Child Effects on Lability in Parental Warmth and Hostility: Moderation by Parents’ Internalizing Problems
Research documents that lability in parent-child relationships–fluctuations up and down in parent-child relationships–is normative during adolescence and is associated with increased risk for negative outcomes for youth. Yet little is known about factors that predict lability in parenting. This study evaluated whether children’s behaviors predicted lability in parent-child relationships. Specifically this study tested whether youth maladjustment (delinquency, substance use, internalizing problems) in Grade 6 was associated with greater lability (e.g., more fluctuations) in parents’ warmth and hostility towards their children across Grades 6–8. The study also tested whether the associations between youth maladjustment and lability in parents’ warmth and hostility were moderated by parents’ internalizing problems. The sample included youth and their parents in two parent families who resided in rural communities and small towns (N = 618; 52% girls, 90% Caucasian). Findings suggest that parents’ internalizing problems moderated the associations between child maladjustment and parenting lability. Among parents with high levels of internalizing problems, higher levels of youth maladjustment were associated with greater lability in parents’ warmth. Among parents with low in internalizing problems, higher levels of youth maladjustment were associated with less lability in parents’ warmth. The discussion focuses on how and why parent internalizing problems may affect parental reactivity to youth problem behavior and intervention implications.
KeywordsParent–youth relationships Parenting Parenting lability Child effects Parental depression
Work on this study was supported by research grants from the National Institutes of Health including R03 DA038685 and R01 DA013709. Further support was given to Gregory Fosco through the Karl R. and Diane Wendle Fink Early Career Professorship for the Study of Families. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Drug Abuse or the National Institutes of Health.
M.L. conceived of the study, ran the analyses, and drafted the manuscript. G.F. participated in the design of the study, aided in the interpretation of the data and findings, and provided feedback on drafts. A.H. participated in the design of the study, aided in the interpretation of the data and findings, and provided feedback on drafts. N.R. provided conceptual and statistical consultation, aided in the interpretation of the data and findings, and provided feedback on drafts. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Work on this paper was supported by research grants from the National Institutes of Health including R03 DA038685 and R01 DA013709. Further support was given to Gregory Fosco through the Karl R. and Diane Wendle Fink Early Career Professorship for the Study of Families.
Data Sharing and Declaration
This manuscript’s data will not be deposited.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The original PROSPER study procedures were approved by Institutional Review Board at The Pennsylvania State University, where the study was housed. All procedures performed in studies 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. The study here used deidentified secondary data from the PROSPER project. Therefore it was deemed exempt from the Institution Review Board at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
All youths and families in the original PROSPER study were informed about and consented to participate in the project.
- Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA school-age forms and profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families.Google Scholar
- Bornstein, M. H. (2015). Children’s parents. In M. H. Bornstein & T. Leventhal (Eds.), Ecological settings and processes in developmental systems. In R. M. Lerner (Editor-in-chief), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (7th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 55-31). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: bioecological perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.Google Scholar
- Carrasco, M. A., Holgado, F. P., Rodríguez, M. A., & Del Barrio, M. V. (2009). Concurrent and across-time relations between mother/father hostility and children’s aggression: a longitudinal study. Journal of Family Violence, 24(4), 213–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-009-9222-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Conger, R. D. (1989). Iowa Youth and Families Project, Wave A. Report prepared for Iowa State University. Ames, IA: Institute for Social and Behavioral Research.Google Scholar
- Dallaire, D. H., Pineda, A. Q., Cole, D. A., Ciesla, J. A., Jacquez, F., LaGrange, B., & Bruce, A. E. (2006). Relation of positive and negative parenting to children’s depressive symptoms. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35(2), 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3502_15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2005). Informant discrepancies in the assessment of childhood psychopathology: A critical review, theoretical framework, and recommendations for further study. Psychological Bulletin, 131(4), 483–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.4.483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Derogatis, L., & Unger, R. (2010). Symptom Checklist-90-Revised. In I. Weiner & W. E. Craighead (Eds.), The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology (pp. 81–84). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Elliott, D. S., Ageton, S. S., & Huizinga, D. (1982). Explaining delinquency and drug use. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Fosco, G. M., Lippold, M., & Feinberg, M. E. (2014). Interparental boundary problems, parent–adolescent hostility, and adolescent–parent hostility: A family process model for adolescent aggression problems. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 3(3), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goodman, S. H. (2007). Depression in mothers. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 3, 107–135. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Greenberg, M. T., & Lippold, M. A. (2013). Promoting healthy outcomes among youth with multiple risks: Innovative approaches. Annual Review of Public Health, 34, 253–270. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hipwell, A., Keenan, K., Kasza, K., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Bean, T. (2008). Reciprocal influences between girls’ conduct problems and depression, and parental punishment and warmth: a six year prospective analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(5), 663–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-007-9206-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lansford, J. E., Rothenberg, W. A., Jensen, T. M., Lippold, M. A., Bacchini, D., Bornstein, M. H., & Malone, P. S. (2018). Bidirectional relations between parenting and behavior problems from age 8 to 13 in nine countries. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 28(3), 571–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McMahon, R. J., & Metzler, C. W. (1998). Selecting parenting measures for assessing family-based prevention interventions. In R. S. Ashery, E. B. Robertson & K. L. Kumpfer (Eds.), Drug abuse prevention through family interventions. NIDA Research Monograph (pp. 294–323). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. 177.Google Scholar
- Ram, N., Gerstorf, D., Lindenberger, U., & Smith, J. (2011). Developmental change and intraindividual variability: Relating cognitive aging to cognitive plasticity, cardiovascular lability, and emotional diversity. Psychology and Aging, 26(2), 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ram, N., & Grimm, K. J. (2015). Growth curve modeling and longitudinal factor analysis. In W.Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.), W. Overton, & P. C. M. Molenaar (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (7th edn., pp. 758–788). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Redmond, C., Schainker, L., Shin, C., & Spoth, R. (2007). Discrepancies between in-home and in-school adolescent self-reports of substance use. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Prevention Research, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- Reitz, E., Deković, M., & Meijer, A. M. (2006). Relations between parenting and externalizing and internalizing problem behaviour in early adolescence: Child behaviour as moderator and predictor. Journal of Adolescence, 29(3), 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sameroff, A. (Ed.) (2009). The transactional model of development: How children and contexts shape each other (pp. 3–21). Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- Sheeber, L. B., Johnston, C., Chen, M., Leve, C., Hops, H., & Davis, B. (2009). Mothers’ and fathers’ attributions for adolescent behavior: An examination in families of depressed, subdiagnostic, and non-depressed youth. Journal of Family Psychology, 23(6), 871–881. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Spoth, R., Greenberg, M. T., Bierman, K., & Redmond, C. (2004). PROSPER community-university partnership model for public education systems: Capacity-building for evidence-based, competence-building prevention. Prevention Science, 5(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000013979.52796.8b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar