Parenting adolescents among low-income families: The moderating

effects of culture on psychological functioning over time

Laura D. PittmanMichelle K. Boswell& Adeya Richmond

Northern Illinois University

AbstractAlthough parenting is viewed as an important determinant of adolescents’ socioemotional development, the extent to which contextual factors may limit or enhance these links is still unclear. Parenting practices that typically are considered effective among Caucasian families may not be beneficial among minority families. This paper examines longitudinally how parenting is linked to adolescent socioemotional outcomes using a random sample representative of families in urban, low-income neighborhoods. This paper focused on the African American and Hispanic American adolescents in this sample. Unlike previous cross-sectional analyses, longitudinally parenting was not found to be predictive of socioemotional functioning over time. However, three significant interactions between parenting and culture were found, where African American adolescents seem to benefit less from paternal warmth and maternal school interest over time compared to Hispanic American adolescents. Given these findings, in comparison to a larger parenting literature, further investigation of how parenting functions within different cultural contexts is warranted.

Parenting There are many aspects of parenting including warmth

and acceptance, monitoring, use of discipline strategies, and school involvement that are thought to influence children’s socioemotional development (e.g., Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Chase-Lansdale & Pittman, 2002).

A growing literature suggests that parents still play an important role in the socioemotional development of their children as they enter adolescence (e.g., Durius et al., 2004; Galambos, et al, 2003).

However, much of the existing literature does focus on middle-class European American families and there is a call to consider whether parenting functions similarly in different cultural contexts (e.g., Mason et al., 1996; Taylor, 1996).

Parenting across cultures Concerns regarding whether these parenting dimensions

function similarly across various racial and ethnic groups as well as socioeconomic groups has been voiced.

Some studies suggest similarities in the associations between parenting and socioemotional outcomes in adolescents (e.g., Steinberg et al. 1991), while others have found differences (e.g., Deater-Deckard & Dodge, 1997) These inconsistencies of findings may relate to differences in

samples, the specific aspect of parenting study, and consideration of whether measurement is culturally equivalent (McLoyd & Steinberg, 1998).

Welfare, Children and Families: A Three-City Study

2402 families completed both adult and youth interview at Time 1 (1999) Children 0-4 or 10-14 years old 74% overall response rate

88% of families retained at Time 2 (2000-2001) 16 months later on average

Main Survey included: Two-hour interview with mother 30 minute interview with young adolescents

This paper focuses on the African American and Hispanic American young adolescents (age 10-14 years) and their families who participated at both time points (N = 933)

Mothers’ Report of Socio-emotional Functioning

Mothers reported on their child’s Internalizing & Externalizing Problem Behaviors using the 100-item Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991). Alpha of Internalizing Subscale = .87 and .88 for African American

and Hispanic American, respectively Alpha of Externalizing Subscale = .89 for both African American

and Hispanic American

Adolescents’ Report of Socio-emotional Functioning

Adolescents reported on their Internalizing Problem Behaviors using the Brief Symptom Inventory 18 (Derogatis, 2000). Alpha = .90 for both African American and Hispanic American,

respectively Adolescents reported on their delinquent behaviors (or

externalizing problem behaviors as we label it) using items modified from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY; Borus, et al., 1982) and the Youth Deviance Scale (Gold, 1970; Steinberg, et al., 1991). Alpha = .75 and .79 for African American and Hispanic American

adolescents, respectively; note this is a significant difference between the two groups (p < .05)

Adolescents’ Reports of Parenting

Mothers’ and fathers’ warmth 12 parent items from the Inventory of Parent and Peer

Attachment (IPPA; Armsden & Greenberg, 1987) Alpha for mothers = .72 for both African Americans and Hispanic

Americans Alpha for fathers = .78 and .80 for African Americans and

Hispanic Americans, respectively Mothers’ monitoring

8 items regarding parental knowledge and use of curfews (adapted from Lamborn et al., 1991)

Alpha = .62 and .66 for African Americans and Hispanic Americans, respectively

Adolescents’ Reports of Parenting

Mothers’ use of harsh punishment 5 items (McLoyd et al., 1994) Alpha = .69 and .73 for African Americans and Hispanic

Americans, respectively Maternal school interest

3 items developed for this study “How often has your mother checked your homework?” “How often has your mother talked to you about what you were

learning in school or how you did on a test?” “How often has your mother helped you with your homework or with

studying?” Alpha = .74 and .77 for African Americans and Hispanic

Americans, respectively

Background Characteristics at Time 1

Young adolescents 48% female; 52% male Mean age: 12.07 years 43% African American;

57% Hispanic American

Caregivers Mean age: 37.80 Years Mean Income-to-Needs

Ratio: 0.88 34% Married;

4% Cohabiting62% Single

35% No High School Degree

Analysis Plan As a test of cultural equivalence, the internal consistencies

of the parenting and symptom measures were compared. No significant differences were found in internal consistencies

among the parenting measures nor the CBCL or BSI-18 measures A small, but significant difference was found on the adolescents

reports of delinquent behavior (p < .05) Using two waves of data, examined changes in

adolescents’ socio-emotional functioning based on five parenting dimensions and culture Included Time 1 child functioning measure as a way to control for

pre-existing characteristics of the youth and family Two models were run:

(1) Time 1 functioning + demographic controls + culture + parenting dimensions

(2) Time 1 functioning + demographic controls + culture + parenting dimensions + culture x parenting dimensions

All analysis weighted and run in STATA

Model 1: OLS RegressionsVariable Internalizing

(Mom Report)

Internalizing (Child Report)

Externalizing (Mom Report)

Externalizing (Child Report)

Time 1 Functioning .53** .38*** .62*** .40***

Child Age -.11* .14 -.04 .04

Child Gender 1= Male; 2 = Female

.04 .15+ -.04 -.11*

Mothers’ Age -.08+ .04 -.06 .06

Mother Married -.02 -.04 -.10* -.04

Mother Cohabiting .08+ -.03 .05 -.02

Mothers’ Education -.05 .05 -.01 -.03

Income-to-needs -.02 -.08 -.03 .03 Cultural group -1 =African American

1 = Hispanic American

-.06 .15 -.11* -.05

Model 1: OLS Regressions (continued)Variable Internalizing

(Mom Report)

Internalizing (Child Report)

Externalizing (Mom Report)

Externalizing (Child Report)

Mothers’ warmth -.11 .06 -.08 -.09+

Fathers’ warmth .01 .07 .01 -.03

Monitoring -.01 -.02 -.02 -.09

Harsh Punishment .15* .04 .05 .10+

School Interest -.01 -.09 .00 -.03

F-ratio 7.90 6.87 11.65 5.85

Adjusted R-squared .36*** .27*** .46*** .30***

Note. Standardized beta coefficients are presented. + p < .10; * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001

Longitudinal Main Effects Few differences emerged in child functioning

over time based on culture or parenting Hispanic American adolescents had lower levels

of externalizing problem behaviors over time as compared African American adolescents

Adolescents were reported to have more internalizing problem behaviors by their mothers over time when the adolescents reported their mothers’ using more harsh discipline techniques

Model 2 – OLS Regressions with InteractionsVariable Internalizing

(Mom Report) Internalizing (Child Report)

Externalizing (Mom Report)

Externalizing (Child Report)

Time 1 Functioning .55** .38*** .63*** .41***

Child Age -.12* .16 -.04 .04

Child Gender 1= Male; 2 = Female

.05 .14+ -.03 -.11*

Mothers’ Age -.08+ .04 -.05 .07

Mother Married .01 -.04 -.07 -.04

Mother Cohabiting .08 -.04 .05 -.03

Mothers’ Education -.05 .06 -.01 -.02

Income-to-needs -.03 -.07 -.04 .02 Cultural group -1 = African American

1 = Hispanic American

-.06 .15 -.10+ -.04

Variable Internalizing (Mom Report)

Internalizing (Child Report)

Externalizing (Mom Report)

Externalizing (Child Report)

Mothers’ warmth -.11 .08 -.08 -.06

Fathers’ warmth .02 .07 .01 -.03

Monitoring -.05 .01 -.06 -.10

Harsh Punishment .13* .06 .03 .10+

School Interest .03 -.09 .05 .04

Culture x M Warmth -.03 .10+ -.02 .04

Culture x F Warmth -.10* .05 -.10* .02

Culture x Monitoring .10+ -.08 .07 .05

Culture x Punishment .08 -.05 .01 .01

Culture x School Int. -.06 -.08 -.08 -.20***

F-ratio 7.57 5.85 8.75 5.28

Adjusted R-squared .38*** .29*** .48*** .33***

Note. Standardized beta coefficients are presented. + p < .10; * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001

Fathers’ warmth x Culture Predicting Mothers’ report of Externalizing Behavior Over Time

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

10.5

11

11.5

12

-1SD +1SD

Fathers' Warmth

Exte

rnal

izin

g Be

havi

ors

HispanicAmericanAfricanAmerican

African American mothers’ report more externalizing behaviors over time when their child views their relationship with their father as more warm, while Hispanic American mothers’ report fewer externalizing behaviors over time when their perceive their relationship more warmly

Fathers’ warmth x Culture Predicting Mothers’ report of Internalizing Behavior Over Time

10.5

11

11.5

12

12.5

13

13.5

14

14.5

-1SD +1SD

Fathers' Warmth

Inte

rnal

izin

g Be

havi

ors

HispanicAmericanAfricanAmerican

African American mothers’ report more internalizing behaviors over time when their child views their relationship with their father as more warm, while Hispanic American mothers’ report fewer internalizing behaviors over time when their perceive their relationship more warmly.

Maternal School Interest x Culture Predicting Teens’ report of Externalizing Behavior over time

African American adolescents’ report more externalizing behaviors over time when they perceive their mothers as more interested in their school work, while Hispanic American adolescents report fewer externalizing behaviors over time when they perceive their mothers as more involved in their school work.

-0.3

-0.25

-0.2

-0.15

-0.1

-0.05

0-1SD +1SD

School Interest

Exte

rnal

izin

g Be

havi

ors

HispanicAmerican

AfricanAmerican

Discussion With the strength of longitudinal analyses,

parenting constructs including maternal and paternal warmth as well as maternal monitoring and school interest do not seem to be important predictors of adolescents’ psychological functioning over time.

The use of harsh punishment had a small effect on increasing internalizing problem behaviors and, at a trend level, externalizing problem behaviors over time.

Discussion Tests of possibly moderating effects of parenting by

culture suggest that perceptions of fathers’ warmth may differentially predict adolescents psychological functioning over time. Specifically, Hispanic American adolescents seem to benefit from a warm and trusting relationship with their fathers more so than African American adolescents.

Similarly, the association between maternal school interest and adolescents’ externalizing behavior appears to be moderated by culture. Specifically, Hispanic American adolescents seem to benefit from more maternal school interest, while African Americans do not.

Although further analysis is needed to disentangle these moderating effects of culture, consideration of how similar behaviors may be interpreted in different cultural contexts may explain these findings.

Discussion The findings of this investigation are limited in their

generalizability. This sample was comprised of low-income African American and Hispanic families in low-income urban neighborhoods and the results may not be applicable to families in other contexts.

In addition, caution is warranted given that there was not cultural equivalence in the adolescents’ reports of externalizing behaviors (i.e., involvement in delinquent behaviors).

Further research with culturally diverse samples of varying socioeconomic levels would help consider whether these findings are specific to families living in poverty.

References Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/4-18 and 1991 Profile . Burlington, VT:

University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry. Armsden, G., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment: Relationships to well-

being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 18, 683-692. Borus, M. E., Carpenter, S. A., Crowley, J. E., & Daymont, T. N. (1982). Pathways to the future, volume ii: A final

report on the national survey of youth labor market experience in 1980 . Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Center for Human Resource Research.

Chase-Lansdale, P. L., & Pittman, L. D. (2002). Welfare reform and parenting: reasonable expectations. Future of Children., 12(1), 166-185.

Deater-Deckard, K., & Dodge, K. A. (1997). Externalizing behavior problems and discipline revisited: Nonlinear effects and variation by culture, context, and gender. Psychological Inquiry, 8(3), 161-175.

Derogatis, L. R. (2000). Brief Symptom Inventory 18, Administration, Scoring, and Procedures Manual . Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems.

Dorius, C. J., Bahr, S. J., Hoffmann, J. P., & Harmon, E. L. (2004). Parenting practices as moderators of the relationship between peers and adolescent marijuana use. Journal of Marriage & Family, 66(1), 163-178.

Galambos, N. L., Barker, E. T., & Almeida, D. M. (2003). Parents do matter: Trajectories of change in externalizing and internalizing problems in early adolescence. Child Development, 74(2), 578-594.

Gold, M. (1970). Delinquent behavior in an American city. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment

among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62, 1049-1065.

Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development. (Vol. IV, pp. 1-101). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Mason, C. A., Cauce, A. M., Gonzales, N., & Hiraga, Y. (1996). Neither too sweet nor too sour: Problem peers, maternal control, and problem behavior in African American adolescents. Child Development, 67(5), 2115-2130.

McLoyd, V. C., Jayaratne, T. E., Ceballo, R., & Borquez, J. (1994). Unemployment and work interruption among African American single mothers: Effects on parenting and adolescent socioemotional functioning. Child Development, 65(2), 562-589.

McLoyd, V. C., & Steinberg, L. (Eds.). (1998). Studying minority adolescents: Conceptual, methodological, and theoretical issues. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Steinberg, L., Mounts, N. S., Lamborn, S. D., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1(1), 19-36.

Taylor, R. D. (1996). Adolescents' perceptions of kinship support and family management practices: Association with adolescent adjustment in African American families. Developmental Psychology, 32(4), 687-695.

AcknowledgementsWe appreciate the support to gather the data for Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study from the following government agencies and foundations: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (RO1 HD36093 "Welfare Reform and the Well-Being of Children"), Office of the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation, Administration on Developmental Disabilities, Administration for Children and Families, Social Security Administration, and National Institute of Mental Health, The Boston Foundation, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, The Lloyd A. Fry Foundation, The Hogg Foundation for Mental Health, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The Joyce Foundation, The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, The W.K. Kellogg Foundation, The Kronkosky Charitable Foundation, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, The Searle Fund for Policy Research, and The Woods Fund of Chicago. A special thank you is also extended to the families who participated in Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study.