Psychology of the University of Lisbon) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Aboim, S. (2010). Género, família e mudança em Portugal [Gender, family and change in Portugal]. In K. Wall, S. Aboim & V. Cunha (Eds), A vida familiar no masculino: Negociando velhas e novas masculinidades [Family life in masculinity: Negotiating old and new masculinities] (pp. 39–66). Lisboa: Comissão para a Igualdade no Trabalho e no Emprego [Commission for Equality in Labour and Employment].Google Scholar
  2. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.12.1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association. (2010). 2010 Amendments to the 2002 “Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.”. American Psychologist, 65, 493  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Appl, D., Brown, S., & Stone, M. (2008). A father’s interactions with his toddler: personal and professional lessons of early childhood educators. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 127–134.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-008-0263-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ball, J., & Daly, K. (2012). Father involvement in Canada: a transformative approach. In J. Ball & K. J. Daly (Eds), Father involvement in Canada: Diversity, renewal, and transformation (pp. 1–25). Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bentler, P. M., & Dudgeon, P. (1996). Covariance structure analysis: statistical practice, theory, and directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 563–592.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernard, S., Whitson, M., & Kaufman, J. (2015). The moderating effect of positive father engagement and accessibility on a school-based system of care intervention for mental health outcomes of children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 2923–2933.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-0096-0.
  9. Bernardi, S. I. (2013). The relationship between role salience and work-family conflict among parents in dual-earner families (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Department of Educational & Counseling Psychology, State University of New York at Albany. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1434888375?accountid=43959.
  10. Bouchard, G., & Lee, C. M. (2000). The marital context for father involvement with their preschool children: the role of partner support. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 20(1-2), 37–53.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J005v20n01_04.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bouchard, G., Lee, C. M., Asgary, V., & Pelletier, L. (2007). Fathers’ motivation for involvement with their children: a self-determination theory perspective. Fathering, 5(1), 25–41.  https://doi.org/10.3149/fth.0501.25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modelling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. O. (1989). Testing for equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456–466.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cabrera, N., & Peters, H. (2000). Public policies and father involvement. Marriage & Family Review, 29, 295–314.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v29n04_04.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cabrera, N., Tamis-LeMonda, C., Bradley, R., Hofferth, S., & Lamb, M. (2000). Fatherhood in the twenty-first century. Child Development, 71(1), 127–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cabrera, N., Tamis-LeMonda, C., Lamb, M., & Boller, K. (1999, August). Measuring father involvement in The Early Head Start Evaluation: A multidimensional conceptualization. Paper presented at the National Conference on Health Statistics, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  17. Canavarro, M. C. (1996). Avaliação das práticas educativas através do EMBU: Estudos psicométricos [Assessing educative practices by the EMBU: Psychometric studies]. Psychologica, 16, 5–18.Google Scholar
  18. Cannon, E. A., Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., Mangelsdorf, S. C., Brown, G. L., & Sokolowski, M. S. (2008). Parent characteristics as antecedents of maternal gatekeeping and fathering behavior. Family Process, 47(4), 501–19.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2008.00268.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chen, F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464–504.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Christopher, C., Umemura, T., Mann, T., Jacobvitz, D., & Hazen, N. (2015). Marital quality over the transition to parenthood as a predictor of coparenting. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 3636–3651.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-015-0172-0.
  21. Coley, R. L., & Coltrane, S. (2007). Commentary: Impact of father involvement on children’s developmental trajectories: new findings panel for the National Fatherhood Forum. Applied Developmental Science, 11, 226–228.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10888690701762134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Coley, R. L., & Hernandez, D. C. (2006). Predictors of paternal involvement for resident and nonresident low-income fathers. Developmental Psychology, 42, 1041–1056.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.6.1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: integration in personality. In R. A. Dienstbier (Ed.), Current theory and research in motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1990: Perspectives on motivation (Vol. 38 pp. 237–288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  24. Doherty, W. J., Kouneski, E. F., & Erikson, M. F. (1998). Responsible fathering: an overview and conceptual framework. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60(2), 277–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Durtschi, J. A., Soloski, K. L., & Kimmes, J. (2017). The dyadic effects of supportive coparenting and parental stress on relationship quality across the transition to parenthood. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 43, 308–321.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.12194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fagan, J., & Barnett, M. (2003). The relationship between maternal gatekeeping, paternal competence, mothers’ attitudes about the father role, and father involvement. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 1020–1043.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X03256397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fagan, J., Day, R., Lamb, M. E., & Cabrera, N. J. (2014). Should researchers conceptualize differently the dimensions of parenting for fathers and mothers? Journal of Family Theory and Review, 6, 390–405.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Feinberg, M. E. (2003). The internal structure and ecological context of parenting: a framework for research and intervention. Parenting, 3, 95–131.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327922PAR0302_01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Flouri, E. (2005). Fathering & child outcomes. England: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Flouri, E., Midouhas, E., & Narayanan, M. K. (2016). The relationship between father involvement and child problem behaviour in intact families: a 7-year cross-lagged study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 44, 1011–1021.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0077-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hurley, A., Scandura, T., Schriesheim, C., Brannick, M., Seers, A., Vandenberg, R., & Williams, L. (1997). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: guidelines, issues, and alternatives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 667–683.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199711)18:6<667:AID-JOB874>3.0.CO;2-T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kass, R. E., & Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kramer, K. Z., & Kramer, A. (2016). At-home father families in the united states: Gender ideology, human capital, and unemployment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78, 1315–1331.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kwok, S., & Li, B. (2015). A mediation model of father involvement with preschool children in Hong Kong. Social Indicators Research, 122, 905–923.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0708-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lamb, M. E. (1987). Introduction: the emergent American father. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The father’s role: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 3–25). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  37. Lamb, M. E. (2000). The history of research on father involvement: an overview. Marriage & Family Review, 29, 23–42.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v29n02_03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lamb, M. E., Pleck, J. H., & Levine, J. A. (1986). Effects of paternal involvement on fathers and mothers. Marriage & Family Review, 9(3-4), 67–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Major, S., & Seabra-Santos, M. J. (2013). Uso de inventários comportamentais para a avaliação socioemocional em idade pré-escolar [Use of behavioral inventories for socio-emotional assessment in pre-school children]. Avaliação Psicológica, 12(1), 101–107.Google Scholar
  40. Margolin, G., Gordis, E. B., & John, R. S. (2001). Coparenting: a link between marital conflict and parenting in two-parent families. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(1), 3–21.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.15.t.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marsiglio, W., & Cohen, M. (2000). Conceptualizing father involvement and paternal influence: sociological and qualitative themes. Marriage & Family Review, 29, 75–95.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v29n02_06.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Marsiglio, W., Day, R. D., & Lamb, M. E. (2000). Exploring fatherhood diversity: implications for conceptualizing father involvement. Marriage & Family Review, 29, 269–293.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v29n04_03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maurer, T. W., Pleck, J. H., & Rane, T. R. (2001). Parental identity and reflected-appraisals: measurement and gender dynamics. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(2), 309–321.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00309.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mehall, K. G., Spinrad, T. L., Eisenberg, N., & Gaertner, B. M. (2009). Examining the relations of infant temperament and couples’ marital satisfaction to mother and father involvement: a longitudinal study. Fathering, 7(1), 23–48.  https://doi.org/10.3149/fth.0701.23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Muñiz, J., Elosua, P., & Hambleton, R. K., the International Teste Commission. (2013). Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: Segunda edición [Guidelines for test translation and adaptation: Second edition]. Psicothema, 25, 151–157.  https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.24.Google Scholar
  46. National Center on Fathers and Families. (2001). The fathering indicators framework: A tool for quantitative and qualitative analysis. Philadelphia: Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  47. Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. 3rd edn. New York: Mcgraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  49. Palkovitz, R. (2002). Involved fathering and child development: advancing our understanding of good fathering. In C. S. Tamis-LeMonda & N. Cabrera (Eds), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 119–167). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  50. Pedro, M. F., & Ribeiro, M. T. (2015). Adaptação portuguesa do Questionário de Coparentalidade: Análise fatorial confirmatória e estudos de fiabilidade e validade [Portuguese adaptation of the Coparenting Questionnaire: confirmatory factor analysis and reliability and validity studies]. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 28(1), 116–125.  https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7153.201528113.Google Scholar
  51. Perris, C., Jacobsson, L., Lindstrom, H., von Knorring, L., & Perris, H. (1980). Development of a new inventory assessing memories of parental rearing behaviour. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 61, 265–274.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1980.tb00581.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peugh, J. L., & Enders, C. K. (2004). Missing data in educational research: a review of reporting practices and suggestions for improvement. Review of Educational Research, 74, 525–556.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Planalp, E. M., & Braungart-Rieker, J. M. (2016). Determinants of father involvement with young children: evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study–birth cohort. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(1), 135–146.  https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pleck, J. (2012). Integrating father involvement in parenting research. Parenting: Science and Practice, 12, 243–253.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2012.683365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Roopnarine, J. L. (2015). Introduction: toward a pancultural understanding of constructions and meanings of fathering. In J. L. Roopnarine (Ed.), Fathers across cultures: The importance, roles, and diverse practices of dads (pp. 1–13). Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  56. R Core Team (2015). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org.
  57. Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R Package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. https://doi.org/10%20.18637/jss.v048.i02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.686740.Google Scholar
  59. semTools Contributors (2016). semTools: useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0. 4–9. http://cran.r-project.org/packagesemTools.
  60. Sevigny, P. R., Loutzenhiser, L., & McAuslan, P. (2016). Development and validation of the Fathering Self-Efficacy Scale. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 17(1), 92–102.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Seward, R. R., & Stanley-Stevens, L. (2014). Fathers, fathering, and fatherhood across cultures. In H. Selin (Ed.), Parenting across cultures: Childrearing, motherhood and fatherhood in non-western cultures (pp. 459–474). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  62. Solhan, M. B., Trull, T. J., Jahng, S., & Wood, P. K. (2009). Clinical assessment of affective instability: comparing EMA indices, questionnaire reports, and retrospective recall. Psychological Assessment, 21, 425–436.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Steenkamp, J.-B., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90.  https://doi.org/10.1086/209528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Trahan, M. (2017). Paternal self-efficacy and father involvement: a bidirectional relationship. Psychology of Men & Masculinity.  https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000130.
  65. Wall, K. (2015). Fathers in Portugal: from old to new masculinities. In J. L. Roopnarine (Ed.), Fathers across cultures: The importance, roles, and diverse practices of dads (pp. 132–154). Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  66. Wall, K., Aboim, S., & Cunha, V. (2010). A vida familiar no masculino: Negociando velhas e novas masculinidades [Family life in masculinity: Negotiating old and new masculinities]. Lisboa: Comissão para a Igualdade no Trabalho e no Emprego [Committee on Equality in Work and Employment].Google Scholar
  67. Waller, M. R. (2012). Cooperation, conflict, or disengagement? Coparenting styles and father involvement in fragile families. Family Process, 51(3), 325–342.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2012.01403.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Watson-Phillips, C. (2016). Relational fathering. Journal of Men’s Studies, 24, 277–293.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1060826516661188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yoo, Y., Adamsons, K., Robinson, J., & Sabatelli, R. (2015). Longitudinal influence of paternal distress on children’s representations of fathers, family cohesion, and family conflict. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 591–607.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-013-9870-7.
  70. Zvara, B. J., Schoppe-Sullivan, S., & Dush, C. K. (2013). Fathers’ involvement in child health care: associations with prenatal involvement, parents’ beliefs, and maternal gatekeeping. Family Relations, 62, 649–661.  https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculdade de PsicologiaUniversidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  2. 2.CICPSI, Faculdade de PsicologiaUniversidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations