PARENT-ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION IN KOREAN IMMIGRANT FAMILIES: RELATIONSHIPS AMONG COMMUNICATION QUANTITY, QUALITY, AND CHALLENGES AND ADOLESCENT’S EMOTIONAL AND ACADEMIC OUTCOMES By Catalina Ji Young Park A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Educational Psychology and Educational Technology—Doctor of Philosophy 2017 ABSTRACT PARENT-ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION IN KOREAN IMMIGRANT FAMILIES: RELATIONSHIPS AMONG COMMUNICATION QUANTITY, QUALITY, CHALLENGES AND ADOLESCENT EMOTIONAL AND ACADEMIC OUTCOMES By Catalina Ji Young Park Despite the increased number of studies on Asian immigrant families, no prior studies have exclusively investigated all of the three aspects of communication (e.g., communication quantity, quality, and challenges) in relation to Asian American adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes. Likewise, despite their growing number in America, Korean immigrants have been underrepresented in the Asian immigrant family literature. Therefore, this study not only provided detailed descriptive of the three aspects of communication in the contexts of Korean immigrant families, but also investigated the relationships among these aspects in relation to adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes. 112 Korean American adolescents participated in an online survey. A series of regressions and path analyses found that communication quantity had positive relationships with communication quality. On the contrary, parent–adolescent conflicts over academics had negative relationship with communication quality. Mother-adolescent communication quality, more specifically, open communication was positively correlated with adolescents’ emotional outcome. Yet, communication quantity, quality, and challenges were not associated with adolescents’ academic outcome. The findings from this study extend our understanding about the mechanism of parent-adolescent communication in Korean immigrant families and suggest implications for parents, adolescents, and practitioners. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my dissertation committee chair, Dr. Chin-Hsi Lin, for his continuous support and interest in my academic and professional development. I made it to this point because of his encouragement, guidance, and trust in me. I would like to also express my gratitude to my dissertation committee members, Dr. Desiree Qin, for her support and mentorship in pursuing my interests in Korean immigrant families, Dr. Cary Roseth, for his insightful suggestions on developing my research and conducting statistical analyses, and Dr. Patrick Dickson, for his care and encouragement throughout the five years of my doctoral study. I would also like to extend my appreciation to my loving husband, Andrew Park, who has always encouraged me and supported me with love, care, and understanding. He has taught me how to be thankful and joyful even in the midst of all the struggles and difficulties. I would also like to give special thanks to my beloved parents, who have taught me the important values in life, loved unconditionally and sacrificed their lives to provide me the best, who still pray for me every morning from 6500 miles afar. I would like to also thank my sister, Jiwon Park, who is my bestfriend and a great supporter. Many thanks to my in-laws in Minnesota, my church family and friends from Ann Arbor, East Lansing, and Chicago who have supported me through many prayers with tears and joy. I am also thankful for my beloved colleagues at Michigan State University, Yining Zhang, Haixia Liu, Ying Hu for their cheering, caring, and undivided support. Lastly, I would like to give all the glory to God for his unending love and guidance in my life. I dedicate my life and all my works to you Lord. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... vii CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 5 Rationale of the Study ............................................................................................................... 5 Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................................................................. 8 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 8 Communication Quantity ......................................................................................................... 8 Communication contents ...................................................................................................... 9 Cultural values ..................................................................................................................... 9 Academic values ................................................................................................................ 10 Dating and sexuality .......................................................................................................... 11 Religion and spirituality..................................................................................................... 12 Father-mother differences in communication quantity ................................................... 13 Communication Quality ......................................................................................................... 14 Iowa Communication Report (ICR) .................................................................................. 14 Communication levels ......................................................................................................... 15 Level 5: Cliché conversation ............................................................................................. 15 Level 4: Factual conversation ............................................................................................ 15 Level 3: Conversation about ideas and opinions ............................................................... 15 Level 2: Conversations about feelings and emotions ........................................................ 16 Level 1: Open communication ........................................................................................... 16 Father-mother differences in communication quality ..................................................... 17 Communication Challenges.................................................................................................... 17 Language barrier ................................................................................................................. 18 Cultural gap ......................................................................................................................... 18 Parents’ unavailability ........................................................................................................ 19 High academic expectations ................................................................................................ 20 CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................................................ 22 METHODS .................................................................................................................................. 22 Participants .............................................................................................................................. 22 Measures .................................................................................................................................. 23 Adolescents’ demographics ................................................................................................. 23 Parents’ demographics ........................................................................................................ 23 Parents’ educational level .................................................................................................. 23 Parents’ occupations .......................................................................................................... 24 Communication quantity .................................................................................................... 24 Frequency of communication topics .................................................................................. 24 iv Communication length ....................................................................................................... 25 Communication quality....................................................................................................... 25 Iowa Communication Report (ICR)................................................................................... 25 Communication levels ....................................................................................................... 26 Communication challenges ................................................................................................. 26 Language barriers............................................................................................................... 26 Cultural conflicts ................................................................................................................ 26 Academic conflicts............................................................................................................. 26 Parents’ unavailability ....................................................................................................... 27 Adolescent outcomes............................................................................................................ 27 Academic outcomes ........................................................................................................... 27 Emotional outcomes........................................................................................................... 27 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 28 Communication quantity .................................................................................................... 28 Communication quality....................................................................................................... 28 Communication challenges ................................................................................................. 28 Relationships among quantity, quality and challenges .................................................... 28 CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................ 31 RESULTS .................................................................................................................................... 31 Communication Quantity ....................................................................................................... 31 Communication length ........................................................................................................ 31 Communication frequency by topics ................................................................................. 32 Communication Quality ......................................................................................................... 32 Communication levels ......................................................................................................... 33 Communication Challenges.................................................................................................... 34 Language barrier ................................................................................................................. 34 Cultural conflicts ................................................................................................................. 35 Academic conflicts ............................................................................................................... 36 Parents’ unavailability ........................................................................................................ 37 Relationship among Quantity, Quality, and Challenges ..................................................... 37 Quantity and quality ........................................................................................................... 37 Communication quantity, levels, and quality .................................................................... 38 Communication quantity, topics, and quality .................................................................... 39 Challenges and quantity ..................................................................................................... 39 Communication challenges and quantity on communication quality ............................ 40 Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Emotional Outcome ....................................... 41 Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Academic Outcome ........................................ 42 CHAPTER 5 ................................................................................................................................ 44 DISCUSSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 44 Communication Quantity ....................................................................................................... 44 Communication Quality ......................................................................................................... 45 Communication Challenges.................................................................................................... 46 Language barriers ............................................................................................................... 46 Cultural conflicts ................................................................................................................. 47 v Academic conflicts ............................................................................................................... 47 Parents’ unavailability ........................................................................................................ 48 The Relationship between Quantity, Quality and Challenges ............................................ 49 Communication quantity and quality ................................................................................ 49 Communication quantity, level and quality ...................................................................... 49 Communication quantity, topics, and quality ................................................................... 51 Challenges and communication quantity .......................................................................... 51 Relationship among communication challenges, quantity, and communication quality ............................................................................................................................................... 54 Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Emotional Outcomes ..................................... 54 Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Academic Outcomes ...................................... 55 Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 56 Future Directions..................................................................................................................... 58 Implications.............................................................................................................................. 59 CHAPTER 6 ................................................................................................................................ 61 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 61 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 64 APPENDIX A: Parental Consent Form ................................................................................ 65 APPENDIX B: Adolescent Assent Form ............................................................................... 67 APPENDIX C: Survey ............................................................................................................ 69 APPENDIX D: Tables ............................................................................................................. 79 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 102 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Demographic Descriptive ............................................................................................... 79 Table 2. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Quantity between Adolescents and Parents .................................................................................................................................... 82 Table 3. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Frequency of Topics between Adolescents and Parents ............................................................................................................... 83 Table 4. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Quality between Adolescents and Parents .................................................................................................................................... 84 Table 5. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Frequency by Level between Adolescents and Parents ............................................................................................................... 85 Table 6. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of the Four Communication Challenges between Adolescents and Parents ............................................................................................................... 86 Table 7. Summary of Adolescents’ Emotional Wellbeing ........................................................... 88 Table 8. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Fathers ........................................................................................................................................... 89 Table 9. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Mothers ......................................................................................................................................... 90 Table 10. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Topics and Communication Quality for Fathers ........................................................................................................................................... 91 Table 11. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Topics and Communication Quality for Mothers ......................................................................................................................................... 92 Table 12. Relationship between Communication Challenges and Communication Quantity ..... 93 Table 13. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Fathers ...................................................................................................................... 94 Table 14. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Mothers .................................................................................................................... 95 vii Table 15. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity (i.e., general communication length), Quality, Levels and Emotional Wellbeing............................................. 96 Table 16. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity (i.e., general communication length), Quality, Levels and Academic Outcome ............................................... 98 Table 17. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity (i.e., frequency of communication about academics), Quality, Levels and Academic Outcome ............................ 100 viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Parents are the agents that most immediately and directly impact a child’s development. From the day of their birth, the parents become the primary caregivers and primary administrators of the socialization process. The socialization process—transmitting values, norms, and customs—occurs through parent–child communication. Parent–adolescent communication remains important during adolescence. The period of adolescence is the phase of life when intact parent–child communication is essential for the normal development of adolescents, but it can also be a period that is disruptive for family socialization (Granic, Dishion, Hollenstein, & Patterson, 2002; Steinberg, 1988). Numerous studies have found that good parent–adolescent communication is positively related to adolescents’ academic achievement (Masselam, Marcus, & Stunkard, 1990), self-esteem (Brage & Meredith, 1994; Demo, Small, & Savin-Williams, 1987; Enger et al., 1994), and mental health (Collins, Newman, & Mckenry, 1995; Hanson, 1986), and is inversely related to adolescent loneliness and depression (Brage & Meredith, 1994), drug and alcohol use, and other maladaptive behaviors (Barnes, Farrell, & Banerjee, 1994; Hawley, Shear, Stark, & Goodman, 1984; Johnson, Su, Gerstein, Shin, & Hoffman, 1995; Kafka & London, 1991; Miller, King, Shain, & Naylor, 1992). Moreover, family communication between parents and adolescents, especially in racial/ethnic minorities and socio-economically disadvantaged families, plays a significant role in the development of various kinds of psychosocial adjustment among adolescents and young adults (Rueter & Koerner, 2008; Fuligni, 1997). Despite the importance of parent-adolescent communication and related adolescent outcomes, little has been discussed about what constitutes communication (or the aspects of 1 communication). Quantity and quality are two aspects of communication long used in describing parent-adolescent interaction (Friedman, Sigelman, Rohrbeck & del Rio-Gonzalez, 2016). In 1970s, as many mothers started working outside the home, they were told that the quality of time mothers spend with their children matters, not how much time they spend with their children (Lingren, 1998; Walker, 1999). Since then, most parent-adolescent communication literature and popular literature have emphasized communication quality, and underestimated the importance of communication quantity. On the other hand, others still argued that quantity matters in family communication. For example, research suggests that children who take part in family meals are linked to positive outcomes such as less delinquency, greater academic achievement, improved psychological well-being, and positive family relationships (CASA, 2010; Council of Economic Advisers, 2000). Some scholars, however, emphasized the need for understanding both quantity and quality of communication and suggested that both quantity and quality of communication are important. (Guzman et al., 2003; Qin, 2008; Whitaker & Miller, 2000). These studies have found that both communication quantity and quality influence various adolescents and family outcomes such as adolescent behaviors, emotional functioning, and family dynamic. For example, Qin (2008) found that both quantity (i.e., a lack of family time due to parents’ long work hours) and quality (i.e., linguistic and cultural barriers) influenced their emotional outcomes and family dynamics in Chinese immigrant families. Current study conceptualizes that both quantity and quality of communication are important and they are also related constructs in Korean immigrant family communication. Not only the aspects of communication have received little attention, parent-adolescent communication needs further examination in the context of immigrant families. Parent– adolescent communication is especially challenging for immigrant families, in which parents and 2 children occasionally face linguistic, cultural, and social obstacles. Qin (2009) noted, for example, that immigrant families often experience “parental adaptation difficulty, lack of time spent with children, language barriers, and an acculturation gap” (p. 24), which leads to increased misunderstanding, a loss in communicating with each other, and increased conflicts. In other words, the number of unique challenges may lead to limited quantity and quality of parent– adolescent communication in immigrant families which, in turn, affects adolescent outcomes. Additionally, this study particularly examined Korean immigrant families, who continue to be underrepresented. Korean immigrants are the fifth largest Asian immigrant subgroup in the United States (US Census, 2012). Compared to the 9.7% growth of the total US population, the Korean American population increased by 33% between 2000 and 2010 (US Census, 2012). Moreover, the much greater percentage of foreign-born individuals (77.7%) compared to nativeborn Korean Americans (22.3%) makes the dynamic of these two immigrant generations unique (US Census, 2004). Despite Koreans and other East Asian share many cultural similarities influenced by Confucianism, Asian culture is not homogeneous. The distinct and unique culture and values of Koreans are observed, one of which is that Korean Americans have historically had a very strong Christian heritage. About 77% of Korean immigrants in the United States are Christians (Hurh, 2011). Beyond a place of religious worship and spiritual fellowship, the Korean church has also functioned as a social center for promoting a communal bond among Korean immigrants, preserving Korean cultural traditions (language, culture, family values, food, etc.) and providing social services (e.g., counseling, job referral, language, health, and legal support). Korean parents are also known to make big sacrifices for their children’s education. The goose father phenomena, for example, reflect Korean’s high emphasis on education. Goose 3 fathers are fathers who remain in Korea and send money to their families while their wife and children stay in an English-speaking country for the sake of their children’s education (Choi, 2005). There are approximately 30,000 to 50,000 goose fathers in South Korea (Choi, 2005). Although a similar strategy is practiced by parents in other East Asian countries, “South Koreans seem unique in terms of the extent and intensity of seeking early English education abroad at the cost of family separation or even the risk of family dissolution” (Lee & Koo, 2006, p. 534). Not only do Korean parents have high expectations for children’s education, they tend to work longer hours than most other countries, which influences the amount of family time, thereby may affect their family relationships. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) labor force statistics, South Korea was the second longest working country; in 2014, Koreans on average worked 2124 hours per year while Japanese worked 1729 hours (OECD, 2014); Koreans worked about 1.2 times longer than Japanese did. Korean media has increasingly highlighted the long work schedule as a major factor that has led to a lack of communication time between fathers and children. Despite the growing number of Korean immigrants in America and the unique generational dynamics and culture Korean immigrants obtain, no prior studies have exclusively investigated the whole picture of the communication practice between Korean immigrant parents and their adolescent children, in particular. Therefore, this study sought to broaden prior and existing research on Asian immigrant families by examining communication between Korean immigrant parents and their second-generation Korean American adolescent children and investigating the quantity, quality, and challenges in relation to adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes. 4 Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to understand communication practices in Korean immigrant families. Using adolescent survey data, I examined the parent–adolescent communication quantity (frequency and length), quality, and the four of the already identified challenges in communication (e.g., language barriers, cultural conflicts, high academic pressure, and long parental work hours). The frequency of communication on the six identified topics (basic needs, academics, friends, dating and sexuality, Korean culture, religion and faith) and at five different levels (from cliché communication to open communication) were examined as well as the length of daily parent–adolescent communication and the adolescents’ perception about the length of communication with their parents. Communication quality and challenges are also important elements of general communication practice, and examining the relationship between communication quantity, quality, and challenges provides an overall picture of how parent– adolescent communication works in Korean immigrant families and what is particularly important (whether it be daily communication length, communication frequency in certain topics, or quality) in relation to adolescent academic and emotional outcomes. This study also examined father–mother differences in communication practice. Rationale of the Study This study will help to form a communication theory nested in Asian immigrant literature. Given most Asian immigrant literature predominately praises the academic success of Asian students (e.g., Louie, 2001; Sue and Okazaki, 1990), or focuses on the linguistic, cultural, and social challenges that Asian immigrant families experience (Suarez-Orozco and SuarezOrozco, 2001; Qin, 2006, Portes and Rumbaut, 2001, Uba, 1994, Ying, 1999), this approach of looking at communication practice in relation to adolescent outcomes is new. This study also 5 extends our previous understanding about parent-adolescent communication in immigrant families by examining the mechanisms and links among the three aspects of communication (quantity, quality, and challenges) in relation to adolescents’ specific academic and emotional outcomes. Lastly, the communication quantity, quality, and challenges with the father and mother were separately examined and compared in this study, which contributes to father– mother differences in the parenting literature. Not only is it a theoretically new approach, this study has a practical contribution for practitioners who work with Asian immigrant families, particularly Korean immigrant families. Most studies in Asian immigrant literature examined communication quality, and to date there has been no empirical study that investigated the length and frequency of communication on various topics and at multiple levels. Therefore, this study will close this gap and provide a source for practitioners in developing parenting conferences and immigrant family counseling sessions. Research Questions 1. How often and how long do Korean immigrant parents and adolescents communicate? a) How frequently do adolescents communicate with their parents on different topics and at different levels? b) How long do adolescents talk with their parents daily? c) How satisfied are adolescents on their communication quantity with their parents? d) Are there differences in the communication quantity between father-adolescent and mother-adolescent relationships? 6 2. How do adolescents perceive their communication quality with their parents? Are there differences in adolescents’ perceptions on communication quality with their mothers and fathers? 3. Do Korean immigrant adolescents experience the four challenges (i.e., language barrier, cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, and long parental work hours) identified from the Asian immigrant family literature? Are there differences in adolescents’ perceived communication challenges with fathers and mothers? 4. What are the relationships among communication quantity, quality, challenges, and adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes? a) Relationship between communication quantity and communication quality b) Relationship between communication challenges and communication quantity c) Relationship among communication challenge, quantity, and quality d) Relationship among communication quantity, quality, challenge and adolescents’ emotional outcome e) Relationship among communication quantity, quality, challenge and adolescents’ academic outcome 7 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW In the following section, relevant literature on communication practices (quantity and quality of communication) as well as identified challenges in communication were reviewed. Communication Quantity Communication quantity has been operationalized as “frequency of communication”, “length of communication”, or “time spent together” (Emmers-Sommer, 2004). Research suggests that children who take part in family meals have less delinquency, greater academic achievement, improved psychological well-being, and positive family relationships (CASA, 2010; Council of Economic Advisers, 2000). Emmers-Sommer (2004) also suggested that the time spent together and continuous interaction lead to positive relational outcome. The frequency and length of communication, therefore, is an important factor that brings family together and lead to positive outcomes. Researchers have investigated parent-child communication length, for example, a survey conducted in the United States found that American parents spend an average of 3.5 minutes a week of meaningful conversation with their children (CSUN, n.d.). According to Chadwick (2011), average time a father spends talking to his children is seven minutes per day, while a mother spends eleven minutes per day talking to her children. Given the added challenges and heated conflicts during adolescence, the adolescents of Korean immigrant families may experience even more trouble finding time to talk to their parents. According to the Korean Statistical Information Services (KOSIS, 2014), about half of Korean adolescents communicated with their mothers for less than one hour daily. Their 8 communication quantity with fathers was even less; 50% of participants reported that they talked with their fathers for less than 30 minutes daily. Although Korean families seemed to have significantly longer daily communication compared to American families as discussed above, it is not clear how much of their conversation was focused, and how frequently or deeply they talked about different issues and topics with each other. Korean media and critics have used this survey results and claim that the time spent between parents and adolescents, particularly with fathers, is not enough. However, this survey does not discuss how satisfied the adolescents are with their communication quantity. Adolescents, for example, may in fact talk a lot with their parents, but may not be satisfied with the way parents communicate to them, or the issues they communicate together may not be of their best interest. In this case, the frequency and length of communication may not necessarily lead to positive adolescent or family outcomes. Therefore, examining communication length in relation to communication quality and contents of communication is necessary. Communication contents. The communication contents are the topics of communication that the parents and adolescents convey during their conversation. Understanding what parents and adolescents talk about and how often they talk about each topic is essential in understanding general communication practice as well as predicting adolescents’ developmental outcomes. In the following sections, I highlighted the previous findings on the four most frequently discussed parent-adolescent communication topics in the Asian immigrant family literature: cultural values, academic values, dating and sexuality, and religion. Cultural values. The sharing of cultural values between parents and adolescents is one of the most frequently communicated topics in Asian families. Asian immigrant parents tend to emphasize and enforce Asian values to their children. These values come from Confucius 9 ideology of social order and hierarchy, loyalty, respect for older family members and obedience, as well as the obligation to the family (Rhee, Chang, Rhee, 2003; Kitano and Daniels, 1995; Min, 1995). In particular, the virtue of respect for one’s parents and ancestors—filial piety—is emphasized in Asian culture, and highly expected in their social relationships. Asian immigrant parents tend to retain these traditional values, lifestyles, and child-rearing practices, while their adolescent children absorb American cultural values and behavioral patterns (Chang, 2003). Therefore, parents think that their children are too Americanized, while children think that the parents are too Asian (Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001). Literature in Asian immigrant families indicate that conflicting values is one of the most serious challenges Asian American immigrant children experience with their parents. For example, studies have shown that a key element of Korean American adolescents’ psychological problems is the stress caused by cultural conflict with their parents. Korean American adolescents experience conflicts with their parents in acculturation issues and ethnic identity problems (Kim, 1997; Min, 1995; Moon, Wolfer, & Robinson, 2001). These conflicting cultural values often result in parental over-involvement in children’s lives, negative emotional outcomes and negative family dynamics (Mau, 1995; Qin, 2008). Academic values. Academics are one of the most frequently communicated topics between Asian parents and adolescents. Asian immigrant parents enforce their excessively high academic expectations for children’s academic pursuits. Popular phrases among Asians such as “Why did you get B, you are an A-sian, not a B-sian” possibly indicates how much Asian parents value academic achievements in their communication with their children. As Amy Chua mentioned in her book, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother (2012), Asian parents tend to think that "academic achievement reflects successful parenting," and that if children did not excel at school 10 then there was "a problem" and parents "were not doing their job." Asian parents repeatedly communicate and enforce the values of academics to their children, therefore, cause high pressure for academic excellence among children. In Lee et al. (2009) study, many adolescents were also able to relate to the stress. Qin (2008) also found that the pressure for academic excellence had negative impacts on Asian immigrant family dynamics. She also noted that although Asian immigrant parents exerted a lot of pressure on their children about education, they paid little attention to other aspects of children’s development. Over-emphasis on education and academics leads to adolescents’ negative emotional outcomes and breaks the balance in multi-aspect adolescent development. Dating and sexuality. One of the least discussed topics in communication between Asian immigrant parents and adolescents is dating and sexuality. This is because dating is seen as an improper behavior (Sung, 1987), and sexuality has been a taboo in Asian culture. Asian parents communicate to their daughters particularly that having an interest in the other gender is highly distracting and improper (Sung, 1987). In Qin’s study (2009), she noted, “a girl is taught not to associate too much with boys because it is bad for her reputation and brings shame to the family” (p. 42). Her study also found that the Chinese parents did not discuss issues related to dating or sexuality with their children other than forbidding their daughters from going out or getting anywhere close to boys. Sexuality was found a taboo for Chinese adolescent girls, in particular. Kim and Ward (2007) also found that Asian parents tend to provide relatively little information about a range of sexual topics, and most adolescents receive restrictive messages about sexual morality more than explicit or helpful information or facts about sex and sexuality. Asian parents also tended to be negative or cautionary in tone when they communicated to their children about sex (Ward and 11 Wyatt, 1994). Morever, Meschke and Dettmer (2012) found that Asian immigrant parents sometimes provide inaccurate information about sex and sexuality to their children. However, when parents and adolescents have positive communication over the topic of dating and sexuality, it can resolve parent-adolescent conflicts and lead to positive developmental outcomes. For example, Cha, Kim, and Patrick (2008) found the quality of parent-adolescent communication significantly predicted a higher condom use for young Korean males. Religion and spirituality. About 25% of young Christians said their family talks about God, the Bible, or other religious things on a weekly or daily basis, and 40% once or twice a month. Religion and spirituality serve as protective factor against negative behaviors and mental health outcomes. Religion and spirituality may be protective against early onset alcohol use and alcohol disorders (Bridges & Moore, 2002; Mahoney, Carels, Pargament, Wachholtz, Edwards Leeper, Kaplar, Frutchey, 2005), depressive symptoms, and suicidal risks. Children develop faith through religious socialization—children who grew up with seriously religious parents are through socialization more likely (1) to have internalized their parents religious worldview, (2) to possess the practical religious know-how needed to live more highly religious lives, and (3) to embody the identity orientations and behavioral tendencies toward continuing to practice what they have been taught religiously (Robert, 2012). Approximately 75% of the Korean population in the U.S. regularly attend church services, either Protestant or Catholic, and these churches often function as not only their spiritual source, but also community centers providing a variety of non-religious services like Korean language school and counseling sessions (Yu, 1990). 12 Despite the high religious involvement in Korean families, and its potential positive impacts on adolescents, there is lack of understanding in how often parents and adolescents communication on religion and faith. Examining the quantity of Korean immigrant parents and adolescents’ communication has practical implications for Korean religious leaders and religious communities. Although previous research has examined each of these parent-adolescent communication contents in relation to related outcomes, there is no research that examined all of these communication contents in a single study to show a bigger picture of how frequently do Asian, more particularly, Korean immigrant parents and adolescents communicate over all of these topics. Father-mother differences in communication quantity. Studies have found that mothers generally spend more time taking care of their children (Stephens, 2009; Craig, 2006). In two parent families, fathers spend an average of 20%-25% as much time as the mother in direct interaction with his children (Lamb et al., 1987). Other studies also support this notion of the lack of father adolescent communication (Barnes & Olson, 1985; Noller & Bagi, 1985). Williams and Kelly (2005) noted that fathers are less involved in parenting their adolescent children than are mothers, for the reason, adolescents report being more securely attached to their mothers. Fathers also perceive that father-adolescent communication is not mandatory and culturally expected, but rather optional and unexpected. Stroker and Swadi’s study (1990) on parenting and adolescents’ drug use also found that communication about drug use occurred mostly between adolescent and mother, and “fathers on the whole were ineffective and generally absent as a significant figure” (p. 296-297). 13 Communication Quality Among the many topics within communication literature, communication quality has been examined and emphasized the most. Quality communication typically means communication that is positive (e.g., supportive, cheerful, and agreeable), intimate (e.g., revealing information about self), and in control (e.g., ability to manage communication through production of coherent conversations, meta-communication, and shared meanings) (Montgomery, 1988). In general, researchers have consistently documented that communication quality in immigrant families has a positive impact on academic success (Masselam, Marcus, & Stunkard, 1990) and emotional wellbeing (Collins, Newman, & Mckenry, 1995; Hanson, 1986; Brage & Meredith, 1994). Given the positive impact of communication quality in immigrant families, many researchers have examined what constitutes high quality communication. In this study, two approaches were used to identify what constitute high communication quality. One way is based on Iowa Communication Report (ICR) by Leatham and Duck (1990), which used a series of bipolar adjectives to describe communication quality. The other way is based on communication levels by Powell (1999), which particularly focused on the depth of communication among various indicators of communication quality. Iowa Communication Report (ICR). ICR is a structured self-report on which respondents record their recollection of conversations, which was developed by Leatham & Duck (1990). ICR is broken down into nine factors, and one of the most reliable, interpretable, and important factor is communication quality, where they created ten items using nine-point scales. Each item includes bi-polar descriptors such as “relaxed/strained” and “indepth/superficial.” ICR allows more objective responses using clear indicators with bi-polar 14 descriptors. ICR has been found to be a valid and reliable measure (yielding Cronbach’s alphas of .80 and higher) in previous studies (See Leatham & Duck, 1990; Duck, Rutt, Hurst, Strejc, 1991). Communication levels. Communication levels by Powell highlights the importance of openness in communication quality. Open communication refers to making clear efforts to listen to each other and discuss personal issues together in an accepting manner, which helps resolving conflicts and disagreements in communication. Powell (1999) described five levels of communication, from level 5 --shallow and closed communication-- to level 1: deep and open communication. This indicates how deeply people communicate to each other. The more frequently they communicate at each level, the better their communication quality is. Level 5: Cliché conversation. At this level, shallow conversation such as “Hi, how are you?” takes place. Traditionally, Korean youngsters are expected to bow and say “Hi” “Bye” or “Glad you came back home safely” to their parents as a way to greet and show respect. Then, the parents reply to them by saying “Hi” “Bye” or simply “Yes”. Nothing is given of the self at this level. When communication remains on this level, it may lead to lack of understanding and disappointment in parent-adolescent relationship. Level 4: Factual conversation. At this level, information is shared, but there are no personal comments attached to it. Therefore, still at this level, nothing of the self is communicated. “Did you see that new movie?” or “where are you going?” can lead to factual answers, but do not reveal personal feelings or emotions. Level 3: Conversation about ideas and opinions. At this level, you risk exposing your thoughts, ideas, feelings, and opinions. Risks are taken at this level because adolescents and 15 parents’ personal beliefs can clash, and draw anger, hurt and other negative reactions. Korean parents and adolescents sometimes report trouble with exchanging their ideas and opinions due to generational and acculturation gaps, which makes them to see the world from very different perspectives. However, communication about own ideas and opinions can yield a better chance to know each other more intimately. Level 2: Conversations about feelings and emotions. Communication at this level describes how you feel about others or a situation. By conversing the feelings of frustration, anger, disappointment or happiness, you are taking a great risk to make yourself vulnerable. Sharing feelings and emotions with others leave you far more vulnerable than sharing thoughts. However, by sharing feelings and emotions, you can gain better insights into how others really feel. Given that communication is a mutual process, parents not only show interests in adolescents’ feelings and emotions, but they also have to express their own. However, Koreans are known to tightly control the display of their emotions (Matsumoto, 2006). This may prevent free expression and exchange of feelings and emotions between Korean immigrant parents and American born adolescents. Level 1: Open communication. At this level, consistent, open, and mutual communication of feeling between two people brings perfect, mutual empathic understanding. Both parents and adolescents should be able to communicate over deeply personal issues. This is the ultimate level of communication to be achieved. Open communication, however, is difficult to facilitate particularly in Asian family due to Asian value of hierarchy and suppression of feelings and emotions. Qin’s study (2006) found that parents expected their children to listen to them and not talk back or challenge them, and required total obedience, while children felt frustrated that they could not communicate openly with their parents. She also noted the 16 importance of establishing open communication; a lack of open communication between Chinese immigrant parents and adolescents contributed to increased alienation in the family. Father-mother differences in communication quality. Studies have shown that adolescents’ quality of communication with fathers and mothers are different (e.g., Moitra & Mukherjee, 2012; Rhee et al., 2003). For example, a study on parent-adolescent communication and delinquency found that mother-adolescent communication was much more important compared to the father-adolescent communication in Asian population (Moitra & Mukherjee, 2012). Rhee et al. (2003) also found that Asian American adolescents tended to feel difficulty talking with fathers than with mothers. Furthermore, they reported that their fathers nag/bother and insult them, and that they are sometimes afraid of asking their fathers for what they want. They also reported that their fathers are not good listeners. These findings suggest that Asian students have difficulty communicating with their fathers than with their mothers. These studies stated that Asian American adolescents express difficulty in communicating with their fathers particularly because of a strong emphasis within Asian families on the authority of the father. Communication Challenges Parents and adolescents cross-culturally report many challenges during adolescence due to the developmental changes and the renegotiation of roles in their relationship (Erikson, 1968; Hall, 1904). Researchers have found that parent-child conflict frequency is highest in early adolescence and conflict intensity is highest in mid-adolescence (Laursen, Coy, & Collins, 1998). These heightened conflicts make positive parent-adolescent communication difficult. Adolescence is the period when individuals experience biological changes and mood disruptions due to hormonal changes (Buchanan et al., 1992; Brooks-Gunn, Graber, & Paikoff, 1994). Adolescents also develop social functioning by asserting their individuality, exercising their 17 independence, and forming identities. The conflicts arise when parents attempt to regulate the pace of adolescents’ growing independence, and adolescents’ rejection for parents’ regulation and yearning for independence. The parent-child communication gap during adolescence is inevitably wider among Asian immigrant families. Not only do the developmental changes and renegotiation of roles take place during adolescence, immigrant families experience added challenges (Qin, 2008; Collins, 1990; Tseng & Fuligni, 2000). The literature discusses four factors that contribute to communication challenges in Asian immigrant families: language barrier, cultural gap, parents’ unavailability and pressure for adolescents to excel academically. Language barrier. Adolescents and immigrant parents encounter communication problems as a result of the lags in parents’ English language competency compared to their children which results in inability to properly communicate to each other (Fillmore, 1991; Boutakidis, 2007). Other researches with immigrant families suggest that children’s lack of native language fluency is linked with frustration and emotional distancing as it is associated with “difficulties expressing themselves and comprehending their parents’ communications in native language” (Tseng & Fuligni, 2000, p. 467). For example, a study noted that approximately 70% of the second-generation Korean Americans reported speaking only or mostly English to their parents after the age of five (Min, 2000). Given that more than half of Korean immigrants were limited in English proficiency (Terrazas & Batog, 2010) and the 90% of Korean born mothers speak Korean as their first language (UCLA Asian American Studies Center, 1975), the communication difficulty among immigrant Asian parents and adolescents are expected. Cultural gap. Many scholars have also found that the cultural gap between Asian immigrant parents and adolescent children widens during adolescence. The parent-child 18 relationship is highly intact and valued in Asian families, as they keep Confucius value systems that emphasize the importance of social order and hierarchy, loyalty, respect for older family members, obedience, and obligation to the family (Kitano & Daniels, 1995; Min, 1995). Immigrant Asian parents tend to retain these traditional cultural values and customs and childrearing practices while children absorb mainstream cultural beliefs and behavioral patterns at a much faster rate than their parents. For the reason, misunderstanding between the Asian immigrant parents and their children occurs. Qin and colleagues’ study (2008) with Chinese immigrant parents and adolescent noted that the adolescents feel frustrated with their parents’ traditional ways of communication. A participant in their study reported, “Chinese parents expect their kids to listen to them without talking back to them. My parents don’t agree with communicating, they believe that I’m your dad, I’m your mom, I give you life, you should listen to me, you should agree with me, you should really feel my beliefs” (Qin et al., 2008, p. 489). This cultural barrier affects the way the Asian parents and their adolescents communicate to each other, and the Asian cultural value and expectations of children’s total submission to their parents, the suppression of emotion and failure to openly express their personal concerns cause bottled up frustration (Rhee et al., 2003) and lead to communication difficulties among Asian immigrant parents and their children. This gap between the immigrant parents and their children results in greater miscommunication and intergenerational conflict. Parents’ unavailability. In addition to the language and cultural barriers, parental work schedules contribute to parent-adolescent conflicts. Qin and colleagues (2008) found that the decreasing time parents and children spent together was particularly a pronounced problem in the families where parents had to work very long hours in service-type jobs. Research has shown that nearly twice as many immigrant parents have poor-quality jobs compared to their native- 19 born counterparts. They have lower hourly wages than native-born parents (earning 22 percent less than native-born parents), less access to pension plans (only 32 percent have pensions, compared with 49 percent of native-born parents), and less access to employment-based health insurance (42 percent have access, compared with 55 percent of native-born parents) (Earle, Joshi, Geronimo, & Acevedo-Garcia, 2014). Due to the lack of English language proficiency, it is often hard for immigrant parents to hold permanent, secure, and white-collar jobs. The status of immigrant parents has a significant bearing on the well-being of children, as parents’ long work schedule and physically challenging jobs decrease the time parents and children can spend together. Qin et al. (2008) also noted parental work schedule contributes to parent-adolescent conflicts, because the parents usually operate on a schedule that has very little overlap time with that of their children’s time at home. High academic expectations. Extremely high parental educational expectations make the communication difficult for Asian families. There are many research findings that highlight and praise the Asian students’ academic success in America. Among the East Asian immigrants, parents are known to play a major role in students’ academic success (Fuligni, 1997; Lew, 2006). They set high expectation for their children, encourage and aspire their children to overcome difficulties, because they believe education to be the most significant way for their children to improve their social status in America. As these expectations may positively influence the academic outcome, Qin et al. (2008) suggest that as a result of the academic pressure, many adolescents choose not to communicate with their parents and feel alienated with their interactions at home. The Asian parents’ over-emphasis on educational outcomes leads to positive academic, but negative emotional outcomes and results in the achievement/adjustment paradox (Qin, 2008). As Asians obtain a more interdependent family unit, parents’ feedback 20 influences the Asian students greatly, and the disapproval from their parents in their academics can be a huge burden for them. For the above reasons, Asian American adolescents experience added difficulty in communicating to their parents. Such prolonged struggles result in lack of perceived connection and leave a lasting negative impact on adolescents’ well-being (Ackard et al., 2006; Sillars et al., 2005). 21 CHAPTER 3 METHODS Participants Participants in this study were second-generation Korean American high school students living in the United States. Participants were recruited primarily with the assistance of gatekeepers. The gatekeepers are individuals who assist the researcher in gaining access and developing trust (Hatch, 2002). They provide entrance to a site, help researchers locate people, and assist in identifying the places to study (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995; Creswell, 2008). For this study, the gatekeepers were youth pastors across the United States who work for Korean churches. The flyer that contains a link to the online survey was emailed to Korean American youth pastors and they distributed the flyers to their Korean American youth group students. An online survey was created using Qualtrics. The first page of the survey contained parental consent form followed by adolescent assent form on the next page. Parents and adolescents were to read and indicate their agreement on the consent and assent forms respectively to begin the survey. Both parents and adolescents were informed about the nature of the study, protection of their rights, and compensation. The adolescents completed the online questionnaires using any electronic devices such as cellphones, tablet pc, or personal computers with internet connection. Adolescents received fivedollar gift certificate electronically upon completion of the survey. Among the 112 students who completed survey, 46% were males. All respondents were high-school students, with 28% in 9th grade, 20% in 10th grade, 34% in 11th grade, and 18% in 12th grade. Respondents reside in at least ten states across America including California, Illinois, 22 Maryland and Texas. Approximately half of the respondents reside in Midwestern states (e.g., Michigan Minnesota, and Illinois). Measures The survey was in five parts: demographics, communication quantity, communication quality, communication challenges, and well-being scale. Adolescents’ demographics. The adolescents’ demographic portion asks brief adolescent information such as gender, grade level (e.g., 9th grade), zip code, and their Korean language fluency. Parents’ demographics. Family information such as parents’ highest educational level, parental occupation, and parental English language fluency were collected. Parents’ educational level. Participants reported their parents’ highest educational level. Then, the parental educational level was converted into years of education. Parents’ years of education was calculated by recoding parents’ highest degree of education on the survey (i.e., high school completion=12 years, some college=14 years, Bachelor’s degree=16 years, Master’s degree=18 years, PhD or equivalent=23 years). In the cases participants responded “Not sure” on this item, I used the average years of education: 16.6 years. Adolescents also reported where their parents completed their highest degree (i.e., 1=South Korea, 2=America, 3=Other country, or 4=Not sure). Approximately 71% of fathers and 64% of mothers completed bachelor’s degree or higher. The average years of education for father and mother were 17.11 years and 15.86 years, respectively. The sample of this study had higher levels of educational attainment than do average Korean immigrants obtain (approximately 52%) (Zong & Batalova, 2014). 23 Results also indicated that about half of fathers completed their highest degree in America (49%), and 44% of fathers completed their highest degree in Korea. The majority (66%) of mothers completed their highest degree in Korea, and only 24% completed in America. Parents’ occupations. Adolescents were also asked to indicate which one of the seven categories of occupations their parents worked for. The categories were: 1= Production, transportation, and material moving occupations, 2= Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations, 3= Sales and office occupations, 4= Service occupations, 5= Management, business, science, and arts occupations, 6= Currently unemployed, and 7= Other occupations. Majority (41%) of fathers worked in management, business, science, and arts occupations, 17% of fathers worked in sales and office occupations, followed by 7% in production, transportation, and material moving occupations, 5% in service occupations, 4% in natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations. Only 4% of fathers were unemployed and 22% reported other occupations. Majority of mothers who are in workforce had management, business, science and arts occupations (19%), followed by 19% in service occupations, 14% in sales and office occupations. 38% of mothers were unemployed and 14% reported other occupations. Communication quantity. The communication quantity portion is composed of two parts, communication frequency and communication length. Frequency of communication topics. Participants responded how frequently they communicated with their fathers and mothers on different topics in 5-point frequency Likert scale from 1= Never to 5= Always. Communication topic items included how often adolescents 24 communicated with their fathers and mothers on topics like academics, friends, dating and sexuality, ethnic culture and value, religion and faith as identified in the literature. Communication length. Communication length is another indicator of communication quantity. Researcher developed 3 questions to determine the length of time adolescents spend with their fathers and mothers. The items included how much time do adolescents talk with their fathers and mothers on weekdays and weekends (ranges from 1= Never to 10= More than two hours), whether the adolescents perceive the length of communication to be enough (in 5-point scale from 1= Too little to 5= Too much), and how much time do adolescents wish to spend with their parents (ranges from 1= Never to 10= More than two hours). Communication quality. Communication quality had two measures: communication levels and ICR. In this study, ICR was used as a proxy of communication quality, while communication levels were used to depict the mechanism in which communication challenge and quantity affected communication quality. Iowa Communication Report (ICR). The parent-adolescent communication quality items are adopted and modified from ICR (Duck, Rutt, Hurst, & Strejc, 1990). The ten items measuring quality of communication are comprised of 9-point Likert scale items measuring the following attributes of parent-adolescent communication: relaxed/strained, impersonal/personal, attentive/poor listening, formal/informal, in-depth/superficial, smooth/difficult, guarded/open, great deal of understanding/great deal of misunderstanding, free of communication breakdowns/a lot of communication breakdowns, free of conflict/a lot of conflict. ICR measure was initially composed of 10 items, however, item #4 (i.e., formal: informal) was deleted for analysis due to the ambiguity of terms reported by several participants. 25 The remaining nine items yielded Cronbach’s alphas of .85 and .89 for father and mother respectively, indicating high reliability. Communication levels. Communication level was adopted by Powell (1999)’s five levels of communication. Participants responded how often they communicated with their fathers and mothers by greetings, having conversation about facts, about opinions, sharing feelings and emotions, and having completely open communication. Communication challenges. Four of the major challenges in Asian parent-adolescent communication: language barriers, cultural conflicts, academic pressure, and long parental work hours were identified from the literature. Language barriers. Language barriers were operationalized as the reverse coding of two items: adolescents’ Korean fluency and parents’ English fluency. On a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (fluent), adolescents recorded how fluent they spoke Korean language, and how fluent their father and mother spoke English language. Cultural conflicts. Cultural conflicts section in the Intergenerational conflict inventory (ICI) by Chung (2001) was adopted and modified to examine cultural conflicts experienced by adolescents. Adolescents reported on a scale from 1 (no conflicts over this issue) to 5 (a lot of conflicts over this issue) on seven items. The reliability of cultural conflicts between fatheradolescent and mother-adolescent were .822 and .929 respectively (see Table 7). A composite score was also created for the seven cultural conflicts items. Academic conflicts. ICI by Chung (2001) was adopted and modified to examine academic conflicts experienced by adolescents. Adolescents reported on a scale from 1 (no conflicts over this issue) to 5 (a lot of conflicts over this issue) on seven items. Academic conflict was found to 26 be highly reliable between fathers and adolescents (α = .847) and between mothers and adolescents (α = .943). A composite score was also created for the seven academic conflicts items (see Table 8). Parents’ unavailability. Parents’ average daily work hours throughout the week were reported by adolescents as the proxy of parents’ unavailability (see demographic section in the Appendix C). Adolescent outcomes. Adolescent outcomes are composed of adolescents’ academic outcomes and emotional outcomes. Academic outcomes. In the demographic section of the survey, adolescents reported their weighted cumulative GPA. The scale ranged from 1 (below 2.5) to 5 (4.1 or higher). Adolescents’ academic outcome was measured through their cumulative weighted GPA. Participants were predominately high achievers (GPA over 3.5); cumulative weighted GPA of 4.1 or over (43%), 3.6-4.0 (37%), 3.1-3.5 (14%), and 2.6-3.0 (3%), with GPA below 2.5 making up the remaining 3% (see Table 1). About 94% of participants reported they have the GPA above 3.0, and only 6% responded they have GPA below 3.0. (see Table 1). Emotional outcomes. Last portion of the survey consisted of 14 items of well-being questionnaires adopted from Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS). This scale consists of subjective well-being and psychological functioning, and all items are worded positively and address aspects of positive mental health. Participants are to indicate how they have generally be feeling in 5-point scale from 1 = None of the time to 5 = All the time. Results found that mean score of all 14 items ranged from 2.85 to 3.61, which indicated moderate level of psychological well-being. Adolescents reported lowest well-being score on feeling relaxed (M 27 = 2.85, SD = 1.05) and energy to spare (M = 2.92, SD = 1.04) and highest on feeling loved (M = 3.61, SD =1.03). In the current study, the reliability of the WEMWBS was very high (14 items; α = .9193). The mean composite score for the 14 items was 3.23. Adolescents reported moderate level of well-being throughout all questionnaires (see Table 7). Data Analysis Communication quantity. To answer the first research question regarding communication quantity, descriptive statistics were first used to illustrate communication length in general, and frequency of communication topics between fathers and adolescents, and mothers and adolescents. Descriptive statistics were also used to illustrate adolescents’ satisfaction of communication quantity with their parents. Lastly, the father-mother differences were also examined through paired-sample t-test. Communication quality. To answer the second research question regarding communication quality, descriptive statistics were used to illustrate communication quality using ICR and communication levels. Lastly, the father-mother differences were also examined through paired-sample t-test. Communication challenges. To answer the third research question regarding communication challenge, descriptive statistics were used to illustrate four aspects of communication challenges (i.e., language barrier, cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, and long parental work hours). Lastly, the father-mother differences were also examined through pairedsample t-test. Relationships among quantity, quality and challenges. To answer the fourth research question regarding relationship among quantity, quality, and challenges, several series of 28 multiple regression and path analyses were performed. I hypothesize that communication challenges would affect communication quantity, and then in turn affect communication quality and adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes. Based on this hypothesis, I conducted the following path analyses. First, I examined the relationship between quantity and quality using path analysis. In Model 1, communication quality was entered as an indicator, and communication quality was the dependent variable. Model 2 added gender and parents’ years of education as the control variables. To understand in what ways communication quantity affected communication quality, two variables, communication levels and topics, were entered in Model 3 and Model 4, respectively. Second, I examined the relationship between challenge and quantity using multiple regressions. Since there is no theoretical or empirical study that describe how these four challenges (i.e., cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, language barriers, and parents’ unavailability) together affect communication quantity, I entered them together in one multiple regression. Third, I examined the relationship among communication challenge, quantity, and quality using path analysis. Communication quality using ICR was the dependent variable. Model 1 added control variables and communication challenges, and Model 2 added communication quantity (i.e., communication length). Model 3 added communication levels. This series of path analyses were performed separately for fathers and mothers. Fourth, I examined how these three aspects of communication practices affected adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes. Academic and emotional outcomes were entered as the dependent variables for each series of path analyses. Model 1 included control variables and 29 communication challenges, and Model 2 added communication quantity (i.e., communication length and the frequency of communication about academic topics). Model 3 added communication quality, and Model 4 added communication levels. This series of path analyses were performed separately for fathers and mothers. All the statistical analyses were performed using STATA 13 software. 30 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Communication Quantity As described earlier, communication quantity was conceptualized using two indicators: communication length in general, and frequency of communication topics. Communication length. Daily communication length between father and adolescent was 39 minutes on weekdays and 54 minutes on weekends. On the other hand, adolescents communicated with their mothers 71 minutes on weekdays and 76 minutes on weekends. Adolescents on average communicated with their fathers for about 47 minutes daily, while they talked with mothers on average 74 minutes a day (see Table 2). Adolescents in this study talked 1.6 times longer with mothers than with fathers on average, and the communication length between adolescents and mothers was significantly longer than that of adolescents and fathers in either weekday or weekend. Moreover, adolescents and parents talked significantly more on weekends than on weekdays (father: t(111) = -5.60, p < .001, and mother: t(111) = -2.13, p < .036). When asked whether their communication with father was enough (see Question 26 in Appendix C), the mean was 2.47 in a scale from 1 to 5 (SD = .84), while they reported mean of 2.95 (SD = .78) communication length with their mother. Adolescents perceived that their communication with both father and mother was slightly less than they desired (3=just right). Lastly, the difference in adolescents’ satisfaction about the length of communication with their fathers and mothers were found significant, which suggests that adolescents were more satisfied with how much they communicated with mothers than with fathers (t(111) = -5.50, p < .001). 31 Communication frequency by topics. Descriptive statistics (see Table 3) indicated that the most frequently discussed topic between adolescents and fathers was academics (M =3.67, SD = 1.03), followed by basic needs (M = 3.57, SD = 1.03), Korean culture (M = 3.16, SD = 1.04), friends (M = 2.07, SD = .99), religion and faith (M = 2.80, SD = 1.32) and talk least about dating and sexuality (M = 2.07, SD = .99). Similar results were found with mother-adolescent communication frequency on these topics. Adolescent reported that they talk about academics most frequently (M = 4.16, SD = .92), followed by basic needs (M = 4.14, SD = 1.06), friends (M = 3.73, SD = .99), Korean culture (M = 3.37, SD =1.02), religion and faith (M = 3.24, SD = 1.15), and dating and sexuality (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21). Overall, adolescents reported that the most frequently discussed topic with both fathers and mothers was academics; adolescents reported that they talked about academics even more frequently than basic needs. Adolescents also perceived that the least frequently discussed topic with both fathers and mothers was dating and sexuality. Based on the results of paired sample t-test, significant difference was found between the frequency of father- and mother-adolescent communication on five out of the six topics (i.e., basic needs, academics, friends, dating and sexuality, and religion and faith). Mothers tend to talk significantly more on these topics than fathers do with their children. However, no significant difference was found between how frequently fathers and mothers communicate with adolescents about Korean culture. Communication Quality Descriptive statistics showed that most of the items in communication quality with fathers were around the midpoint (i.e., five in a nine-point Liker scale, see Table 4). Item #3 poor 32 listening: attentive (M = 6.35, SD = 2.07) had the highest mean scores and item #2 impersonal: personal (M = 4.73, SD = 1.99) had the lowest mean scores for fathers. Similarly, most of the items in communication quality with mothers were around the midpoint, but the highest and lowest items were different. Item #1 strained: relaxed (M = 7.01, SD = 2.06) had the highest mean scores, and #2 impersonal: personal (M = 5.348, SD = 2.463) and #5 superficial: in-depth (M = 5.35, SD = 1.95) had the lowest mean scores for communication quality with mothers. Paired sample t-test found that overall communication quality between adolescents and fathers were not significantly different from that between adolescents and mothers. When comparing father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication quality, paired sample t-test showed father-mother differences for four of the nine items at p < .05. Results found that mothers tended to communicate their children in more relaxed (t(111) = -6.19, p = .024), personal (t(111) = -2.72, p = .008), and open (t(111) = -2.57, p = .0111) manners than fathers did. However, adolescents reported that they had less communication breakdowns with fathers than with mothers (t(111) = 2.18, p = .0031). Communication levels. Another way to look at communication quality was by examining parents-adolescent communication frequency at five different levels using Powell’s five levels of communication (1999). In general, descriptive statistics showed that deeper level of communication occurred less frequently than cliché or factual communication for both fatheradolescent and mother-adolescent communication. In father-adolescent communication, most adolescents reported that they often greet each other (M = 4.14, SD = 1.15, see Table 5). They sometimes talked about ideas, judgments, and decisions (M = 3.33, SD = 1.04) and report facts about others (M = 3.23, SD = .95). However, 33 adolescents rarely shared their feelings and emotions (M = 2.63, SD = 1.22) and talked completely open and out-front with their fathers (M = 2.81, SD = 1.24). In mother-adolescent communication, similarly, there was a slight decrease in communication frequency as the communication depth intensifies. Most adolescents reported they often greeted each other (M = 4.30, SD = 1.10), but sometimes reported facts about others (M = 3.71, SD = 1.10), talked about ideas, judgments and decisions (M = 3.71, SD = 1.05), shared feelings and emotions (M = 3.53, SD = 1.21), and talked completely open and out-front (M = 3.44, SD = 1.22). Father-mother difference in frequency of communication levels was observed at all five levels. Mothers tended to communicate significantly more in frequency with their adolescent children at all levels. Communication Challenges There were four types of challenges identified from the literature: language barrier, cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, and long parental work hours. Descriptive statistics were used to demonstrate communication challenges for fathers and mothers, and paired sample t-test was used to find father-mother differences (see Table 6). Language barrier. Language barriers were operationalized as the reverse coding of the two variables: adolescents’ Korean language fluency and parents’ English language fluency. Descriptive statistics indicated that adolescents might experience moderate level of language barriers when talking to their parents due to their lack of Korean language proficiency (M = 2.67, SD = 1.09). 34 On the other hands, the mean of English language barrier was 2.30 (SD = 1.19) and 2.62 (SD = 1.09) respectively, for father and mother. Paired sample t-test found that there was a significant difference in English language fluency between father and mother (t(111) = -2.86, p = .005). Fathers tended to speak English significantly better than mothers did. Cultural conflicts. Overall, adolescents reported that they had little cultural conflicts with their parents. Among the items, adolescents reported that they had the highest conflicts for desire for independence and autonomy (M = 2.28, SD = 1.06), followed by Korean tradition (M = 2.04, SD = 1.24), learning Korean language (M =1.96, SD = 1.10), gender expectation (M = 2.05, SD = 1.29), birth order expectations (M = 2.12, SD = 1.32), close family relationships (M = 1.63, SD = 1.06), and how much time to spend with the family (M = 2.13, SD = 1.15). Among these cultural conflicts, adolescents reported relatively higher conflicts over independence and autonomy. The composite score of the seven cultural conflicts in father-adolescent communication items was 2.03 (SD = .81) Similarly, adolescents reported that they had little conflicts on desire for independence and autonomy (M = 2.36, SD = 1.17), following Korean tradition (M = 1.97, SD = 1.17), learning Korean language (M = 1.96, SD = 1.20), gender expectation (M = 1.70, SD = 1.05), birth order expectations (M = 1.98, SD = 1.16), close family relationships (M = 1.69, SD = 1.00), and how much time to spend with the family (M = 2.08, SD = 1.20). Among the cultural conflicts with mother, adolescents reported relatively higher conflicts over independence and autonomy. The composite score of the seven cultural conflicts in father-adolescent communication items was 1.96 (SD = .82) Overall, there was no overall difference in cultural conflicts between adolescent-father and adolescent-mother communication (t(111) = 1.26, p = .21). Father-mother differences in 35 cultural conflicts was found significant on only one item: gender expectation (t(111) = 3.58, p = .001). Adolescents tend to experience significantly more conflicts on gender expectations with fathers than with mothers. All other items did not find significant father-mother differences. Academic conflicts. Overall, adolescents reported that they had lower than moderate level of conflicts with father on how much time to spend on studying (M = 2.66, SD = 1.37), importance of academic achievement (M = 2.85, SD = 1.39), emphasis on success (M = 2.84, SD = 1.41), which college to attend (M = 2.72, SD = 1.34), what to major in college (M = 2.25, SD = 1.22), which career to pursue (M = 2.28, SD = 1.28), and being compared to others (M = 2.38, SD = 1.34). Among the academic conflicts with father, adolescents reported relatively higher conflicts over the following issues: importance of academic achievement, emphasis on success, and which college to attend. Adolescents reported they had relatively little conflicts with father over what to major in college and which career to pursue. The composite score of the seven academic conflicts in father-adolescent communication items was 2.57 (SD = 1.12) Adolescents reported lower than moderate level of conflicts with mother on how much time to spend on studying (M = 3.02, SD = 1.25), importance of academic achievement (M = 2.95, SD = 1.37), emphasis on success (M = 3.01, SD = 1.40), which college to attend (M = 2.82, SD = 1.43), what to major in college (M = 2.50, SD = 1.47), which career to pursue (M = 2.61, SD = 1.38), and being compared to others (M = 2.91, SD = 1.40). Among the academic conflicts with mother, adolescents reported relatively higher conflicts over the following issues: how much time to spend on studying, emphasis on success, importance of academic achievement, and being compared to others. Adolescents reported they had relatively little conflicts with mother over what to major in college and which career to pursue. The composite score of the seven academic conflicts in mother-adolescent communication items was 2.83 (SD = 1.20) 36 Overall, adolescents had more conflicts with mothers than with fathers (t(111) = -3.06, p < .01). Father-mother differences in academic conflicts were found significant on the four items: how much time to spend on studying (t(111) = -3.15, p = .002), what to major in college (t(111) = -2.13, p = .035), which career to pursue (t(111) = -3.08, p = .003), and being compared to others (t(111) = -3.91, p = .000). Adolescents reported that they had significantly more conflicts with mothers than with fathers on how much time to spend, what to major in college, which career to pursue, and comparison to others. Parents’ unavailability. Descriptive statistics was used to illustrate average parental work hours. Fathers on average worked close to 8 hours on weekdays, and a little over 3 hours on weekends. Fathers on average worked 45.55 hours weekly. More than 64% of fathers worked longer than 40 hours per week. Furthermore, about 60% of fathers worked on weekends. Mothers on average worked about 3.98 hours on weekdays, and 1.7 hours on weekends. However, when the frequency of weekly work hours was examined, 43.1% of mothers did not work, and 31.2% of mothers worked less than 40 hours per week. Only 34.2% of mothers worked on weekends. Relationship among Quantity, Quality, and Challenges Quantity and quality. A series of path analyses were performed to examine the relationship between quantity and quality. In the first path analysis, communication quality (i.e., ICR), communication quantity (i.e., communication length, and the five communication levels) and the five levels (Powell, 1999) were included. In the second path analysis, communication quality (i.e., ICR), quantity (i.e., communication length) and the six topics were included. In each of these two path analysis, three models were examined. In the first model, adolescent’ 37 gender and parental years of education were entered. In the second model, weekly communication length was entered. In order to find the relationship between communication length and communication quality and the mediation by communication level and topics, path analyses were conducted for adolescent-father and adolescent-mother communication separately in the third model. Communication quantity, levels, and quality. In model 1, adolescents’ gender and father’s years of education was not significantly related to communication quality with father (see Table 8). When adolescents’ weekly communication quantity was added in Model 2, the communication quantity was associated with communication quality with fathers. However, when communication levels were added in Model 3, the association between weekly communication length and quality disappeared and a significant positive relationship between open communication and communication quality appeared. Result from the Model 3 indicated that being able to openly communicate with father was significantly associated with communication quality controlling for all other variables. Similarly, when adolescent’ gender, and mother’s years of education was added in Model 1, there was no significant association found between demographic variables and communication quality. When weekly communication length was added in Model 2, mother-adolescent communication length was positively associated with communication quality (see Table 9). When communication level was added in Model 3, however, the degree of association between communication length and communication quality dropped from .38 to .01, and frequency of communicating at the Level 5 (Cliché communication), Level 3 (Talk about ideas, judgments, and decisions) and Level 1 (Open communication) were found to be positively related to communication quality. 38 Communication quantity, topics, and quality. Next, to examine the relationship between communication quantity and quality and the mediation by communication topics, another sets of path analyses were conducted. Results from Model 1 indicated that adolescent’s gender and father’s years of education was not associated with communication quality (see Table 10). When weekly communication length with father was added in Model 2, communication length and communication quality had a positive relationship. When communication topics were added in Model 3, the degree of association between weekly communication length and quality decreased from .48 to .33, yet the relationship was still significant. Additionally, communicating with father about friends more frequently was associated with better communication quality. The relationship between communication quantity and topics on communication quality was examined for mother-adolescent communication. In model 1, adolescent’s gender and mother’s years of education was not associated with communication quality (see Table 11). Result indicated that weekly communication length was positively associated with communication quality for mother-adolescent communication as in Model 2 (b=.38). Lastly, when the frequency of communication on various topics was added in Model 3, the degree of association between communication length and communication quality dropped from .38 to .19. Although the relationship between communication length and quality disappeared in Model 3, frequently communicating about dating/sexuality with mother was positively associated with communication quality in mother-adolescent communication. Challenges and quantity. Next, simple regression was performed to find how the four communication challenges (i.e., cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, language barriers, parental unavailability) with father and mother affected communication length. Results found that Adolescent’s limited Korean language proficiency (conceptualized as Korean language barrier) 39 was negatively associated with communication length with both parents (see Table 12). In other words, the better adolescents can speak Korean language, the longer adolescents communicated with their father and mother. All other challenges had no significant associations with communication length. Communication challenges and quantity on communication quality. Path analyses were performed to examine the relationship between communication quantity, quality, and challenges. Model 1 found that of the four challenges, only academic conflicts had an impact on communication quality with fathers (see Table 13). As adolescents have more issues with father on academic domains, they reported lower overall communication quality. When communication quantity was added in Model 2, academic conflict with father (though the degree of association decreased slightly from -.34 to -.31) and weekly communication length (b=.43) together had significant associations with communication quality. When the frequency of communication on the five levels were added in Model 3, having more academic conflict was still related to lower communication quality, however, frequently having open communication resulted in positive correlation with communication quality. Similarly, path analyses were performed to examine the relationship between communication quantity, quality, and challenges in mother-adolescent communication. Results from Model 1 indicated that having more conflicts over academic issues in mother-adolescent communication was negatively associated with communication quality (see Table 14). All other challenges had no significant associations with communication quality. When weekly communication length was added in Model 2, communication quantity was positively associated with communication quality while there was also an increase in the standardized coefficient of academic conflict with mother on communication quality (from -.30 to -.33). Weekly 40 communication length strengthened the association between academic conflicts and quality. Lastly, when all five communication levels were added to Model 3, the positive link between communication length and quality disappeared. There was also a decrease in the standardized coefficient, but still significant, of academic conflicts on communication quality (from -.33 to -.23). The significant relationship between communication quality and Level 3 communication (Talk about ideas, judgments, and decisions) as well as with Level 5 communication (Open communication) appeared, which suggests that talking about ideas, judgments, and decisions and having open communication between mother and adolescent are positively associated with their communication quality. Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Emotional Outcome In order to find how communication quantity, quality, and challenges are associated with adolescent’s emotional outcome, another round of path analyses were performed for a dependent variable: adolescent wellbeing. The predictors used were family demographics (i.e., adolescent’s gender and parents’ years of education), communication challenges as identified above (i.e., cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, parental work hours, and parental English fluency), communication quantity (i.e., communication length) as well as communication quality (i.e., nine items from ICR). In Model 1, the relationships among adolescent gender and parents’ years of education as well as the four challenges on adolescent wellbeing was examined. Results indicated that adolescent’s gender, parent’s years of education as well as the challenges were not significantly related to adolescents’ wellbeing (see Table 15). When communication quantity was added in Model 2, communication length was found to have no significant relationship with adolescent’s wellbeing. When communication quality was included in Model 3, a significant positive 41 association between communication quality and adolescent’s wellbeing was found (b = .25, p < .05 in father-adolescent communication and b = .23, p < .05 in mother-adolescent communication). Lastly, in Model 4, when the frequency of communication at the five levels was added, the significant relationship between communication quality and wellbeing disappeared for both father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication. However, open communication (level 5) was found to be positively associated with adolescent’s wellbeing only in mother-adolescent relationship (b = .44, p < .01). Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Academic Outcome In order to find how communication quantity, quality, and challenges are associated with adolescent’s academic outcome, another round of path analyses were performed for a dependent variable: GPA. The predictors used were family demographics (i.e., adolescent’s gender and parents’ years of education), the communication challenges as identified above (i.e., cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, parental work hours, and adolescent’s Korean language barrier, and parental English barrier), communication quantity (i.e., communication length), and communication quality (i.e., nine items from ICR). No significant relationships among demographic variables, communication challenges and GPA was found in Model 1 (see Table 16). There was also no significant association found after adding communication challenges and communication length in Model 2 and Model 3, respectively. When the frequency of communication in five levels were added in Model 4, however, frequency of reporting facts about others (Level 4) was positively associated with adolescent’s GPA only in father-adolescent communication. To further examine the relationship between communication practice and adolescent’s academic outcome, I looked at how the frequency of communication about academic topics 42 influences the adolescent’s GPA. To do this, I performed another round of path analyses for predictors: family demographics (i.e., adolescent’s gender and parents’ years of education), communication challenges, communication quantity (i.e., frequency of communication: academic topics) and communication quality. Results indicated that the frequency of communication about academic topics in both father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication was not associated with adolescents’ GPA in all four models (see Table 17). 43 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSIONS The demographic of Korean immigrant families in this study generally showed higher levels of parental educational attainment than the average Korean immigrants in the U.S. Many parents even completed their highest degree in America, which may have led to higher English language competency, and possibly helped them land a higher paying career. The communication practice, adolescent’s high academic and emotional outcomes may also be explained by these parental demographic characteristics. Communication Quantity This study not only examined the length and frequency of communication, but also adolescents’ satisfaction with the length of communication. Adolescents communicated with their fathers for about 47 minutes, and their mothers for 74 minutes daily. Korean American adolescents talked about 1.6 times longer with mothers than with fathers. Adolescents in this study seemed to have relatively longer communication than how it has been discussed previously (e.g., 3.5 minutes weekly, 7.5 minutes weekly, or 37 seconds daily, see communication quantity section in the literature review). Additionally, adolescents seemed satisfied with the communication with both of their parents, they were particularly more satisfied with the length of time they spent with their mother. Adolescents tended to talk significantly more frequently with mothers than with fathers across all topics. However, the single most frequently communicated topic between Korean American adolescents and immigrant parents was academics, followed by basic needs. This aligns with Qin’s findings (2009) on Chinese immigrant parent-adolescent relationship study. As Qin noted her concerns for Chinese parents’ emphasis on academics while paying very little 44 attention to other aspects, Korean immigrant parents’ unbalanced emphasis on academics was also concerning. In addition, the least frequently discussed topic in parents-adolescent communication was dating and sexuality. This also aligns Qin’s study (2009) on Chinese immigrant families. As adolescent dating is not acceptable and discussing sexuality is considered a taboo in Asian immigrant families, Korean immigrant families may also feel uncomfortable communicating about dating and sexuality, which may limit the frequency of communication about these issues. Communication Quality Although adolescents reported moderate level of communication quality across most items, they tended to report relatively lower on items that were related specifically to intimacy and depths (see Table 4). Communication at deeper and more intimate level occurred less frequently than cliché or factual communication in both father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication. This suggests the need for mutual efforts in building intimacy and depth in communication to improve communication quality in parents-adolescent communication. This study found slightly higher than moderate level of communication quality in both father-adolescent (M=5.60) and mother-adolescent communication (M=5.86). These findings are somewhat different from our prior understanding about Asian immigrant parent-adolescent communication quality. For example, Rhee et al. (2003) compared East Asian American and Caucasian adolescents’ communication with their parents and found that Asian American adolescents reported more difficulty discussing problems with their parents, and were more careful about what they say to their parents. Furthermore, they indicated that their parents tended to say things that would be better left unsaid. 45 Moreover, unlike prior findings from Asian immigrant family studies which claimed higher overall mother-adolescent communication quality over that of father-adolescent’s (e.g., Rhee et al., 2003), this study found no significant differences between overall father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication quality. Although adolescents reported that they feel significantly more relaxed, personal, and open when they communicated with mothers than with fathers, they experienced significantly less communication breakdowns with fathers than with mothers (see Table 4). Furthermore, the mean score of father-adolescent communication quality was higher than that of mother-adolescent communication for four of the nine quality items (items 3, 4, 5 and 8); adolescents reported that their fathers were better listeners, they communicated more in-depth, and with less breakdowns, and overall the communication was slightly smoother with fathers than with mothers. Asian students have reported lower communication quality particularly with their fathers. For example, in Rhee et al.’s study (2003), Asian students reported that their fathers were not good listeners, they are sometimes afraid of asking their fathers for what they want, and experienced more difficulty communicating with their fathers than their mothers. Current study sheds some positive lights to father-adolescent communication quality. Communication Challenges Language barriers. Korean American adolescents tended to switch Korean and English when they talked to their parents, while parents tended to speak Korean most of the time (see Table 1). Additionally, Korean American adolescents and parents reported moderate level of language barriers when they communicated in their non-native language (see Table 6). Lastly, adolescents reported that their mothers experience more language barrier than fathers do when 46 they communicate in English. This might be due to higher rate of fathers’ educational attainment in the U.S. compared to mothers (see Table 1). Cultural conflicts. Korean American adolescents in this study occasionally experienced cultural conflicts with their parents. This finding significantly differs from acculturation studies and numerous studies on Asian immigrant family literature. Literature in Asian immigrant families indicated that the conflicting values due to acculturation gaps between first-generation immigrant parents and their American born children is one of the most serious challenges Asian immigrant families (Kim, 1997; Min, 1995; Moon et al., 2001). This study, however, found little cultural conflicts between Korean American adolescents and their immigrant parents. Among all cultural conflict items, however, Korean American adolescents reported highest conflicts over the issue of autonomy and independence in their communication with parents. This finding is consistent with prior studies on the characteristics of adolescence: seeking independence and autonomy from parents. However, it is not clear whether frequent conflicts over the issue of independence and autonomy is caused by the cultural clash— conflicting cultural values of hierarchy versus yearning for independence enforced by the American culture (Qin, 2009; Sung, 1987)—or simply a developmental characteristics of adolescence. Overall, adolescents reported no significant differences in the level of cultural conflicts with fathers and mothers, except for gender expectations item. Adolescents reported significantly more conflicts with fathers than with mothers regarding gender expectations. Academic conflicts. Korean American adolescents reported moderate level of conflicts in their communication about academics with parents. Despite prior findings on overemphasis 47 and pressure for academic excellence, which leads to a high level of academic conflicts in parent-child communication (Qin, 2008; Qin, 2009; Lew, 2006), participants in this study indicated relatively little academic conflicts with their parents. In general, adolescents reported higher levels of academic conflicts in their communication with mothers than with fathers. Among the seven items, Korean American adolescents indicated that their mothers tend to compare them with others much more than fathers do. The contemporary Korean word ‘umchinah’: (엄친아) is “a shortened form of the Korean expression for “mother’s friend’s son”, which refers to the elusive competitor whom children always hear about but never meet, who succeeds at everything and to whom you are constantly, and always unfavorably compared to” (Umchinah, n.d.). As observed in this study, Korean mother’s tendency to compare their adolescent children with others seemed to cause conflicts in communication. Parents’ unavailability. Korean immigrant fathers in this study worked longer hours than mothers did; fathers on averaged worked 45.5 hours and mothers worked close to 23 hours weekly. Korean immigrant fathers in this study worked close to twice longer than Korean immigrant mothers, 1.3 times longer than average Americans, and even longer than average South Koreans (40.8 hours). Although the long work hours of Korean immigrant fathers were consistent with prior findings (e.g., Qin and colleagues, 2008), Korean mothers in our study did not work as much. Further analysis of the relationship between parents’ unavailability and communication practice was examined in the next section. 48 The Relationship between Quantity, Quality and Challenges The relationships between communication quantity, quality, and challenges were examined using series of path analyses: 1) communication quantity and quality, 2) communication challenges and communication quantity, and 3) communication quantity, challenges and quality. Communication quantity and quality. The relationship between communication quantity and quality was found in two parts using communication levels and topics as third variables in the path analyses. Results found general positive relationship between communication quantity and quality. Communication quantity, level and quality. Results indicated that as Korean American adolescents communicated longer with their parents, the quality of communication significantly improved for both father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication. However, when the five communication levels were added, the significant associations between communication length and communication quality disappeared and positive association between level 5 (open communication) and father-adolescent communication quality was found. In mother-adolescent communication, the significant association between communication length and quality also disappeared, however, level 1 (cliché communication), level 3 (discussing opinions and judgment), and level 5 (open communication) were positively correlated with communication quality. When adolescents had more frequent communication at many different levels with their mothers, they reported higher communication quality. Literature suggests gender differences in communication; women may develop intimacy by talking about topical problems and issues they communally face (Chodorow, 1989; Hartmann, 1991; Statham, 1987; 49 Surrey, 1983; Gray, 1992; Tannen, 1990). Yet, adolescents’ perceptions about the father-mother differences at various levels have not been examined. Adolescents may have different expectations about communication with fathers and mothers, which need further examination. Lastly, of the five levels, open communication was associated with communication quality in both father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication. This finding extends previous findings on the importance of open communication in parent-adolescent relationship. Open communication has been identified as an important communication quality in many prior studies (Wong, Wong, & Obeng, 2012; Updegraff, Madden-Derdich, Estrada, Sales, and Leonard, 2002). Particularly, Wong et al. (2012) discussed that “opportunities to communicate openly with parents by expressing one’s beliefs and ideas, learning to understand each other’s viewpoint, and discussing problems honestly have far-reaching benefits for youths in establishing close relationships both within and outside the family” (p. 294). Despite its importance, open communication is difficult and occurs less frequently as found in our study (see table 5). This is consistent with Qin’s study (2006), in which she noted “while most parents and children communicate relatively well around daily life topics (e.g., “It’s time for dinner”), the more meaningful and deeper personal communication becomes endangered” (p.172). A relatively lower frequency of open communication (compared to other levels) (see Table 5) supports the difficulty of communicating openly. Asian parents do not tend to express their feelings and affection in communication, nevertheless, findings from this study suggested a strong need for open communication between parents and adolescents. The current study also found that establishing an open environment to listen to each other and discuss personal issues together in an accepting manner also played a key role in increasing the parent-adolescent communication quantity (i.e., communication length). 50 Communication quantity, topics, and quality. Communication quantity was associated with communication quality before adding topics to the path analyses. However, when the six topics were added, the association between communication quantity and quality was significant in father-adolescent communication while it was not found significant in mother-adolescent communication. Although Asian family literature found that talking about all of these six topics are important, this study found specifically that talking about friends was associated with positive father-adolescent communication quality and dating/sexuality was positively associated with mother-adolescent communication quality. As Korean American adolescents spend more time with their parents in discussing these topics, the communication quality improved. Friends are crucial part of adolescents’ lives. Friends provide a sense of security for adolescents, as they begin to move from dependency to a more interdependent relationship with parents. According to Coleman (1980), friendship is a major contributing factor to the socialization of adolescents, and Berndt (1982) and Tesch (1983) argued that friendship establishes adolescents’ self-knowledge and self-definition. For Korean American adolescents to be able to talk frequently about friends with fathers certainly indicates potential for high communication quality. According to literature, discussion of dating and sexuality occurs rarely in Asian immigrant families (Qin, 2009). Discussion about dating and sexuality is often challenging due to discomfort and lack of knowledge (Guilamo-Ramos, et al., 2006; Jaccard, et al. 2000). Being able to frequently talk about these highly personal, but everyday issues with their parents can be indicators of high quality communication between parents and adolescents. Challenges and communication quantity. Although there have been numerous studies in Asian immigrant family literature which discussed challenges that Asian immigrant families 51 experience, this study is the first study that examined the effect size of each challenge on communication quantity. Of the four main communication challenges identified in Asian immigrant family studies, adolescents’ lack of Korean language fluency was the only challenge that was significantly associated with both father-adolescent and mother-adolescent communication quantity. Results found that the more fluently Korean American adolescents spoke the Korean language, the longer they communicated with their parents. In the demographic part of this study, adolescents reported Korean and English languages use at home with their fathers and mothers. Although adolescents tended to use both Korean and English to communicate with their parents, their parents communicated with their children in Korean language mainly (approximately 70-80% communication occurred in Korean language). (See Table 1). Therefore, adolescents’ lack of understanding in Korean language may have resulted in communication problems, which could have limited the duration of their communication. The non-significant links of other challenges: cultural conflicts, academic pressure, and parental work hours to communication quantity were unanticipated, as all of these were highlighted as major challenges experienced by Asian immigrant families. For example, literature on the acculturation discusses conflicting cultural orientations between immigrant parents and children, thereby leading to cultural distance and conflicts (Nguyen, Benet-Martinez, 2007). However, cultural conflicts was significantly correlated with communication quantity in this study. The low levels of cultural conflicts in father-adolescent (M=2.03) and motheradolescent communication (M=1.96) support this notion (see Table 6). As many of the sample’s parents completed their education in America, they may have had more chance to be exposed to and are more likely to be open about American culture than the average Asian immigrant 52 parents. The parents’ exposure to American culture may have led to better understanding and prevented cultural distancing and conflicts in their communication, thereby resulting in insignificant link to communication quantity. Similarly, although one of the most frequently discussed topic in Asian immigrant study has been high parental academic expectations and associated emotional distress, this study found no associations between the frequency of academic conflicts and communication quantity. Numerous previous findings (Qin, 2008; Choi, Meininger, & Roberts, 2006; Greene et al. 2006; Qin et al., 2009; Rhee et al. 2003) have specifically discussed Asian adolescents’ academic and emotional disparity, and problematized negative emotional and family outcomes, however, these studies did not particularly discuss the relationship between parent-adolescent academic conflicts and communication quantity. From the regression analysis, this study found also found that parental work hours had no significant association with communication quantity. Although Korean immigrant fathers on average worked long hours (see Table 14), they still communicated with their adolescents longer than fathers from other studies and adolescents reported general satisfaction with the length they communicated with their fathers. In other words, regardless of how busy parents were, and how long their work schedule was, it is not a significant factor that affects the time parents and adolescents actually spend communicating. This is a unique finding that rejects our prior knowledge and leads to further discussion. Prior studies and numerous articles published by media have pointed that less family time is caused by societal issues such as the increase of dualearner families and long parental work schedules. In those studies, parent’s unavailability due to long work hours was not significantly related to quantity. For example, Qin’s studies (2006; 2008) noted that long parental work hours limit the family time. Bianchi et al. (2010) also 53 pointed that “a father’s long work hours [specifically] was negatively associated with the breadth of activities he did with his children… less time with spouse… and less positive involvement with adolescent children” (p. 709). While busy schedules may have set limits on the time parents and adolescents can communicate, it doesn’t necessarily affect how much time parents actually spend time with their children. Relationship among communication challenges, quantity, and communication quality. Although academic conflicts were not correlated with communication quantity, it had significant negative link to communication quality in both father-adolescent and motheradolescent communication. As adolescents experienced more academic conflicts with parents, they reported lower communication quality. This finding supports prior findings about the negative link between high parental academic expectations and parent-adolescent communication difficulty (Qin, 2008; Qin, 2009; Louie, 2004). This finding also suggests that Asian parents’ tiger parenting (Chua, 2012)—a demanding parenting style that push children to high levels of achievement using methods thought of as typical childrearing practice in East Asia— may result in a low communication quality. Furthermore, it suggests a need for change in Asian parents’ educational paradigm about successful parenting: academic achievement does not reflect successful parenting, it may, in fact, cause problems in the parent-adolescent communication quality. Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Emotional Outcomes The four challenges alone (e.g., cultural conflicts, academic conflicts, language barriers, and parental work hours) was not directly associated with adolescents’ wellbeing. However, when the relationships among communication challenges, communication quantity, quality (e.g., ICR and the five communication levels) and adolescent’s wellbeing were examined, having an 54 open communication was associated with higher adolescent’ emotional wellbeing, specifically in mother-adolescent communication. This study supports prior finding about the importance of open communication on psychological wellbeing. For example, Qin (2008) found that a lack of open communication between parent and adolescent led to emotional frustrations among adolescents in emotionally distressed group. The importance of parent-adolescent open communication on adolescents’ emotional outcomes, therefore, has been confirmed by this study. Results from adolescents’ emotional wellbeing item analysis found that Korean American sample reported relatively little emotional struggles, compared to Asian American students in other studies. Although it is difficult to conclude why this group of Korean American adolescents reported higher level of wellbeing compared to samples in the previous studies, it could be due to the characteristic of current study’s sample. For example, the majority of the parents received a bachelor’s degree, and about half of fathers and a quarter of mothers received their highest education in the United States. The parental educational level and parental educational attainment in the US may have led to higher parental English proficiency, better understanding about American culture, and thereby causing relatively little conflicts and higher scores on adolescents’ emotional measure. Communication Practice and Adolescents’ Academic Outcomes This study found that when adolescent and father frequently reported facts (level 4 communication), it was positively associated with adolescent’s GPA. This finding emphasizes that the frequency of communication about factual information, which according to Powell does not involve communication at personal level, may impact adolescent’s academic outcomes. 55 However, it is unclear why level 4 communication particularly had significant association with adolescent’s GPA among the five levels of communication. This finding is also surprising as prior studies have mostly found Asian parents’ high academic expectations as a number one driving force for Asian students’ high academic performance (Fuligni, 1997; Chao & Tseng, 2002). However, this study did not find significant relationship between academic-related variables (e.g., frequency of academic conflicts, or frequency of communication about academics) and the academic outcome. One of the reasons why there was no link found between parents-adolescent communication and academic outcomes may be because of sample’s high academic standing (GPA). Such finding should be interpreted with caution. As most of the adolescents were high achievers with 80% having GPA over 3.5 and 94% having GPA over 3.0, this finding may not be applied to Korean adolescents with low GPA. Another reason may be due to the single measure used in this study: GPA. The use of other measures such as students’ scores on the SAT or ACT, academic motivation or satisfaction could have yielded different results. Limitations This study should be considered in light of several limitations. First, given the demographics of our data, our sample does not represent average Korean immigrant families. Therefore, it cannot be assumed that the findings in the current study are indicative of all Korean American adolescents. Our sample may have consisted of Korean American adolescents from families with relatively higher rates of parental educational attainment in the US, which may have influenced the intensity of language barriers and cultural gaps as well as overall communication practice differently from general Korean American adolescent population. 56 Additionally, since most Korean American adolescents in our study were high achievers, no significant relationship was found between communication and academic outcomes. Furthermore, as the sample came from Korean Christian church context, religion and faith may have influenced the family communication and overall adolescent outcomes. For example, Christian bible teaches that children need to respect, obey, and honor their father and mother (Exodus 20:12 New International Version). Not only that bible also teaches parents to not provoke the children, but bring them up in the training and admonition of God (Ephesians 6:4). This Christian principle may have influenced the parent-adolescent relationship and the way parents and adolescents communicate to each other. Moreover, as the Korean churches serve as an educational context for ethnic language learning and family counseling, our sample may have experienced relatively less language barriers and cultural conflicts than Korean American adolescents who do not attend church. The findings from this study, therefore, may not be generalizable to all Korean American adolescents and families. Another limitation is that all of the measures used were limited to adolescents’ selfreports on their communication practice, GPA and their emotional wellbeing. As the adolescent report was the only source of data, there was no other data to triangulate and cross-check the adolescents’ responses. Additionally, this study used subjective reports of GPA and emotional wellbeing, which may have led to over- or under-reporting (Alsharairi & Somerset, 2015). Lastly, although this study did not find meaningful associations between communication practices (i.e., communication quantity) and adolescents’ academic outcome (e.g., GPA), it does not necessarily indicate no association between family communication and adolescents’ academic development. For example, although communication practice was not associated with 57 academic outcome in this study, it may possibly be related to adolescents’ academic motivation or academic satisfaction. Future Directions Based on the above limitations, future studies should consider several aspects. First, future studies need to examine how immigrant families’ background (e.g., socioeconomic standing) affect different types of challenges, thereby leading to adolescents’ developmental outcomes. Future study should examine communication practice and its effects on adolescent outcomes using both low- and high-achieving samples and from various socioeconomic levels, in order to yield more generalizable data. Second, from developmental point of view, parent-adolescent communication changes based on the changes in the contexts and the developmental needs of children. For example, middle school to high school is a huge contextual and developmental transition. Life events or acute life changes (e.g., parental divorce) may also affect parent-adolescent communication practice. Therefore, it will be worthwhile to examine how the multiple aspects of communication (i.e., quantity, quality, challenges) evolve over time, and affect adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes. By examining the evolution of communication, we can better understand the process of communication, and how it is shaped. There is also a need for promoting more objective methodologies, which will allow triangulation of data, thereby adding more validity to participants’ responses. Therefore, future studies may use both adolescent and parents reports, and have the participants fill out communication records for a period of time to improve the accuracy of data. 58 Lastly, although no significant relationship between communication and adolescents’ academic outcome was found in this study, more research should examine the link between the communication and adolescents’ academic motivation, satisfaction, and different academic outcomes. Implications This study provides some insight on how Korean immigrant families communicate and how their communication practice is associated with adolescent academic and emotional outcomes. Based on the findings of this study, it seems imperative for professionals and practitioners to recognize the importance of communication within the family, especially during the period of adolescence. As open communication leads to positive quality communication and adolescent’s emotional wellbeing, nurturing more daily open conversations, in which parents and adolescents can freely share their daily lives, ideas, and emotions would be essential. Family educators and professionals should help promote open communication in Korean immigrant families by emphasizing this importance. They can teach parents how to communicate with adolescent children and organize parenting education programs. These practitioners can also help parents to understand that overemphasis on academics can lead to conflicts in communication, which in turn, lead to negative consequences in adolescent outcome. This study also adds significance to promoting ethnic language education for Americanborn children for Korean community. When adolescents can speak their ethnic language more fluently, they may feel more comfortable and likely to communicate longer with their parents, who predominantly speak their ethnic language. Failure to speak and understand ethnic language may lead to discomfort in communication and thereby lower communication quantity. Therefore, 59 the role of ethnic language educators in emphasizing and encouraging ethnic language learning among immigrant parents and adolescents is important. More importantly, this study provides an opportunity for Korean immigrant parents and their American-born adolescent children to reflect and improve their own communication. Findings from this study encourages Korean immigrant parents to reflect their existing parenting style (e.g., tiger parenting and overemphasis in academics), and be exposed to alternative parenting approaches (e.g., open communication). Lastly, findings from this study extends our understanding about parent-adolescent communication in Asian immigrant family literature. Although there is a statistical limitation to generalizability of current study’s findings on other Asian immigrant samples, some of the findings from this study align with prior empirical studies with Chinese and other Asian immigrant groups. Overall, my findings lend support to the importance of positive communication to understanding Korean immigrant families and possibly lead to further studies on communication practice in other Asian immigrant families. 60 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION The purpose of this study was to understand communication practice and highlight the importance of communication between parents and adolescents in Korean immigrant families. According to prior findings, Asian immigrant families face many challenges in their communication, which limit their communication quantity and quality. The quantity and quality of communication, then, leads to specific adolescent outcome. Drawn from this conceptual framework, this study focused on the relationships among communication quantity, quality, challenges, and how they influence adolescent’s academic and emotional outcomes using regression and path analyses. This study yielded four main findings about Korean immigrant parent-adolescent communication quantity, quality, challenges, and adolescents’ academic and emotional outcomes. First, open communication plays a key role in the parent-adolescent communication practice and adolescent emotional outcomes. There is a great benefit in having an opportunity to communicate openly with parents about their ideas, discuss problems and share feelings and emotions have great benefits. Although Asian parents tend to be indirect and rather not express their feelings and affection in communication, this study suggested a strong need for open communication between parents and adolescents. Another noteworthy finding was that parent-adolescent communication challenges in Asian immigrant families have been overly emphasized in the literature. Current study found that among the four identified communication challenges in Asian immigrant literature, only adolescent’s Korean fluency and the frequency of academic conflicts was negatively associated with communication quantity and communication quality, respectively. Conflicts over culture, 61 one of the most frequently studied challenges, for example, had no association with communication quantity and quality. Furthermore, no significant association was found between the four challenges and adolescent’s academic and emotional outcomes. Previous studies have exclusively focused on the conflicts that Asian immigrant families experience more than anything. For example, numerous studies have discussed a wide cultural gap between Asian immigrant parents and their American born children as obstacles in parentadolescent relationships. Based on this assumption, researchers have investigated the types of conflicts the Asian immigrant families face, and related outcomes. Therefore, questionnaires have been designed in a way that yielded negative responses based on the assumptions about weaknesses in Asian immigrant parenting. This limit participants’ opportunity to reflect on their family communication objectively and also limit our understanding in Asian immigrant family communication practice. Second, prior studies either did not examine multiple challenges in a single study or did not examine and compare the effect sizes. For example, Rhee et al. (2003) discussed acculturation as a challenge that negatively influenced parents-adolescent communication in Asian immigrant families, however, was not able to compare its effect size with other challenges. Qin’s study (2009) noted different types of challenges (e.g., lack of time spent with children, language barriers, and an acculturation gap) but did not find the degree to how much these challenges altogether affected the adolescent outcomes. In other words, while the language and cultural barriers may be obstacles in the parent-adolescent communication, whether these barriers, in fact, significantly influenced family communication and adolescent outcomes could not be found. Furthermore, parents should consider the balance in adolescents’ development. This study confirmed prior findings that Asian parents emphasize academics more than anything in 62 their communication with their children. Asian parents believe that it is their duty to discuss the value of education, guide, and sometimes push their children to achieve academic excellence. Nevertheless, the frequency of parent-adolescent communication over academic topics had no significant relationship with their academic outcome. Having high academic conflicts, in fact, was associated with low parent-adolescent communication quality and adolescents’ emotional wellbeing. Lastly, although this study found some positive communication quality with fathers (e.g., less communication breakdowns) and adolescent’s general satisfaction about father-adolescent communication quantity, mothers tended to communicate with their adolescents 1.6 times longer on daily basis, and more frequently on all topics and at all levels despite mothers’ lack of English fluency. This finding suggests more efforts from fathers in communication with their adolescent children. Communication is a complex bi-directional process that involves many aspects (e.g., communication quantity, quality, and challenges). Therefore, promoting a good parentadolescent communication is a difficult task that needs efforts on both sides. After all, a good parent-adolescent communication has far-reaching benefits on adolescent development and family dynamics. 63 APPENDICES 64 APPENDIX A: Parental Consent Form We are inviting your child to participate in a research study designed to help us understand parent-adolescent communication. The survey will take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete. If you agree to allow your child to participate in this study, we will ask your child to complete questionnaires designed to better understand his/her daily communication with you. In order to participate in this study, your child MUST be: · High school student · Second-generation Korean American · Primary language is English There are no known risks associated with participation in this study. There are no correct or incorrect answers, and your child’s participation is completely voluntary. Your child may decline to answer the questionnaire or may skip any items that he/she feels uncomfortable answering. All responses are confidential and your child’s privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. The data collected for this research study will be protected on a passwordprotected computer of the investigators for a minimum of three years after the close of the project. Only the appointed researchers and the Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) will have access to the research data. Your child will not directly benefit from his/her participation in this study. However, his/her participation in this study may contribute to the understanding of parent-adolescent communication in Korean immigrant families. Upon the completion of survey, your child will receive $5 gift certificate via email. If you have any concerns or questions about this research study, such as scientific issues, or how to do any part of it, please contact the following investigators: • Dr. Chin-Hsi Lin, project investigator, 513A Erickson Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824. chinhsi@msu.edu (517) 353-5400. 65 • Catalina Park, secondary investigator, Erickson Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824. parkji9@msu.edu (651) 347-9799. If you have any questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, would like to obtain information or offer input, or would like to register a complaint or injury about this research study, you may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Michigan State University Human Research Protection Program at 517-355-2180, FAX 517-432-4503, or e-mail irb@msu.edu, or regular mail at: 207 Olds, East Lansing, MI 48824. By clicking the “I Agree” button, you mark your consent to have your child to participate and confirm that you are a parent of the child. 66 APPENDIX B: Adolescent Assent Form We are inviting you to participate in a research study designed to help us understand parentadolescent communication. The survey will take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete. If you agree to participate in this study, we will ask you to complete questionnaires designed to better understand your daily communication with your parents. In order to participate in this study, you MUST be: · High school student · Second-generation Korean American · Primary language is English There are no known risks associated with participation in this study. There are no correct or incorrect answers, and your participation is completely voluntary. You may decline to answer the questionnaire or may skip any items that you feel uncomfortable answering. All responses are confidential and your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. The data collected for this research study will be protected on a password-protected computer of the investigators for a minimum of three years after the close of the project. Only the appointed researchers and the Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) will have access to the research data. You will not directly benefit from your participation in this study. However, your participation in this study may contribute to the understanding of parent-adolescent communication in Korean immigrant families. Upon the completion of survey, you will receive $5 gift certificate via email. If you have any concerns or questions about this research study, such as scientific issues, or how to do any part of it, please contact the following investigators: • Dr. Chin-Hsi Lin, project investigator, 513A Erickson Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824. chinhsi@msu.edu (517) 353-5400. 67 • Catalina Park, secondary investigator, Erickson Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824. parkji9@msu.edu (651) 347-9799. If you have any questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, would like to obtain information or offer input, or would like to register a complaint or injury about this research study, you may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Michigan State University Human Research Protection Program at 517-355-2180, FAX 517-432-4503, or e-mail irb@msu.edu, or regular mail at: 207 Olds, East Lansing, MI 48824. Your time, insights, and perceptions are valuable resources. Thank you for sharing them! By clicking the “I Agree” button below, you mark your consent to participate in this study. 68 APPENDIX C: Survey Demographics 1. What is your gender? a. Male b. Female 2. Your zipcode (Example: 60034): __________________ 3. Grade a. b. c. d. 9th Grade 10th Grade 11th Grade 12th Grade 4. What is your current cumulative GPA? a. Below 2.5 b. 2.6-3.0 c. 3.1-3.5 d. 3.6-4.0 e. 4.1 or Higher 5. What is your current cumulative GPA? a. 0 b. 1 c. 2 d. 3 e. 4 or more 6. Father’s occupation a. Production, transportation, and material moving occupations b. Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations c. Sales and office occupations d. Service occupations e. Management, business, science, and arts occupations f. Currently unemployed g. Others (Please specify): _________________ 7. Please indicate how many hours your father works for each day (If your father works from 8am to 12:30pm, it is 4.5 hours, then write "4.5" in the box) a. Monday: ___________ hours b. Tuesday: ___________ hours c. Wednesday: ___________ hours 69 d. e. f. g. h. Thursday: ___________ hours Friday: ___________ hours Saturday: ___________ hours Sunday: ___________ hours Total: ____________ hours 8. Please indicate your father's highest level of education a. High School/GED b. Some College c. Bachelor's Degree d. Master's Degree e. Ph.D. or equivalent professional degree f. Not Sure 9. Where was his degree obtained? a. Korea b. America c. Other Country Don't know 10. Mother’s Occupation h. Production, transportation, and material moving occupations i. Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations j. Sales and office occupations k. Service occupations l. Management, business, science, and arts occupations m. Currently unemployed n. Others (Please specify): _________________ 11. Please indicate how many hours your mother works for each day (If your father works from 8am to 12:30pm, it is 4.5 hours, then write "4.5" in the box) i. Monday: ___________ hours j. Tuesday: ___________ hours k. Wednesday: ___________ hours l. Thursday: ___________ hours m. Friday: ___________ hours n. Saturday: ___________ hours o. Sunday: ___________ hours p. Total: ____________ hours 12. Please indicate your mother's highest level of education g. High School/GED h. Some College i. Bachelor's Degree j. Master's Degree 70 k. Ph.D. or equivalent professional degree l. Not Sure 13. Where was her degree obtained? d. Korea e. America f. Other Country g. Don't know 14. When you talk to your parents at home, how much Korean and English do you use? (Example: Korean: 30, English: 70) a. Adolescents: Korean :________% English:________% b. Parents: Korean :________% English:________% 15. How fluent are you in Korean language? a. Not at all b. Beginner c. Intermediate d. Advanced e. Fluent 16. When your father talks to you at home, how much Korean and English does your father use? Korean : ________% English: ________% 17. When your mother talks to you at home, how much Korean and English does your mother use? Korean : ________% 18. How well does your father speak English? a. Not at all b. Beginner c. Intermediate d. Advanced e. Fluent 19. How well does your mother speak English? a. Not at all b. Beginner c. Intermediate d. Advanced e. Fluent 71 English: ________% FREQUENCY OF COMMUNICATION Using the below scales, rate your experiences of communication with your father and mother. Please answer the questions honestly. There are no right or wrong answers. The scale ranges from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). 1 Never 2 3 4 5 Rarely Sometimes Often Always 20. My father and I talk about… a. Basic needs (i.e., food) b. Academics (grade, homework) c. Friends d. Dating and sexuality e. Korean culture and value f. Religion and faith g. Others (Please specify): ________________ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 21. My father and I… a. Greet each other (Insa: 인사) b. Talk about hobbies and interests c. Ask for advices and opinions d. Share feelings and emotions e. Talk completely open and out-front about anything 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 22. My mother and I talk about… a. Basic needs (i.e., food) b. Academics (grade, homework) c. Friends d. Dating and sexuality e. Korean culture and value f. Religion and faith g. Others (Please specify): ________________ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 23. My mother and I… a. Greet each other (Insa: 인사) b. Talk about hobbies and interests c. Ask for advices and opinions d. Share feelings and emotions e. Talk completely open and out-front about anything 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 72 LENGTH OF COMMUNICATION 24. On average, how much time do you talk daily (Monday-Friday) with your father? a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. Never Less than 5 minutes 5-10 minutes 10-20 minutes 20-30 minutes 30-45 minutes 45-60 minutes 1-1.5 hours 1.5-2 hours More than 2 hours 25. How much time do you talk on weekends with your father? a. Never b. Less than 5 minutes c. 5-10 minutes d. 10-20 minutes e. 20-30 minutes f. 30-45 minutes g. 45-60 minutes h. 1-1.5 hours i. 1.5-2 hours j. More than 2 hours 26. Do you think time you spent with your father is enough? 1 Too little 2 3 Just right 4 5 Too much 27. How much time do you wish to talk with your father daily? a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. Never Less than 5 minutes 5-10 minutes 10-20 minutes 20-30 minutes 30-45 minutes 45-60 minutes 1-1.5 hours 1.5-2 hours More than 2 hours 28. On average, how much time do you talk daily (Monday-Friday) with your mother? a. Never 73 b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. Less than 5 minutes 5-10 minutes 10-20 minutes 20-30 minutes 30-45 minutes 45-60 minutes 1-1.5 hours 1.5-2 hours More than 2 hours 29. How much time do you talk on weekends with your mother? a. Never b. Less than 5 minutes c. 5-10 minutes d. 10-20 minutes e. 20-30 minutes f. 30-45 minutes g. 45-60 minutes h. 1-1.5 hours i. 1.5-2 hours j. More than 2 hours 30. Do you think time you spent with your mother is enough? 1 Too little 2 3 Just right 4 5 Too much 31. How much time do you wish to talk with your mother daily? a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. Never Less than 5 minutes 5-10 minutes 10-20 minutes 20-30 minutes 30-45 minutes 45-60 minutes 1-1.5 hours 1.5-2 hours More than 2 hours 74 PARENT ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION QUALITY 32. Describe the quality of recent communication with your father: a. Relaxed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Strained b. Impersonal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Personal c. Attentive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor Listening d. Formal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Informal e. In-depth 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Superficial f. Smooth 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Difficult g. Guarded 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Open h. Great Deal of Understanding 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Great Deal of Misunderstanding i. Free of Communicatio n Breakdowns 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A lot of Communication Breakdowns j. Free of Conflicts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A lot of Conflicts 33. Describe the quality of recent communication with your mother: a. Relaxed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Strained b. Impersonal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Personal c. Attentive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor Listening d. Formal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Informal 75 e. In-depth 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Superficial f. Smooth 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Difficult g. Guarded 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Open h. Great Deal of Understanding 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Great Deal of Misunderstanding i. Free of Communication Breakdowns 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A lot of Communication Breakdowns j. Free of Conflicts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A lot of Conflicts Communication Challenges Using the below scales, rate your experiences of communication challenges with your parents. The scale ranges from 1 (no conflicts over this issue) to 5 (a lot of conflicts over this issue). 1 No conflict over this issue 2 3 4 Some conflicts 5 A lot of Conflicts over this issue 34. Conflicts with Father: Cultural Expectations a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. Your desire for greater independence and autonomy Following cultural traditions Pressure to learn one’s own Asian language Expectations based on being male or female Expectations based on birth order Family relationships being too close Family relationships being too distant How much time to spend with the family 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 35. Conflicts with Father: Education and Career a. b. c. d. e. How much time to spend on studying Importance of academic achievement Emphasis on success Which school to attend What to major in college 76 f. Which career to pursue g. Being compared to others 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 36. Conflicts with Mother: Cultural Expectations a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. Your desire for greater independence and autonomy Following cultural traditions Pressure to learn one’s own Asian language Expectations based on being male or female Expectations based on birth order Family relationships being too close Family relationships being too distant How much time to spend with the family 37. Conflicts with Mother: Education and Career a. b. c. d. e. f. g. How much time to spend on studying Importance of academic achievement Emphasis on success Which school to attend What to major in college Which career to pursue Being compared to others WELL-BEING SCALE 38. Please indicate how you have generally been feeling in the last two months. The scale ranges from 1 (None of the time) to 5 (All the time). 1 2 3 None of the time Rarely Some of the time a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. 4 I've been feeling optimistic about the future. I've been feeling useful. I've been feeling relaxed. I've been feeling interested in other people. I've had energy to spare. I've been dealing with problems well. I've been thinking clearly. I’ve been feeling good about myself 77 5 Often 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 All the time 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 i. I’ve been feeling close to other people. j. I’ve been feeling confident. k. I’ve been able to make up my own mind about things. l. I’ve been feeling loved. m. I’ve been interested in new things. n. I’ve been feeling cheerful. 78 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 APPENDIX D: Tables Table 1. Demographic Descriptive Mean 0.46 SD 0.50 Min 0 Max 1 0.54 0.29 0.50 0.45 0 0 1 1 Grade: 9th grade 10th grade 11th grade 12th grade 0.20 0.34 0.18 0.40 0.48 0.38 0 0 0 1 1 1 GPA: Below 2.5 2.6-3.0 3.1-3.5 3.6-4.0 4.1 or Higher Mean GPA 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.38 0.43 3.87 0.16 0.16 0.35 0.49 0.50 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 4.3 0.07 0.26 0 1 0.04 0.19 0 1 0.17 0.38 0 1 0.05 0.41 0.23 0.49 0 0 1 1 0.04 0.22 0.19 0 0 1 1 0.05 0.12 0.33 0.24 0.23 0.32 0.47 0.43 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Gender: Male Female Father's occupation: Production, transportation, and material moving occupations Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations Sales and office occupations Service occupations Management, business, science, and arts occupations Unemployed Other occupations Father's years of education: 12 years (HS completion) 14 years (Some college) 16 years (Bachelor's) 18 years (Master's degree) 79 Table 1 (cont’d) 23 years (PhD or equivalent) 16.6 years (Not sure) Mean years of education 0.14 0.35 0 1 0.12 17.11 0.32 2.86 0 12 1 23 Father’s highest degree obtained in: Korea America Other country Not sure 0.44 0.49 0.01 0.06 0.50 0.50 0.09 0.24 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0.01 0.09 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.14 0.35 0 1 0.14 0.19 0.39 0.49 0 0 1 1 0.38 0.14 0.35 0 0 1 1 0.10 0.30 0 1 Mother's occupation: Production, transportation, and material moving occupations Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations Sales and office occupations Service occupations Management, business, science, and arts occupations Unemployed Other occupations Mother's years of education: 12 years (HS completion) 14 years (Some college) 16 years (Bachelor's) 18 years (Master's degree) 23 years (PhD or equivalent) 16.6 years (Not sure) Mean years of education 0.15 0.44 0.18 0.02 0.36 0.50 0.38 0.13 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0.12 15.86 0.32 1.96 0 12 1 23 Mother’s highest degree obtained in: Korea America Other country 0.66 0.24 0.01 0.48 0.43 0.09 0 0 0 1 1 1 80 Table 1 (cont’d) Not sure 0.09 Adolescents’ language use at home: Korean (%) English (%) 0.29 0 1 0.51 0.49 0 0 1 1 Fathers’ language use: Korean (%) English (%) 0.68 0.32 0 0 1 1 Mothers’ language use: Korean (%) English (%) Observations 0.77 0.23 112 0 0 1 1 81 Table 2. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Quantity between Adolescents and Parents Father M 39.35 54.22 Mother SD 38.85 45.20 M 71.25 76.32 SD 48.10 48.58 t-test -10.22*** -6.47*** p 0.000 0.000 Weekday Weekend Adolescentfather Communication -5.60*** 0.000 Length: Weekday vs. Weekend Adolescentmother Communication -2.13* 0.036 Length: Weekday vs. Weekend Weekly communication 46.79 39.73 73.78 46.67 -8.32*** 0.000 length How much time wish to 49.96 43.54 71.43 49.16 -6.88*** 0.000 communicate Was time spent 2.47 0.84 2.95 0.78 -5.50*** 0.000 enough Observations 112 * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Communication length is in minutes. Was time spent enough ranges from 1 (Too little) to 5 (Too much). 82 Table 3. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Frequency of Topics between Adolescents and Parents Father M 3.67 3.57 2.97 3.16 2.80 2.07 Mother SD 1.03 1.03 0.97 1.04 1.32 0.99 M 4.16 4.14 3.73 3.37 3.24 2.56 SD 0.92 1.06 0.99 1.02 1.15 1.21 Academics Basic needs Friends Korean culture Religion/faith Dating/sexuality Mean frequency 3.04 0.66 3.53 0.65 by topic Observations 112 * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Communication frequency ranges from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). 83 t-test -4.60*** -6.27*** -7.47*** -1.86 -4.42*** -4.41*** p 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.066 0.000 0.000 -7.715*** 0.000 Table 4. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Quality between Adolescents and Parents Father M 5.42 Mother M SD 7.01 2.06 SD 2.13 t-test -6.19*** p 0.000 1. Strained: relaxed 2. Impersonal: 4.73 1.99 5.35 2.46 -2.72** 0.008 personal 3. Poor listening: 6.35 2.07 5.90 2.01 1.91 0.059 attentive 4. Superficial: in5.69 1.95 5.35 1.95 1.61 0.111 depth 5. Difficult: smooth 5.77 2.13 5.72 2.08 0.17 0.862 6. Guarded: open 5.14 2.13 5.70 2.47 -2.57* 0.011 7. Misunderstanding: 5.75 2.10 6.23 2.21 -1.90 0.060 understanding 8. Communication breakdowns: free 5.85 2.10 5.37 2.00 2.18* 0.031 of breakdowns 9. A lot of conflicts: 5.70 2.25 6.15 2.14 -1.92 0.058 free of conflicts Mean quality 5.60 1.42 5.86 1.59 -1.45 0.149 Observations 112 112 * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 Communication quality ranges from 1 to 9 in from negative to positive communication quality. 7 of 9 items (#1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10) were reverse coded. 84 Table 5. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of Communication Frequency by Level between Adolescents and Parents Father M 4.14 Mother SD 1.15 M 4.30 SD 1.10 Level 5: Cliché Level 4: Report 3.23 0.95 3.71 1.10 facts about others Level 3: Talk about 3.33 1.04 3.71 1.05 opinions/decisions Level 2: Share 2.63 1.22 3.53 1.21 feelings/emotions Level 1: Open 2.81 1.24 3.44 1.22 Communication Observations 112 * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Communication frequency ranges from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). 85 t-test -2.16* p 0.033 -4.74*** 0.000 -3.48*** 0.0007 -7.41*** 0.000 -5.41*** 0.000 Table 6. Summary and Paired Sample T-Test of the Four Communication Challenges between Adolescents and Parents Language Barrier: Adolescents’ Korean barrier: Parents’ English barrier: Cultural Conflicts: Desire for independence Following Korean culture Pressure to learn Korean Gender expectations Birth order expectations Family relationship too close How much time to spend with family Composite score Cronbach’s Alpha Academic Conflicts: Study time Importance of academics Emphasis on success College to attend Major in college Career to pursue Compared to others Composite score Cronbach’s Alpha Father M SD Mother M SD T-test p-value 2.67 1.09 2.30 1.19 2.62 1.09 -2.86** 0.005 2.28 1.06 2.36 1.17 -0.83 0.41 2.04 1.24 1.97 1.17 0.62 0.54 1.96 1.10 1.96 1.20 0.00 1.00 2.05 1.29 1.70 1.05 3.58*** 0.000 2.12 1.32 1.98 1.15 1.62 0.11 1.63 0.98 1.69 1.00 -0.87 0.39 2.13 1.15 2.08 1.20 0.47 0.64 2.03 .822 0.81 1.96 0.82 .929 1.26 0.210 2.66 1.37 3.02 1.25 -3.15** 0.002 2.85 1.39 2.95 1.37 -0.91 0.363 2.84 1.41 3.01 1.40 -1.50 0.137 2.72 2.25 2.28 2.38 2.57 .847 1.34 1.22 1.28 1.34 1.12 2.82 2.50 2.61 2.91 2.83 .943 1.43 1.47 1.38 1.40 1.20 -0.83 -2.13* -3.08** -3.91*** -3.06** 0.408 0.035 0.002 0.000 0.003 86 Table 6 (cont’d) Average Work Hours: On Weekdays 7.95 2.69 3.98 4.12 On Weekends 3.17 3.40 1.70 2.81 Weekly Total Work 45.55 16.94 22.85 24.14 8.52*** 0.000 Hours Observations 112 * ** *** p < 0.05, p < 0.01, p < 0.001. Adolescents’ Korean language barrier and parents’ English language barrier ranges from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Fluent). Cultural and academic challenges range from 1 (no conflicts over this issue) to 5 (A lot of conflicts over this issue). Daily and weekly work hours are in hours. 87 Table 7. Summary of Adolescents’ Emotional Wellbeing M 3.28 SD 1.08 Min 1 Feeling optimistic about future Feeling useful 3.21 0.96 1 Feeling relaxed 2.85 1.05 1 Feeling interested in 3.36 1.03 1 others Energy to spare 2.92 1.04 1 Dealing problems well 3.13 0.92 1 Thinking clearly 3.21 0.96 1 Feeling good about self 3.04 1.00 1 Feeling close to others 3.37 1.02 1 Feeling confident 3.13 1.00 1 Making up own mind 3.41 0.98 1 about things Feeling loved 3.61 1.03 1 Interested in new things 3.39 1.03 1 Feeling cheerful 3.28 1.02 1 Composite score 3.23 0.71 1 Observations 112 Wellbeing scale ranges from 1 (None of the time) to 5 (All the time). 88 Max 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Table 8. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Fathers Gender Father's Years of Education Communication quality with father Model 1 0.04 (0.44) 0.08 Communication quality with father Model 2 0.05 (0.56) 0.11 Communication quality with father Model 3 0.07 (0.81) 0.08 (0.84) (1.25) 0.48*** (0.91) 0.19 (5.66) (1.73) 0.15 (1.72) -0.08 Weekly communication length with father Level 5: Cliché Level 4: Report facts about others (-0.71) 0.13 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (1.25) 0.12 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions Level 1: Open Observations 112 112 R2 0.008 0.235 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 89 (1.06) 0.30** (2.66) 112 0.369 Table 9. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Mothers Gender Mother's Years of Education Communication quality with mother Model 1 0.17 (1.80) 0.05 Communication quality with mother Model 2 0.15 (1.76) 0.11 Communication quality with mother Model 3 -0.04 (-0.47) 0.08 (0.50) (1.22) 0.38*** (1.01) 0.01 (4.34) (0.10) 0.18* (2.13) 0.05 Weekly communication length with mother Level 5: Cliché Level 4: Report facts about others (0.44) 0.38** Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (2.98) 0.05 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions Level 1: Open Observations 112 112 2 R 0.140 0.175 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 90 (0.40) 0.23* (2.30) 112 0.477 Table 10. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Topics and Communication Quality for Fathers Gender Father's Years of Education Communication quality with father Model 1 0.04 (0.44) 0.08 Communication quality with father Model 2 0.05 (0.56) 0.11 Communication quality with father Model 3 0.05 (0.62) 0.03 (0.84) (1.25) 0.48*** (0.38) 0.33** (5.66) (3.36) -0.03 (-0.35) 0.09 (0.91) 0.25* (2.16) -0.08 (-0.69) 0.05 (0.49) 0.12 (1.32) 112 0.312 Weekly communication length with father Basic Need Academic Friends Dating/Sexuality Korean Culture Religion/Faith Observations 112 112 2 R 0.008 0.235 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 91 Table 11. Relationship among Communication Quantity, Topics and Communication Quality for Mothers Gender Mother's Years of Education Communication quality with mother Model 1 0.17 (1.80) 0.05 Communication quality with mother Model 2 0.15 (1.76) 0.11 Communication quality with mother Model 3 0.08 (0.91) 0.05 (0.50) (1.22) 0.38*** (0.57) 0.19 (4.34) (1.91) -0.05 (-0.46) 0.17 (1.71) 0.09 (0.80) 0.27* (2.49) 0.08 (0.76) -0.09 (-0.97) 112 0.294 Weekly communication length with mother Basic Need Academic Friends Dating/Sexuality Korean Culture Religion/Faith Observations 112 112 R2 0.031 0.175 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 92 Table 12. Relationship between Communication Challenges and Communication Quantity Communication Length with Father b SE t p Cultural -1.79 5.94 -0.30 conflicts Academic -2.60 4.23 -0.61 conflicts Adolescent’s Korean -9.05 3.69 -2.45* language barrier Parents’ English -4.98 3.41 -1.46 fluency Weekly -1.33 1.58 -0.84 work hours Observations 112 * ** *** p < 0.05, p < 0.01, p < 0.001 Communication Length with Mother b SE t p 0.764 -9.52 6.61 -1.44 0.153 0.541 4.27 4.63 0.92 0.359 0.016 -9.99 4.25 -2.35* 0.021 0.147 -5.33 4.28 -1.24 0.216 0.402 -1.89 1.25 -1.51 0.133 112 93 Table 13. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Fathers Gender Father's Years of Education Cultural conflict with father Academic conflict with father Adolescent Korean language barrier Father's English language barrier Father's work hours Communication quality with father Model 1 -0.01 (-0.06) 0.04 Communication quality with father Model 2 0.01 (0.07) 0.09 Communication quality with father Model 3 0.01 (0.12) 0.04 (0.48) -0.09 (1.10) -0.07 (0.52) -0.07 (-0.79) -0.34** (-0.67) -0.31** (-0.67) -0.30** (-2.96) -0.15 (-3.01) -0.04 (-3.08) -0.06 (-1.55) -0.09 (-0.47) -0.01 (-0.68) -0.01 (-0.87) 0.06 (0.65) (-0.15) 0.10 (1.23) 0.43*** (-0.17) 0.11 (1.37) 0.14 (5.18) (1.28) 0.09 (1.14) -0.02 Weekly communication length with father Level 5: Cliché Level 4: Report facts about others (-0.20) 0.18 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (1.83) 0.07 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions Level 1: Open Observations 112 112 2 R 0.189 0.357 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 94 (0.60) 0.27* (2.56) 112 0.476 Table 14. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity, Levels and Communication Quality with Mothers Gender Mother's Years of Education Cultural conflict with mother Academic conflict with mother Adolescent Korean language barrier Mother's English language barrier Mother's work hours Communication quality with mother Model 1 0.12 (1.35) -0.05 Communication quality with mother Model 2 0.11 (1.31) 0.02 Communication quality with mother Model 3 -0.07 (-0.89) 0.01 (-0.57) -0.07 (0.22) -0.00 (0.13) -0.11 (-0.59) -0.30* (-0.01) -0.33** (-1.26) -0.23* (-2.59) -0.12 (-3.03) -0.04 (-2.54) 0.04 (-1.24) -0.10 (-0.44) -0.04 (0.54) 0.10 (-0.97) -0.02 (-0.26) (-0.38) 0.03 (0.33) 0.35*** (1.19) -0.01 (-0.15) -0.01 (3.87) (-0.08) 0.11 (1.39) 0.12 Weekly communication length with mother Level 5: Cliché Level 4: Report facts about others (0.99) 0.28* Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (2.22) 0.08 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions Level 1: Open Observations 112 112 R2 0.178 0.282 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 95 (0.65) 0.29** (2.95) 112 0.559 Table 15. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity (i.e., general communication length), Quality, Levels and Emotional Wellbeing Gender Father’s Years of Education Mother’s Years of Education Cultural Conflict with Father Cultural Conflict with Mother Adolescent Korean Language Fluency Father’s English Fluency Mother’s English Fluency Father’s Work Hours Mother’s Work Hours Weekly Communication Length with Father Weekly Communication Length with Mother Wellbeing Model 1 -0.08 (-0.87) -0.11 Wellbeing Model 2 -0.08 (-0.90) -0.08 Wellbeing Model 3 -0.12 (-1.33) -0.11 Wellbeing Model 4 -0.19 (-1.90) -0.10 (-0.71) -0.14 (-0.57) -0.18 (-0.71) -0.03 (-0.65) -0.07 (-0.96) -0.08 (-1.22) -0.11 (-0.19) -0.03 (-0.44) -0.03 (-0.47) 0.18 (-0.71) 0.25 (-0.20) 0.20 (-0.19) 0.08 (1.12) -0.05 (1.59) -0.12 (1.30) -0.12 (0.47) -0.19 (-0.43) -0.07 (-1.12) -0.09 (-1.15) -0.05 (-1.79) -0.04 (-0.58) 0.11 (-0.79) 0.09 (-0.45) 0.07 (-0.31) -0.02 (0.99) -0.14 (-1.43) -0.08 (0.81) -0.13 (-1.31) -0.04 (0.68) -0.14 (-1.57) -0.01 (-0.18) -0.11 (-1.13) -0.04 (-0.83) (-0.46) 0.17 (-0.10) 0.08 (-0.40) 0.05 (1.33) 0.14 (0.56) 0.06 (0.28) -0.02 (1.07) (0.44) 0.25* (-0.11) 0.20 (2.17) 0.23* (1.54) -0.04 (2.12) (-0.30) Communication Quality with Father Communication Quality with Mother 96 Table 15 (cont’d) Level 5: Cliché (Father) -0.01 (-0.06) 0.14 Level 5: Cliché (Mother) (0.92) -0.07 Level 4: Report facts about others (Father) (-0.49) -0.05 Level 4: Report facts about others (Mother) (-0.29) 0.07 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (Father) (0.49) 0.16 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (Mother) (0.92) 0.06 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions (Father) (0.43) -0.04 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions (Mother) (-0.26) -0.18 Level 1: Open (Father) (-1.23) 0.44** Level 1: Open (Mother) Observations 112 112 2 R 0.107 0.179 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 97 112 0.259 (2.94) 112 0.362 Table 16. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity (i.e., general communication length), Quality, Levels and Academic Outcome Gender Father’s Years of Education Mother’s Years of Education Cultural Conflict with Father Cultural Conflict with Mother Adolescent Korean Language Fluency Father’s English Fluency Mother’s English Fluency Father’s Work Hours Mother’s Work Hours Weekly Communication Length with Father Weekly Communication Length with Mother GPA Model 1 0.15 (1.54) 0.14 GPA Model 2 0.16 (1.63) 0.13 GPA Model 3 0.15 (1.52) 0.06 GPA Model 4 0.14 (1.27) 0.03 (0.91) -0.17 (0.85) -0.16 (0.34) -0.12 (0.17) -0.04 (-1.17) 0.03 (-1.04) 0.03 (-0.73) -0.00 (-0.26) -0.03 (0.19) -0.22 (0.20) -0.21 (-0.02) -0.16 (-0.15) -0.10 (-1.33) 0.01 (-1.28) 0.01 (-0.93) 0.01 (-0.55) 0.03 (0.09) 0.02 (0.05) 0.00 (0.11) 0.02 (0.24) 0.05 (0.17) -0.08 (0.02) -0.07 (0.19) -0.08 (0.40) -0.06 (-0.73) -0.03 (-0.33) -0.09 (-0.59) -0.02 (-0.25) -0.09 (-0.66) -0.01 (-0.10) -0.10 (-0.45) 0.04 (0.33) -0.09 (-0.92) (-0.89) 0.19 (-1.00) 0.27 (-0.85) 0.23 (1.40) -0.15 (1.79) -0.20 (1.30) -0.28 (-1.11) (-1.38) -0.14 (-1.68) -0.19 (-1.12) 0.09 (-1.28) 0.17 (0.75) (1.05) Communication Quality with Father Communication Quality with Mother 98 Table 16 (cont’d) Level 5: Cliché Communication (Father) 0.05 (0.33) 0.01 Level 5: Cliché Communication (Mother) (0.09) 0.34* Level 4: Report facts about others (Father) (2.01) -0.10 Level 4: Report facts about others (Mother) (-0.51) -0.17 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (Father) (-1.10) 0.26 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (Mother) (1.34) 0.06 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions (Father) (0.37) -0.15 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions (Mother) (-0.85) 0.01 Level 1: Open Communication (Father) (0.03) -0.14 Level 1: Open Communication (Mother) Observations 112 112 R2 0.104 0.122 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 99 112 0.136 (-0.82) 112 0.214 Table 17. Relationship among Communication Challenges, Quantity (i.e., frequency of communication about academics), Quality, Levels and Academic Outcome Gender Father’s Years of Education Mother’s Years of Education Cultural Conflict with Father Cultural Conflict with Mother Adolescent Korean Language Fluency Father’s English Fluency Mother’s English Fluency Father’s Work Hours Mother’s Work Hours Frequency of Communication about Academics (Father) Frequency of Communication about Academics (Mother) GPA Model 1 0.15 (1.54) 0.14 GPA Model 2 0.16 (1.64) 0.06 GPA Model 3 0.16 (1.61) -0.01 GPA Model 4 0.21 (1.78) -0.03 (0.91) -0.17 (0.39) -0.15 (-0.06) -0.12 (-0.15) -0.10 (-1.17) 0.03 (-0.92) 0.05 (-0.72) 0.03 (-0.52) -0.02 (0.19) -0.22 (0.33) -0.22 (0.18) -0.18 (-0.14) -0.07 (-1.33) 0.01 (-1.29) 0.00 (-1.07) 0.01 (-0.36) 0.03 (0.09) 0.02 (0.04) -0.01 (0.14) -0.00 (0.30) 0.02 (0.17) -0.08 (-0.07) -0.07 (-0.02) -0.08 (0.16) -0.05 (-0.73) -0.03 (-0.33) -0.09 (-0.66) -0.02 (-0.25) -0.07 (-0.68) -0.01 (-0.14) -0.08 (-0.36) 0.03 (0.31) -0.04 (-0.92) (-0.68) 0.15 (-0.78) 0.20 (-0.38) 0.20 (1.30) 0.00 (1.61) -0.01 (1.38) 0.06 (0.01) (-0.05) -0.13 (0.43) -0.25 (-1.11) (-1.63) Communication Quality with Father 100 Table 17 (cont’d) Communication Quality with Mother 0.04 0.16 (0.33) (1.04) 0.06 Level 5: Cliché Communication (Father) (0.37) -0.01 Level 5: Cliché Communication (Mother) (-0.07) 0.31 Level 4: Report facts about others (Father) (1.83) -0.17 Level 4: Report facts about others (Mother) (-0.87) -0.18 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (Father) (-1.14) 0.17 Level 3: Talk about opinions/decisions (Mother) (0.87) 0.10 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions (Father) (0.64) -0.19 Level 2: Share feelings/emotions (Mother) (-1.01) 0.06 Level 1: Open Communication (Father) (0.38) -0.13 Level 1: Open Communication (Mother) Observations R2 112 0.104 112 0.123 Standardized beta coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 101 112 0.134 (-0.76) 112 0.212 REFERENCES 102 REFERENCES Ackard, D. M., Neumark-Sztainer, D., Story, M., & Perry, C. (2006). Parent-child connectedness and behavioral and emotional health among adolescents. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 30, 59-66. Alsharairi, N.A., & Somerset, S.M. (2015). Associations between parenting styles and children’s fruit and vegetable intake. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 54, 93. Barnes, F. (1993). Washington diarist: Quantity time. The New Republic, 209(2), 42. Barnes, G. M., Farrell, M. P, & Banerjee, S. (1994). Family influences on alcohol abuse and other problem behaviors among black and white adolescents in a general population sample. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 183–201. Barnes, H. L., & Olson, D. H. (1985). Parent-adolescent communication the circumplex model. Child Development, 56, 438–447. Bianchi, S.M., & Milkie, M.A. (2010). Work and family research in the first decade of the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 705-725. Bonner, A., & Tolhurst, G. (2002). Insider-outsider perspectives of participant observation. Nurse Researcher, 9(4), 7-19. Boutakidis, I. P. (2007). The role of native language fluency in the cultural intersubjectivity of chinese and Korean American youth and their immigrant parents Available from Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA). (85667436; 200804106). Brage, D., & Meredith, W. (1994). A causal model of adolescent depression. The Journal of Psychology, 128, 455–468. Bridges, L.J., & Moore, K.A. (2002). Religious involvement and children’s wellbeing: What research tells us (and what it doesn’t). Washington, DC: Child Trends. Braun V., & Clarke V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Breen, L. J. (2007). The researcher ‘in the middle’: Negotiating the insider/outsider dichotomy. The Australian Community Psychologist, 19(1), 163-174. Brooks-Gunn, J., Graber, J.A., & Paikoff, R. L. (1994). Studying links between hormones and negative affect: Models and measures. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 469-486. 103 Buchanan, C.M., Eccles, J.S., & Becker, J.B. (1992). Are adolescents the victims of raging hormones: Evidence for activational effects of hormones on moods and behavior at adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 62-107. Berndt, T.J. (1982). The features and effects of friendships in early adolescence. Child Development, 53, 1447-1460. Callan, V. J. (1993). Subordinate–manager communication in different sex dyads: Consequences for job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 13–27. CASA. (2010). The importance of family dinners VI. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://www.casacolumbia.org/templates/publications_reports.aspx Cha, E., Kim, K. H., & Patrick, T. E. (2008). Predictors of intention to practice safer sex among Korean college students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37(4), 641-51. Chadwick, C. (2011). Seven minutes a day: the modern-day excuse for a parent. The National. Retrieved from http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/sevenminutes-a-day-the-modern-day-excuse-for-a-parent Chao, R. & Tseng, V. (2002). Parenting of Asians. In M. H. Bornstein (Series Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 4 Social conditions and applied parenting (2nd ed., pp. 59-93). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Chodorow, N. (1989). Feminism and psychoanalytic theory. New Haven, CT; Yale University Press. Choi, Y.S. (2005). Early study-broad, family, and wild goose father [조기유학, 가족, 그리고 기러기 아빠]. Seoul, South Korea: Korean Studies Information Co. Choi, H., Meininger, J.C., & Roberts, R.E. (2006). Ethnic differences in adolescents’ mental distress, social stress and resources. Adolescence, 41, 163–283. Chung, R. H. G. (2001). Gender, ethnicity, and acculturation in intergenerational conflict of Asian American college students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7, 376–386. Coleman, J.C. (1980). Friendship and the peer group in adolescence. In J.Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of Adolescent Psychology (pp. 408-431). New York: John Wiley. Collins, W. A. (1990). Parent-child relationships in the transition to adolescence: Continuity and change in interaction, affect, and cognition. In R. Montemayor, G. R. Adams, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), From childhood to adolescence: A transitional period? (pp. 85-106). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 104 Collins, W. E., Newman, B. M., & McKenry, P. C. (1995). Intrapsychic and interpersonal factors related to adolescent psychological well-being in stepmother and stepfather families. Journal of Family Psychology, 9(4), 433. Coltrane, S. (1995). The future of fatherhood: Social, demographic, and economic influences on men's family involvements. In W. Marsiglio (Ed.), Research on Men and Masculinities Series:Fatherhood: Contemporary theory, research, and social policy. (pp. 255-275). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Council of Economic Advisers. (2000). Teens and their parents in the 21st Century: An examination of trends in teen behavior and the role of parental involvement. Report released at the White House Conference on Teenagers: Raising Responsible and Resourceful Youth, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/EOP/CEA/html/Teens_Paper_Final.pdf Craig, L.
 (2006). Does father care mean fathers share? A comparison of how mothers and fathers in intact families spend time with children. Gender & Society, 20(2), 259-281. Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Incorporated. CSUN. (n.d.). Television & health. California State University Northridge. Retrieved from https://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html Chua, A. (2012). Battle hymn of the tiger mother (Paperback ed.). London: Bloomsbury. DeLyser, D. (2001). “Do you really live here?” Thoughts on insider research. Geographical Review, 91(1), 441-453. Demo, D. H., Small, S. A., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (1987). Family relations and the self-esteem of adolescents and their parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 705– 715. Duck, S., & Pittman, G. (1994). Social and personal relationships. In M. L. Knapp & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (2nd ed., pp. 676–695). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Duck, S., Rutt, D.J., Hurst, M.H., & Strejc, H. (1991). Some evident truths about conversations in everyday relationships. Human Communication Research, 18, 228-267. Earle, A., Joshi, P., Geronimo, K., & Acevedo-Garcia, D. (2014). New Estimates of Job Characteristics for Minority and Immigrant Working Parents. Monthly Labor Review. Emmers-Sommer, T. M. (2004). The effect of communication quality and quantity indicators on intimacy and relational satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,21(3), 399-411. doi:10.1177/0265407504042839 105 Enger, J. M., Howerton, D. L., & Cobbs, C. R. (1994). Internal/external locus of control, selfesteem, and parental verbal interaction of at-risk black male adolescents. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 269–274. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis. New York: W.W. Norton. Fillmore, L.W. (1991). When learning a second language means losing the first. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323-346. Fox, G. L., & Inazu, J. K. (1980). Patterns and outcomes of mother-daughter communication about sexuality. Journal of Social Issues, 36(1), 7–29. Friedman, S. L., Sigelman, C. K., Rohrbeck, C. A., & del Rio-Gonzalez, A. M. (2016). Quantity and quality of communication during parental deployment: Links to adolescents’ functioning. Applied Developmental Science. Fuligni, A. J. (1997). The Academic Achievement of Adolescents from Immigrant Families: the roles of family background, attitudes, and behavior. Child Development, 68(2), 351-363. Granic, I., Dishion, T. J., Hollenstein, T., & Patterson, G. R. (2002). The family ecology of adolescence: A dynamic system perspective on normative development. In G. R. Adams & M. Berzonsky (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of adolescence (pp. 60–91). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Gray, J. (1992). Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus: a Practical guide for improving communication and getting what you want in a relationship. HarperCollins, New York Greene, M., Way, N., Pahl, K. (2006). Trajectories of perceived adult and peer discrimination among Black, Latino, and Asian American adolescents: Patterns and psychological correlates. Developmental Psychology, 42, 218–238. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.2.218. Guilamo-Ramos, V., Jaccard, J., Dittus, P., & Bouris, A. M. (2006). Parental expertise, trustworthiness, and accessibility: Parent-adolescent communication and adolescent risk behavior. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 1229-1246. Guzmán, B. L., Schlehofer-Sutton, M. M., & Villanueva, C. M. (2003). Let's talk about sex: How comfortable discussions about sex impact teen sexual behavior. Journal of Health Communication, 8(6), 583-598. Hall, G. S. (1904). Adolescence: Its psychology and its relation to physiology, anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion, and education (Vols. I & II). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 2nd edition. London: Routledge. 106 Hanson, S. M. H. (1986). Healthy single-parent families. Family Relations, 35(1), 125-132. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.msu.edu.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.proxy2.c l.msu.edu/docview/61054097?accountid=12598 Hartmann, E. (1991). Boundaries in the mind: A new psychology of personality. New York; Basic Books. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany: State University of New York Press. Hawley, L. E., Shear, C. L., Stark, A. M., & Goodman, P. R. (1984). Resident and parental perceptions of adolescent problems and family communications in a low socioeconomic population. The Journal of Family Practice, 19, 651–655. Hays, R. B. (1988). Friendship. In S. W. Duck, D. F. Hay, S. E. Hobfoll, W. Ickes, & B. M. Montgomery (Eds.), Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research and interventions (pp. 391–408). Chichester, UK: Wiley Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2002). Insider knowledge: Issues in insider research. Nursing Standard, 16(46), 33-35. Hurh, W. (2011). Korean Immigrants. Multicultural America: an encyclopedia of the newest Americans. Greenwood. 1329-1396 Hutchinson, M. K., & Cooney, T. M. (1998). Patterns of parent–teen sexual risk communication: Implications for intervention. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 47(2), 185-194. Jaccard, J., Dittus P. J., & Gordon, V. V. (2000) Parent-teen communication about premarital sex: Factors associated with the extent of communication. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15, 187-208. Jaccard, J., Dittus, P. J., & Gordon, V. V. (1996). Maternal correlates of adolescent sexual and contraceptive behavior. Family Planning Perspectives, 28(4), 159. Johnson, R. A., Su, S. S., Gerstein, D. R., Shin, H. C., & Hoffman, J. P. (1995). Parental influences on deviant behavior in early adolescence: A logistic response analysis of age and gender-differential effects. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 11, 167–193. Kafka, R. R., & London, P. (1991). Communication in relationships and adolescent substance use: The influence of parents and friends. Adolescence, 26, 587–598. Karofsky, P., Zeng, L., & Kosorok, M.R. (2000). Relationship between adolescent-parental communication and initiation of first intercourse by adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 28, 41-45. 107 Kim, S. C. (1997). Korean American families. In E. Lee (Ed.), Working with Asian Americans: A guide for clinicians (pp. 125–135). New York: The Guilford Press. Kim, J. L., & Ward, L. M. (2007). Silence speaks volumes: Parental sexual communication among asian american emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22(1), 3-31. Kingston, P. W., & Nock, S. L. (1987). Time together among dual-earner couples. American Sociological Review, 52, 391–400. Kitano, H. H. L., & Daniels, R. (2001). Asian americans: Emerging minorities (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall. KOSIS. (2014). Conversation with father. Retrieved from http://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=154&tblId=DT_MOGE_3020300232&vw_cd =&list_id=&scrId=&seqNo=&lang_mode=ko&obj_var_id=&itm_id=&conn_path=K1& path= KOSIS. (2014). Conversation with mother. Retrieved from http://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=154&tblId=DT_MOGE_3020300233&vw_cd =&list_id=&scrId=&seqNo=&lang_mode=ko&obj_var_id=&itm_id=&conn_path=K1& path= Lamb, M.E., Pleck, J.H., Charnov, E.L., & Levine, J.A. (1987). A biosocial perspective on parental behavior and involvement. In J.B. Lncaster, J. Altmann, A.S. Rossi, & L.R. Sherrod (Eds.), Parenting across the lifespan: Biosocial dimensions (pp. 111-142). Hawthorne, NY: Aldine. Laursen, B., Coy, K. C, & Collins, W. A. (1998). Reconsidering changes in parent-child conflict across adolescence: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 69, 817-832. Leatham, G., & Duck S. (1990). Conversations with friends and the dynamics of social support. In S. Duck with R. C. Silver (Eds.), Personal relationships and social support (pp. 1–29). London: Sage Publications. Lee, S., Juon, H., Martinez, G., Hsu, C., Robinson, S., Bawa, J.,Ma, G. (2009). Journal of Community Health: The Publication for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, 34(2), 144-152. Lee, Y., & Koo, H. (2006). 'wild geese fathers' and a globalised family strategy for education in korea. International Development Planning Review, 28(4), 533-553. doi:10.3828/idpr.28.4.6 Leland, N. L., & Barth, R. P. (1993). Characteristics of adolescents who have attempted to avoid HIV and who have communicated with parents about sex. Journal of Adolescent Research, 8, 58–76. 108 Lew, J. (2006). Asian Americans in class: Charting the achievement gap among Korean American youth. New York: Teachers College Press. Lingren, H. G. (1998). A new view of ‘quality time.’ Enriching family relationships. Ohio State University Cooperative Extension. Available (accessed 21 July 2000): http://www.ianr.unl.edu/ianr/fcs/efrdec98.htm Louie, A. (2004). Chineseness across borders: Renegotiating chinese identities in china and the united states. Durham: Duke University Press. Mahoney,A., Carels, R., Pargament, K.,Wachholtz, A., Edwards-Leeper, L., Kaplar,M., & Frutchey, R. (2005). The sanctification of the body and behavioral health patterns of college students. The International Journal of the Psychology of Religion, 15, 221–238. Matsumoto, D. (2006). Culture and nonverbal behaviour. In: V. L. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.). Handbook of nonverbal communication. SAGE. Mau, W. C. (1995). Educational planning and academic achievement of middle school students: A racial and cultural comparison. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 518-526. Masselam, V. S., Marcus, R. F., & Stunkard, C. L. (1990). Parent-adolescent communication, family functioning, and school performance. Adolescence, 25, 725– 737. Sales J. M., Milhausen, R. R., Wingood, G. M., DiClemente, R. J., Salazar, L. F., & Crosby, R. A. (2008). Validation of a parent-adolescent communication scale for use in STD/HIV prevention interventions. Health Education and Behavior, 35, 332–345. Meschke, L. L. & Dettmer, K. (2012). "'Don't cross a man's feet'": Hmong parent-daughter communication about sexual health. Sex Education, 41, 89-108. Miller, K. S., Forehand, R., & Kotchick, B. A. (1999). Adolescent sexual behavior in two ethnic minority samples: The role of family variables. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61(1), 85-98. Miller, K. E., King, C. A., Shain, B. N., & Naylor, M. W. (1992). Suicidal adolescents perceptions of their family environment. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 22, 226– 239. Min, P. G. (1995). Asian Americans: Contemporary trends and issues. Thousand oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Min, P. G. (2000). Korean Americans’ language use. New immigrants in the United States (pp. 306-332). UK: Cambridge University Press. Moitra, T., & Mukherjee, I. (2012). Parent-adolescent communication and delinquency: A comparative study in Kolkata, India. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 8(1), 74-94. 109 Montgomery, B. M. (1988). Quality communication in personal relationships. Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research and interventions. (pp. 343-359) John Wiley & Sons, Oxford. Moon, S. S., Wolfer, T. A., & Robinson, M. M. (2001). Culturally-based Korean American family conflict and how churches can help: An exploratory survey. Social Work & Christianity, 28, 106–123. Morrow, S. L., & Smith, M. L. (2000). Qualitative research for counseling psychology of counseling psychology (3rd ed.). (pp. 199-230) John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken, NJ. Nguyen, A.-M. D., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2007). Biculturalism unpacked: Components, individual differences, measurement, and outcomes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 101-114. Noller, P. & Bagi, S. (1985). Parent-adolescent communication. Journal of Adolescence, 8, 125144. OECD. (2014). Average annual hours actually worked per worker. Organization for economic cooperation and development. Retrieved from https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=ANHRS Pistella, C. L. Y., & Bonati, F. A. (1999). Adolescent women's recommendations for enhanced parent–adolescent communication about sexual behavior. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 16(4), 305-315. Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. New York;Berkeley;: University of California Press. Powell, J. (1999). Why I am afraid to tell you who I am. Zondervan. Qin, D. B. (2006). "our child doesn't talk to us anymore": Alienation in immigrant Chinese families. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 37(2), 162-179. doi:10.1525/aeq.2006.37.2.162 Qin, D. B. (2008). Doing well vs. feeling well: Understanding family dynamics and the psychological adjustment of Chinese immigrant adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 22-35. Qin, D. B., Way, N., & Mukherjee, P. (2008). The other side of the model minority story: The familial and peer challenges faced by Chinese American adolescents. Youth & Society, 39(4), 480-506. Qin, D. B. (2009). Gendered processes of adaptation: Understanding Parent–Child relations in chinese immigrant families. Sex Roles, 60(7), 467-481. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9485-4 110 Qin, D. B. (2009). Being "good" or being "popular": Gender and ethnic identity negotiations of chinese immigrant adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 24(1), 37-66. doi:10.1177/0743558408326912 Rhee, S., Chang, J., & Rhee, J. (2003). Acculturation, communication patterns, and self-esteem among Asian and Caucasian American adolescents. Adolescence, 3, 749–768. Robert, J. (2012). The importance of family faith for lifelong faith formation. Retrieved from http://www.faithformationlearningexchange.net/uploads/5/2/4/6/5246709/importance_of_ family_faith_for_lifelong_faith_formation.pdf Rosenthal, D. A. & Feldman, S. S. (1999) The importance of importance: the differentiated nature of parent–adolescent communication about sexuality, Journal of Adolescence, 22, 835–852. Rueter, M. A., & Koerner, A. T. (2008). The effect of family communication patterns on adopted adolescent adjustment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 70, 715–727. Rumbaut, R. (1994). The crucible within: Ethnic identity, self-esteem, and segmented assimilation among children of immigrants. International Migration Review, 28, 748– 794. Schumm, W. R., Barnes, H. L., Bollman, S. R., Jurich, A. P., & Bugaighis, M. A. (1986). Selfdisclosure and marital satisfaction revisited. Family Relations. Journal of Applied Family and Child Studies, 35, 241–247. Sillars, A., Koerner, A., Fitzpatrick, M.A. (2005). Communication and understanding in parentadolescent relationships. Human Communication Research, 31(1), 102-128. Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/fsos/projects/fcp/files/sillars2005.pdf Statham, A. (1987). The gender model revisited; Differences in the management styles of men and women. Sex Roles, 16, 409-429. Steinberg, L. (1988). Reciprocal relation between parent-child distance and pubertal maturation. Developmental Psychology, 24, 122–128. Stephens, M.A. (2009). Gender differences in parenting styles and effects on the parent-child relationship. Honors Thesis. Retrieved from https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/3300/fulltext.pdf Stevenson, H. W., Lee, S., Chen, C., Stigler, J. W., Hsu, C., Kitamura, S., & Hatano, G. (1990). Contexts of achievement: A study of American, Chinese, and Japanese children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 55(1-2), 123. Stroker A, Swadi H. (1990). Perceived family relationships in drug abusing adolescents. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 25, 293–297 111 Suárez-Orozco, C., & Suárez-Orozco, M. M. (2001). Children of immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Sue, S., & Okazaki, S. (2009). Asian-american educational achievements: A phenomenon in search of an explanation. Asian American Journal of Psychology, S(1), 45-55. doi:10.1037/1948-1985.S.1.45 Sung, B. L. (1987). The adjustment experience of Chinese immigrant children in New York City. New York: Center for Migration Studies. Surrey, J. L. (1983). The relational self in women; Clinical implications. In J. V Jordan, J.L. Surrey, & A. G. Kaplan (Speakers), Women and empathy: Implications for psychological development and psychotherapy. Wellesley, MA; Stone Center for Developmental Services and Studies. Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. Ballantine Books, New York Terrazas, A., & Batog, C. (2010). U.S. in focus: Korean immigrant in the United States. Retrieved from Migration Policy Institute website http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=793 Tesch, S.A. (1983). Review of friendship development across the live span. Human Development, 26, 266-276. Tseng, V., & Fuligni, A.J. (2000). Parent-adolescent language use and relationships among immigrant families with East Asian, Filipino, and Latin American Backgrounds. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 465-476. Uba, L. (1994). Asian Americans: Personality patterns, identity, and mental health. New york: Guilford Press. UCLA Asian American Studies Center, (1975). L. A. Asian Americans Facts and Figures. Los Angeles, CA Umchinah. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved June 28, 2016, from https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%97%84%EC%B9%9C%EC%95%84 Updegraff, K.A., Madden-Derdich, D.A., Estrada, A.U., Haase, L., Leonard, S.A. (2002). Young adolescents’ experiences with parents and friends: Exploring the connections. Family Relations, 51, 72-80. Walker, N. (1999). Day-care dilemma. Ebony, 54(4), 35. 112 Whitaker, D., & Miller, K. (2000). Parent-adolescent discussions about sex and condoms: Impact on peer influences of sexual risk behavior. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15(2), 251273. Wong, A., Wong, Y. J., Obeng, C. (2012). An untold story: A qualitative study of Asian American family strengths. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 3, 286-298. doi: 10.1037/a0025553 Williams, S. K., & Kelly, F. D. (2005). Relationships among involvement, attachment, and behavioral problems in adolescence: Examining father's influence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 25(2), 168-196. Ying, Y. (1999). Strengthening intergenerational/intercultural ties in migrant families: A new intervention for parents. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(1), 89-96. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(199901)27:1<89::AID-JCOP6>3.0.CO;2-O Young, R. A., Marshall, S., Domene, J. F., & Juliette Arato-Bolivar, E. A. (2006). Relationships, communication, and career in the parent-adolescent projects of families with and without challenges. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), 1-23. Youniss, J., & Smollar, J. (1985). Adolescent relations with mothers, fathers and friends. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Yu, E.Y. (1990). Korean Community Profile: Life and Consumer Patterns. Korea Times, Los Angeles, p. 28 Zimmer-Gembeck, M.J., & Collins, W.A. (2003). Autonomy development during adolescence. In G.R. Adams & M. Berzonsky (Eds.), Blackwell Handbook of adolescence (pp. 175204). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Zong, J. & Batalova, J. (2014). Korean immigrants in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/korean-immigrantsunited-states#Educational 113