{-0.533
:a:..

i

1 .315... 5....

, 4 u 5- o.
3§D1\t?, .
. :i’. »

“J. :

.n‘i}.

..\3» . AI.
Jinéxdul¥xli 1A!
~.é~o..§u))fu .92
31.2.1}; '51:!
)I R v. .3.\\:
a va

Vgawrwurflzr
:. . Luttn.
a ‘

 

lv - ..|l.l\€ 1‘».
ix i.ra;2\vst
23357,-

:sinfl

1.32.!

 

 

3 I

3.v...%§

.5... 333.. .
.i

 

 

 

"£308

170 N

MIIGCH

l lllllllllllllllllllllllll”llllllllllllllllllll

31293 01402 7803

ll

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

MATERNAL WELL-BEING AND ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR
AND DEVELOPMENT: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY
OF BIDIRECTIONAL PROCESSES

presented by

Domini Rose Castellino

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

mom degree in W

WM

U Major professor

Date Novenber 9, 1995

 

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

 

LIBRARY
M'CMQBn State
University

 

 

 

PLACE H RETURN BOX to romowo this chookout from your record.
To AVOID FINES rotum on or before data duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

APR 269-993;?
O”; U v l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU lo An Affirmative MONEM Opportunity Institution
Wanna-m

MATERNAL WELL-BEING AND ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR
AND DEVELOPMENT: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY
OF BIDIRECTIONAL PROCESSES
By

Domini Rose Castellino

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1995

current :
and acre
relations

mother-a

from the
Study (R2
molhers a

relationsh

 

ABSTRACT
MATERNAL WELL-BEING AND ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR
AND DEVELOPMENT: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY
OF BIDIRECTIONAL PROCESSES
By

Domini Rose Castellino

Framed by ideas brought to the fore by developmental contextualism, the
current study examined a reciprocal model of mother-adolescent relations both within-
and across time. Specifically, the present investigation examined direct and mediated
relations between maternal well-bein g, adolescent behavior and development, and the
mother-adolescent relationship.

Participants in the present study were young adolescents and their mothers
from the Replication and Extension of the Pennsylvania Early Adolescent Transitions
Study (REPEATS). The findings indicated that the within-time relations between
mothers and adolescents were significantly mediated through the mother-adolescent
relationship. However, only a direct relationship emerged when the constructs were
examined across time.

By focusing on the multiple levels of analysis in the bidirectional relations
between mothers and adolescents, the present investigation demonstrated the
usefulness of adopting a developmental contextual framework when examining person-

context relations during this period of life.

T
the com p
members.
inspiring

his dedica

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There are several people I would like to recognize for their support throughout
the completion of this thesis. First, I extend my appreciation to my committee
members. I want to thank Dr. Jacqueline Lemer for her kindness and generosity, for
inspiring me and always looking out for me. I want to thank Dr. Richard Lerner, for
his dedication and standards of quality, he has taught me so much, including
perseverance! My warm appreciation and gratitude goes out to the Lemers for both
their professional and personal support. Thank you to Alexander von Eye for his
kindness and methodological assistance.

I want to thank my friendS--Alex, Linda, Lisa, and Mike--for their support and
encouragement, and for providing diversions just when I needed them!

Finally, I want to thank the people closest to my heart. Thank you to my
father, who has always encouraged me to do what I thought was right and for
standing by me know matter what, thank you for your unconditional love; To my
mother, whose loving memories provide me with my daily source of strength; To my
brother Larry, for supporting, encouraging, and protecting me for as long as I can
remember, for being my secure base, and most of all for loving me so much; To my
brother Gene, for instilling in me my work ethic long ago and for helping me to
“build character!”; and finally to Christopher, who has been my daily support through
the good times and bad, for all the times I’ve given you reason to walk away but you
reached out and took my hand instead. Having all of you in my life, I am truly

blessed.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ....................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................... viii
PROBLEM STATEMENT .................................. 1
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............................. 6
The Developmental Contextual View of Person-Context Relations ..... ll
Developmental Contextualism and the Study of Early Adolescence ..... 16
METHOD ............................................ 32
Participants and Design ............................... 32
Measures ........................................ 34
Procedure ....................................... 46
RESULTS ............................................ 48
Descriptive Analyses ................................. 50
Relationships between Adolescent Behavior and Development
and Maternal Well-Being .......................... 50
Direct Paths between Adolescent Behavior and Development
and Maternal Well-Being within Time .................. 66

Longitudinal Analyses between Adolescent Behavior and
Development, Maternal Well-Being, and the Mother-

Adolescent Relationship .......................... 84
DISCUSSION ......................................... 93
Relationships between Adolescent Behavior and Development
and Maternal Well-Being Within Time ................. 94
Cross-Time Relationships between Adolescent Behavior and
Development and Maternal Well-Being ................. 97
Limitations of the Present Study .......................... 100
Strengths of the Present Study ........................... 102
Conclusions ...................................... 103
LIST OF REFERENCES .................................. 105
APPENDIX A ......................................... 117

iv

 

 

AP

AP

AP}

 

 

APPENDIX D ......................................... 157

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table

Table .

Table I

Table 4

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Participation Rates for Girls, Boys, and Mothers in the REPEATS
Across Three Times of Testing for the 1989-90 Cohort ............ 33

Table 2. The Constructs and Measures from the REPEATS used to Assess the
Relationship between Maternal Well-Being and Adolescent Behavior
and Development .................................... 35

Table 3. The Constructs, Measures, and Scores for the REPEATS Used to Assess
the Relationship between Maternal Well-being and Adolescent Behavior and
Development ....................................... 36

Table 4. Scales, Cronbach Alpha Coefficients, and Participation Rates for
Adolescents in the REPEATS Across Three Waves of Testing for the 1989-90
Cohort .......................................... 41

Table 5. Scales, Cronbach Alpha Coefficients, and Participation Rates for
Mothers in the REPEATS Across Three Waves of Testing for the 1989-90
Cohort .......................................... 42

Table 6. Means and Standard Deviations of the Maternal Well-Being Variables
at the Beginning and End of Sixth Grade and the Beginning of Seventh
Grade ........................................... 51

Table 7. Means and Standard Deviations of the Adolescent Behavior and
Development Variables at the Beginning and End of Sixth Grade and the
Beginning of Seventh Grade ............................. 52

Table 8. Means and Standard Deviations of the Hypothesized Mediating Variables
at the Beginning and End of Sixth Grade and the Beginning of Seventh
Grade .......................................... 53

Table 9. Correlations between Adolescent Behavior and Development Variables,
Maternal Well-Being Variables, and the Mediating Variables at the
Beginning of Sixth Grade ............................... 54

Vi

 

 

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table l

 

Table 10. Correlations between Adolescent Behavior and Development Variables,
Maternal Well-Being Variables, and the Mediating Variables at the End of
Sixth Grade ....................................... 56

Table 11. Correlations between Adolescent Behavior and Development Variables,
Maternal Well-Being Variables, and the Mediating Variables at the
Beginning of Seventh Grade ............................. 58

Table 12. Correlations between Adolescent Behavior and Development Variables,
Maternal Well-Being Variables, and the Mediating Variables at the
Beginning and End of Sixth Grade ......................... 60

Table 13. Correlations between Adolescent Behavior and Development Variables,
Maternal Well-Being Variables, and the Mediating Variables at the
Beginning of Sixth Grade and the Beginning of Seventh Grade ........ 62

Table 14. Correlations between Adolescent Behavior and Development Variables,

Maternal Well-Being Variables, and the Mediating Variables at the End of
Sixth Grade and the Beginning of Seventh Grade ................ 64

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Structural model of maternal well-being, adolescent behavior and
development, and the mother-adolescent relationship. .............. 28

Figure 2. Within- and across-time model of the relationships between
adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-being. ........ 30

Figure 3. Direct and indirect paths tested at the beginning and end of sixth
grade and the beginning of seventh grade. ..................... 67

Figure 4. The t-Values indicating significant paths for adolescent behavior
and development and maternal well-being at the beginning of sixth
grade. ........................................... 68

Figure 5. The t-Values indicating Significant paths for adolescent behavior
and development and maternal well-being at the end of sixth grade. ..... 69

Figure 6. The t-values indicating significant paths for adolescent behavior
and development and maternal well-being at the beginning of seventh
grade. ........................................... 70

Figure 7. The t-values indicating significant paths for maternal well-being
and adolescent behavior and development at the beginning of sixth
grade. ........................................... 71

Figure 8. The t-values indicating significant paths for maternal well-being
and adolescent behavior and development at the end of sixth grade. ..... 72

Figure 9. The t-values indicating significant paths for maternal well-being
and adolescent behavior and development at the beginning of seventh
grade. ........................................... 73

Figure 10. The t-values indicating significant paths for the relations between
adolescent behavior and development, maternal well-being and the mother—
adolescent relationship at the beginning of sixth grade. ............. 78

viii

 

 

Fgur

ligur

figure

 

 

Figure 11. The t-values indicating significant paths for the relations between
maternal well-being, adolescent behavior and development, and the mother-
adolescent relationship at the beginning of sixth grade. ............. 79

Figure 12. The t-values indicating significant paths for the relations between
adolescent behavior and development, maternal well-being and the mother-
adolescent relationship at the end of sixth grade. ................. 81

Figure 13. The t-values indicating significant paths for the relations between
maternal well-being, adolescent behavior and development, and the mother-
adolescent relationship at the end of sixth grade. ................. 82

Figure 14. The t-values indicating significant paths for the relations between
adolescent behavior and development, maternal well-being and the mother-
adolescent relationship at the beginning of seventh grade. ........... 83

Figure 15. The t-Values indicating significant paths for the relations between
maternal well-being, adolescent behavior and development, and the mother-
adolescent relationship at the beginning of seventh grade. ........... 85

Figure 16. Longitudinal direct and indirect paths. .................... 87
Figure 17. The t-values indicating significant paths for adolescent behavior

and development at the beginning of sixth grade and maternal well-being

at the end of sixth grade. ............................... 88
Figure 18. The t-values indicating significant paths for maternal well-being

at the beginning of sixth grade and adolescent behavior and development
at the end of sixth grade. ............................... 9O

ix

Fl

 

 

 

of ill
hege.
PCTSP
under
adequ
Nessle
conseq
(Pepper
human r
Cm'ironr
PTOduee
Lerner,
tIIinslatic

Tire Stres

 

”Pa/Ha:-
resulrs in
hUman de

Tn

@610me

Chapter 1

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Within the last two decades, the philosophical models used to frame the study
of human development have evolved significantly. The earlier philosophical
hegemony of organicism and mechanism has disappeared, primarily because neither
perspective provided a sufficiently comprehensive framework from which to
understand the dynamic interrelatedness of organism and environment: Neither model
adequately captured the interrelated levels that comprise human life (Baltes, Reese &
Nessleroade, 1977; Lerner, 1991; Schneirla, 1957; Tobach, 1981). As a
consequence, many scholars have begun to explore the idea--predicated on contextual
(Pepper, 1942) and general systems (von Bertalanffy, 1933, 1965) metamodels of
human development--that an active organism and a multilevel and changing
environment interact reciprocally (or are "fused”; Tobach & Greenberg, 1984) to
produce development (Lerner, 1991, 1992). Developmental systems notions (Ford &
Lerner, 1992), such as developmental contextualism (Lerner, 1986), epitomize the
translation of this philosophical point of View into a theory of human development.
The stress in developmental contextualism-on the importance of the multiple levels of
organization that comprise the environment, or context, of human development--
results in an emphasis on a multidisciplinary and integrated approach to the study of
human development.

This developmental, multilevel, and integrated approach to the study of human

development may be applied across all portions of the life span. However,

 

 

 

deve

whit

Thro

recog-
perior
transil
group
early a
of life,‘
this per
this peri
context:
develOp
h
lyrically

is such 1

adolescer

 

i’Wfasin:
”‘9 predor
del’tlopm
[hit man
W7 ”1dr '

("Omen er

 

2

developmental contextualism may provide an especially useful framework within
which to study adolescence, and particularly the initial portions of this period of life.
Through the pioneering efforts of Hamburg (1974), early adolescence has been
recognized as a time of biological, psychological and socioemotional changes. This
period is also characterized by changes in the adolescent’s context, such as the
transition from elementary to middle school, and by an alteration in primary social
group (i.e., there is a change in social emphasis from parents to peers). Thus, " . . .
early adolescence can be a challenging time for the adolescent experiencing this phase
of life, for the parents who are nurturing the adolescent during progression through
this period, and for the adult charged with enhancing the development of youth during
this period of life” (Lerner, 1993, p. 3). As such, the multiple individual and
contextual changes of the early adolescent period legitimates a multidisciplinary,
developmental, and contextual approach to the study of development.

Adolescents, although engaged actively with peers, are nevertheless also
typically embedded within their family context (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Lerner, 1993);
as such the family, as a ”proximal" context, has been a major focus in the study of
adolescent development (Allison & Lerner, 1993). While fathers have been given
increasing attention in the literature (Lamb, 1980, 1986, 1988), mothers have been
the predominate focus of most research on family influences on adolescent
development (Ambert, 1992; J. Lerner, 1994). This emphasis may be due to the fact
that mothers of adolescents-more so than fathers--still spend the most parental time
with their children, even in light of changing family roles and the increased rate of

mothers entering the labor force (Hernandez, 1993). While the importance of the

 

_ satisfat'

 

 

 

fathe

led u

adole

0116 a.

mothe

aspou

model

 

3

father is not denied, the predominance of maternal influences during adolescence has
led the focus of the present investigation to be on the influences of the mother on
adolescent development.
The present research tests a structural model of mother-adolescent relations,
one associated with the developmental contextual perspective, to focus on how a
mother’s satisfaction with her caregiving role (as well as with her other roles, e.g. , as
a spouse and/or worker) affects young adolescent behavior and development. The
model uses a construct termed ”maternal well-being"-—which is a, composite of“ family a
WQDQIQEL and rolesatisfaction variablesfF-to test ideas derived from
extant research (e. g. , Lerner & Galambos, 1986); this information stresses that
mothers’ satisfaction with their roles influences the quality of the mother-child
relationship which, in turn, can influence adolescent development. Accordingly, the
present research tests a "process of influence" model (Lerner & Galambos, 1985)
which stresses that role satisfaction, as indexed by maternal well-being, influences
mother-child relations which, in turn, influences adolescent developmental outcomes.
That is, the present research tests the idea that maternal well-being is the key variable
affecting mother-child relations and, in turn, adolescent behavior and development.
Lescarch on young adolescent behavior and development has emphasized the
iflP‘lfléflce at assessing. academis acwevement, adolescent? concept? Of .5919. and.
famifflunct’ironingudfluringthis transitional period of development, (e. g. , Montemayor
& Clayton, 1983; Simmons & Blyth, 1987). Thus, adolescent developmental
outcomes will be indexed by the variables of family satisfaction, familymcohesion,‘

“lf‘wmhzfiné academis achievement.

 

 

 

devel

E3
:12
C
(b

l .

adoles
materr
and dd
adolesc
level a
structur

and yor

AdolesC
Jovanos
Ohannes
Oohon c,

Se"Mun:

beginning~
l

 

Informal.

 

wait of c

“111 exam

 

4

Moreover, given the dynamic, or reciprocal, relations stressed in
developmental contextualism, the present investigation will also address the mumal
influenm between mothers and their adolescents. This focus will occur through
examining the within and across time relations between maternal well-being and
adolescent outcomes. Accordingly, to test the key hypothesis of this study--that
maternal well-being predicts mother-child relations and, in turn, adolescent behavior
and development--and to appraise the reciprocal nature of maternal well-being and
adolescent outcomes (i.e. , it is possible that adolescent behavior and developmental
level at one point in time influences subsequent feelings of maternal well-being),
structural equation modeling will be used to assess the relationships between mothers
and young adolescents over three times of testing.

Data will be derived from the Replication and Extension of the Early
Adolescent Transitions Study (REPEATS; e. g., Jovanovic, Lerner, & Lerner, 1989;
Jovanovic & Lemer, 1994; Ohannessian, Lerner, Lerner, & von Eye, 1994;
Ohannessian, Lemer, Lerner, & von Eye, 1995). The REPEATS is a short-term,
cohort comparative longitudinal study which examined young adolescents from a
semi-rural community in central Pennsylvania. Adolescents were first tested at the
beginning of sixth grade and tested twice each year until the end of eighth grade.
Information was also obtained from parents, teachers, and school records. The initial
wave of data collection was conducted in October 1989. The present investigation
will examine the first three waves of data, from Fall 1989, Spring 1990, and Fall
1990. These waves of data were selected in order to both assess developmental

change and to maximize the number of participants available for study. These data

wil

of-i

thei

Hov

revit

 

TESCE

 

 

 

fl

u .Ilbll..-[|.‘
. . I. )7.

5

will allow the testing of the above-noted ideas pertinent to the utility of the process-
of-influence model in accounting for the ways in which relations between mothers and
their children influence outcomes in adolescent development.

Further details about the methods of this study are presented in Chapter 3.
However, prior to a discussion of the methodology of this research, it is useful to
review the literature pertinent to the process-of-influence model to be tested in this

research. This review is presented in Chapter 2.

 

 

 

 

 

cours
19705
develt
1970)

1983,

PYOCeS:
one ad.
degree
Riegel.
theories
metamo

R9956, r

 

this {ram
on its Cn-
Develop:
1%ng if

Chapter 11

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Over the last thirty years, conceptual frameworks from which to study the
course of human development have evolved significantly. The period preceding the
19705 was characterized by a shift away from the descriptive and normative study of
development to a focus on process and explanation (Bronfenbrenner, 1963; Mussen,
1970) and a call “for studies of developmental processes and mechanisms" (Lerner,
1983, p. 11).

Moreover, throughout this period, the emerging emphasis on developmental
process was embedded in discussions of the idea that the concepts and theories that
one adopts regarding the nature of human developmental change depend to a large
degree on one’s metatheoretical orientation (Lerner, 1978; Overton & Reese, 1973;
Riegel, 1973, 1975). This concern with these philosophical bases of developmental
theories involved discussions regarding two major world views, paradigms, or
metamodels: Organicism and mechanism (e.g., Lerner, 1976, 1978, 1979; Overton &
Reese, 1973; Riegel, 1975, 1976a).

The organisrnic metamodel characterizes humans as active organisms. Within
this framework, the organism is viewed as inherently and spontaneously active, acting
on its environment rather than passively responding to it (Overton & Reese, 1973).
Development is characterized by qualitatively discontinuous changes (i.e. stage-like)
leading toward a final end state (Nagel, 1957). This View is exemplified in Piaget’s

(e.g., 1952, 1970) theory of cognitive development and in Freud’s (e.g., 1949, 1954)

——"‘-
#—
5”]

 

 

LI" "

stag

mac
foro
focu.
envir
1918}

derelo

WSW

the mul
develop.
1975).

Fl
changes 1

Reese. &

 

and aging
Unidirecm.
dlfiierenceg
"“embershgi.

mates, r9,

stages of psychosexual development.

In contrast, the mechanistic metamodel views the organism as a reactive
machine. The organism is inherently at rest, and active only as a result of external
forces (Overton & Reese, 1973). Thus, in this position an active environment is the
focus, rather than an active organism. Development occurs as a result of exposure to
environmental stimulation. This View is illustrated in Behaviorism (Watson, 1913,
1918) and social learning theory (Bandura, 1965).

These paradigms provided an important basis for theory and research in human
development. However, during the 19708, several scholars argued that neither
perspective was able to adequately capture the relationship between the organism and
the multiple levels of organization that comprise the environmental context of human
development (e.g. , Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Lemer, 1978; Riegel, 1975; Sameroff,
1975).

For example, attempts to use an organismic model to account for age-related
changes in the adulthood and aging years were not completely successful (Baltes,
Reese, & Lipsitt, 1980). This was because organismic theorists viewed the adulthood
and aging years as universal and inevitable periods of decline. However, such
unidirectional change was not evident in all data sets. Rather, interindividual
differences in intraindividual change were seen, and this was linked to birth cohort
membership, and thus the historical level of the context of human development
(Baltes, 1979; Baltes & Schaie, 1974). On the basis of these data, Brim and Kagan
(1980) note that, “humans have a capacity for change across the entire life span . . .

there are important growth changes across the life span from birth to death, many

fl

 

 

Ls

indi\'
early

of hu

 

 

Elit'ism

   
   
   

political
Confiden
declines 1

Come 0f ll)

lillbh'ed in

 

8

individuals retain a great capacity for change, and the consequences of the events of
early childhood are continually transformed by later experiences, making the course
of human development more open than many have believed (p. 1).”

Further, variables related to birth cohorts and/or with events occurring within
particular historical periods seemed to exert greater influence on behavior change than
did influences associated with age (Baltes, et. al., 1980). For example, Nesselroade
and Baltes ( 1974), in their longitudinal-sequential study of adolescents from 1970-
1972, suggested that the primary basis of personality changes for these adolescents
over this three year period might have been the type of social change patterns that
comprised the adolescents’ environmental milieu during these times of measurement.
For example, the historical events which characterized this period--including youth
activism in conjunction with the Vietnam War, preoccupation with ethical, moral, and
political issues rather than cognitive achievement, and a decline in respect for, and
confidence in, public and educational leadershipumay have been reflected by the
declines in adolescent superego strength and achievement, and in increases in
independence across the adolescents studied.

Further, Elder’s (1974) study of children and adolescents developing during
the Great Depression of the 19303 is an illustration of the impact of historical events
on development. Elder’s assessment of a cohort of children and adolescents born
between 1920 to 1921 suggested that the economic hardship and subsequent family
deprivation experienced during the Great Depression produced alterations in the life
course of these individuals. For example, deprived children were more likely to be

involved in adult-like tasks within the family, and to enter marriage and/or work roles

 

 

31111

 

famil

indivi

uith r
that in
context
pertinei
position
found ih
Weekend
that com

t0 the sin

lTh’olved

 

 

 

9

at an early age. Further, in adulthood, these individuals were more likely to stress
family activity, and to place a higher value on children and parenthood than those
individuals from nondeprived families.

Thus, variables in the context associated with markers other than age, i.e. ,
with markers such as birth cohort and time of measurement, seem linked to changes
that individuals undergo across their ontogeny. While the import of the role of such
contextual markers is to diminish the strength of the organismic viewpoint, the data
pertinent to these markers also weaken the mechanistic position, at least as the
position is represented by extant environmentally reductionistic Behavioristic theories
found in developmental psychology (e.g., Bijou, 1976; Bijou & Baer, 1961). This
weakening of the mechanistic viewpoint occurs because there is no empirical evidence
that contextual effects associated with cohort or time of measurement can be reduced
to the simple environmental phenomenon (i.e., stimulus-response connections)
involved in these Behavioristic positions.

As a result of these problems with organicism and mechanism and, as well,
because of continuing interest in the metatheoretical bases of human development
theory and research, scholars began to move away from solely organismic or
mechanistic paradigms. They began to explore ways to integrate ideas from the
organismic and mechanistic models and to consider new paradigms--such as
contextualism (Pepper, 1942)--as frames for developmental theories (Dixon & Lemer,
1992; Lerner, 1986, 1992). For example, Riegel’s (1973, 1975, 1976a) dialectic
theory of development was representative of both of these conceptual trends. This

view attempted to integrate key components of both organism and mechanism by

 

 

 

CO V

ofa

of re
oonte
l976t
“embe

derive:

Pepper’;
oontextu
these lev
Of active
sereraj sc
more gen
dei'ClOpme
Dimer, 19

The
pen0d that
”We Conte

Particular (e

[987; [finer

10

considering the reciprocal relations between the active organism and the active
environment. Riegel’s View stressed the continual interplay between multiple levels
of analysis, including inner-biological, individual-psychological, outer-physical, and
sociocultural. His dialectical model views developmental changes “as a consequence
of reciprocal (bidirectional) relations between the active organism and the active
context” (Lerner & Busch-Rossnagel, 1981, p. 3). Thus, Riegel (1975, 1976a,
1976b) 'developmentalized” and "contextualized" the study of the person by
“embedding the individuals within an integrated and changing matrix of influences
derived from multiple levels of organization” (Ford & Lerner, 1992, p. 6).

Thus, Riegel’s dialectical theory can be viewed as consistent with that of
Pepper’s (1942) contextual world hypothesis. That is, both dialecticism and
contextualism assume constant change of all levels of analysis and embeddedness of
these levels; both views promote broadened interest in the developmental implications
of active organisms being engaged in relations with their active context. In fact,
several scholars have noted that Riegel’s (1975) theory was indeed an instance of a
more general concern in the 19705 and 19803 with the role of the context of human
development, and of the dynamic nature of the person-context relation (Dixon &
Lerner, 1992; Dixon, Lemer, & Hultsch, 1991; Lerner, Hultsch, & Dixon, 1983).

There were several instances of theoretical statements developed during this
period that both reflected and advanced this interest in understanding the dynamic role
of the context in human development in general, and in adolescent development in
particular (e.g.,Baltes, 1987; Brooks-Gunn, 1987; Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Petersen,

1987; Lemer, 1982; Lerner & Busch-Rossnagel, 1981; Lewis & Rosenblum, 1974;

Ma

maj

was (1

 

this vi‘

adole

the em:

develop

 

Particuli
contexts

role in d1

 

 

 

ll

Magnusson, 1988). Indeed, because adolescence was an ontogenetic instance of
major biological, psychological, and social change, it was often used as the “sample
ease” for these theoretical discussions of person—context dynamic interactions.

For instance, one influential theoretical position that arose during this period
was developmental contextualism (Lerner, 1986; Lerner & Kauffman, 1985). In fact
this viewpoint has been used quite extensively to frame research in the field of
adolescent development (e. g. , Lerner, 1992; Lerner & Foch, 1987).

Accordingly, because developmental contextualism provides a key example of
the emerging interest within developmental theory in the role of the context in human
development, and because this view’s use in the field of adolescence will be
particularly useful in framing the current study’s focus on adolescents and their
contexts (e.g., their families), it is appropriate to now discuss this position and its
role in developmental theory in general and in the study of adolescence in particular.

D v l m n n x Vi w
of Person-gontext Relations

Developmental contextualism rests on two major ideas. First, this perspective
asserts that variables from multiple, qualitatively distinct, levels of analysis comprise
human development (Lerner, 1992, 1993). While most scholars would not disagree
with this View, some scholars would adopt a reductionistic approach, attempting to
interpret variables from multiple levels in terms of one level (Lerner, 1992, 1993).
Rejecting this reductionistic orientation, developmental contextualists would adhere to
a nonreductionistic orientation, focusing on the relations-or, better, the “fusions”

(Tobach & Greenberg, l984)--among variables from multiple, qualitatively distinct

 

 

 

leve

that

 

 

12

levels.

This notion is linked to the second key idea of developmental contextualism,
that variables from any level one level influence, and are influenced by, variables
from other levels of analysis (Lerner, 1992, 1993). That is, the multi-level variables
that comprise human development exist in reciprocal relation (Lerner 1992, 1993).
Within the developmental contextual perspective, this reciprocal, or bidirectional
relation of variables, is termed dynamic interactionism (Lerner, 1978, 1979). As a
consequence of the dynamic interactions that occur between multiple levels of
organization, “changing relations among levels constitutes the basic process of human
developmental change” (Lerner, 1992; p. 377). That is, development involves the
changing relations between the developing individual and its changing context.

Several other ideas emerged in the 1980s consistent with the stress in
developmental contextualism on the potential for change across life and on the
embeddedness of change at multiple levels of organization. The life-span perspective
(Baltes, 1979, 1987), in its stress on the entire life course, and the ecological
perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), with its emphasis on the contextual systems that
impinge on human development, are representative of these ideas. It is useful to note
in more detail the relationship between developmental contextualism and these other
perspectives.

'f - v 1 m P r 'v

The life-span view of human development (Baltes, 1979, 1987) represents a set

of interrelated ideas about the nature of human development and change (Lerner &

Foch, 1987). This perspective has two principle assumptions or propositions. The

 

 

first

that

biolt

cultu

 

 

13
first proposition, labeled embeddedness (Lerner, Skinner, & Sorell, 1980) suggests

that the key phenomena of human life exist at multiple levels (e.g., the inner-
biological, individual-psychological, dyadic, social network, community, societal,
cultural, outer physical-ecological, and historical) (Lerner, 1987). At any given time,
variables from any of these levels may influence individual functioning. Moreover,
these levels do not function independently of one another, but rather variables at one
level can influence and are influenced by variables at other levels (Lerner, 1987).
Consequently, there is a dynamic interaction among the levels of analysis, which is
the second proposition or assumption of the life-span developmental perspective. This
dynamic interaction implies that each level may be both a product and a producer of
functioning and change at other levels (Lerner, 1987). The life-span developmental
perspective, then, suggests that changes across life are a product and producer of the
multiple levels of context within which the individual is embedded (Lerner & Busch-
Rossnagel, 1981).

Thus, the developmental contextual perspective is consonant with propositions
made by the life-span developmental perspective in regard to both the Was
of levels of analysis and the dynamic interaction among these levels. Similar
comparability exists between developmental contextualism and the ecological
developmental perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).
W t.»

Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological developmental systems theory Views the
child as a developing organism embedded within a complex system of relationships

affected by multiple levels of the context. This theory views the environment as a

_ Fl;

 

 

sen

reh:

indit
ruigt

ndcrc

 

 

14

series of “nested structures,” or systems, each contained by the next. Bronfenbrenner
referred to these structures as the micro-, meso-, exo-, and macrosystem
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979).

The microsystem refers to the immediate environmental settings in which the
individual is embedded. These immediate settings include the home, school, the
neighborhood, and the peer group. The connections, or interrelationships among
microsystems, for instance the relationship between home and school, constitute the
W- The expsystem refers to settings which do not directly contain the
individual, but in which events occur that can affect, or are affected by, events within
the microsystem. For example, a child is not part of a mother’s work environment,
but the mother’s experiences at work may affect the way she interacts with her child.
Finally, the last of the four systems, the macrosystem, contains the most broad
environmental influences such as policies, laws, cultural beliefs, and values.

Ecological deveIOpmental systems theory, consonant with developmental
contextualism and the life-span View of development, maintains that these systems
reciprocally influence each other. That is, change in one system bidirectionally
influences change in other systems. Thus, both ecological developmental systems
theory and the life-span developmental perspective stress ideas associated with
developmental contextual notions of human development. The stress in these
perspectives, on dynamic interactions among the multiple levels of organization that
comprise the context of development, emphasizes the importance of a

multidisciplinary and integrated approach to the study of human development.

 

 

dew
on t
C0011
(199.
develr
organ:
“fusio.
context
to adeq
exist acr
diversity
thSC “c
deveIOpm
IEIiltions ;

Characters

 

(3009(1le

Contextual

“men 19.

MAgnUSSOn t

to the Stud j,

 

15
Conclusion:

As illustrated by the life-span and the ecological developmental systems views,
developmental contextualism emphasizes a set of ideas that bring to the fore a focus
on the study of human development as it is dynamically embedded within a changing
context. As emphasized by Dixon and Lerner (1992) and Dixon, Lerner, and Hultsch
(1991) the nwd to focus on the changing processes of individual development and the
development of his/her changing context are critical for an understanding of
organism-context relations across life. Moreover, the bidirectional relationship-or
“fusion” (Tobach & Greenberg, 1984)--between an active organism and a changing
context must be the focus of developmental analyses in order to allow scientific data
to adequately reflect the broad range of individual differences in development that
exist across human ontogeny and, therefore, to represent the individual and cultural
diversity that comprises the context of human life (Lerner, 1991). Moreover, since
these “changing organism-context relations constitute the basic process of
development” (Lerner, 1991 , p. 28), scientific studies which incorporate these
relations are essential for an adequate understanding of the change processes that
characterize human development across the life—span (Lerner, 1991). In fact,
considerable research has demonstrated the usefulness of such developmental
contextual ideas (e. g., Baltes, 1987 ; Brooks-Gunn, 1987 ; Bronfenbrenner, 1979;
Lerner, 1982; Lerner & Busch-Rossnagel, 1981; Lewis & Rosenblum, 1974;
Magnusson, 1988; Petersen, 1987). To a great extent, much of this research pertains

to the study of early adolescence.

 

 

Mon
the u
fact. .
usefu
adoles

biolog

as wel

 

 

 

l6

D'vltTt‘u‘nA nx i -_ a ' 1.! o _.-. an urn;

Early adolescence has been chosen as the focus of the present study since it is
a period in which both individual and contextual changes are markedly evident.
Moreover, early adolescence is an excellent ontogenetic period in which to appraise
the usefulness of developmental contextualism for understanding such change. In
fact, the period has been termed a “natural ontogenetic laboratory” for evaluating the
usefulness of such ideas (Lerner, 1981). For example, the period of early
adolescence has been recognized as one of not only change within the individual (i.e.,
biological), but also of change within the adolescents’ context (i.e., school transitions)
as well.

Given that the organism and the multiple contexts in which it is embedded are
dynamically interactive (Lerner, 1978, 1979), development involves the rejatisms
between the active organism and its changing context. Thus, the “study of early
adolescence exemplifies the theoretical and empirical issues involved in the use of a
developmental contextual perspective” (Tubman, Lemer, & Lerner, 1991, p. 216).
Accordingly, it is now useful to discuss the period of early adolescence with a focus
on both individual and contextual changes, and further, a focus on how developmental
contextualism both (a) frames existing information about individual and contextual
change, and (b) brings to the fore important questions which must be addressed to
further understand this period of development.

r h 1'1 1’ l A le c n
The period of early adolescence is one of pronounced physiological,

psychological, and social changes (Hamburg, 1974). For instance, not only are

 

 

 

adc
but
ach

sub:

that :
emph
perioc
1994;

existin,

 

 

l7
adolescents faced with the biological changes that accompany puberty (Petersen, 1987)

but, in addition, adolescents are faced with challenges regarding school transitions and
achievement (Simmons & Blyth, 1987), increasing independence from parents and,
subsequently, changing parent-adolescent relations (Hoffman, 1986).

Research on young adolescents may, in fact, reveal findings in areas
pertaining to academic achievement, to parent-adolescent relations, and to self—esteem
that are very different from earlier periods of development. Existing research has
emphasized the importance of assessing these variables during the young adolescent
period (e.g., Blyth, Simmons, & Carlton-Ford, 1983; Lord, Eccles, & McCarthy,
1994; Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994). Therefore, the next sections discuss the
existing literature pertinent to these aspects of young adolescent development.

AW

The period of early adolescence marks the transition between elementary and
middle school for most American adolescents. This transition is an important one for
the adolescent in many ways. In many cases, the young person experiences changes
in school structure and, often, this requires adjustment to a larger school, to different
grading procedures, to more stringent teacher expectations, and to a less personal
overall school environment (Feldlaufer, Midgley & Eccles, 1988; Simmons & Blyth,
1987). These school-related changes can subsequently have an impact on adolescents’
academic functioning. For example, the transition between elementary and middle
school has been found to influence adolescents’ grades in school. Blyth, Simmons
and Carlton-Ford (1983), as well as others, have found a decline in grade point

average (GPA) for both boys and girls following a school transition during

 

 

kej
the
diff

less

great

acade
found
motive

resulte

 

 

18

adolescence. This decline may be the result of higher teacher standards of
performance as well as greater demands being placed on the adolescent within other
key contexts (Crockett, Petersen, Graber, Schulenberg & Ebata, 1989). For example,
the adolescent may be faced with greater responsibility at home (involving more or
different chores, e.g. , the care of a younger sibling). Therefore, he or she may have
less time for academic tasks.

The early adolescent period is also a time when the child begins to spend a
greater amount of time with friends and peers, and thus their potential influence on
academic performance is also important to consider. Ryan, Stiller, and Lynch (1994),
found that emulation of friends was negatively related to school adjustment and
motivation in grades seven and eight; in turn, emulation of parents and teachers
resulted in more positive outcomes on these variables for young adolescents.

A large amount of research pertaining to adolescents’ academic performance
has examined the importance of both parents and teachers on school achievement and
adjustment. Studies assessing parenting styles in relation to academic achievement
report that children with authoritative parents have higher grades and have more
positive attitudes toward school as compared to children with authoritarian or
permissive parents (Baumrind, 1971; Lambom, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dombusch,
1991; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Authoritative parents also tend to be more involved
in their children’s education, for instance through participation in activities and
helping with homework (Paulson, 1994). The more parents are involved in their
children’s education, the better children do in school (Gottfried, 1991; Stevenson &

Baker, 1987). These findings may suggest a mediated effect of parenting style on

 

 

3C8

to t

achi

aspi;
abou
adole
that l.
positi:
achiet-

lnvolv

amderr
climate
Spirific
Perceivci

been rap

 

”milder. 1
Stmerits \
“P8116175
Pitceited i

 

l9

academic performance through parental involvement.

In addition to parenting style, other parental characteristics have been reported
to be related to academic achievement. Gottfried (1991) found that school
achievement in adolescence was positively correlated with the parents’ educational
aspirations for their children. Similarly, positive parental beliefs and attributions
about their adolescent’s capabilities have been reported to be positively related to
adolescent academic achievement (Holloway & Hess, 1982). Paulson (1994) found
that high levels of parental control and high parental responsiveness were related to
positive achievement outcomes for adolescents. This study also reported that school
achievement was more positively related to adolescents’ own perceptions of parental
involvement and parenting rather than parents’ perceptions.

Teachers’ characteristics have been found to contribute also to adolescent
academic competence. For instance, adolescents’ experiences of the ”interpersonal
climate” of the classroom may be related to school functioning (Ryan et. a1. , 1994).
Specifically, perceived teacher support has been associated with intrinsic interest and
perceived competence in young adolescents (Goodenow, 1992). Similar findings have
been reported in other research. Ryan and Grolnick (1986) found that adolescents
who Viewed their teachers as warm and supportive of autonomy were more apt to feel
competent, to be intrinsically motivated, and to have higher self-esteem than those
students who perceived their teachers more negatively. Subsequently, students who
experienced high levels of teacher support, and who were moved to classrooms where
perceived teacher support was low, showed decrements in interest and attitudes

toward learning (Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989).

 

 

 

mul
adoi
schc
adoh
to m
adole
charai
adole:

genera

 

 

20

In essence, then, adolescent academic competence can be influenced by
multiple factors, including parental characteristics, teacher expectations and attitudes,
adolescents’ ability, motivation, and effort (Paulson, 1994), as well as adjustments to
school transitions mlyth et. al., 1983). Since the present study examines young
adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-bein g following the transition
to middle school, academic competence will be assessed as it contributes to overall
adolescent behavior and development me! how it affects and/or is affected by maternal
characteristics. Key variables involved in this relationship are one’s linked to the
adolescent’s concept of self (Simmons & Blyth, 1987), e. g., overall self-concept,
general self-esteem, perceived self-competence, or self-worth.

’ n f 1

Several constructs pertinent to the adolescent’s concept of self have been
forwarded in the literature (e. g., see Harter, 1983; Lerner & Spanier, 1.980; Simmons
& Blyth, 1987). For instance, self-concept refers to the general knowledge a youth
maintains about himself or herself, e. g., I am a male, I like tuna fish salad, and I am
good at tennis (Lerner & Spanier, 1980). In turn, the construct of perceived self-
competence pertains to one’s knowledge/beliefs about one’s abilities, e.g., I am good
at tennis and I am a bad bowler (Hatter, 1983). General self-esteem is a construct
that pertains to the overall affective valence one maintains about one’s
knowledge/beliefs about the self (Lerner & Spanier, 1980; Simmons & Blyth, 1987).
Self-worth is a construct reflecting the value one associates with one’s

knowledge/beliefs; it is conceptually different than self-esteem since it is believed

possible that there is not a linear correspondence between levels of positive, negative,

'“Wlll‘

 

 

pn:

yor

(68
Shut
deve
ident
ahfle
hasga
dunng
social 1‘
Dine
queSUo
selfeon

social]y

 

actrue.

 

’1
Primary pl
Saw
sum]

MmMm

21
and neutral affect and the value one places on one’s self (e. g., high levels of neutral

affect may be judged by some youth as of low value, since such attributes do not
promote positive affect; in turn, high levels of neutral affect may be judged by other
youth as of high value, since such attributes do not promote negative affect).

Self-esteem has been the focus of a considerable amount of adolescent research
(e.g., Block, 1976; Constantinople, 1969; Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Matteson, 1974;
Simmons & Blyth, 1987). Perhaps this focus is due, in part, to the key
developmental issue concerning this period of the life-span, the formation of one’s
identity. According to Erik Erikson (1959, 1963), the most important task of the
adolescent period is that of achieving an identity. The knowledge that the adolescent
has gained thus far, of who he or she is, is challenged by the changes which begin
during the early adolescent period: Changes in physical, psychological, cognitive, and
social dimensions. Thus, the adolescent is forced to evaluate him or herself in light
of these changes, and is faced with the question, “Who am I”. This is basically a
question that requires information (knowledge) about the self and is thus an issue of
self-concept development. In addition, if this development allows the youth to find a
socially approved role in society then, Erikson (1968) argues, positive self-esteem will
accrue.

The family, and the interactions that occur within the family, are considered of
primary importance for the development of one’s self-concept (Demo, Small, &
Savin-Williams, 1987). Adolescent self-esteem and well-being have been related to
supportive, close family relationships (Grotevant & Cooper, 1985; Marcia, 1983;

Matteson, 1974). Demo, Small, and Savin-Williams (1987) found that adolescents’

 

 

inve

than

com.

 

 

22

perceptions of intrafamilial communication and participation with parents were
correlated with adolescent self-esteem. Parental control was reported to have an
inverse relationship to adolescent self-esteem. Further, sons’ self-esteems, more so
than daughters’, were related to dimensions of the parent-child relationship, including
communication with parents and with youth participation in joint activities with them.
Openshaw, Thomas, and Rollins (1984) found that adolescents’ perceptions of
parents’ supportive behaviors were related to positive self-esteem in the mother-
daughter dyad. Parental coercive behavior was negatively related to self-esteem in the
father-daughter dyad.

Recent research derived from the Replication and Extension of the
Pennsylvania Early Adolescent Transitions Study (i.e., from the REPEATS) has
begun to examine the relationship between adolescents’ self-worth and familial
characteristics and behaviors. Ohannessian, Lerner, Lerner, and von Eye (1994)
reported that young adolescents who perceived their families as better adjusted had
higher levels of self-worth than adolescents whose perceptions of their family
adjustment was low. Further, adolescents’ self-worth was negatively related to their
emotional adjustment, as indexed by levels of depression and anxiety. That is,
adolescents with lower self-worth scores were more likely to report being anxious and
depressed in comparison to adolescents with higher levels of self-worth (Ohannessian,
Lerner, Lerner, & von Eye, 1994). Additional research conducted on the REPEATS
sample by Ohannessian, Lerner, Lerner, and von Eye (1995) has examined gender in
relation to adolescents’ self-worth and parental acceptance and emotional adjustment.

In general, boys reported higher levels of self-worth than did girls. Further analyses

 

 

 

 

Salimv
Ohanneh

welltzel

and Pare

 

idoleSce:
spend up
Youth to &
Smlnberg.

”lenient,

 

23
revealed that, for girls, self-worth was positively predicted by both perceived maternal

and paternal acceptance. In addition, self-worth negatively predicted trait and state
anxiety for girls. For boys, only perceived paternal acceptance predicted self-worth.
In turn, self-worth negatively predicted depression for boys (Ohannessian, et a1. ,
1995).

The above-noted research suggests the importance of assessing covariation
between adolescent-parent relations and adolescents’ concepts of self. Within the
REPEATS data set, which will be used in the present investigation, the construct of
self-worth seems to be a particularly salient instance of adolescents’ concepts of self.
Thus, the covariation between the adolescent-parent relationship and adolescent self-
worth will be a focus of the present investigation.

i i in M - l l ' h'

A considerable amount of literature has demonstrated the influence of familial
characteristics and parental behaviors on adolescent development (Demo, Small, &
Savin-Williams, 1987; Kurdek & Fine, 1994; Lerner & Galambos, 1985, 1986;
Ohannessian, Lerner, Lerner & von Eye, 1994; Paulson, Hill, & Holmbeck, 1991;
Wentzel, 1994). However, despite the ubiquitous influence of the family in general,
and parents more specifically, on youth behavior and development across the
adolescent period, there is generally a decrease in the amount of time that adolescents
spend with their parents. Often this change is predicated on pressure put on these
youth to achieve autonomy from parents during this period (Koski & Steinberg, 1990;
Steinberg, 1981, 1990; Steinberg & Hill, 1978). These gains in autonomy can alter

the parent-adolescent relationship, and typically, heighten family conflict

, .3

 

 

(M
like

chil

 

 

 

pube
and t
betwc
313W
behav
mothe
effecti
other 3
Conflict

lTll’olve

 

qualitah'

 

in the $0
jmporrar.
Wham
Slim-vim,
“Merriam
Ph‘r'a 10h

adOIesCent

 

24

(Montemayor, 1983; Steinberg, 1981). In turn, families with adolescents are more
likely to be less cohesive and more chaotic than families with either younger or older
children (Olson, 1986).

In addition, the biological, social, and psychological changes that accompany
puberty may also influence the parent-child relationship. Anderson, Hetherington,
and Clingempeel (1989) found that throughout puberty, warmth and involvement
between mothers and sons declined. Heightened conflict was also apparent, but
appeared to decline as boys passed the pubertal apex. Acting-out and noncompliant
behaviors increased as well. This finding was not evident in pubertal girls, although
mothers did become less involved and monitored their daughter’s behaviors less
effectively as they progressed through puberty. Similar results have been reported in
other studies, indicating that pubertal development is associated with increased
conflict and tension, ineffective discipline and control, and decreased warmth and
involvement by parents (Hill et. al., 1985; Steinberg, 1981).

In essence, then, past research indicates that, despite quantitative and
qualitative changes in the parent-child relationship, parents still play an important role
in the socialization of their adolescents. Thus, the parent—child relationship is still
important to evaluate during this period. Indeed, given the multiple quantitative and
qualitative changes in this relationship, changes that include negotiations regarding
supervision, activities, and decision making in general, such assessment is vital for
understanding this period. The quality of the parent-adolescent relationship should
play a role in how these negotiations and the overall corregulation between parent and

adolescent are carried out. Consequently, this relationship is meaningful to evaluate

 

 

tired
thatr

(Amb
expec
SUggei
& Har
l975;'
Continu
they an
deons

fathers (

AS dlSCU:
wen as u

00“flier.

 

ill dtVelop

 

25

not only because it influences adolescent behavior and development but, as well,
because it can impact maternal well-being, and thus become a moderator of the
person-person bidirectional relations stressed in developmental contextualism (Lerner,
Castellino, Terry, Villarruel, and McKinney, 1995).
n ' h r

Psychological research relating to child socialization has primarily focused on
the parental influences exerted on children and youth. The characteristics of children
that may affect parents, either positively or negatively, have rarely been evaluated
(Ambert, 1992). However, the idea that children influence the behaviors, ideas, and
expectations of their caregivers is not new. Bell (1968), as well as others, has
suggested that child socialization is a process of parent-child reciprocal influence (Bell
& Harper, 1977; Lerner & Spanier, 1978; Lewis & Rosenblum, 1974; Sameroff,
1975; Thomas, Chess, Birch, Hertzig, & Korn, 1963). Moreover, since mothers
continue to be the primary caregivers, child characteristics may affect them more than
they affect fathers (Kasak & Marvin, 1984; Williams, 1988). Indeed, research has
demonstrated that children report greater closeness with their mothers than with their
fathers (Youniss & Smollar, 1985; Paulson, Hill, & Holmbeck, 1991).

Young adolescents, in particular, can pose an additional challenge for mothers.
As discussed previously, the increasing amounts of time spent away from parents, as
well as the changes associated with puberty, can lead to heightened parent-adolescent
conflict. As noted above, most research has focused on parental causality of
adolescent outcomes. However, based on the concept of reciprocal influence stressed

in developmental contextualism (Lerner, et. al., 1995), the affect of this conflict, and

 

 

 

the

arm
dep:
pred-
(Pau
have
of yo
levels

famili

Compr
does e.

Severe

 

Oil "701'

framed

ass€55 a

 

”What '8

deh'filop

26

the characteristics of adolescents themselves, can, in turn, affect the mother.

While not extensive, some research exists that informs us about this link.
Barnes (1984), and Maccoby and Martin (1983), found that parents report closer
parent-child relationships when children display behavioral competence, high
academic performance, high self-esteem, and a lack of negative characteristics such as
depression, drug use, and deviant behaviors. Closeness in family relationships has
predicted parental satisfaction and childrens’ participation in family activities
(Paulson, Hill, & Holmbeck, 1991). Child conduct problems have been found to
have a negative impact on parents (Cook, 1988; Kazak & Marvin, 1984). In a study
of young adolescents, high levels of self-worth and academic performance, and low
levels of behavior problems, were associated with high reports of maternal role and
family satisfaction and family cohesion (Lerner, Castellino, & Perkins, 1993).

While research has supported the link between child to mother, the lack of
comprehensive studies has limited our understanding of this relation. What research
does exist primarily focuses on extreme child characteristics such as delinquency,
severe behavior problems, and physical handicaps (Ambert, 1992). Further research
on more normative populations in necessary to assess this relationship more fully.

rviwfh r nnv ° 'n

The present study, predicated on the notion of reciprocal socialization, and
framed by ideas brought to the fore by developmental contextualism, attempts to
assess a reciprocal model of mother-adolescent relations that focuses on how a
mother’s satisfaction with her role affects young adolescent behavior and

development; in turn, the influence of adolescent behavior and development on the

 

 

Ga
quz

dev

ado;
focu
othe:
devei
comp
test i
infor
the m
Accorq
Galaml
being,
develOp
Well-be;-

behavioy

(Figure

 

 

27
mother is assessed also. Specifically, a “process of influence” model (Lerner &

Galambos, 1985), which stresses that a mothers’ role satisfaction influences the
quality of the mother-adolescent relationship which, in turn, influences adolescent
development, will be used to frame this research.

More specifically, the present research tests a structural model of mother-
adolescent relations, one associated with the developmental contextual perspective, to
focus on how a mother’s satisfaction with her caregiving role (as well as with her
other roles, e.g., as a spouse and/or worker) affects young adolescent behavior and
development. The model uses a construct termed ”maternal well-being”--which is a
composite of family satisfaction, family cohesion, and role satisfaction variables-40
test ideas derived from extant research (e.g., Lerner & Galambos, 1986); this
information stresses that mothers’ satisfaction with their roles influences the quality of
the mother-child relationship which, in turn, can influence adolescent development.
Accordingly, the present research tests a "process of influence” model (Lerner &
Galambos, 1985) which stresses that role satisfaction, as indexed by maternal well-
being, influences mother-child relations which, in turn, influences adolescent
developmental outcomes. That is, the present research tests the idea that maternal
well-being is the key variable affecting mother-child relations and, in turn, adolescent
behavior and development, specifically, adolescents’ feelings of self-worth, their
family satisfaction, their ratings of family cohesion, and their academic achievement
(Figure 1).

Moreover, given the dynamic, or reciprocal, relations stressed in

developmental contextualism, the present investigation will also address the mutual

28

damage—2 Boone—ovaeofioE 05 v5 Egg—08.3 van .2223 Enema—ova $502.03 3:39: no .308 BSD—Em ._ 95$".

 

 

Snowman... .6 8.592. qub: E Rena—z—
Eiao 5520549. E130 $5.205.me

 

 

EmZO—Hsmm

HZMOWMAOQTMEOE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

  
  

 

 

 

 

£8309
:— meoz. 1 i ,
2033.8
:2: sumac-1%?
205:8
5—5....
a 30843 .
E 8me
205<3F<m
5.5...
, ~553ng cammflma sunfish...
< nz<moS<Em szmp<2 6655...
9§< Hzmommqg A 5.25.
5.53
.353 20:33—53

12%:

 

 

 

 

 

balance
examining
adolescent
hypothesis
and, in tur
nature of r
adolescent
subsequent
to assess 1hr
testing.

In re,
hlllOtheses v
0f matemahu
Positively and
Specifically, r
behaviol» and
Significantly p
w'r’H‘being and
mediated by th

D333 us
EXtensjon of m
um, & um

29

influence between mothers and their adolescents. This focus will occur through
examining the within and across time relations between maternal well-being and
adolescent behavior and development (Figure 2). Accordingly, to test the key
hypothesis of this study--that maternal well-being predicts mother-adolescent relations
and, in turn, adolescent behavior and development «and to appraise the reciprocal
nature of maternal well-being and adolescent outcomes (i.e., it is possible that
adolescent behavior and developmental level at one point in time influences
subsequent feelings of maternal well—being), structural equation modeling will be used
to assess the relationships between mothers and young adolescents over three times of
testing.

In regard to specific expectations to be tested in this study, the following
hypotheses will be addressed through structural equation modeling: 1. The constructs
of maternal-well-being and adolescent behavior and development are expected to
positively and reciprocally influence each other both within and across time.
Specifically, maternal well-being is expected to significantly predict adolescent
behavior and development, and, adolescent behavior and development are expected to
significantly predict maternal well-being; and 2. The relationship between matemal-
well-being and adolescent behavior and development is expected to be significantly
mediated by the quality of the mother-adolescent relationship.

Data used to address these questions will be derived from the Replication and
Extension of the Early Adolescent Transitions Study (REPEATS; e.g. , Jovanovic,
Lerner, & Lerner, 1989; Jovanovic & Lemer, 1994; Ohannessian, Lemer, Lerner, &

von Eye, 1994). The REPEATS is a short-term, cohort comparative longitudinal

3O

        
  

 

.88» 5:93. .o magnum u m 08:. v5 one» 5% .3 .5 u N as: .38» 5.6 «O 9.53.8 n _ 05:.

$509.33 BESS: can. Sofia—22,3 98 8323 .5820? 5033 8220322 05 Lo 63.: 08:.388 v5 -55.? .N 2:3..—

           
  

4b.
AK

3.2.3
.0520:

939:0;
.3032

8.8 -__es
363a:

 

 

\ /
/

 

 

 

 

 

\
\

5. / 1
d \ /
k
«5:50.960 nan 50:50.98 can
an .6325 203203.

20:50.35 vco
gum 238.03

 

 

6328 288.03

008$ «95... p05:

 

 

study Whit
Pennsylva
twice each
parents, te
conducted
waves of d;
were select:
number of l
above-noted
accounting ft
influence out'

this Sludy ar

 

 

31

study which examined young adolescents from a semi-rural community in central
Pennsylvania. Adolescents were first tested at the beginning of sixth grade and tested
twice each year until the end of eighth grade. Information was also obtained from
parents, teachers, and school records. The initial wave of data collection was
conducted in October 1989. The present investigation will examine the first three
waves of data, from Fall 1989, Spring 1990, and Fall 1990. These waves of data
were selected in order to both assess developmental change and to maximize the
number of participants available for study. These data will allow the testing of the
above-noted ideas pertinent to the utility of the process-of-influence model in
accounting for the ways in which relations between mothers and their children
influence outcomes in adolescent development. Further details about the methods of

this study are presented in Chapter 3, Methods.

 

 

 

P;
the Replil
(REPEA'J
Ohannessi
Eye, 1995
sixth-grad:
school disti
Which was
middle scho
cohort of six

Data
WI. At the
and four way,—
focuses only
The adolescen
”a" (SD=.4.
adolescents (44
thereto“, rep re

paniClpazed at i '

and 67% 0f the

 

Chapter III
METHOD

Participants in the present study are young adolescents and their mothers from
the Replication and Extension of the Pennsylvania Early Adolescent Transitions Study
(REPEATS; e.g., Jovanovic, Lerner, & Lerner, 1989; Jovanovic & Lerner, 1994;
Ohannessian, Lerner, Lemer, & von Eye, 1994; Ohannessian, Lerner, Lerner, & von
Eye, 1995). The REPEATS sample consists of two cohorts (1989-90 and 1990—91) of
sixth-graders from three middle schools within a central Pennsylvania semi-rural
school district. The REPEATS is a short-term, cohort-comparative longitudinal study
which was designed to follow each of the two cohorts of sixth-graders across their
middle school years. The initial wave of data collection, involving the 1989-90
cohort of sixth-graders, was conducted in October, 1989.

Data were collected once in the fall and once in the spring of each school
year. At the completion of the study, six waves of data were collected on cohort one,
and four waves of data were collected on cohort two. However, the present study
focuses only on the first three waves of data—-data pertinent to the first cohort only.
The adolescents were from lower-middle class backgrounds with a mean age of 11.8
years (SD=.45) at the beginning of the study. One hundred and sixty young
adolescents (44% male; 99% European American), from a total of 454 students (and
therefore representing 35 % of the total population), in the three middle schools
participated at the first wave of testing. In addition, 249 parents (89% of the mothers

and 67% of the fathers) participated at this time as well. Table 1 presents the

32

33

 

 

 

 

 

 

S m: a: 8562
25 26 $8
ace 6 fix: 5 e8“ 8: 38.
win 9. an... on ea. Q a8
*9. :. em a a? mm ”:6
z 38. z a 38. z. z 38 .z.
6 m 6 x 6 a
880 5.6% 6 maeswum 265 £me 6 Em 880 5x6 6 @65me

a... 1.)”. -q u. ... .v. I ...~ .-Am -5. :1. .1“ .3 J. .. 1.. ~ur .

g 033.

 

 

 

participa

'l
relations
developr
to be me
measures
measures

Indicators

 

Th.
ratings of .'
Detailed in.

Presented bv

questionnaj re
domains of m.
mum of the
Commas as t
edthiOng] 5,,
“mafia”, her p
timing of lab

or labor.

34

participation rates for the first three waves of testing.
Matures

The primary objective of the present study was to examine the reciprocal
relationship between mothers’ well-bein g and their adolescents’ behavior and
development both within and across time. Further, this relationship was hypothesized
to be mediated through the quality of the mother-adolescent relationship. Several
measures were used to assess the variables of interest in the present study. These
measures are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

- in

The construct of maternal well-being was indexed by measures of the mothers’
ratings of maternal role satisfaction, family satisfaction, and family cohesion.
Detailed information regarding the measures used to assess these variables is
presented below.

’ if i ' rv M

The Life Situation Survey for the mother (MLSS) is a closed-ended
questionnaire developed by Lerner et a1. (1986). Constructs assessing the important
domains of the mother’s employment and family situation were included based on
reviews of the literature (e. g., Lerner & Galambos, 1985). Items measure such
constructs as the mother’s employment history throughout the child’s life, her
educational status and job type, her role satisfaction with her spouse’s employment
situation, her perceptions of the child’s satisfaction with her employment situation, the
division of labor for child care and housework, and her satisfaction with this division

of labor.

 

 

 

Table

w

Constr

l. Glc

4- Pam.

5. MOth
Relarj

6- Mater
Satisfa

 

Table 2

H u .‘ 40 u‘-:<‘

35

 

 

Construct Measure Used Measured By
1. Global Self-Worth 1. Harter (1983) SPP: Adolescents
Subscale for Global
Self-Worth
2. Academic Achievement 2. Academic Grades (GPA) Student Grade
Report
3. Family Satisfaction 3. Family Satisfaction Scale Mothers and
Adolescents
4. Family Cohesion 4. Family Adaptability & Mothers and
Cohesion Evaluation Scale Adolescents
(FACES III)
5. Mother-Adolescent 5. Parental Acceptance & Mothers and
Relationship Quality Rejection Questionnaire Adolescents
6. Maternal Role 6. Mothers’ Life Situation Mothers
Satisfaction Survey

 

 

 

 

Eng. .2265 MD, UM: en
E... in- .. . .. .2 .15.... .E. ._ .

 

4. cc. .. 0 sq.

 

 

36

 

 

 

 

iawj u l «5.883886%
9 Bo_u_ web: =< .8 28m Sam 93 3=Sao8< Egan .a fiancee—om Eo$2¢c<¢o£02 .m
fie" m 28m 66865 666m 66266 628.60 26
a 321 .6360 :66". §=§§< 366m 6
amino
8 32u— 2:8— :a .3 28m Esm 28m :ouofimuam .383 .o
.53
9 .msuo 8680 8..on 8680 o_Eoc8< .n
:wEuv 2835 0535 “cacao—gun
8 32v; 5.53.:3 3220 couqoouom..=om Beam .a 28 .5323 958222 .m
.32" n 28w 2835 28m 52335 :28on can
a 32! 66.28 been 563%? gene .6
guano
3 Bo_u_ 8.8— :~ .3 28m Esm 2.8m couoflmwam 33$ .9
fiaum 66: 29.6 65m 62636
a El 668668 23. a: ”.6562 6 38.63 66662 A
owcdm 28m 69.: 23.82 836.com
: E _o> .— _>
.. ..t.1uu .. J .4»; 4. . .. 4 a . .104 .1. . 4. . 3. Ma. .6. v) a u. .-

m oEah

 

H

 

 

 

37

More specifieally, mothers provided information on the following major areas:
(a) Their current marital status-~i.e., single, married, separated, divorced, remarried-—
and the duration of their status; (b) their parental status in regard to their relation to
their young adolescent-~i.e. , natural parent, step parent, adoptive parent-~and length of
their parental status; (c) their educational status; and (d) their employment history
with reference to when their young adolescent was less than 2 years old, was 2-5
years old, was 5-10 years old, and from age 10 to the present.

Mothers also (e) select one of 15 job type categories chosen from n;
W (U .S. Department of Labor, 1977). The jobs that
are listed are based on the type of jobs that were expected to be present in the
sample, given the demographic characteristics of the participants (predominantly
European American, lower-middle class, semi-rural). Mothers also respond to items
assessing: (f) the pattern of division of the household chores and child care activities,
and their satisfaction with the arrangement; (g) the role—difficulty experienced by them
in balancing all their roles as spouse, parent, employee, volunteer worker, etc.; (h)
their degree of satisfaction with their role; (1) their degree of satisfaction with various
aspects of their own and their spouse’s employment situation; and (j) their perceptions
of their children’s satisfaction with their employment situation.

The ratings of the division of labor for child care and household work are
ordered so that higher scores indicate that the mother does most of the work. The
satisfaction items are rated on a five-point Likert-type scale, with high scores
indicating greater satisfaction. Perceived role difficulty is rated similarly, with

increasing scores corresponding to an increase in experienced difficulty.

 

 

 

 

term 101
were fo
were fo
middle (
own cm;
of her 53
hours, th
oonsistenc
satisfactio;
the same f
and status).
Present stuc
construct is
rellresents h.
The resPOIlSé
.55.me $11

The PAC

 

EvaNation Sc

  

Mode) ofMar

(0)50”, P011116

efflOtional bOm

38
In the Pennsylvania Early Adolescent Transitions Study (PEATS), a short-

term longitudinal study assessing the transition to junior high school, two subscales
were formed through use of the MLSS items (Lerner, et al., 1986). Both subscales
were formed during the period of the PEATS when the participants were in the
middle of seventh grade. The first subscale, which pertains to satisfaction with one’s
own employment situation, consisted of five items involving the respondent’s ratings
of her satisfaction with the following aspects of employment: The job, the salary, the
hours, the responsibility, and the status. This subscale had a Cronbach alpha internal
consistency coefficient of .83 for mothers (IS-=28). The second subscale pertained to
satisfaction with one’s spouse’s employment situation, and measured satisfaction with
the same five aspects of the spouse’s employment (job, salary, hours, responsibility,
and status). This subscale had a Cronbach alpha of .82 for mothers (LI=28). For the
present study, only the mothers’ report of their role satisfaction was utilized. This
construct is indexed by one item: ”Please circle the number which most closely
represents how satisfied you are with being employed or with not being employed. "
The response alternatives for this item ranged from ”1" ="very dissatisfied" to
”5" ="very satisfied."

Family Adaptability and Qghesion Evaluation SQJQ III (EAQES III)

The FACES III is the third version of the Family Adaptability and Cohesion
Evaluation Scale developed to assess the two major dimensions of the Circumplex
Model of Marital and Family Systems; family cohesion and family adaptability
(Olson, Portner, & Lavee, 1985). Olson et al. (1985) define family cohesion as the

emotional bonding that family members have towards one another. Family

 

 

 

adaptabi
structun
develop:
Wit}
from ex:
connects
been lab
adaptabil
rigid, str
adaptabil
balanced
healthy f;
PTOblemal
FACE
adaptabilit
UHdersmnc
Adolescem
their famil;
5:31"1 Ost :

for help, u .I

39
adaptability is defined as the ability of a marital or family system to change its power

structure, role relationships and relationship rules in response to situational or
developmental stress.

Within the Circumplex Model, there are four levels of family cohesion, ranging
from extreme low cohesion to extreme high cohesion: disengaged, separated,
connected, and enmeshed. The two moderate or balanced levels of cohesion have
been labeled mm and mum. There are also four levels of family
adaptability, ranging from extreme low adaptability to extreme high adaptability:
rigid, structured, flexible, and chaotic. The two moderate or balanced levels of
adaptability have been labeled flew; and structured. For each dimension, the
balanced levels (the two moderate levels) are hypothesized to be most viable for
healthy family functioning, whereas the two extreme areas are generally seen as more
problematic for families.

FACES III is a 20-item self-report inventory containing 10 cohesion items and 10
adaptability items. FACES 111 items were developed to be readable and
understandable by both adults and adolescents (as young as 12 years of age).
Adolescents and parents are asked to indicate how often each statement is true for
their family, using a Likert response format ranging from 1=almost never to
5=almost always. Representative items include: "Family members ask each other
for help," ”Our family changes its way of handling tasks,” and ”Family togetherness
is very important.”

The Cohesion and the Adaptability scores are calculated by summing all the odd

items and even items, respectively. Olson and his colleagues report a non-significant

 

relation
1985).

'1
sample (

and .62

 

reliabilitj
testing, a
1985). F

adolescen

 

As
sample for
Were .86 (
Coefficiem:
'83 m =56

Fam

\

The
safiSfaction.
Dyadic Adj“
measufe Wen
lust Satisfa C tit
could be 9&in

StUden

 

40

relation between these two orthogonal subscales ([= .03; Olson, Portner, & Lavee,
1985).

The internal consistency of the two dimensions is also adequate. Based on a
sample of 2,412 people, the Cronbach alpha’s for FACES III are .77 for Cohesion
and .62 for Adaptability (Olson, Portner, & Lavee, 1985). In addition, test-retest
reliability coefficients for FACES III, with a four to five week lag between times of
testing, are .83 for Cohesion and .80 for Adaptability (Olson, Portner, & Lavee,
1985). For the present investigation, as previously discussed, mothers’ and young
adolescents’ scores on the Cohesion subscale only were used.

As noted in Tables 4 and 5, the Cronbach alpha coefficients in the REPEATS
sample for the first three times of measurement for the adolescents’ Cohesion scale
were .86 (H=156), .90 (5:152), and .88 (3:83), respectively. The corresponding
coefficients for the mothers’ Cohesion scale were .87 (L1: 135), .83 (5= 100), and
.88 (u=56).

mil i f i

The Family Satisfaction Scale (FSS) was utilized to measure perceived family
satisfaction. Items on the Family Satisfaction Scales were adapted from Spanier’s
Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS; Spanier, 1976). The items in the original DAS
measure were recast to pertain to satisfaction with all 1am relationships, instead of
just satisfaction with one dyadic relationship. All items were re-written so that they
could be easily read and understood by both young adolescents and their parents
(Hess, 1985).

Students and parents were asked to respond to the first eight items of the FSS

. Jig Sp%
:1: < OEQCCK“ CF: Cm War—OUWQ—GU , . ..

 

V 0~Ofiyfi

 

 

 

41

.38» 5:26. .0 »:.==.»om n m 25... .23 .38» 5x..." .0 .Em u N 08.... .38» 5x.” .3 »:.==.»om u . 08.... .994

 

 

 

35:23.3.

N» no. ow. 8. ov. .a. .co80.¢n<-._ofio2
a a. on 2.. t: a. 8:828 £58
m» .»». an. co. on. 0». 8.3.30 2.89.
m» 3.. en. o». mm. m... 532...?» .320
Z 8...... Z 8....< Z. 8.54. 0.8»
83%

. .. v; .. ‘1 a. ....4 ..A.... .u; .. .4. ....1. ..... ...

v 038.

..... 3...... 2E2 mimumwdfiflfigxflz H

 

 

 

W. U~A~MFN~

42

.223 5:23 .o ”5:522. u m 22:. 23 .222» 5% 2. .5 u N 2.5. .222» 5% .8 2.638 n _ 22:. .32

 

 

 

35:23.3.
mm 5. 8 3. m2 5. a§28<$5§
: S. a a. E 9. 82222.3 2:58
on 2w. 2: a. we 5. 832.8 2:58
z 232 m 2a? z 22.2 22%
mag
._ . .4... . 5 . £1 . 2. ...} . ‘...u....... u...- A :1. ....

n 0.3...

 

 

accord

represe
the hou
respons
time to
assess U
about th
F
Scale tha
loading v
dimension
dimensio:
loadings t
utilized of
within the
adolescent:
PTeSem inv
As r
adOIESCitnts
(5:147), .:

COCfficjems 1

43

according to how often each situation occurs in the family. For example,
representative items included: "How often do you or another family member leave
the house after a fight?," and ”Do you hug and/or kiss people in your family?” The
response scale for these items was a six point Likert scale, ranging from l=all the
time to 6=never. In addition to these items, two additional items were included that
assess the degree of happiness with the family in general and how the subject feels
about the future of his or her family relationships.

Factor analyses revealed that the ten items on the original Dyadic Adjustment
Scale that were hypothesized to be indicators of Dyadic Satisfaction had their highest
loading with that factor. Factor loadings of the 10 items on the Satisfaction
dimension ranged from .32 to .82, while the same items on the other three
dimensions of the DAS (Consensus, Cohesion, and Affectional Expression) had
loadings that ranged from .01 to .28 (see Spanier, 1976). Therefore, the present study
utilized one general factor to index the subjects’ satisfaction with the relationships
within the family. Separate family satisfaction scores from mothers and young
adolescents, to index both mothers’ and adolescents’ own ratings, were utilized for the
present investigation.

As noted in Tables 4 and 5, the Cronbach alpha coefficients for the
adolescents in the REPEATS sample for the first three times of testing were .81
(13:147), .79 (fl=150), and .85 (b1=82), respectively. The corresponding

coefficients for the mothers were .82 (13=137), .80 (3 =99), and .83 (3:51).

 

 

 

 

adolescer

 

mothers 2
this varia'
Questionn
Ra

Th

was used I
relationshij
Banko, Cr
item measu
aggression,
“Ems may I
SCOre Used i
The .
1=almost 2
adOICSCenLg'

momers. PA}

44

It; 4 rm ‘ i a! ‘1'... in V ' l' ' o hr-Adle nt R‘lticn hi
The variable hypothesized to mediate between maternal well-being and
adolescent behavior and development was the mother—adolescent relationship. Both
mothers and adolescents provided ratings of this variable. In both cases the score for
this variable was derived from the Rohner (1980) Parental Acceptance and Rejection

Questionnaire.

 

The Parental Acceptance and Rejection Questionnaire (PARQ; Rohner, 1980)
was used to measure the adolescents’ and mothers’ perceptions of the quality of their
relationship. A 34-item modified PARQ, constructed and validated by McHale,
Bartko, Crouter, and Perry-Jenkins (1990), was used in the present study. This 34-
item measure consists of four subscales (warmth and affection, hostility and
aggression, indifference and neglect, and undifferentiated rejection). In addition, the
items may be summed to reflect a total perceived acceptance score. This was the
score used in the present investigation.

The response scale of the PARQ is a four-point Likert-type scale where
1=”almost always true” and 4=”almost never true.” Sample items from the
adolescents’ PARQ include: "Treats me gently and with kindness"; and in the
mothers’ PARQ items include: "I say nice things about my child”.

The PARQ has been found to be a valid and reliable indicator of perceived
parental acceptance (Rohner, 1980). Internal consistency estimates have been
reported to range from .72 to .90 for the four scales (Rohner, 1980). As noted in

Tables 3 and 4, the internal consistency coefficients in the REPEATS sample for the

 

 

 

 

adoles

beginn

 

ratings .
academi
satisfact:
have bee
and adoh
fl

Tl

for Childr
individuaj‘
social acce
The
competenc-
SPP is a {O
competence

Scale SCOre

771e

examined a

45
adolescents’ version were .91 (13=149), .93 (H=146), and .94 (H=82) at the

beginning of sixth grade, the end of sixth grade, and the beginning of seventh grade,
respectively. The corresponding coefficients for the mothers’ version of the PARQ
were .87 (H= 133), .86 (H=90), and .87 afi=55).

r l thvir Devl men

Measures of adolescent behavior and development consisted of adolescents’
ratings of family satisfaction, family cohesion, global self-worth, and a measure of
academic achievement. Measures used to index adolescents’ ratings of family
satisfaction and family cohesion were the same measures given to the mothers, and
have been presented above. As such, the measures used to index global self-worth
and adolescent academic achievement are presented below.

Haney: Self-Perception Profile (SPP)

The SPP is a revised version of the Harter (1982) Perceived Competence Scale
for Children. The questionnaire provides several separate scores that asses an
individual’s evaluation of his or her own scholastic competence, physical appearance,
social acceptance, athletic competence, behavioral conduct, and global self-worth.

The SPP was designed for third to ninth grade students to measure their
competence and adequacy of psychosocial functioning. The response format of the
SPP is a four-point structured alternative format where l = low perceived
competence and 4 = high perceived competence. Each scale includes six items.
Scale scores are calculated as the mean of these items.

The SPP has good psychometric characteristics. When Harter (1983)

examined a sample of sixth-graders, she found Cronbach alphas coefficients for

 

 

 

phys
subsr
PEA'

Cron‘.

noted

SPP 5

respec

judgen
was us
range f
include
educati.
include
acadenr
findenu

Scale w

46
physical appearance, scholastic, social, athletic, conduct/behavior, and self-worth

subscales of .81, .80, .81, .82, .77, and .83, respectively. In addition, when the
PEATS data were examined across six times of measurement, Schwab (1990) found
Cronbach alpha coefficients to exceed .72 on all of the SPP subscales.

In the present study, only the global self-worth subscale was utilized. As
noted in Table 3, the Cronbach alpha coefficients in the REPEATS sample for the
SPP subscale of global self-worth were .75 Q~1=155), .80 (3:154), and .78 (H=83),
respectively, for the first, second, and third waves of testing.

mi om tence based n rade int ave e PA

As a means to index academic competence, one based on the teachers’
judgements of the students’ classroom performance, the grade card of each subject
was used to determine an overall grade point average (GPA), which had a possible
range from a high of 4.0 to a low of 0.0. Information on the student record card
included grades for all academic subjects and all nonacademic subjects (e. g., physical
education). In addition, information about school absences and tardiness was
included. GPA was calculated through a unit weighing and averaging of each
academic subject. The grades contributing to the GPA scores were assigned to the
students at the close of the academic year. All grades were converted to a five-point
scalewhereO = Fand4 = A.

Pr r

Informed parental consent forms were obtained for all of the participants prior

to their participation in the study. Data collection involved group testing in each of

the three middle schools. Each school was visited across two consecutive days within

 

 

a spa
small
leade:
quesh
within

conufl.

47

a span of ten days. All of the subjects, within their respective schools, were tested in
small groups of approximately 10 adolescents accompanied by one or two group
leaders. Across the two days of testing, subjects completed several self-report
questionnaires, including the questionnaires described above. Shortly after the testing
within the schools was completed, the adolescents’ parents were sent questionnaires to

complete and return to the REPEATS investigators.

 

fl

 

 

relations
process
maternal
family 52
indexed l
as well a:
adolescen
Whether tl
adolescent
Acr
addressed;
l.

develoPmer

time? Spec

SlBHlficanuy
2. Is
and dCVeIOpn

relationship?

SEVm-a

queSllOUS. F]

Chapter IV
RESULTS

To test ideas derived from developmental contextualism, about bidirectional
relations between developing persons and their significant others being central in the
process of development, the present investigation examined the relationship between
maternal well-being (as indexed by mothers’ ratings of maternal role satisfaction,
family satisfaction, and family cohesion) and adolescent behavior and development (as
indexed by adolescents’ ratings of family satisfaction, cohesion, and global self-worth,
as well as by their academic achievement). In addition, both the mothers’ and the
adolescents’ ratings of the mother-adolescent relationship were assessed to determine
whether these variables mediated the relationship between maternal well-being and
adolescent behavior and development.

Accordingly, using the REPEATS data set, the following two questions were
addressed:

1. Do the constructs of maternal-well-being and adolescent behavior and
development positively and reciprocally influence each other both within and across
time? Specifically, do maternal well-being and adolescent behavior and development
significantly predict one another or is the relationship unidirectional?; and

2. Is the relationship between matemal-well-being and adolescent behavior
and development significantly mediated by the quality of the mother-adolescent
relationship?

Several sets of statistical analyses were conducted in order to address these

questions. First, to increase power of analyses, missing data were prorated in order

48

to obtai
score 01
number
value. j

item res

 

calculate
sample;
measure:

assess th

 

 

T
examine
Within an
maternal
between
and acrog
326d on

vElfiable,

 

Variable, ;
of the m0.
APPendix

Der

lllCSe anal).

49

to obtain equal sample sizes for each variable. This prorating was done by taking the
score of the items to which responses existed for a given scale, relative to the total
number of items responded to in the scale, and substituting that value for the missing
value. However, data for participants were excluded if more than 10 percent of the
item responses for any scale were missing. Second, descriptive statistics were
calculated for each variable of interest, to assess (a) mean levels of functioning for the
sample; and (b) if, based on past research with normal samples of youth, the
measures were behaving as expected. In addition, correlations were calculated to
assess the interrelationships among the variables of interest.

To address Questions 1 and 2, structural equation modeling was used to
examine whether maternal well-being predicted adolescent behavior and development
within and across time; whether adolescent behavior and development predicted
maternal well-being within and across time; and/or whether the predictive relationship
between maternal well-being and adolescent behavior and development both within
and across time was significantly mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship.
Based on unrotated, principle components analyses, the mother-adolescent relationship
variable, indexed by mothers’ responses, and the mother-adolescent relationship
variable, indexed by adolescents’ responses, were collapsed to form a single indicator
of the mother-adolescent relationship construct. The command file presented in
Appendix B illustrates the procedure used to collapse this variable.

Detailed descriptions of all the analyses, as well as the results obtained from

these analyses, are presented below.

 

 

 

and st
satisfa
deviat:
acader
Table ‘
mediat

as repo

and am

Tables S

is preset

50
BMW

Means and standard deviations were calculated for all measures. The means
and standard deviations for the maternal well-being measures (role satisfaction, family
satisfaction, and family cohesion) are presented in Table 6. The means and standard
deviations for the adolescent behavior and development measures (global self-worth,
academic achievement, family satisfaction, and family cohesion) are presented in
Table 7. In addition, the means and standard deviations for the hypothesized
mediating variables (mother-adolescent relationship quality as reported by mothers and
as reported by adolescents) are presented in Table 8.

Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated both within
and across time for all maternal and adolescent variables. These data are presented in
Tables 9-14. For replication purposes, the variance/covariance matrix for the data set
is presented in Appendix C.

Relationships between Adolescent Behavier age
Development age Maternal Well-Qeing

A series of structural equation models were estimated with linear
transformations performed on the raw data to counteract problems of
heteroskadasticity (see Raykov, Tomer, & Nesselroade, 1991). In order to provide
information about these procedures, Appendix D illustrates the command file used to
transform the data. LISREL 8 (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1988) was used to estimate the
structural equation models; these models used maximum likelihood estimation of the
structural equation parameters to address Questions 1 and 2--whether the relationship

between maternal well—being and adolescent behavior and development positively and

I tilill

. . .. . s: A QCQ) l
u . . .., q . . . - mat. k .v. C 03
o . . o x C. .__.::_ . . k 2.2:...

. .c . . ...,.:.> .E. “-73 . E.

s .n. u.
.

‘V
n

i. . “.‘mt .. 1' ~r1
I

 

 

 

51

.38» 5:88 ..o »:.::.»2. 23 .: 0.83 3:88.03: 23 :33 hmuz 3:: .38»
52% .3 3:0 23 .: 803 3:88.33: 2.. :33 8. NZ .38» .32.: .3 »:.::.»3 o... .: 803 3:88.33: 05 :33 a... "Z .334

 

 

S 2: on 2% 3 3m 8 - 2 83.2.8 been.

3 2: o.“ a? m: 3:... 8 - 2 8:23.38 3.28

ho N... 2 o... 3 o... m - 2 8:838: 20:

a: :82 ma :8: a :82. 3:3. 2:232 382:2
88»

 

 

83.323828

-- 1.-.... ._. . Z. .7 .. .71“ -c .. . .. .-.> 9.4..- .35.. .i.. - . .. .. .. ,.-.........- .2-.. in).

e 2e...

 

 

 

 

 

. IIC Cr: TC.“

 

h 0~Gfirh

52

.38» 5x3: .«3 3:0

05 .: 30.5388 .3: 83 8080.30.33: 3.83:3< .038» 5:08... .33 »:.::.»3 3. 3: 0:03 3:88.33: 05 :33 wwuz 3:: .38»
5x3 ..3 3:0 05 3: 083 3:88.33: 05 :33 :3. "Z .038» 533... 33 »:.::.»03 05 3: 0:03 3:88.33: 05 :33 33. "Z. .343

 

 

 

 

3... «.3 3.» ».3m 3... 3.3» on - o. :3.8..3U 3.8:".
3 3.9. 2 we. 3 ed. 33 - o. 83833:: 33.5:
3.: o: 3.: o: v - _ 3552623 258:2
3.3 QN 3.3 a.» 3.3 o.» 3 - . 53333.0» .335
an :82 m: 38': 9. 3|: 83m 2382 388222
033»

0.3801388.” 0.3% 3804.333

..3 »:.::.»0m ..3 3:m .3 »:.::.»0m
-.....~ .. .. .. .... .. .. 1m u. .—.1..:.> C-E..—->-Q ...t. .m>..£-u CW4 .—..< - M. :0m .m>.. . ..... .. .. .. M32

.3.

«C.

 

35‘

cc.

.5:

 

 

 

 

1. o4.
.

3..

 

035.3333»;

,. . -.. 3‘.
m). o o

53

.038» 5:08: ..3 »:.::.»3 05 .: 0:03 3:88.33:
05 :33 83.3.: bmuz 3:: 3:88.33: wwuz 3:: .038» 533: .3 3:0 0... .: 0:03 3:88.33: 3. :33 83.38 8. NZ 3::
3:88.33: 33.1,. .038» 5x3». ..3 »:.::.»3 3. .: 0:03 3:88.33: 3. :33 8053.: N... NZ 3:: 3:88.33: 33. "Z 3.37:.

 

 

 

:2 3n: 3.. «a: mo. 3: 33 - «m 32.82
.3. 3.: I: 3.: 3. 3.8. 33 - «m 28:28.:
”33.83330”.
388.33.83.32
5 :82 mm :82 dd :82. 88M. 23:39 9.33302
033»
«330.3883 “3::... 33m. 03%
.o 3:58: .6 2: :3 macaw»:
.. : > .::.
-.. ..:. 3.... .- . ,. \ .1... . M: ..0m - .. .—....u?.> .c. .....«a . .JNM -5 .4: -q. . co. ..m>.1n. . “1..-..- ...... .zu-

54

 

 

 

 

 

:8... m3. 8.. 8.883 3.38".
12.8. 8. 31%. 33.. 838.838 3.3.8".
.3. . N..- 81.9.. ..:.:..»N. 8.. Swan-tug 0.3M
":32
.o. 1.8:. 3.- 8. 8. 8.. 8.883 38a...
.3. 1.8. no. 8. no. *8. 8.. 838.82.. 3.8.".
8. 1.8:. a..- 8.- 8.- 1.8. :38. 8.. 5833.8
8.- 8.. 8. 8.- 8.- :8. :8. *3. 8.. <33
“3:...
8382
8.33. 8.33. 8.883 838.33: 838.88 8.883 838.88 583 <33
.282 2.5 3.8.". 3.8.". 0.3. 3.8". 3.8.". 3.2..
322. :83»... .332. 3.83-83 .33.... 888.303 :8
.§8.8<.§.82 352.2 8.8.»: .8828...
a
. 3......” ...... 1.8.9 23%.... ._._ 3...; :33-.03. J 2.. w .883 81.5.5. :7 .3..." .8828... 8.....- 8

o 03:...

 

 

c .5550... on. f .33! ¢> . .3593 . was

 

Qua-ho c-~
U—r—ST—S> Cmme—Tug SE0.‘) 2 fin: Q> 2:9: 30>”. =3 3.)... .0..- .0. V.- A .. .1 u..-

390333500» Q D~n~lyh

 

 

 

55

.50. V q......... .5. V 9.... "no. V m...
.563). .3 v3.2.2 minnowsoy. .2008.o..<-..o£o2 u 8.3.3. .0502 32080.3(.
3 8:82 8808.3. 808.8888... u 8.8.3. 2.5 888.2 88.. 825 n $6 .853 8. N... u a 28 2.88.28 8. 8. u z 9%

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.. 8.3.3. .053).
8. 8.. 8.8.3. 2.6
3.5,.
2.632
8.8.3. 8.8.3. 8.880 888.88 8.8288 8.880 8.88.3. .8? <5...
8.8.2 2.6 .25". 2.8.". 23. 3.5. :8... :8
922. n.......8.._..3. 832. 8.3. .83 8...... 888.889 2:
.586.o..<..85o2 158.2 atrium .880.o..<
o o .
. 11.31.: .H a: 1. 8&...-.> . 2.1.9.!) 4.. .1.-- w . ...d1.> .31.- .03 3.4.03: 33¢. .> .m- . 50>... 11. 03.3.4“ ...-. 3.0.... 1.530.. .33 . u .

82.5.50. a 0......-

 

5...

as U

0

=- a L...-

>

 

. 2.3:

.fi:

3.3.x» ....3. P5 3: ._

 

.02-.

. >

‘0‘.

3., > .

..d..

 

 

3. >32... .. gcobmu :

h83~\

 

°~ 0~€IL|

56

 

 

 

 

 

8..-N. N. .- 8.. 8.880 2.8...
Ea... 8.- tin... 8.. 8.8.8.28 2.8....
2. 8.- 2. :8. 8.. 888...... 23.
832
8.- 1...... w..- 8.- 8. 8.. 8.880 2.8....
8. is... 8.- 8.- 8. .18. 8.. 8.8.2.... 2.8...
8. 3...... 8. 2. 8. :8. 8.- 8.. 583......
59..
2882
88.3. 8.33. 8.880 888...... 8.8.8.... 8.880 888...... $83
8.82 2.6 2.8... 2...... 23. 2.5.... 2.8... :2.
92.2. 28833. 832. 8.3. -83 8...... 888.889 2...
88.22.28: .88.: 8.2.8.. 808.8...
882
. o .. .. «.3... . :8; .- .1. 8825 ..-.-.-.o>» 3.. 82...; .9588. ..: 8.2.8. ... .8. 7.3.... .w....2.6

2 03am.

5.3:. .....-.-........,-.:w... 2. 82... >

 

 

 

 

«30:58:0U» O~ 03.3.5-

57

.80. V q......... .8. V 9.2.. ”no. V m...
.8502 .3 3:09. 93.22.23. .38o_ov<-.oflo2 u 8.8.3. .0502 3:38.25.
2. 8...... 88...... 88.2.8882 r- 8223. 2.6 8.82.. .2... 8.5 u .80 82...... 8. 8. u m 2.. 3.8.8.8. 8. R. u 2 8|...

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.. 8....3. 8.82
8.- 8.. 8....3. 2....
3.3,.
2.832
8....3. 8....3. 8.880 88.2.... 8.8.2.... 8.880 8.8.2... .83
8.8.... 2.5 2...... 2...... 23. 2...... 2...... 2..
9.52. .88....3. .952. .23. .83 8...... 828.2... 2..
.88.8<-8..82 .88.... .28.... .8822...
28d
.. . - 8......» 2... .. .8......>....m-..31.2. .. 18> 8..-:23. .1 22.... .. (.2: -. 3.22..

A3255. o. 03¢...

.Mm Mgcmavlmzlod. .a .33.: a> . .. 50

 

 

o... 3.. v.

2....

 

:.> h

a. -235 .

a...

v.02... a> :5:

AV~D>U

3:! 5.312%.“ .t. . 7.07.3 .

Db):

DE .2 C, ‘5 :ume»

?~

.~.,

~ ~ 0~n~Cnh

58

2...... .o. 8.. 8.8.80 2.8....

 

 

 

 

 

1...... 8.- 2:9. 8.. 8.8.2.... 2......
2. 8.- 0.. .o. 8.. 88......» 23.
2.32
o..- 3...... o..- o..- w. .- 8.. 8.8.80 2.8.".
8. 2...... 8.- B. 8.- 2:8. 8.. 828...... 2.8...
8.- :8. 2. 8.- 8.- :8. t. 8.. 2.83....
2. 8.- 2. 2.. 8.- S. 8.. o..- 8.. $6
5......
2882
88.... 88.... 8.8.80 8.8.2.8 8.8.2.8 8.880 8.8.2.... 2.83 $6
8.82 220 .28.. 2.8... 23. 2.8.... 2.2... .8...
:22. .2822... 832. M.2... -83 6.2. 888.35 2..
8.8.2.8882 .38.... 88...... 8.8.2...
3%.].
-. ......._...... .. 2...... m8. 8...-.. 88.5 ....m-..>» 2.: .2... 5.88.2.8. a.-. 2? .m... .22: .. 82.... r.

Z 055—.

buy-:0 nttbxvquw
.:._q..uu -... ,. £31..) 7...... . ... 3:. .6332?) Eum-:o>> 3 U... £933Ls> :05 C 97).. 35. O5: 5..

 

~€UUQU§U 7.03 3 H... . q. . .

38032.3:39.» ~ ~ 333C.

 

 

59

.8. v 9...... .8. v P... .8. v a...
22.82 .3 v8.82 n32.0223— .uoou6_ov<..ofioz H cons—um .0532 36803.2.
3 8.88. .2822... 8.8.8882... u 8...... 2.6 8.8.3. .2... .85 u 58 8...... 8. R u a 2.. 28.8.2... 8. 2. u z a...

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.. 8...... 8.8.2
8. 8.. 8...... 2.6
222
288:
8...... 8...... 8.8.6 88...... 8.8.2... 8.8.6 88...... 583 <6
8...... 2.6 :8... 28... 2... 2...... .28.. .8.
922. .288... £32. .2... -83 59... 828.38 2..
.88....<-§...2 18...... 82...... 8.8.22
86.2818.
. 2......" -_ .. 81> 3.4.8.. ... a-.. 8..... .> ......-...3 3...... 2.3.83... :29-.. .88.? .. 2.8.2.. .53.... ....a.6

€025.58 : 03:.

 

cfiaunvlawwmm k: hmwwl
1c: acmccmuum up: .a wu_mw.,.....w> “FEE—flwlfllqanz .83-.13» . ..

 

N~ 0~9~in

 

 

 

oo- wo.. no. mo. N. . w. .- 2.. mo: 8.- 8.8.30 baa-.—

 

 

 

 

 

8. 8. 8. ... 8. 8. 8.- 8.. 8. 88...... ......
... 8. 8.- 8. ...- ...- ...- 2.....- :. 88...... ......
.35 ......
.. 8m ”m3:
8.. .... ...- 8.- 8.- 8.. ... .o.. .o. 8.880 .8...
8. ...- 8.- .. .- 8. 8. ... 8.- 8. 88...... .8...
...- ...- ......- 8.- o..- ... 8. 8. 8.- .83 ....
...... ......
.. ...... 5....
23.32
8...... 8...... 8.880 88...... 88...... 8.880 88...... .8? <8
8.82 2.6 ...... :8... ...... b8... ...... ....
.85 ...... .o 8.8.... .85 a... .. 8.8.... ...... ...... .o .58....
...-.2. .888... 832. ...... -...3 6.5 858.2,... .8
.88-$85.: .83.: 8.8.... 8.8.8..
86.58%

.1... ......-...~. ,8“ 0.- -. ni- .a.u1.> ...-ML?)- ....¢ ... ...—SC. ..> ....QmI=.3 Jn.q- a} va—DCWJ> 3.44.1 .O—Q>0.. v.1. o.>... .n u,.i.0mO—°mv. ...“... 1.. ..omuG—. u o

N— aid--

1:: 05:55.4. of 3 a.._£.:.-_.l:> “ac-:3...-

 

._2 um... 35. ...-.33 a> Eu

 

 

 

.....g

«Bacwucavhvv N h o‘cth.

61

..8. v 9...... .8. v ...... "8. v a.

£2.52 .3 v8.2.8

macaw—om .88—068.0502 u nous—om .0502 3:00.203. .3 v3.09: 9385.39: .80..3u<-.o£02 n noun—om EEO ”own-.25. .Eom 380
u $6 .8... .... .o 8. 2. a .858. 8. 8. .8828. ... u m .8... a... .o .58.... 2. .. .88.. N: 8. 9.8.28. 8. u m as...

 

 

 

 

 

 

8. :.- 8.- ... 8. 8.- .....- 8.- 8. 8..... .282
8.- : .- 8.- 8.- 8.- .... .2. 8. 8. 8..... 86
.86 ....
.o 8. ....2
0.5.532
8..... 8..... 8880 88...... 88...... 8880 88...... .83 $6
.282 3.6 .8... .8... 2o. :8... 28.. 8.
8.6 a... .c 8.8.... 8.5 .... .o .88... .86 a... .o .88...
256 .888... 832. .8. -83 8.8 .8588... 8.
8828.882 183.: 83.8. 8.8.8...
o o . o .
. :1 .... ..v.v.4u ....- 1 va—.G.—.A> ...uML—uO} ..4. 3...}. m0 SQ. -.> .150“- .03 Immune“ 2;. a“. ¢> .-g.0_0>0. ...J. Okra—3“. ...». Ja—OU< .833 womua 0.0

88.80. a. as...

 

- . . .-C «d. 1.... (.....an 55w..-
.: 3::»:qu 9:. «aim-......EaNJME...—.82 2.4.1:... :9.L=.Ca> 353.433 ...—22:: ...-.2523» ......EE:u>vQ 3:: began-am .

 

 

  

 

 

 

 
 

 

62

8. 8.- 8. 2.. ...8. 2.- 2. 8. 8. 8880 .88.

 

 

 

 

8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 2. 8. 88...... 28..
8.- 8. 2. 8. 2.. 8. 8.- 2. 2. 88...... 8.
.88 588. .o
.88... ".3:
E.- 8. 8. 8.- 2 .- .8. 8. 8.- 8. 8880 :8...
a..- 2.. 8.- 8.- 8. ... 8. 8.- 8. 88...... .8...
8.- 2.. 8. 8.- 8. :.- 2 .- 3.- 8.- .83 ....
......- 8. 8. 2 .- 8. 8.- 8.- 2.. 8.- <8
.88 58>... .o
.85... H....
23.32
88... 8.8. 8880 88...... 88...... 8880 88...... .8? <8
.28: .80 .28.. .8... 2o. .8... .28.. ....
8.8 a... .o .88.... 8.8 a... .o .58.... .88 a... .o .58....
922. 8.8.8. 832. .8. -83 8.8 85888. 8.
.308_ov<.8502 368.2 8.23.5 33.203.

 

 

. ..-.-. ...... o.- .. ...... .> ...... 2. .... 85....» ......83 85.: 83.838822? ... 8... .. .... i8< ...-.28 .8. 3

m— via-H

 

0:. 3:3 why—£3...) 82.3.8235 72:92.: ......catlxl .EfiEF—Sfiguq ...:- ho..>= .

 

31033:...fdv n.»— O‘CSL.

 

 

 

63

..8. v at... .8. v P... .8. v P

.5502 .3 63.090.

03.00:..3— .uo8o_0c<-.0502 H 00.33— 8502 3508—03. .3 vow—0&2 ABEEEQM 2308—03.-..8502 n 00:23— EEU ”omega .80.. 03.0 n
5.0 .8... 588. .o .38.... 2. .. .88.. .. 8. 3.8.28. 8 u z. ”8... a... .o 8.8.8 2. .. .852. 8. 8. 288.8. 8. u m .8...

 

 

 

 

 

2 .- 2.. 2.- 2 .- o. .- 8. 8. 8.- I... 8...... .282
8.- 2 .- 8. 8. 8. S. 8. 8.- ... 8...... 330
8.6 588. .o
8.8.... 322
05.3.2
88.... 8...... 8880 88...... 88...... 8880 8.8.8.. .83 £0
.28: 220 38... .8... .8. :8... :8... .8.
820 a... .o 8.8... 8.5 a... .o .88... 820 a... .o 8.8....
022. 8.8.8.. 832. .8. -...3 8.5 8588.0 8.
.§_00<..0502 1.0.2.2 .0333 “50.6.0.2

 

. ...... 2. 8.8.5, ......

.. 8. .88., .8883 ..E...

 

8.6 8..... .0

...—satu> 21.8.0.0? . .1 3.25.5 .. .

. om 2. 8. 8:0 ...

.—°—v .

. 3.3.3 30:20.30

8.6.80. 2 .3...

.1. ..ID a... ... a1_£:....a> actitbzlmclfidaa

 

82.8.5 «94.8293 ..

 

I u- . I {VF-C Cukwm

 

8. 8. 8. ... 8.- 8. ... 8. 8880 ......

 

 

 

 

8.- .... ...- 8. 8. 8. ... 8. 88...... ......
8. ... ...- ... : .- .8. ... 8. 88...... ......
.....0 58... .o
.58.... "m3:
...- t .- 8.- 8. 8. 8.- ...- 8.- 8880 ......
N..- 8.- 8. 8.- 8. 8.- ...- 2 .- 88...... .8...
8.- 8. 8.- 8.- .o. 8. ...... ... .83 ....
8. :8..- ... 8. 8. .8... ...- o. .- 5.0
880 5...... .o
8.8.... 5m...
0.2.582
88.... 88.... 8880 88...... 88...... 8880 88...... .83
.282 .....0 ...... ...... ...... :8... ...... ....
880 a... 8 8m 8:0 ...... .o ...m .80 a... .. 8m
02:. .888... 832. ...... -...B 8...... 8.88.8.0 8.
.038.00<-.o£02 13.2.2 .0333 300.203.

 

 

O .... 0d- 1 8—fiu.ud> ... ...4. l .4. ....l WOT—6.. U> ...OMI ~03 .wdusuflj WOT“. n> ..nw....O—O>.A .1... .../“1.4“ «.3. (JO—v.1 3.200 ...omufl—go-

: 035—.

65

.8. V 9...... 2o. V 9.... “no. V a...
8.82 .. 8:2...

03.00520m 8008—0350502 u 00030m .0502 30080—004. .3 08.000. 0.0.00530M .0030.00<..0502 fl 000.:3— 205 “09003.. «0.0.. 0020

u <..0 ...... 5...... .o .58.... ... .. 8.8.. .. .8 08.8.8. .. u z ...... ...... .o .... ... .. .88.. 8. .8 288...... ... u z ...ul-oz

 

8.-

 

 

 

 

 

... ...- 8.- 8.- 8. 8. ...- 8...... .282
N..- 8. 8. ...- .....- 8. 8.- 8 88.... ....0
......0 8.... .o
8.8.... 02:
0.0.82
00.30..— 005£0M 03.0000 00505.55 00505.58 00.8000 00505.55 5.0 3
.282 ......0 ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ....
8:0 ...... .. ...... .....0 a... .o .80 .....0 a... .o 8..
022. 8.8.8.. .032. ...... -...3 .00... 888.250 .8
.000..0_00<..0502 0.0.3.2 .0333 «0080—03.
....o . ....2... .
. . .o .. .. .. 8.8.; a... .. ......5 ...“-..3 ...: 8.883582... .... .8...“ ......8... ...-3.... 5.... .0

800500an 3 030,—.

66

reciprocally influence each other both within and across time, and whether the
relationship between maternal well-being and adolescent behavior and development is
significantly mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship. At each time of
measurement (the beginning of sixth grade, the end of sixth grade, and the beginning
of seventh grade) the following relationships were tested: 1. The direct path between
adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-being; 2. The indirect path
between adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-being mediated by
the mother-adolescent relationship; and, to assess the reciprocity of these
relationships; 3. The direct path between maternal well-being and adolescent behavior
and development; and 4. The indirect path between maternal well-being and
adolescent behavior and development mediated by the mother—adolescent relationship.
Thus, within each time of measurement, four structural equation models were tested
(see Figure 3).

Direet Paths betwgn Adolescent Behavior and Development and

Maternal Well-Being within Time

As shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6, the direct path from adolescent behavior and
development to maternal well-being was non-significant at each time of testing.
Similarly, the direct path from maternal well-being to adolescent behavior and
development was also non-significant at each time of testing (see Figures 7, 8, and 9).
The following sections detail the results for each model at each of the three times of

testing.

67

 
 
 

Adolescent Behavior
and Development

Maternal
Well-Being

 
  

 

.7 .

Maternal
Well-Being

  

Adolescent Behavior
and Development

 
   
 

Mother-Adolescent

Relationship

 

    
 

 

  

   
 

Maternal ‘ Adolescent Behavior
Well-Being ’ and Development

Maternal Adolescent Behavior
Well-Being and Development

  

Mother-Adolescent

Relationship

 

Figure 3. Direct and indirect paths tested at the beginning and end of sixth
grade and the beginning of seventh grade.

68

._ ...l......z

 

 

.0 0.50...
8.8.8 0......

 

 

 

.20.:
.0 02......
88...... 0.08.

 

 

 

 

808...... ..3.
.0522

 

 

...... 00 .3 00.00.00. 0.0 0500 .Sociwmm 00.2w 5.... ..0 0.000.000 05 .0 00.03.03
.0580... 000 0.0052050 000 .0320; 0.008.000 .0. 050.. 0.003.003 00000.0... 8..—0?. 0.2. .0 0.00.0

maxi...»

300.02

 

0.0053080
000 3.2200
.0080.00<

 

lag—000'
.0 ......E.
8......0 0......

 

lagdil
.0 09......
80.0.08 0.5...

 

 

 

 

300.0320...
.088...

 

 

 

5.03.33
030.0

 

 

 

69

.....z. ..0 .3 00.00.00. 0.0 0.00.. 0.00...0m.m 000% 0...... ..0 000 0... .0 w0.0..-..03
30.0.00. 000 .00800.0>00 000 .0.>0..0.. 0.080.000 .0. 00.0.. .000...0w.m w0..00.00. 0020?. 00H .m 00%...

 

 

 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

     

   

 

  

288.80
.0 0200... .0 .050...
8.8.8 ....50 8.8.00 .....a...
m .000...0.0>0Q €800.00...
E 000000. 0.09.03 A 000 .0.>0..0m E 000000.
8.00.0000 ....50 .0620: ... 088.80 8.000000 .....a.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00.00.0000 0.3. 0003.03
00.0.02 030.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

7O

... .... 00 0.. 00.00.00. 0.0 00.00 0.000.0w.m .0003 500.60 ..0 m0.00.w0..

0... .0 w0.0..-..03 .00.0.00. 000 0.0802300 000 .0.>0..0.. 00002000 .0. 0.000 E0003... w0..00.00. 0020?. 0.. H .0 Saw...

 

 

.208.
.0 .0930...
8.808 ....50

 

 

 

 

.0503.
.0 .023...
8080.000 .000...

 

 

 

 

 

02.000003 0.3—
.0505).

 

 

053.003
.0500:

 

   

02.0

\\*\©N‘.M\'

 

000.0233.

 

~=§_Ofi<

.0 850...
8.8000 ......00

 

 

.0008.00<

.0 0960...
8.00.0000 .0500

 

 

 

on .-

   

05 3.20.00

 

0.080.000.

.000.0>0...0<
0.0.0080.

 

 

 

5.03.0.3
030.0

 

 

 

71

.. ...... 00 0.. 00.00.00. 0.0 0.000 .000....0m.m .000.» ...... ..0 00.00.02. 0...
.0 0.0502050 0:0 .0.>0..0.. 2080.000 000 00.30.03 0.0.0.00. .0. 0500 0.00.0.5.» 02.00.00. 0020? . 00.... ... 0.00.".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

...88.8<
.0 09.00...
, 8.8... 8 ...5... w .m.3...523.. _
. 00. 0 0 =00
0.88.02 x . .00.. U .. ...
.0 83m...
gamuam =50..—
- ...... 552.00 0 00.00.03 0 .mflwuuc.
0.88.00... 2. 0.0.0.02 .2... .. w— 02.000008 3.0.00
20503.5( 0
_ 0.588..
8.000.... 0.3.
0.0.0.02
5.53....“

 

 

300.0

 

 

72

...... 00 .3 0000.00. 0.0 0.50.. 0.000.005 000.0 5.00 ..0 000 0... .0 0.0802050
000 .0.>0..00 0.003.000 000 00.34.03 00.0.00. .00 00.0.. 0.000.000 00.00.00. 0020?. 00.... .0 0.00....

 

 

 

.0 850... .0 3.8...
8.8.8 .080. 8.808 0.0.0.

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.0—000.0% 00. .0603.
000.03
...... 3.2200 A . . .0 350...
088.8... m. .0620: 80000000 0.0.0.
5.03.000 0000000000 23.

030.0 03.0.02

 

 

 

 

 

 

...... 00 .3 00.00.00. 0.0 0.00.. 2000.006 000.0 0.00.8 .0 00.00.02. 0...
.0 0.0602050 000 83000.. 0080.000 000 00.0..-.

.03 .0530... .0. 0.00.. 200500.. 00000.00. 000.03 00... .0 0.00.".

 

. .088.00<
..0 0280...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02.9.8 .05.. .232
n ..0 85......
. =0 0 an
...88.8< R 09. 0 _. 0
.0 .332.
00.600000 0.03... . o
- 220020 .+ on- 00“.”...03 v aux”...
0.88.02 . 0S. .0. .- 02.00.0000 2.0.0..
305030.90 .
00508...
.3300 a o o
.... .0 . .0. «m _ 0
0003.08

 

 

.0520:
.0020

 

 

 

 

74

Die.» in. .1 or; ‘0‘; a. H '..;i [(11 u .u "V',Hu‘ 11' 1‘! ._, ‘-=;1'
l E . . E 5 l E !

Based on the results of the LISREL analyses, the fit of the model appears to
be quite good, x203, N=147)=7.67, p <.86, GFI=.99, CFI=l.OO, standardized
RMR=.O4. The structural parameter of interest, the direct path from adolescent
behavior and development to maternal well-being, was not significant, indicating that
a direct relationship between these constructs is not evident at the beginning of sixth
grade.

Similarly, the reciprocal, direct path from maternal well-being to adolescent
behavior and development was not significant (see Figure 7). Again, the model fit
the data well, x203, N=147)=7.67, p <.86, GFI=.99, CFI=1.00, standardized
RMR=.O4.

As shown in Figure 4, the observed variables appeared to be significant
indicators of their respective latent constructs. Specifically, maternal role satisfaction,
family satisfaction, and family cohesion were significant indicators of maternal well-
being, and adolescent global self-worth, academic achievement, family satisfaction,
and family cohesion were significant indicators of adolescent behavior and
development. The significance of each of the paths may be examined by reference to
the t-values presented in Figure 4. Since the mother-adolescent relationship construct
was assessed by a single indicator, this parameter was fixed at 1.0 and therefore was

not estimated.

75

Do. :0. u an A ol;.;n :‘h.v1or.. «Develomen .. . Wll- in
W-

Based on the goodness of fit statistics, x’(8, N=103)=8.75, p < .36,
GFI=.97, CFI=.99, standardized RMR=.06, this model appeared to fit the data
well. As at the beginning of sixth grade, the direct path from adolescent behavior and
development to maternal well-being was not significant. Similarly, the reciprocal path
from maternal well-being to adolescent behavior and development was also not
significant (see Figure 8). The goodness of fit statistics, x2(8, N=103)=8.75, p
< .36, GFI=.97, CFI=.99, standardized RMR=.06, indicated that this model fit the
data well.

The measurement model at the end of sixth grade included the same variables
as the measurement model at the beginning of sixth grade with the exception of
adolescent academic achievement. This variable was measured at the beginning of
sixth grade and the beginning of seventh grade only; thus, it was not included as part
of the measurement model at the end of sixth grade. Moreover, and as found in prior
analyses, the t-values of the paths indicated that all indicators of the latent constructs
were significant (see Figure 5).

D’ a. P h or an Anlescen Behvior. d Develomn .. . M mal Wll-in
at the fieginning of Seventh grade

Consistent with analyses from the beginning and end of sixth grade, the direct
path from adolescent behavior and development to maternal well-being was not
significant. The model did appear to fit the data, {(13, N =57)=6.05, p < .94,

GFI=.97, CFI=1.00, standardized RMR=.05. However, the small sample size

76
available for model testing at the beginning of seventh grade means that this

consistency must be interpreted cautiously.

The reciprocal path from maternal well-brin g to adolescent behavior and
development was also not significant, with goodness of fit statistics the same as in the
path from adolescent behavior and development to maternal well-being (see Figure 9).

Due to a significant loss in sample size and, therefore, in statistical power at
the beginning of seventh grade, the results for these analyses must be interpreted with
caution. While the same variables as at the beginning and end of sixth grade were
used as indicators for the latent constructs, adolescents’ academic achievement was
not a significant indicator of adolescent behavior and development and mothers’
family satisfaction was not a significant indicator of maternal well-being at the
beginning of seventh grade. The non-significant t-values seen in Figure 9 illustrate
these non-significant paths.

mm

The measurement models for each of the three times of testing appeared
adequate. All of the indicators of the latent constructs at the beginning of sixth grade
and the end of sixth grade were significant, indicating that the hypothesized variables
were good indicators of the latent constructs. Adolescent academic achievement was
not a significant indicator of adolescent behavior and development at the beginning of
seventh grade, nor was mothers’ report of family satisfaction a significant indicator of
maternal well-being at the beginning of seventh grade. Again, the small sample size
available at this time of testing may account for the inconsistency between the two

sixth grade analyses, on the one hand, and the seventh grade analysis, on the other.

77

When the structural relations between the latent constructs were examined, all
paths were non-significant at each of the three times of testing. Specifically,
adolescent behavior and development was not directly predicted by maternal well-
being within each time of testing, and maternal well-being was not significantly
predicted by adolescent behavior and development within each time of testing. Since
a direct relationship does not appear to exist between these constructs, these results
suggest that, if there are any links between adolescent behavior and development and
maternal well-being, they may be mediated by a third variable. Such a possibility
legitimates analyses designed to test a key hypothesis of the present study--that the
relationship between adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-being is
mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship. Consequently, the results of tests of
these indirect relationships will be presented next.

u; an A ol- n “.ohvir .nc D-ovel men . . M W11-L‘l‘
07-513.! . - M hr- ulesn Rlation hi .. he 'winnin . ' ..-

As hypothesized, the relationship between adolescent behavior and
development and maternal well-being was significantly mediated by the mother-
adolescent relationship. Specifically, adolescent behavior and development
significantly predicted the mother-adolescent relationship which, in turn, significantly
predicted maternal well-being (see Figure 10). The goodness of fit statistics indicated
that the model fit the data well, 3809, N=147)=18.78, p < .47, GFI=.97,
CFI=1.00, standardized RMR=.O6.

The t-values on Figure 11 indicated the structural paths of the reciprocal model

were also significant. Having the same goodness of fit statistics as the previous

78

...... 00 .... 00.00.00. 0.0 00.0.. 0.000.006 .000.0 0...... ..0 00.00.02. 0... .0 00.000020. 8800.80.50.00. 0... 000 00.00.00.5
.0520... 400.000.9900 000 30000.. 0030.000 000.50.. 00000.0. 0... .0. 2.0.. .08....000 00000.00. 0020?. 00... .0. 0.00. ...

 

 

.2002 .0 0900...
8.808 .050...

 

00.800000
088.80.30.02

 

 

 

8.—

      

  

0.0.0.0020...
.0080.00<-.0502

,lauauagl
.0 02.000.
8.8.8 .00....

 

 

0.88.80
.0 09.00...

 

 

 

 

.00... 00.80.0000 ...—00...

 

 

 

.000...0.0>0n.

 

  
  
 

 

   
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

am 000”“... 00.09.33 000 30,003. .000.0>00.0<
a - 0.0.0.02 0.080.000. .00.. .
00.60.0000 00.0... 0.0.0000<
0000000000 0.3. /
.h— v I
30.0.02 5.0.3 ...00

 

 

 

 

 

.0020

 

 

9
7

...... 00 .... 00.00.00. 0.0 00.0.. .0000.00.0 600.0 0.0.0 .0 00.00.02. 0... .0 0.0000020. .0000_000-.00.00. 00. 000 000500.260
000 5.2.000 .00000.000 00.00.33 .0580... 0003.00 00000.0. 0... .0. 00.0.. .000...00.0 00000.00. 0020?. 00... ._ _ 0.00...

 

02080000
.§_8<-.£.oz

 

 

   
   

0.0000033.
088.004.50.02

 
   

 

 

288.03
.0 85....

 

 

 

 

 

 

.2002
x 802.0 .00... . .0 0930...
. 8.8.30 .00...
50000.8( 000.0 0
.0 028...
A 8.60.0.0 .05 , 0.208.260 200...»... . _ Ewan”:

    

 

 

  

 

000 5.2.000
.0800.00<

 

  

 

.0050: 00...: . v78.60.0000 0.000...

 

 

0.200.622
00000.0(

 

 

.0530:

 

_ 5.00.0.0 0.3.

 

 

0:03.000
.000...

 

 

80
model, this model also appeared to fit the data well.

a: -l n; a. an 5 a c, ya. =; .. ' -__H D ‘V‘ on n an ._ ‘11..- 1 -§;1|'
u‘vAU‘vJo ‘ Ali-anklgt Lucy 10: ‘_n!0 i 1 ru‘

As shown in Figure 12, the relationship between adolescent behavior and
development and maternal well-being was again significantly mediated by the mother-
adolescent relationship at the end of sixth grade. The model appeared to fit the data
well, x203, N=103)=14.08, p (.37, GFI=.97, CFI=.99, standardized
RMR=.O6.

The reciprocal model containing the path from maternal well-being to the
mother-adolescent relationship and the path from the mother-adolescent relationship to
adolescent behavior and development was again significant at the end of sixth grade
(see Figure 13). The goodness of fit statistics, x203, N=103)=14.08, p < .37,
GFI=.97, CFI=.99, standardized RMR=.06, indicated that this model fit the data
well.
or; :n Mr A; L‘hwor 1 a Dveln-mn .. ,o M -rn._ W -'

.u at... 9.! n h M r- 001‘ n "ltlnto hi . h winn° ' of- vnt rt"
As discussed previously, the results from the tests of the models at the
beginning of seventh grade should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample

size available at this time of measurement. However, goodness of fit indices
indicated a fairly good model fit, )8(l9, N=57)=16.88, p < .60, GFI=.93,
CFI=1.00, standardized RMR=.O6. As well, t-values indicated non-significant paths
for both of the structural parameters, in addition to many non-significant t-values for

the indicators of the latent constructs (see Figure 14).

...... 5 3 3.8:; 2a 2.2— .fichufi .32» 5:... be .23 c5 3 9.7.5322 Ego—83052: 05 v5 .ufionéoa
5:22: guano—3oz :5 8322. .5083? 52.33 €2.22 2: 8.. 2:8 2.85:3” 95855 $29,; 2:. .2 2:3"—

 

£25“?—
.=88_8<-.232

 

 

 

    
   

3:95:33—
.c8ao_ov<-.o:32

 

 

 

 

 

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

m 588.33
.282 am 852.
a 352. 5:28 :23...
5.335 Egan. .23 . ,
. :83
.25: fl 523.8 . _ a-_ rag.
an .85—:.— ..5 8328— .36 «_ 398.338 2.5!.—

..8838 rial—rt ..3 .=88_8<

 

 

 

5.53.58
.330

 

.9532

a 80.38.33.” 20“ 5%

 

 

 

2
8

...... 5 .3 3.8%.: 2a 252. E3555 62:» 5:». be e5 2: 3 95.5222 acne—evadofios 05 v5 €083.33
was $323 E8832 £53.:oa 3.:an c833 22.22 as 8.. v.53 2.85:!» 9.23%.: 8293 2:. .2 9:5...

 

 

.8§_8<-.£.o2

M 3:93:53—

 

 

   
   

n29.333—
E83.3<L2_52

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

      

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.9502
288.2% E 853
E 852— 8.9.8 €55
5.28 h=5". ,
93.6
2...... .252
”MAM“? “a Susan 28-..»? _ E 85...:
0 . . . i %
533398 .55..— .ca m Eon-2e—v< .an.a2 .2. o .— 553.353 :53. -
gig—om 5% 5.6835 9.3.
.320 .55.»:

 

 

 

 

 

83

...... ca .3 3.8%... o... 2...: .58....ng at...» 5:96». .3 935.33 2: .c 3.7.5232 EBB—89.2.55 o... ...... 9:27:93
55...... ....oEasgo—v ...... .2222. EBB—2... 503.2. £5.32 2: .8 2...... ESE—.3» ”5.8%... 8...»: of. .2 2:»...—

 

 

3502 E noun—v:—
cofiuaou >55...

 

 

:52: fl
... 8.8.2..

8.5.3.3 ...:a...

 

_.

 

 

8.5.3.5 0.3.
.25....)—

 

 

 

x...

      

2.0m-..93
359...:

 

3:95:50:
.coomo—O—u< Lo; 3

 

..

 

 

3:30:20:
588.23-3522

 

 

 

... .552...
8.3.8 ......an.

 

 

 

 

 

......
o—n.‘
...ouno_ov<
fi .... .552... l—
a: ectoemtom 3...... -
22.52260 .
22.2.2. _ 2.2.2.2.
2.83.0.3 9.. H u_Eo_.mu<

 

 

.Ed stead—Tm
.320

 

 

84
Similarly, while model fit was again good for the reciprocal effects model,

x209, N=57)=16.88, p < .60, GFI=.93, CFI=1.00, standardized RMR=.06, the
path from the mother-adolescent relationship construct to the adolescent behavior and
development construct was non-significant (see Figure 15). Although the smaller
sample size available in seventh grade could account for the differences in results
from the beginning and end of sixth grade to the beginning of seventh grade, these
changes might also have been due to developmental changes in the sample. Further
discussion of these issues will be presented in the next chapter.
1 i 11
As predicted, the mother-adolescent relationship significantly mediated the
relationship between adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-being
within time. This mediated relationship was evident when tested in both directions.
Thus, these models not only supported the presence of an indirect relationship
between adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-being but, as well,
they supported a reciprocal effects model of mother-adolescent relations within time.
Moreover, given that these models appeared to be stable over time, additional tests
were run to further assess the nature of the relationships between the constructs across
time. These models are presented next.
ni in n etw nA lanehavir Dvl n
lel- in Mhr-Al nR i hi
Structural equation modeling (LISREL; Joreskog & Sorbom, 1988) was again
used to examine the hypothesized relationships across-time between adolescent

behavior and development and maternal well-bein g. The following relationships were

85

...... ..a .3 38...... o... 9.5.... .5355.” ...—x.» 55>... ... ”5.5.9.. o... ... .2223? 508.89.»..85 o... ...... ......Eae_o>o..
...... 8.22.2. 288.2... .m...o..-=o3 350...... c838; 82.2.... o... .8 «5.... .58....5.» 953...... 8..—....-. 2:. .m. 2:»...—

 

 

niacezsofl
...88.€<-.o.=os.

 

   
               

3:20.53.
...83.2.<-.2=02

 

 

288......
... 8.3.2.
..

w 8.8.8....-

288......
... 35....
8.335 ... ..

22:262....
u....o..8<

 

 

 

.... 3.3...
5.8.6 ...E...

_ 2...:
. ... 85.2.

.3... "iguana ......

 

 

23-..»...
.55....)—

 

 

 

 

 

8..8.....m ......
1:50.62

 

 

86

tested: 1. The direct path between adolescent behavior and development at the
beginning of sixth grade and maternal well-being at the end of sixth grade; 2. The
indirect path between adolescent behavior and development at the beginning of sixth
grade and maternal well-being at the end of sixth grade, mediated by the mother-
adolescent relationship examined at the end of sixth grade; 3. The direct path between
maternal well-being at the beginning of sixth grade and adolescent behavior and
development at the end of sixth grade; and 4. The indirect path between maternal
well-being at the beginning of sixth grade and adolescent behavior and development at
the end of sixth grade, mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship examined at
the end of sixth grade (see Figure 16). Due to the decrease in statistical power
associated with the small sample size available for testing at the beginning of seventh
grade, and in light of the cautions about the interpretation of the results discussed in
the previous section, data from the beginning of seventh grade were not included in
the longitudinal analyses.

Ir D'r h .- wn: A lscen Beh.ovir . . D-wvl o-mn .. h L- 'nn'n of
Sixth gm; and Maternal Well-Being at the End of Sixth grade

As illustrated in Figure 17, all indicators of the latent constructs were

significant. Contrary to what was found in the within-time analyses, the direct path
between adolescent behavior and development at the beginning of sixth grade and
maternal well-being at the end of sixth grade was significant. Based on the results of
the LISREL analysis, the model appeared to fit the data well, {(7, N=103)=5.26, p

(.63, GFI=.99, CFI=1.00, standardized RMR=.O7.

87

 
  

     
     

     
   

Maternal
Well-Being
Time 2

Adolescent Behavior
and Development
Time 1

 
  

   
     

  
      
    
     

Maternal
Well-Being
Time 2

Adolescent Behavior
and Development
Time 1

 
   
     

Mother-Adolescent
Relationship
Time 2

 
  

     
   

Maternal
Well-Being
Time 1

Adolescent Behavior
and Development
Time 2

 

V

 
  

   
      

  
     

Maternal
Well-Being
Time 1

Adolescent Behavior
and Development
Time 2

 
   
     

Mother-Adolescent
Relationship
Time 2

Figure 16. Longitudinal direct and indirect paths. Time 1=Beginning of sixth
grade, Time 2=End of sixth grade.

...... .3 .3 3.8%... o... 8......— .§o......w.m 6.3% 5...... ..o ....o o... .a web??? 350...... ......
38w 5...... ..o $68.3; o... 3 2.0an.2.2. ...... 8322. .5822... .0. was... 885:3... @386... 82.2.-. 2E. ...— 83w...—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

88

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28833.
... 3......
.232
:28 .. ......
... 8...... . . ..ou .. n.
5.8.8 ......8 ...... N
Enema—cu...
.m .5on
.0502 . - 5.8.88 3......
am 3x3... 9:09.33 .1 ..“ohmmofin .. N.
8.8.38 .....a... .. Z. .....ooamwwm
2.080520...
2.528..
8.8.828 29..
...: €95.28
.320

 

 

 

 

The structural path of interest, from maternal well-being at the beginning of
sixth grade to adolescent behavior and development at the end of sixth grade, was
significant (see Figure 18). Goodness of fit indices for this model indicated a
moderate fit, {(4, N=103)=24.02, p=.00, CFI=.93, CFI=.93, standardized
RMR=.09, although the chi-square was a bit large. However, the model was
accepted based on the overall evaluation of the other goodness of fit indices.

up. '. u; -n Ac-ol cn Beh.ovir .. . Dku-lmn .. . M - 1..- W l-
i h hr-Al aninhiAr T'm

Contrary to the within-time analyses, the mediated models of across-time
relations were rejected. The model which examined the relationship between
adolescent behavior and development at the beginning of sixth grade and maternal
well-being at the end of sixth grade, mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship,
was rejected based on the goodness of fit statistics, x’(ll, N=103)=66.79, p=.00,
GFI=.87, CFI=.93, standardized RMR=.18. Specifically, the chi-square was six
times the number of degrees of freedom and the GFI was below the minimum .90 cut-
off for acceptance of the model. Therefore, this across time, mediated effects model
was rejected.

Similarly, the model which examined the relationship between maternal well-
being at the beginning of sixth grade and adolescent behavior and development at the
end of sixth grade, mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship, was also rejected.

The goodness of fit indices were, x2(7, N =103)=62.50, p=.00, GFI=.89,

. ... .3 3.8.2.. o... 3.... ...8E..w.w 03% 3.3. ..o ....o 3. .. 33.3.33 ...... 5.233 2.3.0.0....

..i:

...... 39% 3.3. .0 3.3.9.. 3. .. 3.34.25 350...... 8.. 3.... 33.33. 3:86... .o.....>-. 3 ... .m. flaw...

 
 

         

 

 

 

 

 

   

 
   

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

..m 3.69.. mm 35...:
8.880 2...... 8.380 ......
. .0 33.8.33. .382
8.3-83
mm 35...»... ...... 339.8 A . .9552 .5 3.8.3.
‘ 8.8.2... ...... 888...... .8 .. 88...... 2.5....
5.25.... 88...... 0.3.

 

.320 .«EofiE

 

 

 

 

 

 

91
CFI=.83, standardized RMR=. 17. The chi-square for this model was almost nine

times the degrees of freedom and the GFI fell below the minimum .90 acceptance
level. , Thus, this model could not be accepted as fitting the data.
conclusions

The examination of the direct paths between adolescent behavior and
development and maternal well-being within each time of testing revealed no
significant relationship between these two constructs. Specifically, adolescent
behavior and development did not appear to predict maternal well-being and,
reciprocally, maternal well-being did not appear to predict adolescent behavior and
development, either at the beginning or end of sixth grade or at the beginning of
seventh grade. However, these constructs did appear to be linked by a third,
mediating variable: The mother-adolescent relationship. Specifically, adolescent
behavior and development significantly predicted the mother-adolescent relationship
which, in turn, predicted maternal well-being. In addition, the reciprocal paths were
also significant, indicating a bidirectional relationship between mothers and
adolescents. This findings is consistent with the emphasis stressed in developmental
contextualism regarding the importance of the relationship between the developing
individual and his or her changing context (e.g. , family context) for psychosocial
behavior and development (Lerner, 1991).

In turn, however, the longitudinal analyses resulted in quite different findings.
When the across time, direct paths between adolescent behavior and development and
maternal well-being were examined, the relationships were significant. Thus,

adolescent behavior and development at the beginning of sixth grade significantly

92
predicted maternal well-being at the end of sixth grade, and maternal well-being at the

beginning of sixth grade significantly predicted adolescent behavior and development
at the end of sixth grade. This pattern of findings suggests that both adolescents and
mothers are influencing each other over time. However, the mediated relationships
were not significant when examined longitudinally. This finding suggests that a
direct, rather than a mediated, relationship exists across time between maternal well-
being and adolescent behavior and development. However, a full discussion of the
nature and meaning of these results, especially with respect to a developmental

contextual approach to human development, will be presented in the next chapter.

Chapter V
DISCUSSION

The primary goal of the present investigation was to examine the relationships
between mothers and children during the early adolescent period. Framed by a
developmental contextual perspective of human development (Lerner, 1986, 1991),
the current study examined bidirectional relations between mothers and their children.
Developmental contextualism stresses that both characteristics of the developing
individual, as well as characteristics of his or her changing context, dynamically
interact to comprise the basic process of human development (Lerner, 1992, 1993).
Therefore, individual characteristics (e. g., academic achievement and global self-
worth) and characteristics of the environment (e. g., family satisfaction and family
cohesion) that are central to psychosocial behavior and development during
adolescence (Lerner & Spanier, 1980; Petersen, 1988) were examined to assess
whether adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-being influenced
each other both concurrently and longitudinally.

In addition, the role of potential mediating variables is important to consider in
order to better understand the pm of change involved between the individual and
his or her context (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Crouter, 1982).
Consequently, the mother-adolescent relationship was examined in the present
investigation as a potential mediator between adolescent behavior and development
and maternal well-being.

The current chapter presents a discussion of the results obtained from the

present study. Further, both the strengths and the limitations of the current study will

93

94

be presented. Finally, directions for future research involving mothers and young
adolescents will be suggested.
1 ' ' n l n h vi r v 1 m
Maternal Well-Being Within flfime

Past research has demonstrated the influence of familial characteristics and
parental behaviors on children’s and adolescents’ development (e.g., Demo, Small &
Savin-Williams, 1987; Kurdek & Fine, 1994; Lerner & Galambos, 1985, 1986;
Ohannessian, Lerner, Lerner, & von Eye, 1994; Paulson, Hill, & Holmbeck, 1991;
Wentzel, 1994). For example, Gottfried (1991) reported that the more parents were
involved in their child’s education, the better the child performed academically.
Consistent with other research, the present investigation also found that parental
characteristics, indexed by maternal well-being, were associated with adolescent
behavior and development. However, no direct relationship between maternal well-
being and adolescent behavior and development emerged at any time of testing
(beginning of sixth grade, end of sixth grade, or beginning of seventh grade).
Instead, this relationship was significantly mediated through the mother-adolescent
relationship.

While no previous study has examined the mediated relationships between
mothers and adolescents in the manner used in the present investigation, past literature
does provide evidence for the link between familial relationships and both parental
and adolescent outcomes. For example, adolescent self-esteem and well-being have
been related to close, supportive family relationships (Grotevant & Cooper, 1985 ;

Marcia, 1983; Matteson, 1974). Similarly, Paulson, Hill, and Holmbeck (1991)

95

found that close family relationships predicted parental satisfaction. While these
findings provide evidence for the importance of the role of the parent-adolescent
relationship, in regard to both adolescents’ and parents’ functioning, these prior
studies have not examined the nature by which the parent—adolescent relationship
mediates the impact that parents and adolescents have on each other. Therefore, these
studies have failed to capture the m involved in person-context (i.e. person-
parent) relations. Consequently, the present investigation went beyond this past
research and examined how parental characteristics (i.e. maternal well-being) affected
the mother-adolescent relationship and, in turn, how this relationship affected
adolescent behavior and development. In this way, the current study attempted to
capture the process involved in how parents affect their children and how children
affect their parents.

The present investigation, in fact, did find support for this process-of—influence
model in that all within-time relations between mothers and adolescents were
significantly mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship. These results support
those of Lemer and Galambos (1985) that found that the relationship between
maternal role satisfaction and child outcomes was mediated by mother-child
interacton. Barling ( 1986) also found similar results with fathers and children.
Specifically, Barling reported that the father-child relationship significantly mediated
the influence of fathers’ job dissatisfaction on childrens’ levels of hyperactivity and
conduct problems.

Both Barling’s findings and those of the current investigation support the

notion that the influence of parents on children, and of children on parents, is

96

transmitted through the parent-child relationship, at least when both are assessed at
the same point in time. Further, and specific to the present study, the results suggest
that adolescents’ feelings of self-worth, their academic performance, and their reports
of family satisfaction and family cohesion affect mothers’ well-being through the
quality of the parent-adolescent relationship. Similarly, mothers’ role satisfaction,
family satisfaction, and family cohesion affect adolescents’ behavior and development
through the mother-adolescent relationship also.

Given that only the within-time mediated relationships were significant, the
current findings suggest that neither the mothers’ nor the adolescents’ characteristics
that were examined in the present study had a direct impact on one another when
examined concurrently. Instead, and as already noted, the current findings suggest
that the impact that mothers had on their adolescents and, reciprocally, that
adolescents had on their mothers, was one that is promoted by the nature of the
mother-adolescent relationship. Thus, the quality of the mother-adolescent
relationship may be the key factor in determining the impact of mothers’ well-being
on adolescents’ behavior and development and, in turn, of the impact of adolescents’
behavior and development on mothers’ well-bein g.

The importance of these findings lies in being able to begin to understand the
process by which parents and adolescents influence each other. Moreover,
understanding the key role that the mother-adolescent relationship plays in the
relations between mothers and adolescents is twofold. First, the mother-adolescent
relationship can be a focal point in improving both maternal well-being and adolescent

behavior and development. For example, since the current investigation found that

97

the mother-adolescent relationship directly predicted adolescent behavior and
development, perhaps enhancing the quality of the mother-adolescent relationship for
an adolescent with low academic achievement may, in turn, enhance his or her
academic performance. This idea is supported by past literature that has found that
the more parents are involved in their children’s education, the better the children do
in school (Gottfried, 1991; Stevenson & Baker, 1987). Second, the mother-adolescent
relationship may possibly buffer the potential negative effects of maternal
characteristics on the youth and, in turn, of adolescent characteristics on the mother.
For example, low maternal role satisfaction may not have a negative effect on the
adolescent if the quality of their relationship is high. The current study’s findings
provide some support for this idea in that the only significant relationship found
between mothers and adolescents, when their relationship was examined concurrently,
was one that was mediated through the mother-adolescent relationship.

In turn, however, when examining longitudinally maternal well-being and
adolescent behavior and development, the direct relationship between these constructs
becomes the important path to which to attend. Accordingly, these cross-time
relationships are discussed next.

Cross-Time Relationships between Adolescent Behavior
Dvl mn Mem Wll- in

The findings of the analyses of the cross-time relations between maternal well-
being and adolescent behavior and development were quite different than those that
resulted from the analyses of the within-time relations. Specifically, maternal well-

being at the beginning of sixth grade directly predicted adolescent behavior and

98
development at the end of sixth grade. Reciprocally, adolescent behavior and

development at the beginning of sixth grade significantly predicted maternal well-
being at the end of sixth grade. However, unlike the within-time findings, adolescent
behavior and development and maternal well-being were not significantly mediated
across time by the mother-adolescent relationship.

One possible explanation for the difference between the within- and across-
time findings may be that both maternal and adolescent characteristics become
functionally autonomous as they endure across time. Specifically, within any given
point in time, behavioral characteristics that are manifested primarily at that occasion
of measurement may be perceived more as transitory, or attributable to situational
factors, than as enduring features of the person. In other words, such time-specific
behaviors may be viewed as merely “states” of being; for example, the emergence of
a low level of self-worth might be interpreted by a parent as a transitory function of
the transition to middle school. It may be that when behaviors are viewed as
temporary states, specific to a given point in time, the quality of the mother-
adoleseent relationship-which, presumably is an outcome of the history, to date, of
the relationship-may supersede ”transitory" behaviors as the key influence on
outcomes for the mother or youth.

For example, if the quality of the mother-adolescent relationship is high, low
adolescent self worth at the beginning of sixth grade may not impact the mother’s
well-being because the mother may view this level of functioning as a temporary
state. However, if the behavior persists across time, then, it might become a more

pronounced influence on outcomes for the members of the dyad; indwd, it may be the

99

case that this ”persistence” may lead to a trait-like attribution by the mother and, if
so, such traits may become the major predictor of dyadic functioning, superseding
even the quality of the mother-adolescent relationship because, in effect, it would be
the traits of the child that ”shape“ (or set boundaries for) the nature of the
relationship.

That is, if behaviors or characteristics endure across time, they may change
the perceptions of the mother from being seen as states of being to being viewed as
”trait-like." For example, continued, low adolescent academic performance may be
attributed by the mother to persistent low motivation or to poor ability, rather than to
transitory situational factors such as the transition to middle school. Accordingly, and
as noted above, once a behavior is attributed to being a trait of the individual, the role
of the mother-adolescent relationship in mediating the relations between adolescent
behavior and development and maternal well-being may not be as important, since the
traits, as parts of the enduring character of personality, may be salient enough to
supersede the relationship or may become, in fact, a basis of the relationship.

The findings of the present study allow the speculation that if and when
characteristics are attributed to be trait-like a direct relationship will emerge between
maternal well-being and adolescent behavior and development. This state-to trait
attribution change process may in fact explain the findings of the current study, in
that the relation between adolescent behavior and development and maternal well-
being was significantly mediated by the mother-adolescent relationship only within
times of measurement. Of course, the present interpretation of the differences

between the within- and across time findings of this study can only be tested in future

100

research, investigations that would need to involve assessment of the hypothesized
role of state versus trait attributions by the mother.

Accordingly, both within-time, mediated relations and across-time, direct
relations are valuable for future researchers to consider in order to provide additional
information regarding the changing dynamics of parent-adolescent relations.
Moreover, future research should be conducted in a manner that addresses the
limitations of the current investigation.

Although the present investigation was conducted over three time periods,
additional times of measurement and longer periods of time between measurements
would have been advantageous. The present study was only able to examine mothers
and adolescents from the beginning of sixth grade through the beginning of seventh
grade. Additional times of measurement over a longer period of time would enable
one to assess more of the developmental changes that are involved in adolescence. In
addition, longer periods of time between testing could diminish the influence of
practice effects on the results. In turn, more intensive measurement methods and
designs, such as involved in P-technique factor analysis (Cattell, Cattell, & Rhymer,
1947; Nesselroade & Ford, 1985), may provide information about the structure of
intraindividual change by examining an individual’s behaviors over many closely
successive occasions; such an observational frame could be used to ascertain if, and
when, maternal attributions of adolescent behavior alter from a state-like to a trait-like
status. Thus, intensive measurement designs, such as involved in P-technique, could

be used to test the above-noted ideas about the basis of the different role of the quality

101

of the mother-adolescent relationship in mediating within- and across-time adolescent
and maternal outcomes.

Another limitation of the current investigation concerns the sample. Whereas
the sample size was large enough to conduct the analyses relevant to the questions of
this study, a larger sample size would have provided additional power. This
increased power would have been especially important given that structural equation
modeling techniques were used in the present study. Because structural equation
techniques examine all parameters simultaneously, they require a sample large enough
to test, with adequate degrees of certainty, the structural parameters under
investigation in a given study. In fact, the inconsistency between the results obtained
from the beginning and end of sixth grade, on the one hand, and the beginning of
seventh grade, on the other, may be due largely to a substantial drop in sample size
(from 142 to 103 to 57 across the three testing times, respectfully). Perhaps with
additional power to estimate the parameters of interest at the beginning of seventh
grade, additional paths would have been significant.

Moreover, replicating the current analyses with additional populations would
also be beneficial in terms of the validity of the study. The current findings are only
generalizable to White, semi-rural, Pennsylvania mothers and adolescents of a lower-
middle class background. For instance, results obtained from conducting the same
study with African-American or Asian-American families, or with families of upper-
middle class socioeconomic status, or with urban families, might well be different.

Another limitation of the current study concerns the measures. All measures

used in the present investigation, with the exception of the indices for academic grade

102

point average, were self-report questionnaires; thus, common method variance could
have introduced error into the assessment of the functioning of the mothers and of the
adolescents. Therefore, measures from additional methods of measurement should be
incorporated also into future research in order to ascertain the influence of common
method variance and, through triangulation, to better determine the variance due to
the substantive nature of the constructs under study. Furthermore, then, use of
multiple measures to assess the same constructs as those in the present study may be
beneficial in terms of establishing convergent validity.

In addition, the variables used in the present investigation were drawn from an
archival data set. Therefore, only a limited number of variables were available for
study. However, the variables chosen from the archive were based on prior research
and were all significant indicators of their latent constructs.

In sum, several means exist for enhancing the current study. Nevertheless, the
results obtained from the present investigation are beneficial in many respects. It is
useful to note these assets.

r n th h Pr n d

A primary strength of the present study was its simultaneous use of both
within-time and longitudinal assessments of the relationship between mothers and
adolescents. An additional strength of the present investigation was the use of
structural equation modeling techniques. These techniques allow for simultaneous
solutions to be estimated for the parameters of interest. Further, latent constructs can
be examined rather than single variables examined in isolation.

Moreover, by examining both the direct and indirect relations between mothers

103

and adolescents, both within- and across-time, the current investigation contributed to
the existing literature on mother-adolescent relations. Specifically, the present study
went beyond previous research, which primarily examined mothers and adolescents at
only a single point in time and only examined the direct relationship between mothers
and adolescents. The current investigation used three times of measurement and
examined both direct and indirect relations between mothers and adolescents.

Finally, the vast majority of prior research focused on the influence of mothers
on adolescents. The current investigation examined the bidirectional relationships
between mothers and adolescents during this important period of life, and thus
provided data pertinent to major, contemporary theoretical interests in the field of
adolescence, ones that stress developmental systems theories such as developmental
contextualism (Ford & Lerner, 1992; Lerner, 1991, 1995).

n I i n

The current study examined the relationship between maternal well-being and
adolescent behavior and development both within- and across-time. The findings
were that the within-time relations between mothers and adolescents were significantly
mediated through the quality of the mother-adolescent relationship. In turn, however,
only a direct relationship emerged when maternal well-being and adolescent behavior
and development were examined across time. In addition, the results supported the
existence of bidirectional relationships among maternal well-being, the mother-
adolescent relationship, and adolescent behavior and development.

By focusing on the multiple levels of analysis in the bidirectional relations

between mothers and adolescents, the present investigation demonstrated the

104

usefulness of adopting a developmental contextual framework when examining person-
oontext relations during this period of life. This perspective should be of further use
as the research reported in this study is extended to chart, in an increasingly more

refined manner, the evolving relationships between adolescents and their mothers.

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Allison, K. W., & Lerner, R. M. (1993). Adolescents and the family. In R.M.
Lerner (Ed.), 1 n ' r i r h li
mm (pp. 17—23). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ambert, A. M. (1992). free effmt of ehildren on pants. New York: The Haworth

Press.

Anderson, E. R., Hetherington, E. M., & Clingempeel, W. G. (1989).
Transformations in family relations at puberty: Effects of family context.

WW, 2, 310-334.

Baltes, P. B. (1979). Life-span developmental psychology: Some converging
observations on history and theory. In P. B. Baltes & O. G. Brim, Jr. (Eds.),
Life-span development and behavior, Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press.

Baltes, P. B. (1987). Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental
psychology: On the dynamic between growth and decline. Developmental
Psychology. 23. 611-626.

Baltes, P. B., Reese, H. W., & Lipsitt, L. P. (1980). Life-span developmental
psychology. Annoal Review of Psyehology, 3_1, 65-110.

Baltes, P. 3., Reese, H. W., & Nesselroade J. R. (1977). MW
osyehology; Introooetioo to resgteh methoog. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Baltes, P. B., & Schaie, K. W. (1974). The myth of the twilight years. Mology

my 1, 35'40'
Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models’ reinforcement contingencies on the
acquisition of imitative responses. WM

my. 1, 589-595.

Barling, J. (1991). Father’s employment: A neglected influence on children. In
J.V. Lerner & N.L. Galambos (Eds.), Em l m ther h ir '
(pp.181-209). New York: Garland.

Barnes, G. (1984). Adolescent alcohol abuse and other problem behaviors: Their

relationship and common parental influences. WM
Arum, 13, 329-348.

105

106

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. melopmeotal
W. 4.. (1-102).

Bell, R. Q. (1968). A reinterpretation of the direction of effects in studies of

socialization. Esyehologigal Review, 15, 81-95.
Bell, R. Q., & Harper, L. V. (1977). Qhfldjfleetaooadults. Hillsdale, N.J.:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bijou, S. W. (1976). h'l v 1 m n' si f l hildh
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bijou. S. W., &Baer. D. M. (1961). WW4
W. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Block, J. H. (1976). Issues, problems, and pitfalls in assessing sex differences: A
critical review of The psychology of sex dzfi’erences. Merrill-Palate;

Quentin. 22. 283-308.

Blyth, D. A., Simmons, R. G., & Carlton-Ford, S. (1983). The adjustment
of early adolescents to school transitions. loomal of Qtly
Mum, 3, 105-120.

Brim, O. G., Jr., & Kagan, J. (1980). Constancy and change: A view of the 1ssues.

1110 G Brim Jr &J Kagan(Eds)§4nstan4x_an4_cmge_1ahman
mm. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1963). Developmental theory in transition. In H.W. Stevenson

(Ed.), Child psyehology. Sixty-mm yearbook of the Nationfl Sgiety of
Edmtiott. Part 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). W. Cambridge, Mass.:

Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Crouter, A. C. (1982). Work and family through time and

space. In S. B. Kamerman & C. D. Hayes (Eds. ), Families that work; Children
ia a eh aaging world. Washington, DC: National Academy of science.

Brooks-Gunn, I. (1987). Pubertal processes and girls’ psychological adaptation. In
R.M. Lerner & T.T. Foch (Eds.), i l i - h l i ' i n in
Wee (pp.123-153). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cattell, R. B., Cattell, A. K. S., & Rhymer, R. M. (1947). P-technique
demonstrated in determining psycho-physiological source traits in a normal

individual. Esyohometrika, 12, 267-288.

107

Constantinople, A. (1969). An Eriksonian measure of personality development in

college students. Developmental Psyehology, 1, 357-372.

Cook, J. A. (1988). Who ‘mothers’ the chronically mentally ill? Eamily Relations,
31, 42-49.

Crockett, L. P., Petersen, A. C., Graber, J. A., Schulenberg, J. 13., & Ebata,
A. (1989). School transitions and adjustment during early

adolescence. Journal of mly Adoleseenee, 2, 181-210.

Demo, D. H., Small, S. A., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (1987). Family
relations and the self-esteem of adolescents and their parents. {outed

WM! 42. 705-715.

Dixon, R. A., & Lemer, R. M. (1992). A history of systems in developmental
psychology. In M.H. Bornstein & M.E. Lamb (Eds.), Developmental

psyehology; An advapegj textka (3rd ed.) (pp.3-58). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.

Dixon, R. A., Lerner, R. M., & Hultch, D. F. (1991). Maneuvering among models
of developmental psychology. In P. van Geert & L.P. Mos (Eds.), Apnfls of
W (Vol. 7). New York: Plenurfiouvan, E., & Adelson, J.
(1966). flfhe adoleseent exmrience. New York: Wiley.

Elder, G. H., Jr. (1974). Children of the great depression. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.
Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life-cycle. Psychologiea! Issues, _1_, 18-164.
Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhfl and society. New York: Norton.

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis. New York: Norton.

Feldlaufer, H., Midgley, C., & Eccles, J. S. (1988). Student, teacher, and
observer perceptions of the classroom environment before and after the

transition to junior high school. MW, 3, 133-
156.

Ford, D.H. & Lerner, R. M. (1992). Developmentfl systems thmry; An integtatjve
approach. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Freud, S. (1949). Catline of psyehoaaalysis. New York: Norton.
Freud, S. (1954). Collgtgi woth, stgdard Qition. London, Hogarth.

108

Goodenow, C. (1992). Strengthening the links between educational

psychology and the study of social contexts. MW,
21, 177-196.

Gottfried, A. E. (1991). Maternal employment in the family setting:
Developmental and environmental issues. In J .V. Lerner & N .L.

Galambos (Eds.), l h ir hildr (pp.63-84).

Grotevant, H. D., & Cooper, C. R. (1985). Patterns of interaction in family
relationships and the development of identity exploration in adolescence.

W441. 16, 415-428.

Hamburg, B. (1974). Early adolescence: A specific and stressful stage of the life
cycle. In G. Coelho, D. A. Hamburg, & J. B. Adams (Eds.), Comeaod
adaptatltm (pp. 231-331). New York: Basic Books.

Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child
W. 53. 87-97.

Harter, S. (1983). Supplementary deseription of the self-pereeivgl profile for;

ilrn° viin fh riv cm 11 fr ilrn
Unpublished manuscript, University of Denver, Denver, CO.

Hernandez, D. J. (1993). Ameriea’s ehildren; Resourees from family, governmeot,
W. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Hess, L. E. (1985). WWW
adoleseenee. Unpublished manuscript, The Pennsylvania State University,

Department of Human Development and family Studies, University Park, PA.

Hill, J. P., Holmbeck, G. N., Marlow, L., Green, T. M., & Lynch, M. E. (1985).
Pubertal status and parent-child relations in families of seventh-grade boys.

Journal of Early Adolescenee, 5, 31-44.

Hoffman, L. W. (1986). Work, family, and the child. In M.S. Pallak &
P.O. Perloff (Eds.), h l w rk: Pr i n h
employment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Holloway, S. D. ,& Hess, R. D. (1982). Causal explanations for school
performance: Contrasts between mothers and children. mm

mm 3 319- 337.

Jovanovic, J ., & Lerner, R. M. (1994). Individual—contextual relationships and
mathematics performance: Comparisons between American and Serbian Young

Adolescents. WW. 1_4., 449-470.

109

Jovanovic, J., Lerner, R. M., & Lerner, J. V. (1989). Objective and subjective

attractiveness and early adolescent adjustment. m f l A 1 n ,
12, 225-229.

Kazak, A. E., & Marvin, R. S. (1984). Differences, difficulties and adaptation:
Stress and social networks in families with a handicapped child. Family

891449113, 33, 66-77-

Koski, K. J ., & Steinberg, L. (1990). Parenting satisfaction of mothers during
midlife. MW. 12. 465-474.

Kurdek, L. A., & Fine, M. A. (1994). Family acceptance and family control as
predictors of adjustment in young adolescents: Linear, curvilinear, or

interactive effects? Child Development, o5, 1137-1146.

Lamb, M. E. (1980). Fathers in the context of family influences: Past, present and

future. WM. 2. 336-353.

Lamb, M. E. (1986). Effects of paternal involvement on fathers and mothers.
Mamage and Family Review, 2, 67-83.

Lamb, M. E. (1988). The determinants of paternal involvement in primiparous
Swedish families. International Journal of Behaviofl Development, _l_1, 433-
449.

 

Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dombusch, S. M. (1991).
Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from
authoritative authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child

mm, Q29 1049-1065'

Lemer, J. V. (1994). Working women and theit families. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.

Lerner, J. V., Castellino, D. R., & Perkins, D. P. (1993). The influence of
adolescent characteristics on maternal well-being. Paper presented at a
symposium titled “Domains of generativity: Linkages between parenting, self,
and family”, at the Biennial Meetings of the Society for Research in Child
Development, New Orleans, LA., March 24-28.

Lerner, J. V., & Galambos, N. L. (1985). Maternal role satisfaction, mother-child

interaction, and child temperament. Developmentm Esyehology, 11, 1157-
1164.

lemer, J. V., & Galambos, N. L. (1986). Child development and family
change: The influences of maternal employment on infants and

110

toddlers. In L.P. Lipsitt & C. Rovee-Collier (Eds.), Adyaueesju
111W (Vol. 4, pp. 39-86). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Lerner, J. V., Hess, L. W., & Tubman, J. (1986). Maternal employment
maternal role satisfaction and early adolescent outcomes. Paper
presented at the first meeting of the Society for Research in
Adolescence, Madison, WI.

Lerner, R. M. (1978). Nature, nurture, and dynamic interactionism. Human
1293410941111. 2.1. 1-20-

Lerner, R. M. (1979). A dynamic interactional concept of individual and social
relationship development. In R. Burgess & T. Huston (Eds.), Soejalextmauge
' lation hi (pp.271-305).

Lerner, R. M. (1981). Adolescent development: Scientific study in the 1980s.
MM. 1.2. 251-275.

Lerner, R. M. (1982). Children and adolescents as producers of their own
development. Developmental Review, _2_, 342-370.

Lemer, R. M. (1983). The history of philosophy and the philosophy of history in
developmental psychology: A view of the issues. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.),

Developmental psyehology; Historical ad philosophieal permtives (pp. 3-
26). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Lerner, R. M. (1986). Coneepts and theories of human development (2nd ed.). New

York: Random House.

Lerner, R. M. (1987). A life-span perspective for early adolescence. In R.M.
Lerner & T.T. Foch (Eds.), Bi lo ical- ' ' ° '
W, (pp. 9-34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lemer, R. M. (1991). Changing organism-context relations as the basic process of
development: A developmental contextual perspective. Qeyglopmemal

We» 21. 27-32.

Lerner, R. M. (1992). Dialectics, developmental contextualism, and the further
enhancement of theory about puberty and psychosocial development. [om-gal

f l A 1 n ,_1_2_, 366-388.

lemer, R. M. (1993). A developmental contextual view of human development. In
S.C. Hayes, L.J. Hayes, H.W. Reese, & T.R. Sarbin (Eds.), Vam'etlesof
seientifie (mntextualism (pp.301-316). Reno, NV: Context Press.

111

Lerner, R. M., & Busch-Rossnagel, N. A. (1981). Individuals as producers of their
development: Conceptual and empirical bases. In R.M. Lerner & N. A.

Busch-Rossnagel (Eds.).144rxr4uals_as_mxluee_rs_of_therr4exelopment_A_h£e_
W (m 1-36).

Lemer, R. M. ,,Castellino D. R. ,Terry, P. A. ,,Villarruel F. A, & McKinney, M.
H. (1995). A developmental contextual perspective on parenting. In M. H.

Bernstein (Ed). HEWWWQ
oiologLoLpapemjug. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lerner, R. M., & Foch, T. T. (1987). i l i l- h i in ci n °
Mag. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, New Jersey.

Lemer, R. M., Hultch, D. F., & Dixon, R. A. (1983). Contextualism and the
character of developmental psychology in the 19703. Annals of the New XQLR

Aeademy of Seiences, 4_12, 101-128.

Lerner, R. M., & Kauffman, M. B. (1985). The concept of development in
contextualism. Developmental Review, 5, 309-333.

Lerner, R. M., Skinner, E. A., & Sorell, G. T. (1980). Methodological
implications of contextual/dialectical theories of development. Jim

W. 23. 225-235.

Ierner. R. M-. & Spanier. 6- B. (Eds.). (1978). Qbilaiaflueaeemnmm
family lntetactiou; A life-span mrsmtive. New York: Academic Press.

Lemer, R. M., & Spanier, G. B. (1980). Adolescent development; A life-span
W. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lewis, M., & Rosenblum, L. A. (Eds). (1974). The effth of the infaut on its
megiyems. New York: Wiley.

Lord, 8. E., Eccles, J. S., & McCarthy, K. A. (1994). Surviving the junior high
school transition: Family processes and self-perceptions as protective and risk

factors. Joumal of Eatly Adolescence, 14, 162-199.
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). h 1 iff r .

Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the
family: Parent-child interaction. In P.H. Mussen (Ed.), WEEK—Q1

eltildpsycmology (Vol. 4, pp.1-101). New York: Wiley.

Magnusson, D. (1988). Individual development from an interactional perspective. In

112
D. Magnusson (Ed.), WW (Vol 1, pp. 3-31). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Marcia, J. E. (1983). Some directions for the investigation of ego development in

early adolescence. MW. 3. 215-244.

Matteson, R. (1974). Adolescent self-esteem, family communication, and marital

satisfaction. Loumalflsyehology, 86, 35-47.

McHale, S. M., Bartko, W. T., Crouter, A. C., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (1990).
Children’s housework and psychosocial functioning: The mediating effects of
parents’ sex-role behaviors and attitudes. Went, 61, 1413-1426.

Midley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. (1989). Student/teacher relations
and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to

junior high school. Child Development, 69, 981-992.

Montemayor, R. (1983). Parents and adolescents in conflict: All families
some of the time and some families most of the time. lloumal of Early
W43. 3. 83-103-

Montemayor, R., & Clayton, M. D. (1983). Maternal employment and
adolescent development. Theoty into Pmctiee, 22, 112-118.

Mussen, P. H. (Ed.). (1970). Cmmiehael’s manual of ehild psyehology (3rd ed.).
New York: Wiley.

Nagel, E. (1957). Deterrninism in development. In D. B. Harris (Ed.), Ihegmeept
ofideyelomneru. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Nesselroade, J. R. ,& Baltes, P. B. (1974). Adolescent personality deveIOpment and

historical change 1970-1972 WW
Child Developmen t, 32, (1, Serial No. 154).

Nesselroade, J. R., & Ford, D. H. (1985). Multivariate, replicated single subject
designs for studying older adults: P-technique comes of age. 3w

Aging, 1. 46-80.

Ohannessian, C. M., Lerner, R. M., Lerner, J. V., & von Eye, A. (1994). A
longitudinal study of perceived family adjustment and emotional adjustment in

early adolescence. Wit—MW. M. 371-390.

Ohannessian, C. M., Lerner, R. M., Lerner, J. V., & von Eye, A. (1995).
Discrepancies in young adolescents’ and their parents’ perceptions of family

functioning and adolescent adjustment. WW.

113

Olson, D. H. (1986). Circumplex Model VII: Validation studies and FACES 111.
W. 25, 337-351.

Olson, D. H., Portner, J., & Lavee, Y. (1985). FACES III. Family Social Science,
University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.

Openshaw, D. K., Thomas, D. L., & Rollins, B. C. (1984). Parental

influences of adolescent self-esteem. MW. .4.
259-274.

Overton, W. F. ,& Reese, H. W. (1973). Models of development: Methodological
implications. In J. R. Nesselroade & H. W. Reese (Eds. ), Driespah

WW2: (pp 65- 86) New York:

Academic Press.

Paulson, S. E. (1994). Relations of parenting style and parental involvement with

ninth-grade students’ achievement. MW, 14, 250-
267.

Paulson, S. E., Hill, J. P., & Holmbeck, G. N. (1991). Distinguishing between
perceived closeness and parental warmth in families with seventh grade boys

and girls. loumal of Early Adolescenee, 1_1_, 276-293.
Pepper, S. C. (1942). World hymtheses. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Petersen, A. C. (1987). The nature of biological psychosocial interactions: The
sample case of early adolescence. In R.M. Lerner & T.T. Foch (Eds.),

Biological—psyehosgmial intetaetions in gtly adoleseenge (pp. 35-61).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Petersen, A. C. (1988). Adolescent development. nn vi ,
32, 583-607.

Piaget, J. (1952). Th ri in f int lli en i ii r 11. New York: International
Universities Press.

Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget’s theory. In P. H. Mussen (Ed. ), h 1’
W, _Ql.l New York: Wiley.

Riegel, K. F. (1973). Dialectic Operations. The final period of cognitive
development. Human Development, l_6, 346-370.

Riegel, K. F. (1975). Toward a dialectical theory of development. Human
222219221211, 1.8. 50-64-

114
Riegel, K. F. (1976a). The dialectics of human development. Ameriean

We 11’ 689'7m°
Riegel, K. F. (1976b). From traits and equilibrium toward developmental dialectics.
In W. J. Arnold & J. K. Cole (Eds.), m i 'v '

Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Rohner, R. P. (1980). Hmdhmk for the study of parental acceptance and rejeeu'on.

The University of Connecticut.

Ryan, R. M., Grolnick, W. S. (1986). Origins and pawns in the classroom:
Self-report and projective assessments of individual differences in

children’s perceptions. MW
59, 550-558.

Ryan, R. M., Stiller, J. D., & Lynch, J. H. (1994). Representations of
relationships to teachers, parents, and friends as predictors of academic

motivation and self-esteem. loumal of Early Adoleseenee, 15, 226-
249.

Sameroff, A. (1975). Transactional models in early social relations. Humg
Development, 18, 65-79.

Schneirla, T. C. (1957). The concept of development in comparative psychology. In

D. B. Harris (Ed.), The eoncept of development. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.

Schwab, J. E. (1990). Smial competence in early adolesgnce during the ttmtsiu'on
to junior high sehgml. Unpublished Master’s thesis, The Pennsylvania State

University, University Park, PA.

Simmons, R. G., & Blyth, D. A. (1987). Moving into adolescence. New York:
Aldine DeGruyter.

Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the

quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage as! the Family,
38, 15-28.

Steinberg, L. (1981). Transformations in family relations at puberty.
W. 11. 833-840.

Steinberg, L. (1990). Interdependency in the family: Autonomy, conflict, and

harmony. In S. Feldman & G. Elliot (Eds.), At the threshold; The developing
adolescxnt (pp. 255-276). Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

115

Steinberg, L. & Hill, J. P. (1978). Patterns of family interactions as a function of

age, the onset of puberty and formal thinking. Developmental Psyehology,
L4, 683-684.

Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1987). The family-school relation and the
child’s school performance. Child Development, 53, 1348-1357.

Thomas, A, Chess, 8., Birch, H. G., Hertzig, M. E., & Korn, S. (1963).
W New York: New York University

Press.

Tobach, E. (1981). Evolutionary aspects of the activity of the organism and its
development. In R. M. Lerner & N. A. Busch-Rossnagel (Eds.), Ind'miduals

as produgrs of their development; A life-span persmetive. New York:

Academic Press.

Tobach, E., & Greenberg, G. (1984). The significance of T. C. Schneirla’s
contribution to the concept of integration. In G. Greenberg & E. Tobach

(Eds.), Behaviotal evolution and integrative levels (pp. 1-7). Hillsdale, NJ :

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Tubman, J. G., Lerner, J. V., & Lerner, R. M. (1991). Developmental
contextualism and adolescent development. In R.M. Lerner, A.C. Petersen, &

J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.), n l i f A l 11 (Vol. 1) (pp. 215-220).
New York: Garland.

United States Department of Labor. (1977). Dictionam of moupational
fljitles. Washington, DC.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1933). Modern theories of development. London: Oxford
University Press.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1965). On the definition of the symbol. In J.R. Royce (Ed.),

Esyehology and the symhol; An interdisciplinam symmsium. New York:
Random House.

Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psyehologifl
Review, 2_Q, 158-177.

Watson, I. B. (1918). Psyehology from the standpoint of a hehavt'orist.
Philadelphia: Lippincott.

Wentzel, K. R. (1994). Family functioning and academic achievement in

middle school: A socio-emotional perspective. LomaLotjany
Adolescence. 1.4.. 268-291-

116

Williams, D. G. (1988). Gender, marriage, and psychosocial well-being.
loumaLoLEamflxlm. 2. 452-468.

Youniss, J., & Smollar, J. (1985). Adoleseent relations with mothers, fathers, and
mos. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

APPENDIX A

MEASURES USED IN THE PRESENT STUDY

Adolescent Measures:
1. Family Satisfaction Scale (FSS)
2. Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale 111 (FACES)
3. Parental Acceptance and Rejection Questionnaire (PARQ)
4. Harter’s Self-Perception Profile (SPP)
Maternal Measures:
1. Mother’s Life Situation Survey (MLSS)
2. Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale 111 (FACES)
3. Family Satisfaction Scale (FSS)

4. Parental Acceptance and Rejection Questionnaire (PARQ)

117

100: __ __ __ __
Have:

Form: I-l 5
HOW I FEEL ABOUT MY FAMILY

we realize that sometimes families get along well, and sometimes they don’t get
along so well. He’d like to know how you feel about your family relationships.
Therefore, for the questions on the following pages please circle the number which
best describes how often these things happen in your family.

For example, if a sentence said:

More
All Most of Often Occa-
The Time The Time Than Not sionally Rarely Never

1. How often do
family members
get on your
nerves? 1 2 3 4 5 6

PLEASE TURN THE PAGE
YOU MAY NOH BEGIN

 

118

ID#:
Nave: __
Form: 1 l 1

HOW I FEEL ABOUT MY FAMILY

PLEASE CIRCLE THE NUMBER WHICH BEST DESCRIBES HON OFTEN THESE THINGS HAPPEN IN YOUR
FAMILY.

» More
All Most of Often Occa-
The Time The Time Than Not sionally . Rarely Never

1. How often have
you thought or
talked about
leaving your
family? 1 2 3 4 5 6

2. How often do you
or another family
member leave the

house after a
fight? 1 2 3 4 5 6

3. In general, how
often do you think
that things between
you and your family
are going well? 1 2 3 4 5 6

4. Do you feel that you
can tell people in
your family things
that are very
personal and
important to you? 1 2 3 4 5 6

5. Do you ever wish
you were not
living with your
family? 1 2 3 4 5 6

6. How often do you
argue with people
in your family? 1 2 3 4 5 6

7. How often do
family members "get
on your nerves?” 1 2 3 4 5 6

8. Do you hug and/or

kiss people in
your family? 1 2 3 4 5 6

PLEASE CONTINUE . . . .

119

104:

 

 

 

 

 

9. Please circle the number which best describes how happy you are with your
family relationships.
Extremely Fairly A Little Very EXtVGNElY
Unhappy Unhappy Unhappy Happy Happy Happy Perfect
2 3 4 5 6 7
10. Think about how you want your family to be in the future. Please choose the

sentence which best describes how you feel about your family relationships.
Circle ONLY ONE number:

In the future I want very much for my family to get along well, and
would go to almost any length to see that we do ............. 1

In the future I want very much for my family to get along well, and
will do all I can to see that we do ................... 2

In the future I want very much for my family to get along well, and
will do my fair share to see that we do ................. 3

In the future it would be nice if my family could get along well,
but I can’t do much more than I am doing right now to help us get along . 4

In the future it would be nice if my family could get along well, but I
refuse to do more than I am doing right now to help us get along ..... 5

My family can never get along well, and-there is no more that I
can do to help us get along ....................... 6

STOP HERE! ! w

120

WHAT MY FAMILY IS LIKE

104:

Have:

Form: I_1 5

The following sentences describe ways in which families can behave at any time.
We realize that families behave many different ways and that your family does not
always behave the same way. However, we’d like you to think about how your family
usually behaves. Think carefully about each sentence, and please circle the number

corresponding to the choice that best describes your family.

For example, suppose a sentence said:

ALMOST ONCE IN SOME-
NEVER A HHILE TIMES

Our family likes to play games. 1 2 3

PLEASE TURN THE PAGE
YOU MAY NON BEGIN

ALMOST
OFTEN ALNAYS
4 5

121

WHAT MY FAMILY IS LIKE

IOl:
Wave:
Form:

CIRCLE THE RESPONSE THAT BEST OESCRIBES HOW YOUR FAMILY USUALLY BEHAVES.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

. Family members ask each other for

help.

. In solving problems, the children’s

suggestions are followed.

. We approve of each other’s friends.

. Children have a say in their

discipline.

. We like to do things with just our

immediate family.

. Different persons act as leaders in

our family.

. Family members feel closer to other

family members than to people
outside the family.

. Our family changes its way of

handling tasks.

. Family members like to spend free

time with each other.

Parent(s) and children discuss
punishment together.

Family members feel very close to
each other.

The children make the decisions in
the family.

When our family gets together for
activities, everybody is present.

Rules change in our family.

ALMOST
NEVER

ONCE IN
A WHILE

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

SOME-
TIMES

OFTEN

Ifl §

ALMOST
ALWAYS

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

122

ALMOST ONCE IN
NEVER A WHILE

We can easily think of things to do
together as a family. 1 2

We shift household responsibilities
from person to person. I 2

Family members consult other
family members on their
decisions. 1 2

It is hard to identify the leader(s)
in our family. 1 2

Family togetherness is very
important. 1 2

It is hard to tell who does which
household chores. 1 2

STOP HERE!!

SOME-
TIMES

ID#:

OFTEN

ALMOST
ALWAYS

123

IDA:
Wave:

Form: 1‘ 1 5

HOW MY MOTHER ACTS TOWARD ME

Please tell us about the person you live with who acts like a mother to you.
Is she your:

natural mother 1
step mother 2
adoptive mother 3
grandmother 4
father’s girlfriend 5
other

There is no person who acts like a mother in my life. If so, please skip
this questionnaire.

Here are some statements about the way mothers act toward their children. We
want you to think about how each one of these fits the way your mother treats you.

There are four choices after each sentence. Please circle the answer that best
describes how your mother treats you. Remember, there is no right or wrong answer
to any statement, so be as honest as you can. Answer each statement the way you
feel your mother really is rather than the way you might like her to be. For
example. if your mother almost always hugs and kisses you when you are good, you
should mark the item as follows:

TRUE OF MY MOTHER NOT TRUE OF MY MOTHER
Almost Almost
Always Sometimes Rarely Never
True True True True
My mother hugs
and kisses me when
I am good. 1 2 ' 3 4

PLEASE TURN THE PAGE

 

 

YOU MY N0" BEGIN 4021.. week, 1 menu wink
Wk! THAT‘S 710(qu u? ‘1ch
Mrrwgmclznmmmzmk
F012 sauna 1 31qu GustaES

T; ' YOU :5 k SLAVE.

 

   
      

Now begin. Please circle only one answer for each question.

My Mother

1. Says nice things
about me.

2. Nags or scolds me
when I am bad.

3. Talks to me about
our plans and listens
to what I have to say.

4. Complains about me to
others when I do not
listen to her.

5. Encourages me to bring
my friends home, and
tries to make things
pleasant for them.

6. Makes fun of me.

7. Makes it easy for me
to tell her things
that are important to
me.

8. Treats me strictly.

9. Makes me feel proud
when I do well.

10. Views me as a problem.
11. Punishes me severely

when she is angry.

124

TRUE OF MY MOTHER

Almost
Always
True

Sometimes
True

Please continue. . . .

104:

NOT TRUE OF MY MOTHER

Rarely
True

Almost
Never
True

My Mother:
12. Makes sure that I have

13.
14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

the right kind of food
to eat.

Is impatient with me.

Is too busy to answer
my questions.

Is cranky toward
me.

Is concerned who my
friends are.

Says many unkind things
to me.

Ignores me when I
ask her to help.

Tells me that I
get on her nerves.

Pays a lot of
attention to me.

Goes out of her way
to hurt my feelings.

Forgets important
things I think she
should remember.

Frightens or threatens
me when I do something
wrong.

125

TRUE or MY MOTHER

Almost

Always Sometimes

True True
1 2
l 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
l 2
l 2
l 2
l 2

Please continue. . . .

104:

NOT TRUE OF MY MOTHER

Rarely
True

Almost
Never
True

My Mother:

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

Likes to spend time
with me.

Shames me in front of
my playmates when I
misbehave.

Tries to stay away
from me.

Feels other children
are better than I am
no matter what I do.

Cares about what I
would like when she
makes plans.

Thinks other children
behave better than I
do.

Has other people take
care of me (for example,
a neighbor or relative).

Tries to make me feel
better when I am hurt
or sick.

Tells me how ashamed
she is when I misbehave.

Makes me feel ashamed
or guilty when I
misbehave.

Treats me gently and
with kindness.

126

TRUE OF MY MOTHER

Almost

Always Sometimes

True True
1 2
l 2
l 2
l 2
1 2
1 Z
1 2
l 2
l 2
l 2
l 2

STOP HERE!!

104:

NOT TRUE OF MY MOTHER

Rarely
True

Almost
Never
True

127

104: __ __
Wave: __
Form: 1 Q 2

WHAT I AM LIKE

DIRECTIONS:

We are interested in what each of you is like, what kind of a person you are
like, and how you think and feel about different things. This is not a test. There
are no right or wrong answers. Since kids are very different from one another, each

of you will be putting down something different.

Here is one sample sentence.

First, let me explain how these sentences work.
This sentence talks about two

I’ ll read it out loud, and you follow along with me.
kinds of kids.

SAMPLE SENTENCES

Really Sort of Sort of Really
True True True True
for me for me for me for the

Some kids would rather Other kids would rather
D D play authors in their BUT watch T.V. D D

spare time.

(I) First. I’d like you to decide whether you are more like the kids on the
left side who would rather play outdoors, or whether you are-more like the
kids on the right side who would rather watch T.V. Don't mark anything down
yet, but first decide which kind of kid is most like you, and go to that side

of the page.
(2) Now, decide whether that is only sort of true for you, or really true and
mark your answer box with an "X“.

*‘*BE SURE TO ONLY CHECK ONE OF THE FOUR BOXES FOR EACH PAIR OF SENTENCES.***

(3) Now we have some more sentence pairs that we would like you to choose the
one that goes With what is true for you, what you are most like.

 

 

 

 

 

Really
True
ior me

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11D ll [—1 El

 

 

 

 

 

L77

 

 

Sort oi
True
tor ma

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

H 17 i]

 

 

——

 

 

 

 

 

 

LT D D D

 

 

128

WHAT I AM LIKE

Some kids tool that they

are very good at their BUT
schoot work

Some kids find it hard to

make iriends BUT
Some kids do very well

at all kinds oi sports BUT
Some kids are happy

with the way they look BUT
Some kids oiten do not

like the way they behave BUT

Some kids are otten
unhappy with themselves BUT

Some kids test like they

are just as smart as BUT
as Other kids their age
Some kids have slot or

BUT

tnends

Other kids worry about
whether they can do the
senooi work assigned to
them.

Other kids find it's pretty
easy to make iriends.

Other kids don 't test that
they are very good when
it comes to sports.

Other kids are not happy
with the way they look.

Other kids usually like
the way they behave.

Other kids are pretty
pleased with themselves.

Other kids aren't so sure
and wonder it they are
as smart.

O

Other kids don't have
very many iriends.

IOl: _ _ __ _
Wave:
Form: To 2
Sort oi Really
True True
tor ma tor me

[3
L1

 

 

 

 

LT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UL!
D Ll D Ll El L1 L1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H. D L7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

L

Please continue.

10.

11.

12.

13.

1‘.

l5.

l6.

17.

18'

19.

L] L]

Really
True
ior me

 

 

 

 

 

E]

 

 

 

 

[ I

 

 

U

 

LTD El E] El E1 [:1

LI a CH] E] E] E] [31:] [:1 El 3

Sort oi
True
ior me

 

 

 

 

 

129

Some kids wish they
could be alot better at
spons

Some kids are happy
with their height and

weight

Some kids usually do
the right thing

Some kids don’t like the
way they are leading
their liie

Some kids are pretty
slow in itnlshlng their

school work

Some kids would like to
have alot more iriends

Some kids think they
cOuld do well at just
about any new sports
activity they haven't
tried beiore

Some kids wish their
body was driiereni

Some kids usually set
the way they know they

8!. SUDDOBOU ‘0

Some kids are happy with
themselves as a person

Some kids oiten iorgei
what they learn

Some kids are always
doing things with alot
Ol kids

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

Other kids ieel they are
good enough at sports.

Other kids wish their
height or weight were

diliereni.

Other kids oiten don't
do the right thing.

Other kids do like the
way they are leading
their llie.

Other kids can do their
school work quickly.

Other kids have as many
iriends as they want.

Other kids are airaid
they might not do well at
sports they haven't ever
tfled.

Other kids like their
body the way it is.

Other kids oiten don ’i
act the may they are
supposed to.

Other kids are oiten not
happy with themselves.

Other kids can
remember things easily.

Other kids usually do
things by themselves.

Please continue.

tor:

Sort oi
True

Reeuy
True

ior me ior me

C] C]_

 

DEL

C]

CL

DEL.
DEL.

Cl [1.
CL

C]

 

 

DEL.

E]

 

 

 

 

 

 

E

 

 

F—

‘flv .-

 

 

C C]...

:1 .-
U

 

 

 

21.

22.

24.

25.

27.

2B.

31.

32.

Really Bert oi
True True
ior me ior me

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

E D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DE! DD D. [‘1 El D
L1 L1 L1 DE] L7 E! El CID D D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[:1

130

Some kids ieel that they
are better than others
their age at sports

Some kids wish their
physical appearance (how
they look) was dliiereni

Some kids usually get
in trouble because oi
things they do

Some kids ltke the kind
oi person they are

Some kids do very well
at their classwork

Some kids wish that
more peoole their age
liked them

in games and sports
some kids usually watch
instead oi play

Some kids wish
something about their
lace or hair looked
dr'tierent

Some kids do things
they know they
shouldn't do

Somekids are very
happy being the way'
they are

Some kids have trouble
liguring out the answers
in school

Some kids are peputar
with others their age

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

BUT

Other kids don't ieel
they can play as well.

Other kids like their
physical appearance the
way it is.

Other kids usually don 'i
do things that get them
in trouble.

Other kids oiten wish
they were someone
else.

Other kids don ’t do
very well at their
classwork.

Other kids ieel that most
peepie their age do like
them.

Other kids usually play
rather than just watch.

Other kids like their lace
and hair the way they
are.

Other kids hardly ever
do things they know
they shOuidn’t do.

Other kids wish they
were ailment.

Other kids almost
always can ligure Out
the answers.

Other kids are not very
popular.

10!:

Sort oi
True
ior me

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D D D Li D E] E! El Cl D D L7
D H D D [IL—l E! D. E!

 

 

fleafly
True
ior me

L7

 

 

 

D

 

 

l3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please continue.

Really Sort oi
rue True
ior me ior me

DC}
DE
DE

 

Some kids don't do well
at new outdoor games

Some kids think that
they are good looking

Some kids behave
themselves very well

Some kids are not very
happy with the way they
do alot oi things

 

131

BUT

...

BU

BUT

BUT

Other kids are good at
new games right away.

Other kids think that
they are not very
good looking.

Other kids oiten lind it
hard to behave
themselves.

Other kids think the way
they do things is Irne.

STOP HERE !

IDll: __ _ __ _

Sort oi Really
True True
let me ior me

DEL
CID_
DEL
DEL.

 

 

 

 

132

100: __ __ __ __
Have: 1
Form: 2 Q 1
MOTHER’S LIFE SITUATION SURVEY
Your Birthdate: ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
Month Day Year

Please circle the appropriate number which indicates your relationship to your child
participating in our study:

Natural Parent
Step Parent
Adoptive Parent
Foster Parent
Grandparent
Other

aims-um.—

 

If Other. please explain

If you are a Step Parent, Adoptive

Parent, or Foster Parent, for how

long have you been so? ___ ___ ___ ___
Years Months

Please circle the appropriate number which indicates your current marital status.

Never Married
Married
Separated
Divorced
Remarried
Hidowed

GUI-buiNPe—I

lf you are Married. Separated,
Divorced, Remarried. or Widowed
for how long have you been so?

75an— —l~t—onth'

DIRECTIONS

Your child’s development and behaviors in school are related in important ways
to his or her home life. Parents are the primary people who influence the child's
life at home. We want to find out about some aspects of your home situation. 0n
the following pages is a list of questions that have to do with your education and
employment history, the support and help you have in running your household, and the
types of activities in which your family is involved. Finally, we want to learn
about how satisfied you might be with various aspects of your home situation.

1.

133

ID#:

Please circle the number below which describes the final level of education you
have obtained:

 

Elementary school but not high school
Some high school

High school graduate

Some college or technical school
College graduate

Some graduate school

Masters degree

M.D., Ph.D., Ed.0., or law degree

Other
If other, please indicate

H

tomuatutsnwro

 

This question pertains to your employment history since you:
Please circle the number that best represents your employment for the

majority of each time period.

hem.

Not Part-Time Full-Tine
Employed Employed Employed
Birth to Z-years old 1 2 - 3
2 to S-years old 1 2 3
5 to lO-years old 1 2 3
10-years-old to Present 1 2 3

Laid-
Off '

134’

ID#:

If you are greeengly employed, please circle the number below which best
describes your job. If your job is gee described below, please write it down
on the last blank line marked Other. Please circle only one response.

glerieel wgrken, such as bank teller, bookkeeper, secretary,

typist, or mail carrier ...................... Oi
graftemen, such as baker, automobile mechanic, machinist,

painter, plumber, or carpenter .................. 02
farmer, or farm manager ........................ 03
Leheger, such as construction worker, car washer, sanitary

worker, or farm laborer ...................... 04
flenegez, en administrator, such as sales manager, office

manager, school administrator, or restaurant manager ....... 05

Military eegyiee wgrker, such as career officer, or enlisted
man or woman in the Armed Forces ................. 06

Qgereeive gegkez, such as meat cutter, assembler, machine
operator, welder, or taxicab, bus, or truck driver ........ 07

Beefeeeieeel werker, such as accountant, artist, registered
nurse, engineer, librarian, social worker, actor, actress,

athlete, politician, 9g; gee inelgging League: .......... 08
Prefeseionel werker, such as clergyman, dentist, physician,

lawyer, scientist, or college teacher ............... 09

’ e; neeigeeg gwner, such as the owner of a small

business, a contractor, or a restaurant owner ........... 10
ELQLQELiXQ eervjee geekeg, such as a detective, police officer

or guard, sheriff, or fire fighter ................ 11
gale; werker, such as a salesperson, an advertising or insurance

agent, or a real estate broker .................. 12
Sehegl Legenen, such as an elementary or secondary school

teacher .............................. 13'
geeyiee wgrker, such as barber, beautician, practical nurse,

private household worker, Janitor, waiter, or waitress ...... 14
Teehnieel werker, such as draftsman, medical or dental technician,

or computer programmer ...................... 15
Other ................................. 16

(Please describe )

4.

135

108:

Please circle the number which most closely represents how satisfied you are
with being employed or with not being employed.

Very Dissatisfied 1
Somewhat Dissatisfied
Neutral

Somewhat Satisfied

01:50)“)

Very Satisfied

If you are greeenjly empleyeg, please circle the number which best represents
how satisfied you are with the following aspects of your job:

Very Somewhat Somewhat Very
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied

Salary 1 2 3 4 5
Hours 1 2 3 4 5
Responsibility 1 2 3 4 5
Status 1 2 3 4 5

Whether you are employed or not, there are no doubt many tasks that you face
each day (for example, those related to being a wife, mother, employee, or
community volunteer). We would like you to rate the degree of gljfleglty you
find in trying to balance all of your various rolés. Do you find it to be:
Easy all the time 1
Easy most of the time

Easy half of the time; difficult half of the time

hum

Difficult most of the time
Difficult all of the time S

136

ID#:

7. Which response best describes the division of labor in your home with respect
to household chores?

Mother does major share of household chores 1
Father does major share of household chores

Children do major share of household chores

Housekeeper/paid employee does major share of household chores
Mother and father share the household chores equally

Entire family divides the household chores

NOM#WN

Other
(please indicate . )

8. Which response best describes who usually does the child care activities in
your family?

Mother does major share of child care activities 1
Father does major share of child care activities

Older child does major share of child care activities
Babysitter/paid employee does major share of child care activities
Mother and father share child care activities equally

Entire family divides the child care activities .

warms-um

Other
(please indicate )

9. What do you think about the amount of homework your child gets?
Gets too much 1
Gets the right amount 2

Doesn’t get enough 3

137

ID#: __ __ __ __
10. How often does your child bring homework home?
1-2 nights per week 1
2-3 nights per week
3-4 nights per week
4-5 nights per week

Never

0.01th

Don’t know

11. When your child brings homework home, where does he/she usually do it?
His/her room 1
Kitchen table
Special study area

In front of the TV

(”-th

Other
(Please specify )

Don’t know 6

12. How often do you help your child (e.g., available for questions, check answers)
while he/she is doing homework)?

Always 1
Sometimes 2
Never 3

13. During the eeheel geek how often do you eat breakfast with your children?
Everyday 1
I Sometimes 2

Never 3

138

ID#:

14. Please circle the response which most closely represents how satisfied you are
with each of the following aspects of family life:

Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Does No:
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Apply

Division of labor
for household
chores 1 2 3 4 S 6

Division of labor
for child care

activities I 2 3 4 5 6
Husband’s

employment I 2 3 4 5 6
Husband's salary l 2 3 4 . 5 6

Husband’s employment
hours 1 2 3 4 S 6

Husband’s employment
responsibilities 1 2 3 4 5 6

Husband’s status at his
place of employment 1 2 3 4 5 6

Your child’s

satisfaction with

your employment

situation 1 2 3 4 S 6

gemmeetiz If you are dissatisfied with any of the above, please indicate why:

 

 

 

 

 

139

ID#:

15. The next set of questions are about things that may affect your general health.
Please tell us if any of these have applied to you over the last six months.

91W: he do
Have you ever needed a strong cup of coffee first thing
in the morning to calm your nerves? 1 0
Have you ever needed to exercise regularly to feel good? 1 0
Have you ever had a drink first thing in the morning to
steady your nerves or get rid of a hangover (eye-opener)? 1 0
Have people annoyed you by criticizing your eating habits? l 0
Have people annoyed you by criticizing your drinking habits? l 0
Have people annoyed you by criticizing your smoking habits? l 0
Have you ever felt bad or guilty about your drinking? 1 0
Have you ever felt you ought to cut down on your eating? 1 0
Have you ever felt you ought to cut down on your drinking? 1 0
My overall health is ................... (Choose one):
Excellent 1
Good 2
Fair 3
Poor 4

M . Any additional comments about yourself or your family that you
would care to provide would be most welcome and appreciated.

 

 

 

 

 

140

WWWISIDG
(Mather)

The purpose of this questicnnaire is to fix! out how different people describe
their family. mast as we are all different frail one another, so too do our families
differ. We’d like you to help \5 tmderstand sane of the diaracteristis of your
family. 'me following sentences describe ways in which families can behave at any
time. werealizetnatyuirfamilydoesmtalwaysbehavethesamkey. Housver,

we’d like you to think about how your family usually behaves. Think carefully about
eachsentenoe, ampleasecirclet‘iemmberoormspaxiingtothedioioethatbest
describes your family.

For each of the sentences, circle either:

um NEVER true for your family
trmavCEmAM-Erlzforymrfamily
W true for your family
OFTEN true for yair family

1

2

3

4

5 W AIMYS true for your family.

For example, suppose a sentence said:

madam- m
mammmm

Our family like: to play gems. 1 2 3 4 S

IfthissentenoeweretrueONCEINAhmforymrfamily,ymwmldcircleZas
shown.

141

IN:

MEREWWBESPDESCRI‘WYQRWWMVES.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

. Family umber; ask each other for

help

In solving problars, the children’s
suggestions are followed

We approve of each other’s friends

Children have a say in their
discipline

.Weliketodothingswithjustour

immediate family

. Different persons act as leaders in

our family
Family numbers feel closer to other

family numbers than to people
outside the family

Our family changes its way of
handling tasks

Familymembersliketospendfree
timewitheadaother

Parent(s) anddiildrendisalss
pmisrmenttogeflaer

Family manbers feel very close to
eadi other

The children make the decisions in
the family

When our family gets together for
activities, everybody is present

Rules change in our family

Wecaneasilythinkofthingstodo
together as a family

momentum-

um
Am m m we

2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 ' 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

142

We shift Mission respomibilities
frun perscn to perscn

Family where ousult other
family more a: their
deoisiors 1

It is hard to identify the leader(s)
inourfamily 1

Family togetherness is very
important 1

Itisharidtotellmodoeswhidi
householdchores 1

armor
m
1

can
”an:
2

3 4 5
3 4 5
3 4 5
3 4 5
3 4 5

143

WIMWMW
(Mather)

Wave: T——_
Form: 295

Werealizethatsanetimsfamiliesgetalagwell, andscnetimestheydm'tget
alongsowell. We'dliketolmowhowymfeelabartyuirfanilyrelatimships.
Fortheqnstiaismthefollowimpagesplease circlethenmbermidabest

describesl'rowoftenthesethingshappeninyourfamily.

For eada sentmroe circle either:

l-IfthisharpersAIL'n-ETDIE
2-Ifthishamensm0F'mr-3Tm
3=Ifthishappersmommmr
4=Ifthismsmrm1mhappers
s-Irthisnmxhappens
6-IfthisNEVERhappexB

lb:-
hll noetof Often Occa-
The'l'ime The'rime manNot sionally

How often do family

menbersgetmywr
nerves? 1 2 3 4

It you oocasromrrx felt this way, you would circle 4 as shown.

144

mmmmmmmmmommmmmmm
FAMILY.

lbre
All Motto! Oftn Gooe-
mun- m'rine nanrbt eionelly Rarely Never

1. How often have
you thought or

5. Doyoueverwish

living with your ,
family? 1 2 3 4 5 6

6.Howoftendoyou

argue with people
in your family? 1 2 3 4 . 5 6

7. How often do
family matters "get
on your nerves?" 1 2 3 4 5 6

8. Do you hug and/or
kiss people in
your family? 1 2 3 4 5 6

145

9. On a scale of 1 to '7 (with "1" representirg ”My Unhappy" and "7"
representing "Perfect") , please circle the mnber which best describes Yam
degree of happiness with your family relationship.

 

Extruely Pair-1y A Little Very My
mm M w my my WP! Perfect
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

 

 

10. mutabouthowymwantymrfamilytobeinthefuurre. Pleasechoosethe
sentmwhidabestdescz'ibeslmymfeelabQKyuirfamflymlatithips.
CircleCNIflCNErnmber:

InthefutureIwantdesperatelyformyfamilytogetalongwelLard
«mldgotoalncstanylengthtoseethatwedo ............. l

Inthefuturelwantverynrhformyfamilytogetelorqwell,aniwill
doallIoantoseethatwedo ........ . ...... .......2

InthefutureIwantverymdaformyfamilytogetalongwell,amiwill

Inthefutureitwuildhenioeifmyfamilygotalohgwell,but1
mn’tdomidimorethanlamdoingnowtohelpusgetalm-g ....... 4

Inthefutureitvmldbenioeifwegotalongwell,butIrefuse
todoanymrethanIamdoingnowtohelpusgetalorg ......... 5

Myfamilycannevergetalongwell,andthereismmrethatI
candotohelptisgetalong. .......... . ........... 6

146

10!:
Have:
Form: 2 Q 1

How I BEHAVE WITH MY CHILD
(MOTHER)

The following pages contain a number of statements describing the way different
mothers act toward their children. Read each statement carefully and think how well
it describes the way you treat your child. work quickly; give your first impression
and move on to the next item. Please do not dwell on any item.

For each of the sentences, circle either:

ALMOST ALWAYS TRUE about the way you treat your child
SOMETIMES TRUE about the way you treat your child
RARELY TRUE about the way you treat your child
ALMOST NEVER TRUE about the way you treat your child

@NNo—I
I I

For example, suppose a sentence said:

TRUE OF ME NOT TRUE OF ME
Almost Almost
Always Sometimes Rarely Never
True True True True
I hug and kiss my child
when he/she is good. 1 2 3 4

If this is almost always true for you, you would circle 1 as shown.

Remember, there is no right or wrong answer to any statement so be as frank as
you can. Respond to each statement the way you fee] you really are rather than the
way you might like to be.

10.

ll.

12.

Now begin. Please circle only one answer for each question.

TRUE OF ME

I say nice things about
my child.

I nag or scold my child
when he/she is bad.

I discuss general daily
routines with my child
and listen to what he/she
has to say.

I complain about my child
to others when he/she does
not listen to me.

I encourage my child to
bring friends home, and
I try to make things
pleasant for him/her.

I make fun of my child.

I make it easy for my
child to confide in me.

I am harsh with my child.

I make my child feel proud
when he/she does well.

My child is a burden for
me.

I punish my child when I
am angry.

I make sure my child has
the right kind of food
to eat.

147

Sometimes

10!:

Thank you.
NOT TRUE OF ME
Almost

Never
True

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

I am impatient with
my child.

I am too busy to answer
my child’s questions.

I am irritable with my
child.

I am concerned who my
child’s friends are.

I say unkind things to
my child.

I ignore my child when
he/she asks for help.

I tell my child that
he/she gets on my nerves.

I pay a lot of attention
to my child.

I hurt my child's feelings.

I forget events that my
child thinks I should
remember.

When my child does some-
thing wrong, I threaten
or frighten him/her.

I like to spend time with
my child.

When my child misbehaves,
I shame him/her in front
of his/her playmates.

148

104: __ __ __ __

TRUE OF ME NOT TRUE OF ME
Almost Almost
Always Sometimes Rarely Never

True True True True

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

149

10!: ...__
Wave: -' "
Form: Z—Q 1
TRUE OF ME NOT TRUE OF ME
Almost Almost
Always Sometimes Rarely Never
True True True True
26. I avoid my child's
company. 1 2 3 4
27. I compare my child
unfavorably with other
children. I 2 3 4
28. When I make plans, I
take my child into
consideration. 1 2 3 4
29. When my child misbehaves,
I compare him/her
unfavorably with other
children. 1 2 3 4
30. I leave my child to
someone else’s care
(e.g., a neighbor or
relative). 1 2 3 4
31. I try to make my child
feel better when he/she
is hurt or sick. 1 2 3 4
32. I tell my child I am ashamed
of him/her when he/she
misbehaves. l 2 3 4
33. When my child misbehaves,
I make him/her feel ashamed. I 2 3 4
34. I treat my child gently
and kindly. 1 2 3 4

Is there anything else you would like to tell us
child?

about your relationship with your

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX B

PROCEDURE USED TO COLLAPSE
MOTHER-ADOLESCENT RELATIONSHIP VARIABLES

150

PROCEDURE USED TO COLLAPSE

MOTHER-ADOLESCENT RELATIONSHIP VARIABLES

Data from file c:\masters\mergeall.sav

Compute collrell = mean(momrelc1 + momtotl)
Execute.

Compute collre12 = mean(momrelc2 + momtot2)
Execute.

Compute collrel3 = mean(momrelc3 + momtot3)
Execute.

Note. Momrelcl = mother-adolescent relationship reported by adolescents at the
beginning of sixth grade; momtotl = mother-adolescent relationship reported by
mothers at the beginning of sixth grade; momre1c2 = mother-adolescent relationship
reported by adolescents at the end of sixth grade; momtot2 = mother-adolescent
relationship reported by mothers at the end of sixth grade; momrelc3 = mother-
adolescent relationship reported by adolescents at the beginning of seventh grade; and
momtot3 = mother-adolescent relationship reported by mothers at the beginning of
seventh grade.

APPENDIX C

VARIANCE/COVARIANCE MATRICES

151

vmfim mm .v NV-vv 83230 bash

 

 

 

 

8.3 43 8.2 and 8:83.“: 3::..—
Sa 8&- an.” 8; ME 8:833 23.
532
on. 3% 3.- we. 2. 22% 8380 been.
9.. 8§ 3n 6.. 8. 8.8 3.2. 8:2:.-.:am been.
on. 2 2.- 2.- 3.- 8. 2 an. :8? :3
s..- 3 2. 8.- 8.- 8. 3 8. 5. <8
"one.
8.632
8:33: 8:43 8.880 8:83.3- 8:8:..:.m 3880 8:833...- 583 <30
8.82 2:6 3:8". 3:8". 0.3. 2:8". 3:8". =8
92% agate... 8323 «sum-=03 Ems 88228 :8
«Some—oz-aoeoz 183:2 83¢an 3080334

 

 

4::

_. 35¢. .> .33.? 05 L-.. 85.4.», atom-03 .. 3:2 05 83.315 goon—.23.. condom? ..H .3828: ._ .5: .... «a: 3 N. 50935. .>

m— 033—.

152

20:62 .3 13.2.2 zigzsom .§_oc<-eofio2 fl ooze—om 8282 32086.23.
3 8.88. e.g.-8:23. .8828<-.2.82 u 8:23. 2:6 .35.... .20.. 02:0 u $8 .228... 8. a... u m 2:. 4.8.8.8. 8. 8. u 2 ....oz

 

 

 

 

 

 

2...: 8:23. .282
a. .. 98m 8:23. 2:6
".22
238—2
8:23. 8:23. 8.8.8 8:83.3- 8:82:44. 8.886 8:83....- :83 .....o
8.8.2 2:6 28.... ...:8". 23. 2:8". 2:8”. :8.
9.5... 288:23. 83:. 98.. -.....3 8..... 888.33 :5
.8§.8<-882 .23.: 8223. .8038...

 

 

.- 8......1> .... a o. .... 82.....5 son-...? 1. 2.2 8...... .>..- .23-... 8.5.2 89.28. 2. o 2.... 8. so .8. .:.>

€35.88 3 03:.

153

8.886 2:8".

 

 

 

 

 

...... .2..- 6.8
5.2 5.... :3. 8.8 8:323. 2:8...
2... w. .- 8.. 2... 8.. 8822...... 23.
.23:
.n. 8...: 8...- .2- 2. 8...: 8.880 2:8".
82. 3.2. 8... an..- a. ....8. 8.2. 8:888: 2:8”.
3.. :3 t. 2.. 3. m... 2... mm. €832»...
"on...
8882
8:23. 8:23. 8.886 8822...: 8.8.2.8 8.886 8:888: :83
.282 2:6 2:82 2:8... 23. 2:8... 2.82,. :3.
92:. 2.8883. 83.2. 2:3. -..»; 5.3 .5883 2..
888.8528: 38...: 8.223. 808.8,:
8.: .
2.. 8.8...» .....28 91.8.. 8.8.5. 82.03 o... 8.8.. .>.......m.._o>.. 38.882.84.88. ... o ...? 8. 889858.,

3 050,—.

.6532 .3 v3.2.8 9:35:30”. .58o_ov<-..05o2 N 20:23— .6502 3:88.03.
2.. 8:82 n........8.....3. .882::<-§.82 u 8:23. 2:6 8:83.. .23. “.220 u <20 82:9: 8. 8. u .... :8 2:88.88 8.. E. u a 8%

 

 

 

 

 

 

83...... 8:23. 8.8:.
:3- .38 8:23. 2:6
m 322
2.632
2230M nova—om 228200 coconummfim :ozoémzam =23on szoammzam 5.03
8.82 2:6 2:8". 2:8”. 23. 2:8". 2:8". 22.
922. .28....3. 83:. 8.3. 2.2., 8.3 888.88 :8
.§_3<-.0502 188:2 .5163 388—23.
:2 .... :
2. - .....> .....28: ...- :..-- 8..... .> ...».-.03 -... 2. 8329.88.28». :.. :33". .. 3.8.. .... . ...... . .-....>oo.8::.>

83886. ... 2......

155

2.5 .3 3.9. 8.880 2:8".

 

 

 

 

8.2 m3- 8.... ......m 8.88:8 2.8...
8.. 8.- 3. 8. 8. 8:888: 23.
532
we..- 2...: NS- ...8 ....- 88 8.880 2:8".
8... 3.2. 8: R... 8.- 3.8 8.8 8:88.3- 2:8...
3.- 88 mm. 8.- 8.- a. .5. ..N. :83 ...-8
E. ....- on. ......- 8: on. 2.. 8.- 3. <8
5.2
2:082
8.33. 8:23. 8.880 8:383 8822.2. 8.880 8:888. :83 <20
88.2 :.:.0 2:8". 2:5... 23. $8.". 28.". .8.
256 A22.888... 832. 28.. -..»? 8.3 888.93 :9.
8088:8882 . . 38...: 882.3. .8883

 

388.4888:
3 .852 .> .,.-..2_8 ... 8.8.1., .28-.83 .888 8......-.> 3.22.. 2? .u ,8:- n o ... 85. 80.85....

S 033—.

156

.5532 an v3.88 mEmaozflom .§_ov<-.5502 fl coca—om 3532 snug—03‘
.3 3:82 $8823. .Soasufoeoz u 83% 2:6 "095% .38 830 n <8 £058. .8 S u z. B. 388%.: .e 3 u z. .202

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.8— noun—om 5502
8. $58 83% 2:6
322
2%:
853. 830”. 8,830 8:323 8:833 58.30 8:823 553 E0
sec: 2.5 has". 2.5:. 23. :35 has; :8
256 niacin”. 832v “sum -35 Ems .88338 as.
.8§_8<.§%2 wag: 8328 .5833
2: “ ..... .35 :33: o 2.85%; .q.3-__03 1.2a . 83aE>3z2§2 .fi 83..“ :828. o o is: .. :5: \8 “.1.>

A§€88 : 2.3

APPENDIX D

PROCEDURE USED TO TRANSFORM DATA FOR LISREL ANALYSES

157
PROCEDURE USED TO TRANSFORM DATA FOR LISREL ANALYSES

Raw data from file: c:\masters\mergeall.sav

Compute tcohescl = cohescl * .Ol.

Execute.

Compute tfamlycl = familycl * .01.
Execute.

Compute tmomrlcl = momrelcl * .01.
Execute.

Compute ttotgpal = totgpa61 * . 10.
Execute.

Compute tworthl = worthl "' .10.
Execute.

Compute tcohesml = cohesml * .01.
Execute.

Compute tfamlyml = familyml * .01.
Execute.

Compute tmomtotl = momtotl * .01.
Execute.

Compute twrksatl = mwrksatl * .10.
Execute.

Compute tcolrell = collrell * .01.
Execute.

Compute tcohesc2 = cohesc2 * .01.

Execute.

Compute tfamlyc2 = familyc2 * .01.
Execute.

Compute tmomrlc2 = momrech * .01.
Execute.

Compute tworth2 = worth2 * .10.
Execute.

Compute tcohesm2 = cohesm2 * .01.
Execute.

Compute tfamlym2 = familym2 * .01.
Execute.

Compute tmomtot2 = momtot2 "‘ .01.
Execute.

Compute twrksat2 = mwrksat2 * .10.
Execute.

Compute tcolre12 = collre12 * .01.
Execute.

158

Compute tcohesc3 = cohesc3 * .01.
Execute.

Compute tfamlyc3 = familyc3 * .01.
Execute.

Compute tmomrch = momrelc3 * .01.
Execute.

Compute ttotgpa3 = totgpa63 * .10.
Execute.

Compute tworth3 = worth3 * .10.
Execute.

Compute tcohesm3 = cohesm3 * .01.
Execute.

Compute tfamlym3 = familym3 * .01.
Execute.

Compute tmomtot3 = momtot3 * .01.
Execute.

Compute twrksat3 = mwrksat3 * .10.
Execute.

Compute tcolre13 = collrel3 * .01.
Execute.

"111111111111111“