Upload
merry-richard
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Child conflict in adoptive families and non-adoptive families:
The role of family communication
Martha A. Rueter
Department of Family Social Science
Margaret A. Keyes
Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research
Ascan F. Koerner
Department of Communication Studies
University of Minnesota
Sibling Interaction Behavior Study (SIBS)
Research Team
Matt McGue, PI
Bill Iacano
Irene Elkins
Meg Keyes
Martha Rueter
SIBS is funded by grants for the US government: NIMH, NIDA, NIAAA
N = 616 families, each with two participating children.
Child M age = 14.9 years.
Families with 2 adopted children: N = 285
Families with 1 adopted child, 1 biological child: N =
124
Families with 2 biological children: N = 208
M age of adoption = 4.7 months.
All adoptees placed within 2 years of age.
27.3% domestically adopted, 72.3% internationally adopted.
Sibling Interaction Behavior Study (SIBS)
Participants
Self-reported parent-child conflict
p < .05 p < .05 p < .05 p < .05
Dark Bars: Adoptive
Light Bars: Biological
Rueter et al, 2009
Mean
con
flic
t le
vel
p < .05 p < .05 p < .05
Within family comparisons: Self-reported parent-child conflict
Dark Bars: Adopted child
Light Bars:
Biological child
Rueter et al, 2009
Mean
con
flic
t le
vel
p < .05
p < .05
Dark Bars: Adoptive
Light Bars: Biological
Rueter et al, 2009
Mean
con
flic
t le
vel
Observed parent-child conflictual behavior
Family Communication Patterns Theory
(Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2004)
Optimal family functioning requires that members achieve a
Shared social reality exists when family members
(A) Agree.
(B) Accurately perceive their agreement.
shared social reality
Family Communication Patterns Theory
(Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2004)
Conversation Orientation: Emphasizes conversation to achieve shared social reality.
Conformity Orientation: Emphasizes conformityto achieve shared social reality.
Shared Social Reality Achieved through reliance on a combination of 2 orientations.
Conversation Orientation
Co
nfo
rmit
y O
rien
tati
on
Family Communication Patterns (FCP)
Low High
High
Consensual
Pluralistic
Protective
Laissez-Faire
Conversation Orientation
Co
nfo
rmit
y O
rien
tati
on
Consensual
Pluralistic
Protective
Laissez-Faire
Child conflict levels by Family Communication Pattern
Lowest conflict
Moderate conflict
Moderate conflict
Highest conflict
Family Communication
Pattern
ChildConflict
Hypothesis 1:
Child conflict varies by FCP.
Study Hypotheses
Family Communication
Pattern
ChildConflict
Hypothesis 2:
Child conflict varies by adoption status.
Study Hypotheses
Adoptedvs.
Non-adopted
Family Communication
Pattern
ChildConflict
Hypothesis 3:
Adoption status and FCP interact . . .
Study Hypotheses
Adoptedvs.
Non-adopted
Conversation Orientation
Co
nfo
rmit
y O
rien
tati
on
Consensual
Pluralistic
Protective
Laissez-Faire
Hypothesized interaction between Family Communication Pattern and adoption
status
Adopted similarto non-adopted
Adopted higherthan non-adopted
Adopted higher than non-adopted
Adopted higherthan non-adopted
Hypothesis 1:
Child conflict varies by FCP.
Hypothesis 3: Adoption status and FCP interact such
that . . .
Study Hypotheses
H3a: Among adoptive families, conflict varies by FCP.
H2b: Among non-adoptive families, conflict does not vary by
FCP.
Hypothesis 2:
Child conflict varies by adoption status.
M F E Y M F E Y M F E Y M F E Y
Family Communication
Patterns
(4 Latent Classes)
Observed Control
Observed Communication
ObservedListening
ObservedWarmth
Measuring Family Communication Patterns
Rueter et al, 2008
Dark Bars: Adoptive
Light Bars: Biological
Rueter et al, 2009
Sum of 4 observed ratings:
Child hostility to (1) mother and to (2) father.
Measuring Child Conflict
Extent to which child’s behavior was characterized as angry, hostile, contemptuous.
Child coercion to (3) mother and to (4) father. Extent to which child’s behavior was
characterized as demanding, threatening.
Conversation Orientation
Co
nfo
rmit
y O
rien
tati
on
Consensual
Pluralistic
Protective
Laissez-Faire
Lowest conflict
Moderate conflict
Moderate conflict
Highest conflict
Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis 1: Child conflict varies by FCP.
Observed Child Conflict by Family Communication Pattern
Hypothesis 1: Child conflict levels vary by FCP
Mean
con
flic
t le
vel
Dark Bars: Adoptive
Light Bars: Biological
Hypothesis 2: Child conflict levels vary by adoption status
Observed child conflict by adoption status
Mean
con
flic
t le
vel
Dark Bars: Adoptive
Light Bars: Biological
Observed child conflict by adoption status and FCP
Hypothesis 3: Adoption status and FCP interact
Mean
con
flic
t le
vel
Family Communication
Pattern
Family SharedSocial Reality
Adoptedvs.
Non-adopted
ChildConflict
Conclusions and Future Directions
Family Communication
Pattern
ChildConflict
Adoptedvs.
Non-adopted
Family Communication
Pattern
Family SharedSocial Reality
Adoptedvs.
Non-adopted
ChildConflict
Conclusions and Future Directions
Family Communication
Pattern
ChildConflict
Adoptedvs.
Non-adopted
Observed warm, supportive behavior
Dark Bars: Adoptive
Light Bars: Biological
Rueter et al, 2009
Mean
warm
th
level
Mother-adolescent
Father-adolescent
Observed parental control
p < .05
Dark Bars: Adoptive
Light Bars: Biological
Rueter et al, 2009
Mean
con
trol
level