Child Trends-2005!10!14 SP ion

8/8/2019 Child Trends-2005!10!14 SP ion

1/45

Family Process Measures

Kristin A. Moore, Ph.D.

Elizabeth C. Hair, Ph.D.

October 14, 2005


2/45

2

Overview of Presentation

1. Child Trends

2. NLSY 97 sample and structure

3. Available variables from NLSY97 data

4. Family Process Measures5. Child Trends work using NLSY97



3/45

3

What is Child Trends?

A nonpartisan, nonprofit research center dedicated toproviding science-based information for the purpose of

improving decisions, programs, and policies that affectchildren

Is NOT an advocacy organization

Disseminates research through a variety of vehicles

Monitors and develops new indicators of child, youth,and family well-being


4/45

4

Child Trends Areas of Research

Welfare and poverty

Fertility and family structure

Indicators

Data and measurement Early childhood development

Emerging issues- Fathers - Health

- Immigrants - Research to results


5/45

5

Child Trends and the NLSY97

National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY 97)

Sponsored by the BLS NORC

Child Trends Family Processes

Fertility & Marriage

Peers

Fatherhood


6/45

6

NLSY97 Sample

About 9,000 youths born 1980 to 1984

and living in U.S. households in 1997

Nationally representative

All living sample members are eligible

each year

Over 90 % of Round 1 participants have

participated in Rounds 6 or 7


7/45

7

Structural Features of the NLSY97

Youth Interview Event history-style rather than point-in-time

reports permits full dating of key events

Rostering permits unique identification of

jobs, household members, schools and

other elements despite discontinuity in

youths life


8/45

8

Sources of NLSY97 data

Annual youth interviews

Household Screener information from

initially sampled household (1997)

Parent Interview (1997)

Household Income Update from parentsthrough Round 5


9/45

9

Sources of NLSY97 data

(continued)

ASVAB scores (1997) (available after Round 3+)

High school transcript records (BLS only)

Geo-code file NLSY97 (available at county levelthrough contract; below county level available at BLS only)

School Surveys (1996 and 2000) for allhigh schools in original sampling units (BLSonly)


10/45

10

NLSY97 Youth Interview Topics

Employment and Job Training

Schooling, School-to-Work, College Financing,

College Choice

Household Composition and Family

Relationships

Marriage and Cohabitation, Dating, SexualBehavior

Fertility, Child Care


11/45


12/45

12

Family Process Items in

the NLSY97


13/45

13

Relationship of Residential ParentsDescriptionQuestions asked youth to describe the extent to which their parents weresupportive of each other.

Scale 6 questions 5 point scale with response categories ranging from Never to

Always

Available Data

Round 1: 12-14 year olds; mothers Round 5: 17-18 year olds Round 2/3: 14-15 year olds Round 6: 18 year olds

Cronbachs alpha Youth Report Residential mother is supportive of father = .74 Youth Report Residential father is supportive of mother = .81

Maternal Report Residential father is supportive of mother

= . 83

14


14/45

14

Estranged Parents RelationshipDescriptionQuestions asked youth to evaluate how often their residentialparents were in contact with their estranged parents, and how well

these two got along.

Scale 3 questions, 2 response sets:

- 1 question has a 9 point scale with response categories rangingfrom Never to Almost every day

- 2 questions have a 8 point scale with response categories rangingfrom Very Friendly to As hostile you can imagine

Available Data Round 1: 12-14 year olds, mothers Round 2/3: 14-15 year olds

Round 5: 17-18 year olds Round 6: 18 -22 year olds

15


15/45

15

Youth Contact with Absent Parent

DescriptionQuestions asked youth to describe how often they are in contactwith an absent parent.


- 2 questions have a response categories of Yes or No

- 3 questions have an 8 point scale with response categoriesranging from Never to Everyday

Available Data

Rounds 1, 2/3, 6: all youth

16


16/45

16

Communication with ParentsDescriptionThe question asked youth to describe how often they had

contact with her parents.

Scale

1 question

9 point scale with response categories ranging fromNever to Everyday

Available Data

Round 4: 19-20 year olds Round 5: 19-21 year olds

Rounds 6 & 7: all youth

17


17/45

17

Advice from ParentsDescriptionQuestions asked youth to describe how often they seek out aparent for advice on vocational or personal matters.

Scale 2 questions 4 point scale with response categories ranging from Often to

Never

Available Data Round 4: 19-20 year olds

Round 5: 19-21 year olds Rounds 6 & 7: all youth

18


18/45

18

Index of Family RoutinesDescriptionQuestions asked youth how often they participated in variousactivities with their family.

Scale 4 questions 8 point frequency scale response categories ranging from 0

times a week to 7 days a week

Available Data Round 1: 12-14 year olds

Round 2/3: 14-16 year olds Round 4: 16-18 year olds

19


19/45

19

Family Events and HolidaysDescriptionQuestions asked youth to explain how often their family gathersfor events and holidays, and how important these gatherings are

to the youth.


- 1 question has a 6 point scale with response categoriesranging from Never to About once a week or more

- 1 question has a 4 point scale with response categoriesranging from Not at all important to Very important

Available Data Round 5: 19-21 year olds Round 7: all youth

20


20/45

20

Parent-Youth RelationshipDescriptionQuestions measure parenting behaviors, and the closeness of the parent-adolescent relationship.

Scale 8 questions, 2 response sets:- 3 questions have a 5 point scale with response categories ranging

from Strongly Disagree to Agree- 5 questions have a 5 point scale with response categories ranging

from Never to Always

Available Data Round 1: 12-14 year olds Round 5: 17-18 year olds

Round 2: 14-16 year olds Round 7: all youth

Cronbachs alphaParent-Youth Relationship (Residential Mother) = .75

Parent-Youth Relationship (Residential Father) = .82Parent-Youth Relationship (Non-Residential Father) = .83Parent-Youth Relationship (Non-Residential Mother) = .85

21


21/45

21

Parent Closeness/Caring/Conflict

with YouthDescriptionQuestions asked youth to describe the extent to which they feltclose with their parent, and how much the youth felt that his/her

parent cared about him/her.

Scale 4 questions

10 point scale with response categories ranging from Notclose at all to Very close

Available Data

Round 5 & 7: All youth

Similar questions were asked in regards to other people in the youthslife, such as the dating partner, spouse, parent of the youths child (if not

the dating partner or spouse), and the youths best friend

22


22/45

22

Parent StrictnessDescriptionQuestions asked youth to describe how strict their parents weretowards them.

Scale 1 questions 2 point scale with response categories of Strict or

Permissive

Available Data

Round 1: all youth Round 2: 14-16 year olds Round 4: 16-18 year olds

23


23/45

23

Parent SupportivenessDescriptionQuestions asked youth to describe how supportive their parentswere towards them.

Scale 1 questions 3 point scale with response categories ranging from Not very

supportive to Very supportive

Available Data Rounds 1, 4, 6 & 7: all youth

Round 2/3: 14-16 year olds

24


24/45

24

Parental Monitoring of YouthDescription

Questions asked youth how much their parents knew about their friends,

teachers, and way they spend their time when theyre away from home.

Scale

4 questions, 5 point scale with response categories ranging from Knows

nothing to Knows everything

Available Data

Round 1: 12-14 year olds Round 5: 17-18 year olds

Round 2/3: 14-16 year olds Round 7: all youth

Round 4: 16-18 year olds

Cronbachs alpha

Residential Mother Monitoring =.71

Residential Father Monitoring = .81Non-Residential Mother Monitoring = .85

Non-Residential Father Monitoring = .85

25


25/45

25

Parent Knowledge of YouthDescriptionQuestions asked youth how much their parents knew about theiraspirations, values and friends.

Scale

4 questions

5 point scale with response categories ranging from Knowsnothing to Knows everything

Available Data

Round 5: 19-21 year olds Round 7: all youth

26


26/45

26

Conflict/Autonomy

DescriptionQuestions asked youth who made rules for them regardingtelevision viewing, curfews and with whom they could spend their

time. Questions also asked youth how often they had broken theserules, and who dealt with their rule breaking and how.

Scale

10 questions

4 different response sets

Available Data Round 1: 12-13 year olds, parents




27


27/45

27

Social Support of Youth

Description

The question asked youth who they would first turn to for help with

a personal problem.

Scale

1 question

14 possible choices ranging from biological parent to otheradults

Available Data

Round 1: 12-14 year olds Round 2/3: 14-16 year olds

Round 4 & 6: All youth

28


28/45

28

Religiosity Scale

DescriptionQuestions asked youth about their attitudes and beliefs towards

spirituality, as well as how often they have attended a worshipservice in the past year.

Scale

6 questions, 2 response scales- 5 questions have response categories of True or False:- 1 question has an 8 point scale with response categories ranging

from Never to Everyday

Available Data Round 4, 5, 6 & 7: all youth

Questions on religious beliefs were asked only of youth in Round 6

29


29/45

Related Measures

MOS General mental health

Youth dispositions Agreeableness Conscientiousness

Ecology of the youths neighborhood and home

Domains of Influence Friendships

Money Management Education/Job Training

30


30/45


Analyzed by Child Trends

31


31/45

Descriptive AnalysesThe Continued Importance of Quality Parent-Teen

Relationships & Interactions: Far More Positive Than Not

Measures Used

Parent-Youth Relationship (3 question scale)

Major Findings

Adolescents reported high esteem for their biological, residentialparents. Though adolescents attitudes towards their parents did dipas they aged (from 12-13 to 16-17), the dip was modest (from 70 to

61 percent) and evened out over time.

32


32/45

Person Year Analyses

Disconnected Youth: Family, Program and Youth Influenceson Becoming Disconnected and on Re-connecting

Measures Used Parent-Youth Relationship

Parental Monitoring

Parental Involvement in School

Parental Religiosity Family Routines Index

Social Supports

Major Findings

Parental school involvement and maternal monitoring protect againstyouth disconnecting.

33


33/45

The Continued Importance of Quality Parent-AdolescentRelationships During Late Adolescence

Hypothesis

Parenting practices will mediate the relationship between high-qualityparent-early adolescent relationships and adolescent delinquency andmental well-being.

Measures Used

Parent-Youth Relationship

Parental Monitoring / Awareness

Parental Supportiveness Parental Strictness

Family Routines Index

Path Analyses/ Structural Modeling

M di t M d lControls


34/45

Quality

Parent-

Adolescent

Relationship

Youth

Outcomes

2001

Strictness

Monitoring/

Awareness

of

Adolescent

Routine

Family

Activities

Supportiveness

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinEarly

Adolescence 1997

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinLater

Adolescence(1999)

YouthOutcomesEarly

Adulthood

(2000/2001)

Mediators ModelControls

Race-ethnicityAge

GenderFamily Structure

Poverty levelParentalEducation

Prior DelinquentBehavior

D li t B h i


35/45

Quality

Parent-

Adolescent

Relationship

Delinquent

Behaviors

2001

Strictness

Monitoring/

Awareness

of

Adolescent

Routine

Family

Activities

Supportiveness

.31***/.30***

.51***/.4

0***

.07*/-.01

.42***/.44***

-.01/.01

-.05*/-

.10*

-.03/-.03

-.06/-.02

-.12*/-.12*

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinEarly

Adolescence 1997

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinLater

Adolescence(1999)

YouthOutcomesEarly

Adulthood

(2000/2001)

Delinquent Behaviors

D li t B h i


36/45

Quality

Parent-

Adolescent

Relationship

Delinquent

Behaviors

2001

Strictness

Monitoring/

Awareness

of

Adolescent

Routine

Family

Activities

Supportiveness

.31***/.30***

.51***/.4

0***

.07*/-.01

.42***/.44***

-.01/.01

-.05*/-

.10*

-.03/-.03

-.06/-.02

-.12*/-.12*

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinEarly

Adolescence 1997

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinLater

Adolescence(1999)

YouthOutcomesEarly

Adulthood

(2000/2001)

Delinquent Behaviors

M t l W ll B i


37/45

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinEarly

Adolescence(1997)

Parent-Adolescent

RelationshipinLater

Adolescence(1999)

YouthOutcomesEarly

Adulthood

(2000/2001)

Quality

Parent-

Adolescent

Relationship

Strictness

MentalWell-

Being

2000

Monitoring/

Awareness

of

Adolescent

Routine

Family

Activities

Supportiveness

.33***/.29***

.52***/.3

9***

.44***/.44***

.07*/.01

.12*/.11*

.11*/.08*

.02/.04

.10**/.11

*

-.05*/-.06

Mental Well Being

38


38/45

The Family Religious Practices, Parental Religiosity and

Risk Behavior Among Adolescents

Hypothesis Higher levels of family religiosity will be associated with lower levels

of adolescent risk-taking behavior. The parent-adolescent relationship and parental awareness and

monitoring of adolescent activities will partially mediate theassociation between parental religiosity and adolescent risk taking.

Measures Used

Parent-Youth Relationship Parental Monitoring Parental Religiosity Family Routines Index

Path Analyses/ Structural Modeling

ControlsReligiosity Model


39/45

Negative

Peer

behaviors

Parental

Awareness

Routine

Family

Activities

Adolescent

Outcomes

Positive

Peer

behaviors

Parent

Youth

Relations

Parental

Religious

beliefs/

activities

OutcomesinLate

Adolescence(2000)

ReligiosityinEarly

Adolescence(1997)Parentingandpeersin

Adolescence(1997/1998)

Controls

Race-Ethnicity

Age

Gender

FamilyStructure

PovertyLevel

Neighborhood

Characteristics

Religiosity Model

PositiveSexual Activity


40/45

ReligiosityinEarly



OutcomesinLate

Adolescence(2000)

Negative

Peer

behaviors

1997

Parental

Awareness

1998

Routine

Family

Activities

1998

Outcome:

Sex

2000

Positive

Peer

behaviors

1997

Parent

Youth

Relations1997

Parental

Religious

beliefs/

activities

1997

.02

.09*

-.03

.21*

**.01

.19**

-.09**

-.06*.50***

.09**

.07*

.05

-.11*

.77***

-.15***

Sexual Activity

PositiveSubstance Use


41/45

Negative

Peer

behaviors

1997

Parental

Awareness

1998

Routine

Family

Activities1998

Outcome:

Substance

Use

2000

Positive

Peer

behaviors

1997

Parent

Youth

Relations1997

Parental

Religious

beliefs/

activities

1997

.09*

-.03+

.21***

.03

.18***

-.12**

.03.10**

-.12

***

.49***.07*

.02

.76***

-.13**

-.15*

OutcomesinLate

Adolescence(2000)

ReligiosityinEarly



Substance Use

42


42/45

Parent-youth relationships: Are quality relationships in

early adolescence related to better educational and labor

force outcomes?

Hypothesis

Positive parent-child relationships will be significantly and positively

associated with favorable educational and employment outcomes andwill be negatively associated with unfavorable educational and

employment outcomes.

Measures Used

Parent-Youth Relationship

Logistic Regression

43


43/45

Logistic Regression

Dependent Variables

Dropped out of HS and has no GED 0.70 *** 0.77 *

Delayed academic progress 0.57 * 0.64 +

Jobless because of incarceration 0.67 * 0.81In college prep or specialized

academic program 1.24 * 1.30 **

Believes s/he will have a collegedegree by age 30 1.44 * 1.19

Received income in the past year 1.05 0.99

Relationship with:

Mother Father

44


44/45

Conclusion

The family process measures in the

NLSY97 work Both psychometrically and substantively

A valuable addition to a labor force study


45/45

www.childtrends.org

www.childtrendsdatabank.org

Documents

Child Trends-2005!10!14 SP ion