| Literature DB >> 34831792 |
Qiongwen Zhang1, Daniel T L Shek2, Yangu Pan1.
Abstract
Although recent studies demonstrated that parent-child discrepancies in the perceived family processes were associated with children's developmental outcomes, few studies have addressed this issue in different types of families in mainland China. The present study investigated that how discrepancies in parents' and adolescents' perceptions of parent-adolescent communication were associated with early adolescent depressive symptoms in a nationally representative sample (N = 15,377) with 7010 father-adolescent dyads (adolescents: Mage = 14.24 years, SD = 1.25 years; 5960 adolescents from two-parent families, 443 adolescents from single-father families) and 8367 mother-adolescent dyads (adolescents: Mage = 14.02 years, SD = 1.18 years; 6670 adolescents from two-parent families, 1362 adolescents from single-mother families) in China. Adolescent respondents completed a measure of depressive symptoms and all informants reported on the perceived levels of parent-adolescent communication. Results indicated that adolescents reported parent-child communication more negatively than did their parents. Father-adolescent discrepancies were also greater in intact families than non-intact families. Polynomial regression analyses indicated that while there was a significant interactive effect of father-reported and adolescent-reported father-adolescent communication in Chinese two-parent families, no significant interaction was found for mother-adolescent dyad. Besides, adolescent-reported mother-child communication interacted with mother-reported communication in Chinese single-mother families only. The findings clarify parent-adolescent discrepancies in parent-child communication in different types of families in China and they have theoretical and practical implications on the role of discrepancies in parents and adolescent children on perceived parent-adolescent communication in early adolescent depressive symptoms.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese; depressive symptoms; early adolescence; parent-child communication; parent-child discrepancies; single-parent families; two-parent families
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34831792 PMCID: PMC8624406 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182212041
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Distribution of respondents.
| Variable | Father-Adolescent Dyads ( | Mother-Adolescent Dyads ( |
|---|---|---|
| Family categories | ||
| Two-parent family | 5960 | 6670 |
| Single-mother family | 163 | 1362 |
| Single-father family | 443 | 60 |
| Family with both parents absence | 444 | 275 |
| Total | 7010 | 8367 |
| Gender | ||
| Boys | 3860 | 3871 |
| Girls | 3204 | 4496 |
| Grade | ||
| 7th | 3524 | 4536 |
| 9th | 3486 | 3831 |
| Mean Age (years) | 14.24 (1.25) | 14.02 (1.18) |
Means and SDs of all study variables as well as tests of congruency between parent and adolescent reports of parent-adolescent communication.
| Variable | Adolescent-Report | Father-Report | Mother-Report |
| Cohen’s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
| Total sample | |||||
| Depressive symptoms ( | 10.14 (3.76) | ||||
| Mother-adolescent communication ( | 11.11 (2.81) | 11.87 (2.54) | −25.62 *** | −0.28 | |
| Father-adolescent communication ( | 9.77 (2.85) | 11.23 (2.52) | −40.85 *** | −0.54 | |
| Two-parent families | |||||
| Depressive symptoms ( | 10.02 (3.74) | ||||
| Mother-adolescent communication ( | 11.23 (2.78) | 11.99 (2.49) | −22.91 *** | −0.29 | |
| Father-adolescent communication ( | 9.82 (2.83) | 11.33 (2.49) | −38.83 *** | −0.57 | |
| Single-mother families | |||||
| Depressive symptoms ( | 10.57 (3.74) | ||||
| Mother-adolescent communication ( | 10.70 (2.83) | 11.51 (2.62) | −10.94 *** | −0.30 | |
| Father-adolescent communication ( | 9.31 (2.65) | 11.24 (2.28) | −8.27 *** | −0.78 | |
| Single-father families | |||||
| Depressive symptoms ( | 10.65 (3.78) | ||||
| Mother-adolescent communication ( | 9.97 (3.00) | 11.62 (2.56) | −5.00 *** | −0.60 | |
| Father-adolescent communication ( | 9.52 (3.08) | 10.58 (2.68) | −7.19 *** | −0.37 | |
| Families with both parents absent | |||||
| Depressive symptoms ( | 10.98 (3.89) | ||||
| Mother-adolescent communication ( | 10.43 (2.85) | 10.77 (2.66) | −2.04 * | −0.12 | |
| Father-adolescent communication ( | 9.45 (2.88) | 10.55 (2.63) | −8.08 *** | −0.40 |
Note. N = 15,377 (including 7010 father-adolescent dyads and 8367 mother-adolescent dyads), * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
Comparisons of parent-child discrepancies in perceived parent-adolescent communication between intact families and non-intact families.
| Intact Families | Non-Intact Families |
|
| Cohen’s | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mother-child discrepancy in perceived parent-child communication | 0.76 (2.72) | 0.76 (2.75) | −0.008 | 0.994 | 0.00 |
| Father-child discrepancy in perceived parent-child communication | 1.51 (3.01) | 1.21 (3.00) | 2.98 | 0.003 | 0.10 |
Note. For mother-child discrepancy in perceived parent-child communication, N = 6670 in intact families, N = 1697 in non-intact families. For father-child discrepancy in perceived parent-child communication, N = 5960 in intact families, N = 1050 in non-intact families.
Polynomial regression analyses predicting early adolescent depressive symptoms (father and adolescent (adol.) report father-adolescent communication as predictors).
| Predictor | Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Family economic status | ||||||||
| Middle income | −0.42 *** | 0.12 | −0.17 | 0.38 | −0.25 | 0.62 | −0.70 † | 0.40 |
| Rich | −0.68 *** | 0.23 | −1.69 † | 0.92 | −1.87 | 1.41 | −0.57 | 0.82 |
| Father education | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.15 |
| Mother education | −0.07 * | 0.03 | −0.06 | 0.12 | −0.24 | 0.23 | −0.23 † | 0.14 |
| Grade | 0.74 *** | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.36 | 0.64 | 0.56 | 0.10 | 0.35 |
| Gender | −0.51 *** | 0.10 | −0.89 * | 0.36 | −0.66 | 0.59 | −0.82 * | 0.35 |
| Adol. report communication | −0.51 *** | 0.05 | −0.47 * | 0.19 | −0.21 | 0.33 | −0.84 *** | 0.20 |
| Father report communication | −0.20 *** | 0.06 | −0.37 † | 0.22 | −0.80 * | 0.36 | −0.80 ** | 0.23 |
| (Adol. report)2 | −0.04 | 0.05 | −0.26 | 0.17 | −0.35 | 0.31 | 0.59 ** | 0.19 |
| (Father report)2 | −0.05 | 0.05 | −0.08 | 0.15 | −0.27 | 0.27 | −0.29 † | 0.17 |
| Adol. report × Father report | −0.12 * | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.20 | 0.005 | 0.36 | −16 | 0.21 |
| Adjust R2 | 0.048 | 0.056 | 0.032 | 0.114 | ||||
|
| 5960 | 443 | 163 | 444 | ||||
Note. Grade: 0 = 7th grade, 1 = 9th grade. Gender: 0 = girl, 1 = boy. Reference group of Family economic status: poor family. † p < 0.10, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Group 1: adolescents in two-parent families (N = 5960); Group 2: adolescents in single-father families (N = 443); Group 3: adolescents in single-mother families (N = 163); Group 4: adolescents in parent-absent families (N = 444).
Figure 1(a) Predicted values of depressive symptoms as a function of adolescent-reported communication at high and low levels of father-reported communication among adolescents in two-parent families (N = 5960). (b) Predicted values of depressive symptoms as a function of adolescent-reported communication at high and low levels of mother-reported communication among adolescents in two-parent families (N = 6670).
Polynomial regression analyses predicting early adolescent depressive symptoms (mother and adolescent (adol.) report mother-adolescent communication as predictors).
| Predictor | Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Family economic status | ||||||||
| Middle income | −0.83 *** | 0.14 | 0.86 | 1.66 | −0.54 * | 0.23 | −1.01 † | 0.57 |
| Rich | −0.90 *** | 0.21 | 1.68 | 2.36 | −1.14 † | 0.60 | 1.55 | 1.34 |
| Father education | 0.09 ** | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.35 | −0.07 | 0.07 | −0.16 | 0.17 |
| Mother education | −0.07 * | 0.03 | −0.64 † | 0.37 | 0.00 | 0.07 | −0.01 | 0.17 |
| Grade | 0.72 *** | 0.09 | 2.32 * | 1.14 | 0.61 ** | 0.20 | 1.01 * | 0.49 |
| Gender | −0.41 *** | 0.09 | −1.69 | 1.17 | −0.28 | 0.20 | −0.93 † | 0.48 |
| Adol. report communication | −0.60 *** | 0.05 | 0.82 | 0.92 | −0.57 *** | 0.12 | −0.71 * | 0.28 |
| Mother report communication | −0.03 | 0.06 | −0.95 | 0.95 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.41 | 0.30 |
| (Adol. report)2 | −0.04 | 0.05 | −0.25 | 0.74 | 0.22 † | 0.12 | 0.20 | 0.28 |
| (Mother report)2 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.40 | 0.77 | 0.21 * | 0.10 | 0.32 | 0.24 |
| Adol. report × Mother report | −0.06 | 0.06 | −0.97 | 1.15 | −0.29 * | 0.13 | −0.43 | 0.32 |
| Adjust R2 | 0.045 | 0.084 | 0.038 | 0.051 | ||||
|
| 6670 | 60 | 1362 | 275 | ||||
Note. Grade: 0 = 7th grade, 1 = 9th grade. Gender: 0 = girl, 1 = boy. Reference group of Family economic status: poor family. † p < 0.10, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Group 1: adolescents in two-parent families (N = 6670); Group 2: adolescents in single-father families (N = 60); Group 3: adolescents in single-mother families (N = 1362); Group 4: adolescents in parent-absent families (N = 275).
Figure 2(a) Predicted values of depressive symptoms as a function of adolescent-reported communication at high and low levels of mother-reported communication among adolescents in single-mother families (N = 1362). (b) Predicted values of depressive symptoms as a function of adolescent-reported communication at high and low levels of father-reported communication among adolescents in single-father families (N = 443).