Advertisement

Multilevel covariance structure analysis of sibling substance use and intrafamily conflict

  • Terry E. Duncan
  • Anthony Alpert
  • Susan C. Duncan
  • Hyman Hops
Article

Abstract

Conventional covariance structure analysis, such as factor analysis, is often applied to data that are obtained in a hierarchical fashion, such as siblings observed within families. A more appropriate specification is demonstrated which explicitly models the within-level and between-level covariance matrices of sibling substance use and intrafamily conflict. Participants were 267 target adolescents (mean age=13.11 years) and 318 siblings (mean age=15.03 years). The level of homogeneity within sibling clusters, and heterogeneity among families, was sufficient to conduct a multilevel covariance structure analysis (MCA). Parental and family-level variables consisting of marital status, socioeconomic status, marital discord, parent use, and modeling of substances were used to explain heterogeneity among families. Marital discord predicted intrafamily conflict, and parent marital status and modeling of substances predicted sibling substance use. Advantages and uses of hierarchical designs and conventional covariance structure software for multilevel data are discussed.

Key words

substance use multilevel structural equation modeling analyses siblings parents adolescents 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abramovitch, R., Corter, C., Pepler, D. J., & Stanhope, L. (1986). Sibling and peer interaction: A final follow-up and comparison.Child Development, 52, 217–229.Google Scholar
  2. Aitkin, M., & Longford, N. (1986). Statistical modeling issues in school effectiveness studies.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 149(1), 1–43.Google Scholar
  3. Andrews, J. A., Hops, H., Ary, D., Tildesley, E., & Harris, J. (1993). Parental influence on early adolescent substance use: Specific and nonspecific effects.Journal of Early Adolescence, 13, 285–310.Google Scholar
  4. Ary, D. V., Tildesley, E., Hops, H., & Andrews, J. (1993). The influence of parent, sibling, and peer modeling and attitudes on adolescent use of alcohol.International Journal of the Addictions, 28, 853–880.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes, G. M., & Welte, J. W. (1986). Patterns and predictors of alcohol use among 7–12th grade students in New York State.Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47, 53–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Blum, K., Nobel, E. P., Sheridan, P. J., Montgomery, A., Ritchie, T., Jagadeeswonan, P., Nogami, H., Briggs, A. H., & Cohen, J. B. (1990). Allelic association of human dopamine D2 receptor gene in alcoholism.Journal of American Medical Association, 263, 2094–2095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., Gordon, A. S., & Brenden, C. (1983). Older brother's influence on younger sibling's drug use.Journal of Psychology, 114, 83–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., Nomura, C., Gordon, A. S., & Cohen, P. (1988). Personality, family, and ecological influences on adolescent drug use: A developmental analysis.Journal of Chemical Dependency Treatment, 1, 123–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brook, J. S., Cohen, P., Whiteman, M., & Gordon, A. S. (1992). Psychosocial risk factors in the transition from moderate to heavy use or abuse of drugs. In M. Glantz & R. Pickens (Eds.),Vulnerability to drug abuse (pp. 359–388). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  10. Burstein, L. (1980). The analysis of multilevel data in educational research and evaluation.Review of Research in Education, 8, 158–233.Google Scholar
  11. Byram, O. W., & Fly, J. W. (1984). Family structure, race, and adolescents' alcohol use: A research note.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 10, 467–478.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cloninger, C. R., Bohman, M. M., Sigvardsson, S., & von Knorring, A. L. (1985). Psychopathology in adopted-out children of alcoholics: The Stockholm adoption study.Recent Developments in Alcoholism, 3, 37–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cotton, N. S. (1979). The familial incidence of alcoholism: A review of the literature.Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 40, 89–116.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cronbach, L. J. (1976).Research on classrooms and schools: Formulation of questions, design, and analysis, Unpublished manuscript. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Evaluation Consortium, School of Education.Google Scholar
  15. Cumes-Raynor, D. P., Lucke, J. C., Singh, B., Adler, B., Lewin, T., Dunne, M., & Raphael, B. (1992). A high-risk community study of paternal alcohol consumption and adolescent's psychosocial characteristics.Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 53, 626–635.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. de Leeuw, J., & Kreft, I. (1986). Random coefficient models for multilevel analysis.Journal of Educational Statistics, 11, 57–85.Google Scholar
  17. Dohrenwend, B. P., Levav, I., Shrout, P. E., Schwartz, S. N., Naveh, G., Link, B. G., Skodol, A. E., & Stueve, A. (1992). Socioeconomic status and psychiatric disorders: The causation-selection issue.Science, 255, 946–952.Google Scholar
  18. Dornbusch, S. M., Carlsmith, J. M., Bushwall, S. J., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, H., Hastorf, A. H., & Gross, R. T. (1985). Single parents, extended households and the control of adolescents.Child Development, 56, 326–341.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Duncan, S. C., & Duncan, T. E. (1994). Modeling incomplete longitudinal substance use data using latent variable growth curve methodology.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 29, 313–338.Google Scholar
  20. Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., & Hops, H. (1994). The effects of family cohesiveness and peer encouragement on the development of adolescent alcohol use: A cohort-sequential approach to the analysis of longitudinal data.Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 55, 588–599.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., Hops, H., & Stoolmiller, M. (1995). Analyzing longitudinal substance use data via generalized estimating equation methodology.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 317–339.Google Scholar
  22. Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., & Hops, H. (1996). The role of parents and older siblings in predicting adolescent substance use: Modeling development via structural equation latent growth methodology.Journal of Family Psychology, 10, 158–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fauber, R., Forehand, R., Thomas, A. M., & Wierson, M. (1990). A mediational model of the impact of marital conflict on adolescent adjustment in intact and divorced families: The role of disrupted parenting.Child Development, 61, 1112–1123.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Forgatch, M. S., & Patterson, G. R. (1989).Parents and adolescents living together. II. Family problem solving. Eugene, OR: Castalia.Google Scholar
  25. Goldstein, H. I. (1986). Multilevel mixed linear model analysis using iterative general least squares.Biometrika, 73, 43–56.Google Scholar
  26. Goodwin, D. W. (1985). Alcoholism and genetics: The sins of the fathers.Archives of General Psychiatry, 42, 171–174.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Gottman, J. M. (1979).Marital interaction: Experimental investigations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  28. Grych, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (1990). Marital conflict and children's adjustment: A cotgnitive-contextual framework.Psychological Bulletin, 108, 267–290.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Harnqvist, K. (1978). Primary mental abilities at collective and individual levels.Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 706–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hansen, W. B., Graham, J. W., Sobel, J. L., Shelton, D. R., Flay, B. R., & Johnson, C. A. (1987). The consistency of peer and parent influences on tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use among young adolescents.Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 10, 559–579.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R., & Miller, J. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention.Psychological Bulletin, 112, 64–105a.Google Scholar
  32. Hops, H., Tildesley, E., Lichtenstein, E., Ary, D., & Sherman, L. (1990). Parent-adolescent problem-solving interactions and drug use.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 16, 239–258.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Hops, H., Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., & Stoolmiller, M. (1996). Parent substance use as a predictor of adolescent use: A six-year lagged analysis.Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 18(3), 157–164.Google Scholar
  34. Jaycox, L. H., & Repetti, R. L. (1993). Conflict in families and the psychological adjustment of preadolescent children.Journal of Family Psychology, 7, 344–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Keesling, J. W., & Wiley, D. E. (1974).Regression Models of Hierarchical Data. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
  36. Kreft, I. G. (1992). Multilevel models for hierarchically nested data: Potential applications in substance abuse prevention research. In L. Collins & L. Seitz (Eds.),Technical Review Panel on Advances in Data Analysis for Prevention Intervention Research. NIDA Research Monograph 108.Google Scholar
  37. Kumpfer, K. L. (1987). Special populations: Etiology and prevention of vulnerability to chemical dependency in children of substance abusers. In B. S. Brown & A. R. Mills (Eds.),Youth at high risk for substance abuse (pp. 1–72). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  38. Kumpfer, K. L., & DeMarsh, J. P. (1986). Family environmental and genetic influences on children's future chemical dependency. In S. Ezekoye, K. Kumpfer, & W. Bukoski (Eds.),Childhood and chemical abuse: Prevention and intervention (pp. 49–91). New York: Haworth.Google Scholar
  39. Lewin, L. M., Hops, H., Davis, B., & Dishion, T. J. (1993). Multimethod comparison of similarity in school adjustment of siblings and unrelated children.Developmental Psychology, 29, 963–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Longford, N. T. (1987). A fast scoring algorithm for maximum likelihood estimation in unbalanced mixed models with nested effects.Biometrika 74, 817–827.Google Scholar
  41. Mason, W. A., Wong, G., & Entwistle, B. (1984).Contextual analysis through the multilevel linear model. Sociological methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  42. Montemayor, R. (1983). parents and adolescents in conflict: All families some of the time and some families most of the time.Journal of Early Adolescence, 3, 83–103.Google Scholar
  43. Moos, R. (1974).Family environment scale and preliminary manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  44. Muthén, B. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Presidential Address to the Psychometric Society, July 1989.Psychometrika, 54, 557–585.Google Scholar
  45. Muthén, B. (1991). Multilevel factor analysis of class and student achievement components.Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 338–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Muthén, B. (1992).Mean and covariance structure analysis of hierarchical data. Paper presented at the Psychometric Society meeting, Princeton, NC, June.Google Scholar
  47. Muthén, B., & Satorra, A. (1989). Multilevel aspects of varying parameters in structural models. In R. D. Bock (Ed.),Multilevel analysis of educational data (pp. 87–99). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  48. Needle, R., McCubbin, H., Wilson, M., Reineck, R., Lazar, A., & Mederer, H. (1986). Interpersonal influences in adolescent drug use—The role of older siblings, parents and peers.International Journal of the Addictions, 21, 739–766.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Nelson, G., & Muthén, B. (1991).Analysis preparation steps for multilevel analysis using LISCOMP (technical report). Los Angeles, University of California.Google Scholar
  50. Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler, P. M. (1988). The impact of family context, deviant attitudes, and emotional distress on adolescent drug use: Longitudinal latent-variable analyses of mothers and their children.Journal of Research in Personality, 22, 154–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Olson, D. H., Bell, R., & Portner, J. (1982).The family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scale. St. Paul: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  52. Patterson, G. R. (1982).A social learning approach: III. Coercive family process. Eugene, OR: Castalia.Google Scholar
  53. Patterson, G. R. (1984). Siblings: Fellow travelers in a coercive system. In R. J. Blanchard & D. C. Blanchard (Eds.),Advances in the study of aggression (Vol. 1, pp. 173–215). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  54. Patterson, G. R. (1986). The contribution of siblings to training for fighting: A microsocial analysis. In D. Olweus, J. Block, & M. Radke-Yarow (Eds.),Development of antisocial and prosocial behaviors (pp. 235–260). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  55. Patterson, G. R., & Bank, L. (1986). bootstrapping your way in the nomological thicket.Behavior Assessment, 8, 49–73.Google Scholar
  56. Patterson, G. R., Reid, J. B., & Dishion, T. J. (1992).A social learning approach: IV. Antisocial boys. Eugene, OR: Castalia.Google Scholar
  57. Prinz, R. J., Foster, S., Kent, R. N., & O'Leary, K. D. (1979). Multivariate assessment of conflict in distressed and nondistressed mother-adolescent dyads.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 691–700.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Raudenbush, S., & Bryk, A. (1988). Methodological advances in studying effects of schools and classrooms on student learning. In E. Z. Roth (Ed.),Review of research in education (pp. 423–475). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  59. Reid, W. J., Crisafulli, A. (1990). Marital discord and child behavior problems: A meta-analysis.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18, 105–117.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Schmidt, W., & Wisenbaker, J. (1986).Hierarchical data analysis: An approach based on structural equations (Tech. Rep. No. 4.). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Department of Counseling Educational Psychology and Special Education.Google Scholar
  61. Searle, S. R., Casella, G., & McCulloch, C. E. (1992).Variance components. New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  62. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads.Journal of Marriage and Family, 38, 15–28.Google Scholar
  63. Steinberg, L. (1987). Single parents, stepparents, and the susceptibility of adolescents to antisocial peer pressure.Child Development, 58, 269–275.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. West, D. J., & Farrington, D. T. (1973).Who becomes delinquent: Second report of the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development. New York: Crane Russak.Google Scholar
  65. Winer, B. J. (1971).Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  66. Winer, B. J., Brown, D. R., & Michels, K. M. (1991).Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Terry E. Duncan
    • 1
  • Anthony Alpert
    • 1
  • Susan C. Duncan
    • 1
  • Hyman Hops
    • 1
  1. 1.Oregon Research InstituteEugene

Personalised recommendations