The Relationship of Early Adolescent Functioning

7/26/2019 The Relationship of Early Adolescent Functioning

1/12

Journal of A bno rm al Child Psychology, V ol. 16, No. 6, 1988, pp. 707-718

T h e R e l a t i o n s h i p o f E a r l y A d o l e s c e n t

Fu n c t ion in g to Par e n t R e p or te d an d

A d ole s c e n t Pe r c e ive d I n te r p ar e n ta l C on f l i c t

M i c h e l l e W i e r so n 1 R e x F o r e h a n d 1 2 a n d A m a n d a M c C o m b s 1

I s a n a d o l e sc e n t 's p e r c e p t i o n o f i n te r p a r e n ta l c o n f l i c t i m p o r t a n t o r i s t h e p a r -

e n ts r e p o r t o f s u c h c o n f l i c t s u f f i c i e n t t o p r e d i c t a d o le s c e n t f u n c t i o n i n g ? T o

e x a m i n e t h is q u e s t io n , a s t u d y w a s u n d e r t a k e n w i t h 1 7 8 y o u n g a d o l e s c e n ts

an d the i r mo ther s , fa ther s , and soc ia l s tud ies teachers . A do lesc en t s com ple ted

a m e a s u r e o f t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s o f i n t e rp a r e n ta l c o n f li c t w h i l e m o t h e r s a n d

f a t h e r s c o m p l e t e d a s e l f - re p o r t m e a s u r e o f t h e i r c o n f li c t. T e a c h e r s p r o v i d e d

a n a s s e s s m e n t o f e a ch a d o l e s c e n t 's c o g n i t iv e a n d so c i a l f u n c t i o n i n g a t t w o

separa te t imes , 1 yea r apar t. R esu l t s ind ica ted tha t bo th pare n ta l r epor t, par -

t ic u l ar ly m a t e r n a l, a n d a d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f i n t e r p a r e n ta l c o n f l ic t w e r e

s i g n i fi c a n t l y r e l a t e d to a d o l e s c e n t c o g n i t i v e a n d s o c i a l f u n c t i o n i n g , a n d t h e

ma gn i tud e o f the cor re la t ions d id n o t d i f f e r s ign i fi can tly . H ierarch ica l r egres-

s i o n a n a ly s es w e r e p e r f o r m e d in w h i c h m o t h e r a n d f a t h e r r e p o r t o f c o n f li c t

w a s o r c e d i n t o t h e e q u a t i o n i n it ia l ly a n d a d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f s u c h c o n -

f l i c t w a s a l lo w e d t o e n t e r f r e e l y . T h e s e a n a ly s e s in d i c a t e d t h a t a d o l e s c e n t s '

p e r c e p t i o n s a c c o u n t e d f o r u n i q u e v a ri an c e in t h e ir f u n c t i o n i n g , b e y o n d t h a t

a c c o u n t e d f o r b y p a r e n t a l r e p o rt . T h e r e s u l ts a r e d i s c u s s e d i n t e r m s o f t h e

s p e c i fi c r o l e s t h a t p a r e n t a l c o n f l i c t a n d a d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n s o f s u c h c o n -

f l i c t p l a y a n d t h e p o s s i b l e m e c h a n i s m s b y w h i c h e a c h o p er a te s .

M a n u s c r i p t r e c e i v e d i n f i n a l f o r m A p r i l 2 8 , 1 9 8 8 .

T h i s r e s e a r c h w a s s u p p o r t e d , i n p a r t , b y t h e W i l l i a m T . G r a n t F o u n d a t i o n a n d b y t h e

U n i v e r s i t y o f G e o r g i a s I n s t i t u t e f o r B e h a v i o r a l R e s e a r c h .

1 P s y c h o l o g y D e p a r t m e n t , U n i v e r s i t y o f G e o r g i a , A t h e n s , G e o r g i a 3 06 0 2.

2 A d d r e s s a l l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e t o R e x F o r e h a n d , P s y c h o l o g y D e p a r t m e n t , U n i v e r s i t y o f G e o r g i a ,

A t h e n s , G e o r g i a 3 0 6 0 2 .

707

0091-0627/88/1200-0707506.00/0 9 1988 Plenum P ublishing Corporation


2/12

7 0 8 W i e rs o n F o r e h a n d a n d M c C o m b s

I N T R O D U C T I O N

R e s e a r c h c o n s i s t e n t ly h a s s h o w n t h a t i n t e r p a r e n t a l c o n f l i c t, i n b o t h i n-

t ac t and d ivo rced f am i l ie s , i s r e l a ted to d i f f i cu l ti e s in ch i ld ren ' s an d ado les -

cen t s ' f unc t ion ing , inc lud ing ex te rna li z ing and in te rna l i z ing p rob lem s as we l l

a s de f ic i ts in cogn i tive and soc ia l com pe tenc e (Emery , 1982 ; Long , F oreh and ,

Fa ube r , Bro dy , 1987 ; Shaw Em ery , 1987). Nev er the les s , i t r em ains un -

c lea r how in te rpa re n ta l conf l i c t nega t ive ly in f luences deve lopm en t . O ne pos -

s ib i li ty i s tha t such con f l i c t adver se ly a f f ec t s pa ren t ing sk il ls (Em ery , 1982).

E x t r e m e c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n p a r e n t s m a y c r e a t e i n c o n s i s t e n t m o o d s i n e i t h e r

o r b o t h p a r e n t s a n d , t h e r e f o r e , c o n t r i b u t e t o i n c o n s is t e n t p a r e n t in g b e h a v i o r

( e .g . , en fo rcemen t o f ru les ) .

A n o t h e r p o s s i b il i ty is t h a t t h e o b s e r v e d r e l a t io n b e t w e e n i n t e rp a r e n t a l

conf l i c t and ch i ld /ado lescen t func t ion ing i s s ign if ican t fo r r easons o th e r than

the d i s rup t ion i t c r ea tes in the pa ren t s ' l i ves and pa ren t ing sk i l l s . Ra the r ,

i t m a y b e t h e c h il d 's p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e c o n f l i c t t h a t i s t h e i m p o r t a n t v a r i a b le .

Th a t i s, i f ch i ld ren pe rce ive the con f l i c t and v iew i t a s s e r ious and po ten t i a l -

l y t h r e a t e n in g t o t h e m o r t h e f a m i l y , t h e y m a y d i s p l a y d i ff i c u lt i e s i n f u n c -

t ion ing . Such a hypo thes i s i s p laus ib le g iven r esea rch showing tha t an

i n d i v id u a l 's p e r c e p t i o n o f s t i m u l i is m o r e m o t i v a t i n g t h a n t h e a c t u a l s t im u l i

(Mishe l , 1973) . Cons i s t en t w i th th i s f ind ing , Schaefe r (1965) demons t r a ted

t h a t w h a t c h i ld r e n p e r c e i v e t h a t t h e i r p a r e n t s d o o r s a y , n o t w h a t p a r e n t s

ctu lly d o o r s a y , is o f m o s t i m p o r t a n c e i n a f f e c ti n g c h i ld r e n 's b e h a v i o r .

Th us , i t i s pos s ib le tha t p e rce p t ion o f in te rpa ren ta l conf l i c t is m ore in f luen -

t i a l than i s ac tua l conf l i c t .

C u m m i n g s a n d C u m m i n g s ( 1 9 8 8 ) h a v e d e v e l o p e d a m o d e l t o e x p l a i n

w h y p e r c e p t i o n o f c o n f li c t m a y b e o f p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e . T h e y s u g g e s t t h a t

c h i ld r e n 's p e r c e p t i o n s o f i n t e r p a r e n ta l c o n f l i c t d e t e r m i n e h o w t h e y w ill c o p e

wi th the conf l i c t . G iven an angry envr ionmen t ( i . e . , i n te rpa ren ta l conf l i c t ) ,

c h i ld r e n m a y b e n e g a t iv e l y a f f e c t e d b y t h a t e n v i r o n m e n t i f t h e y p e r c e i v e i t

a s t h r e a t e n in g a n d b e y o n d th e i r c o n t r o l. T h i s p e r c e p t i o n c a n l e a d to c o p i n g

s t ra t e g ie s t h a t a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i th t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p s y c h o p a t h o l o g y . A s

C u m m i n g s a n d C u m m i n g s n o t e , w o r k i n t h e a r e a o f c h il d re n 's c o p i n g s t ra t e -

g ies i s in i t s in fancy , and the as soc ia t ion be tween a pa r t i cu la r cop ing s ty le

a n d p s y c h o p a t h o l o g y h a s n o t b e e n d e l i n e a te d . N e v e r t h el e s s, t h e n e c e s s a ry

f i r s t s tep in the proce ss , wh ich th is s tud y addresses , i s to determ ine i f a ch i ld ' s

p e r c e p t i o n o f i n t e r p a r e n t a l c o n f l i c t is i m p o r t a n t . I f i t i s, th e n s u b s e q u e n t

w o r k c a n a d d r e s s t h e m e c h a n i s m s ( e .g . , f a u l t y c o p i n g s t r at e g ie s ) b y w h i c h

s u c h c o n f l i c t l e a d s t o p o o r f u n c t i o n i n g .

I n a s t u d y d e s i g n e d t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r c h i l d p e r c e p t i o n s o f i n t e r -

pa ren ta l conf l i c t a r e adequ a te measu res o f ac tua l confl i c t, Em ery and O 'L eary

(1 98 2) c o m p a r e d p a r e n t a l m e a s u r e s o f m a r i t a l a d j u s t m e n t a n d o p e n m a r i t a l


3/12

Interparental Co nflict 7 9

conflict with children s perceptions of discord in their parents marriages.

They found that children s perceptions correlated significantly with actual

level of discord and that children s perceptions of such conflict were an ac-

curate predictor of deficits in their own functioning. However, these investi-

gators did not specifically compare children s perceptions of conflict and

parental report of conflict to discern which of the two variables is the more

important factor in predicting deficits in funct ioning or if child perceptions

of conflict accounted for variance beyond that accounted for by the actual

level of conflict.

One purpose of this study was to assess and compare the association

between adolescent functioning and each of the following two variables: (1)

adolescent perception of interparental conflict and (2) parental report of such

conflict. A second purpose was to determine if the adolescent s perception

of conflict contributed unique variance, beyond that contributed by the paren-

tal report, in predicting functioning. By considering each of these questions,

the importance of perceptions of interparental conflict could be determined.

It was predicted that both parental report of interparental conflict and

adolescent perception of conflict would correlate significantly with deficits

in functioning. However, it also was predicted, in light of Mischel (1973),

that the correlations between perceptions of conflict and functioning would

be significantly larger than the correlation between the parent report of such

conflict and functioning. In addition, we predicted that adolescent reports

of parental conflict would contribute variance beyond that accounted for

by the parental report.

Since data on adolescent functioning were available at two separate

times, 1 year apart, both the immediate and long-term association between

such conflict and functioning was examined. We predicted that significant

concurrent relationships between conflict and functioning present at the first

assessment would continue to be evident 1 year later. That is, interparental

conflict would be correlated with current adolescent functioning as well as

functioning 1 year later. Finally, since interparental conflict may be differen-

tially related to different areas o f functioning, we examined four areas: cog-

nitive competence, prosocial competence, internalizing problems, and

externalizing problems.

M E T H O D

ubjects

Participants were 178 young adolescents and their mothers, fathers, and

social studies teachers. At the time of the first assessment, subjects ranged


4/12

71

W ierson Forehand and M cCombs

in age from 10 years 10 months to 15 years 6 months, with a mean age of

13 years 4 months. Seventy-nine were from recently divorced families (in

which the biological parents divorced within the previous 12 months), and

the remaining 99 were from families in which the biological parents were

still married. All the subjects in the divorced group were in the custody of

their mothers . The average time since parental divorce at the first assessment

was 5 months (range 1 month to 12 months). None o f the divorced mothers

were remarried.

The socioeconomic status (SES) of each participating family was de-

termined using the Myers and Bean (1968) two-factor index of social posi-

tion. The social position score for each family was calculated according to

the individual with the highest educational and occupational level in the house-

hold. The Myers and Bean classification system yields possible scores rang-

ing from 11 to 77, with lower scores indicating higher social position. Scores

from the families in this study ranged from 11 to 66, with a mean score of

31, indicating that the sample was predominantly middle to lower middle

class.

Families were recruited for the project through notices posted in local

communities, fliers distributed at public schools, advertisements placed in

local newspapers, and public service announcements broadcast on local ra-

dio stations. In addition, recently divorced parents o f young adolescents were

identified through local courthouse records and contacted by mail. Approx-

imately 40% of those contacted agreed to part icipate. All notices and letters

invited mothers and young adolescents to participate in a research project

examining mother-adolescent relationships.

For each time they participated in the project, which involved a 2-hour

session at a southeastern university, each mother-adolescen t dyad was paid

$50. Fathers of the adolescent subjects were paid $15 for completing and

returning questionnaires mailed to them. Questionnaires also were mailed

to each adolescent's current social studies teacher, all of whom were paid

$5 for completing and returning them.

Measures

Predictor Variables

The two predictor variables were parent report o f

conflict and adolescent perception of parental conflict. Parental conflict was

assessed by using the O'Leary-Porter Scale (OPS), a 10-item parent-completed

scale developed to measure the frequency of overt parental conflict in the

presence of the adolescent (Porter & O'Leary, 1980). The items are rated along

a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from very often to never. The OPS

yields scores from 0 to 40. Porter and O'Leary (1980) reported a test-retest

reliability of the OPS over a 2-week period of .96. The correlation between


5/12

Interparental onflict

7

t h e O P S a n d t h e M a r it a l A d j u s t m e n t T e s t w as .6 3. B o t h m a t e r n a l O P S s co r es

( M O P S ) a n d f a t h e r O P S s c or e s ( F O P S ) w e r e u s e d. H i g h e r s c or es o n th e O P S

i n d i c a t e

less

c o n f l i c t ; h o w e v e r , f o r p u r p o s e s o f t h i s s tu d y , s c o r i n g w a s r e v e r s e d

( 4 0 - s c o r e ) s o t h a t h i g h e r s c o r e s i n d i c a t e d m o r e c o n f l i c t .

A d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f m a r i t a l c o n f l i c t w a s a p p r a i s e d b y t h e P e r s o n a l

D a t a F o r m ( P D F ) . T h e P D F is a 3 0 -i te m i n v e n t o r y c o n t a i n i n g s t a te m e n t s

c o n c e r n i n g t h e a d o l e s ce n t 's h o m e a n d s c h o o l l if e ( E m e r y O ' L e a r y , 1 9 82 ).

I t e m s a r e s c o r e d o n a s c a le o f 0 ( n o t t r u e ) , 1 ( s o m e t i m e s t r u e ) , a n d 2 ( tr u e ) .

E m b e d d e d w i t h i n t h e i n v e n t o r y a re 1 0 i te m s t h a t E m e r y a n d O ' L e a r y ( 1 98 2 )

f o u n d t h r o u g h f a c t o r a n a ly s is t o l o a d o n a f a c t o r b e s t la b e le d a s p e rc e p t i o n s

o f i n t e r p a r e n t a l c o n f l i c t . T h e s e 1 0 i t e m s w e r e u s e d t o c o n s t i t u t e t h e m e a -

s u r e o f t h e a d o l e s c e n t s ' p e r c e p t i o n s o f i n t e r p a r e n t a l c o n f l i c t . H i g h e r s c o r e s

o n t h e P D F i n d i c a t e m o r e c o n f l i c t .

Criterion Variables

T h e c r i t e r io n v a r i ab l e s w e r e g e n e r a t e d f r o m s c h o o l -

b a s e d d a t a o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e a d o l e s c e n ts ' c u r r e n t s o c i al s tu d ie s t e a c h e r o r

r e g u l a r c l a s s r o o m t e a c h e r i f t h e r e w a s n o t a s p e c i f i c t e a c h e r f o r s o c i a l s tu d i e s .

M e a s u r e s w e r e s e l e ct e d t h a t a l l o w e d t h e a s se s s m e n t o f f o u r a r e a s o f f u n c -

t i o n in g : c o g n i ti v e c o m p e t e n c e , p r o s o c i a l c o m p e t e n c e , e x t e rn a l iz i n g p r o b l e m s ,

a n d i n t er n a li z in g p r o b l e m s . T h e m e a s u r e s u s e d w e r e a c a d e m i c g ra d e s , t e a c h e r

j u d g m e n t o f c o g n i t iv e a n d s o c i al c o m p e t e n c e , a n d t e a c h e r r a ti n g s o f i n t e r-

n a li z in g a n d e x t er n a li z in g b e h a v i o r p r o b l e m s . A c a d e m i c g r a d e s w e r e o b t a i n e d

f o r m a t h , E n g l i s h , s c i e n c e, a n d s o c i al st u d i es f r o m t h e a d o l e s c e n t ' s m o s t r e -

c e n t re p o r t c a r d . L e t t e r g r a d e s w e r e c o n v e r t e d t o a n u m e r i c a l m e a s u r e ( A

= 4 , B = 3 , C = 2 , D = 1 , F = 0 ) a n d u s e d t o c a l c u l a t e a t o t a l g r a d e

p o i n t a v e r a g e ( G P A ) , r a n g i n g f r o m 0 t o 4 .

T e a c h e r s c o m p l e t e d th e T e a c h e r ' s R a t i n g S c a le o f A c t u a l C o m p e t e n c e

( T R S ) , a 2 0 - it e m s c a le t o a s s es s t h e t e a c h e r 's j u d g m e n t o f t h e a d o l e s c e n t 's

c o m p e t e n c e ( H a r t e r , 1 9 82 ). T h e T R S y i e l d s f o u r s u b s c a le s c o re s ; f o r t h e p u r -

p o s e s o f t h e p r e se n t s t u d y , t h e c o g n i ti v e ( T C O G ) a n d s o ci al ( T S O C ) c o m p e -

t e n c e s c al es w e r e u s e d . T h e c o g n i t i v e c o m p e t e n c e s u b s c a l e p r i m a r i l y r e la t e s

t o a c a d e m i c p e r f o r m a n c e a n d t h e s o c ia l s u b s c al e f o cu s e s u p o n i n t e r p e r s o n a l

p e e r i ss u es . B o t h s u b s c a l es c o n t a i n 7 i t e m s w i t h p o s s i b le s c o r e s r a n g i n g f r o m

1 t o 4 , w h e r e h i g h e r s c o r es i n d i c a te h i g h e r c o m p e t e n c e . H a r t e r ( 1 9 8 2) r e p o r t e d

t h a t t h e f a c t o r i a l v a l id i t y o f t h e T R S h a s b e e n i n v e s t i g a te d w i t h t w o i n d e p e n -

d e n t s a m p l e s , a n d r e s u lt s h a v e c o n s i s t e n t l y i d e n t i f i e d f o u r f a c t o r s t h a t c o r -

r e s p o n d t o t h e p e e r s u b sc a l es . I n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y re l ia b i li ti e s f o r t h e f o u r

T R S s u b s c a l e s r a n g e f r o m . 9 3 t o . 9 6 .

T e a c h e r s a l s o c o m p l e t e d t h e R e v i s e d B e h a v i o r P r o b l e m C h e c k l i s t

( R B P C ) , a n 8 9 - i t e m s c a le d e s ig n e d t o a p p r a i s e a d u l t r a t i n g s o f ch i l d b e -

h a v i o r a l d e v i a n c e ( Q u a y P e t e r s o n , 1 98 7). T w o o f t h e s ix s c al es o f t h e R B P C

w e r e u s ed . A n a s s e s s m e n t o f e x t e r n a l iz i n g b e h a v i o r p r o b l e m s i n t h e a d o l e s -

c e n t w a s o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e C o n d u c t D i s o r d e r ( C D ) s c al e; a d o l e s c e n t i n te r -

n a li zi n g b e h a v i o r p r o b l e m s w e r e a s se s se d b y t h e A n x i e t y - W i t h d r a w a l ( A W )


6/12

712

W ierson Forehand and M cCom bs

scale. Quay and Peterson (1987) have presented extensive reliability (e.g.,

mean test-retest reliability across subscales of .67, mean interrater reliability

across subscales of .64) and validity (e.g., discrimination between clinic-

referred and normal groups of children) data.

rocedure

The announcements used to recruit subjects instructed interested par-

ties to phone the experimenter for more information. When contacted, the

experimenter first determined whether the potential subjects were eligible,

according to such criteria as the adolescent s age and the parent s marital

status. After describing the project to eligible volunteers, the experimenter

scheduled a data-collection session at the university for those who agreed

to participate. Mothers were requested to bring to the session a copy of the

adolescent s most recent report card.

At the beginning of the session, the experimenter explained the project

to each mother-adolescent dyad. The subjects then were given consent forms

to read and sign while the experimenter recorded the adolescent s grades from

the provided report card. A release of information form was signed by the

mother and the adolescent, authorizing teachers to complete the question-

naires concerning the adolescent. The dyad was then administered a series

of questionnaires, presented in a random order. Only the mother s OPS and

the adolescent s PDF were relevant to the purposes of the present study.

A packet of questionnaires was sent to the adolescent s father, who was

requested to complete the forms and return them in an enclosed return

envelope.

One year later the mothers, fathers, and adolescents were recontacted

and invited to participate again; the experimental procedures were repeated

with the 123 dyads who were contacted and consented to participate.

RESULTS

Means and standard deviations for each of the predictor and criterion

variables, at both assessment times, are presented in Table I. One of the

primary questions under investigation concerned the relationship of adoles-

cent functioning to both parent-reported interparental conflict and adoles-

cent perception of interparental conflict. To explore the relationships, Pearson

correlations were conducted between all criterion variables (GPA, TCOG,

TSOC, CD, and AW) and each of the three reports of conflict (adoles-

cent PDF, mother OPS, father OPS). Table II presents the results of those

correlations for the criterion variables at both Time 1 and Time 2. Note that


7/12

Interparental Con flict 7 3

Table I. Means and Stand ard Devi-

ations for All Variables

Variables a Mean S

Predictor

PD F 5.05 4.60

MO PS 28.77 6.20

FO PS 29.68 4.97

Criterion

Timel

GP A 3.10 0.79

TCO G 3.34 0.74

TSOC 3.19 0.72

CD 2.52 5.49

AW 2.47 2.95

Time 2

GP A 3.03 0.83

TCO G 3.37 0.69

TSOC 3.23 0.73

CD 4.34 9.65

AW 2.00 2.74

PDF = Personal Data Form;

MOPS = mother's O'Leary-Porter

Scale; FO PS = father's O'Lea ry-

Por ter Scale; TCO G = Cognitive

subscale of Teacher Rating of

Act ual Competence; TSOC =

Social subscale of Teacher R ating

of Actual Competence; CD =

Conduct Disorder scale of teacher-

rated Revised Behavior Problem

Checklist; AW = Anxiety-With-

drawal scale of teach er-rated Re-

vised Behavior Problem Checklist.

T i m e 1 p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b le s ( P D F , M O P S , F O P S ) w e r e c o r r e l a t e d w it h t h e

c r i t er i o n v a r ia b l e s a t b o t h a s s e ss m e n t s o f a d o l e s c e n t f u n c t i o n i n g . A t T i m e

1, a d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f c o n f l i c t ( P D F ) c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i ca n t l y w i t h G P A ,

T C O G , C D , a n d A W . A t T i m e 2 , t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s r e m a i n e d s i g n i fi c a n t f o r

G P A a n d T C O G b u t n o t f o r a n y o t h e r o f t h e c r i t e ri o n v a r i a b le s . M o t h e r

r e p o r t o f c o n f l i c t ( M O P S ) c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n tl y w i t h a l l t h e c r i t e ri o n v a r i-

a b le s a t T i m e 1 a n d w i t h G P A , T C O G , T S O C , a n d A W a t T i m e 2. F a t h e r

r e p o r t o f c o n f l i ct w as s i g n i f i c a n t ly r e l a t ed o n l y t o A W a t T i m e 1 b u t d i d

c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h G PA ,~ T C O G , a n d T S O C a t T i m e 2 . I t s h o u l d

a l s o b e n o t e d t h a t P D F w a s s ig n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i th M O P S ( r = . 43 ,

p < .0 1 ) a n d F O P S ( r = . 45 , p < . 01 ). F u r t h e r m o r e , M O P S a n d F O P S

w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d ( r = . 61 , p < . 0 5) .

A s e c o n d q u e s t i o n w a s w h e t h e r a d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f c o n f l i ct o r p a r -

e n t r e p o r t o f s u c h c o n f l i ct is t h e m o r e i m p o r t a n t v a r i a b l e in p r e d i c t i n g f u n c -

t i o n i n g . T o a s se s s t h is i ss u e , t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t f o r P D F a n d e a c h


8/12

714

Wierson, Forehand, and M eComhs

Table I I . C o r r e l a t io n s B e t w e en E a c h P r e d i c t o r a n d C r i t e r io n V a r i a b l e

T i m e 1 C r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e sa

p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e sa G P A T C O G T S O C C D A W

T i m e 1

P D F - .27 a - .28 a - .15 .25 a .32 a

(174) b (142) (142) (143) (143)

M O PS - . 16 c - . 23 a - . 26a 30 a .36 a

(178) (146) (146) (147) (147)

FO PS - .15 - .10 - .10 .08 .31 a

(106) (89) (89) (89) (89)

T i m e 2

PD F - . 21 r - . 24c - .11 .16 .15

(12 0) (102) (102) (102) (102)

M O PS - .20 - .25 a - .31 a .17 .26a

(123) (105) (105) (10 5) (105)

F O PS - .23 r - .28 ~ - .28 ~ .03 .16

(83) (71) (71) (70) (70)

a T C O G = C o g n i t i v e s u b s c al e o f T e a c h e r R a t i n g o f A c t u a l C o m p e t e n c e ( T R S );

T S O C = S o cia l s u b s ca l e o f T e a c h e r R a t i n g o f A c t u a l C o m p e t e n c e (T R S ) ; C D =

C o n d u c t D i s o r d e r s c al e o f t e a c h e r - r a te d R e v is e d B e h a v i o r P r o b l e m C h e c k l is t ;

A W = A n x i e t y - W i t h d r a w a l s ca le o f t e a ch e r - r a t ed R e v is e d B e h a v i o r P r o b l e m

C h e c k l is t ; P D F = P e r s o n a l D a t a F o r m , m e a s u r e o f a d o l e sc e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f

i n t e r p a r e n t a l co n f l ic t ; M O P S = m o t h e r s O L e a r y - P o r t e r S c a le , m a t e r n a l

r e p o r t o f i n t e r p a r e n t a l c o n f l i c t; F O P S = f a t h e r s O L e a r y - P o r t e r S ca le , p a t e r n a l

r e p o r t o f i n t e r p a r e n t a l c o n f l i c t .

b N u m b e r s i n p a r e n t h e s e s i n d i c a t e s a m p l e s i z e s .

cp < .05.

d p < 01

c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e w a s c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n M O P S a n d e a c h

c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e , a s w e r e t h e s a m e c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s f o r

P D F a n d F O P S . N o n e o f t h e s e c o m p a r i s o n s w a s s i g n i f i c a n t ( a l l z s c o r e s . 0 5 .

A l t h o u g h a d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f c o n f l i c t a n d p a r e n t a l r e p o r t o f c o n -

f l i c t a r e n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p t o a d o l e s c e n t f u n c -

t i o n i n g , a d o l e s c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f s u c h c o n f l i c t m a y n e v e r t h e l e s s c o n t r i b u t e

u n i q u e v a r i a n c e b e y o n d t h a t a c c o u n t e d f o r b y p a r e n t a l r e p o r t . M u l t i p l e h i -

e r a r c h i c a l r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s w e r e c o n d u c t e d t o t e s t s i g n i f i c a n t i n d e p e n d e n t

c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f a d o l e s c e n t s p e r c e p t i o n , b e y o n d p a r e n t a l r e p o r t , t o t h e i r o w n

f u n c t i o n i n g . M O P S a n d F O P S w e r e f o r c e d i n t o t h e e q u a t i o n s a n d a d o l e s -

c e n t p e r c e p t i o n o f c o n f l i c t w a s a l l o w e d t o e n t e r f r e e l y . E n t e r i n g P D F l a s t

i n t h e r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n a l l o w e d t h e e x a m i n a t i o n o f i ts u n i q u e c o n t r i b u -

t i o n o n c e t h e e f f e c t s o f M O P S a n d F O P S ( p r e v i o u s l y e n t e r e d ) w e r e p a r t i a l e d

o u t . T a b l e I I I p r e s e n t s t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s a t b o t h T i m e

1 a n d T i m e 2 . T h e c r i t e r i o n f o r e n t r y o f t h e P D F w a s s e t a t . 1 5 . T h e r e f o r e ,

o n l y t h o s e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s w h e r e P D F m e t t h i s c r i t e r i o n a r e s h o w n i n


9/12

Interparenta l C on f l ic t 7 5

Table III. At Time 1, PDF accounted for a significant amou nt of variance

in GPA , TCO G, and TCD. At Time 2, the contribution of Time 1 PD F ac-

count ed for a significant amo unt of variance in TCO G and a marginally sig-

nificant amo unt of variance in GPA. 3

Finally, to take into account the role that adolescent gender and age

and parental marital status and SES may contribute to adolescent function-

ing, each o f the hierarchical regression analyses was repeated with these four

variables, as well as MOPS and FOPS, forced into the equations initially.

In terms of the contributions of the PDF score, the results remained consis-

tent with the analyses reported above except that GPA at Time 2 was no

longer significant at a borderline level of significance.

DISCUSSION

As expected, adolescent perception of conflict correlated significantly

with deficits in cognitive compe tence an d teacher perceptions of internaliz-

ing and externalizing problems at both assessments. Consistent with previ-

ous studies (Emery, 1982), mot her report o f conflict also was correlated with

deficits in adolescent functioning. Alt houg h father report of conflict at Time

1 correlated significantly with only one variable at Time 1, it did correlate

significantly with both cognitive and social variables at Time 2. Overall, these

results indicate that both adolescent perception and parent report are relat-

ed to deficits in adolescent functioning. To the best of our knowledge, this

is the first study that has demonstrated both a concurrent and a long-term

relationship between interparental conflict and adolescent functioning.

The correlations between parental report and the criterion variables did

not differ from the correlations between adolescent perception and the

criterion variables. This finding suggests that the assessment of interparen-

tal conflict from either perspective is equally effective in predicting adoles-

cent functioning. While contrary to our hypothesis, the finding does lend

some support to Emery and O'Leary's (1982) conclusion that children's rat-

ings of conflict are valid.

Although the comparison of perceived conflict and parent report of

conflict did not yield results as predicted, the multiple hierarchical regres-

~Direct comparisons between the zero-order correlations presented in Table II and the multiple

regressions reported in Table III cannot be made because of changes in sample size. Any

missing data point (e.g., father data) for a subject resulted in the subject's being deleted from

the regression analysis. As a consequence, the R 2 accounted for by the mother OPS and

father OPS in the regression analysis may be different from the square of a zero-order cor-

relation. For example, based on 146 subjects, the correlation between MOPS and TCOG at

Time 1 was - .23 or 5 of the variance; yet in the regression equation, based on 87 subjects,

MOPS plus FOPS accounted for only 2~ of the variance.


10/12

T

e

H

i

e

a

c

c

R

e

o

A

n

y

E

m

i

n

n

h

U

n

q

C

b

o

o

A

d

e

P

c

o

o

n

e

p

e

a

C

c

o

A

d

e

F

o

n

I

n

e

m

e

a

R

2

w

h

T

m

e

1

P

D

F

V

a

a

e

a

S

e

F

f

R

e

e

e

a

T

m

e

1

G

P

A

T

G

T

T

m

e

2

G

P

A

T

G

1

M

o

h

a

a

h

O

P

1

1

2

1

.

0

2

P

D

F

2

4

3

1

.

0

.

0

Y

1

M

o

h

a

a

h

O

P

1

0

2

8

.

0

2

P

D

F

2

6

3

8

.

0

.

0

c

1

M

o

h

a

F

h

O

P

5

4

2

8

.

1

2

P

D

F

7

3

3

8

.

2

.

1

a

1

M

o

h

a

a

h

O

P

2

1

2

7

.

0

2

P

D

F

2

1

3

7

.

0

.

0

b

1

M

o

h

a

a

h

O

P

3

0

2

6

.

0

2

P

D

F

4

0

3

6

.

1

.

0

c

a

T

G

=

C

v

s

u

e

o

T

s

R

n

o

A

c

u

C

m

p

e

C

=

C

D

is

o

d

s

e

o

e

a

e

R

s

B

o

P

o

e

m

C

s

~

Documents

The Relationship of Early Adolescent Functioning