University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Affection and conflict in family relationships

(USC Thesis Other)

Affection and conflict in family relationships

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these w ill be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing
from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
ProQuest Information and Learning
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, M l 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
AFFECTION AND CONFLICT IN FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS
by
Angele Calista Fauchier
A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF ARTS
(PSYCHOLOGY)
December 2001
Copyright 2001 Angele Fauchier
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UM I Number 1411024
Copyright 2001 by
Fauchier, Angele Calista
A ll rights reserved.
U M I*
UM I Microform 1411024
Copyright 2002 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, M l 48106-1346
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T he G raduate School
U n iversity Park
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90089-1695
T h is th e sis, w ritte n b y
AnqjeJe.. Fauchier____________
U n der th e d ire c tio n o f h& c. . T hesis
C om m ittee, a n d a p p ro v e d b y a ll it s m em bers,
h a s been p re se n te d to a n d a c c e p te d b y The
G radu ate S chool, in p a r tia l fu lfillm e n t o f
req u irem en ts fo r th e d eg ree o f
M.asffcC a £ L A rfc
Dean o f G raduate S tu dies
D a te December 17, 2001
CO M M ITTEE
c*S
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table of Contents
List of Tables.....................................................................................................................iii
List of Figures.................................................................................................................. iii
Abstract............................................................................................................................. iv
Introduction........................................................................................................................ 1
Methods.............................................................................................................................. 8
Overview......................................................................................................................... 8
Participants......................................................................................................................8
Measures....................................................................................................................... 10
Affection................................................................................................................... 10
Conflict..................................................................................................................... 12
Results...............................................................................................................................14
Descriptive Statistics.................................................................................................... 14
Affection................................................................................................................... 14
Conflict..................................................................................................................... 15
Correlations................................................................................................................... 17
Affection...................................................................................................................17
Conflict..................................................................................................................... 17
Hypothesis 1..................................................................................................................19
Hypothesis 2..................................................................................................................19
Hypothesis 3..................................................................................................................19
Hypothesis 4................................................................................................................. 25
Hypothesis 5................................................................................................................. 26
Discussion........................................................................................................................28
References........................................................................................................................34
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
List of Tables
Table 1 Descriptive Statistics for Measures ofAffection and Conflict for Mothers,
Fathers, and Children (N = 8 7 ).............................................................................. 16
Table 2 Intercorrelations among Family Members ’ Reports o f Affection and Conflict
(N = 87)..................................................................................................................... 18
Table 3 Summary o f Stepwise Regression Analyses fo r Variables Predicting Parent-
Child Affection (N = 87)...........................................................................................20
Table 4 Summary o f stepwise regression analyses for variables predicting parent-
child conflict (N = 87)..............................................................................................27
List of Figures
Figure I Plot o f High and Low Levels o f Marital Conflict as a Moderator for the
Effect o f Marital Affection on Parent-Child Affection..........................................22
Figure 2 Marital Versus Parent-Child Affection, Split by Low and High Levels o f
Marital Conflict According to Fathers................................................................... 24
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
iv
Abstract
This research project is the first study to examine the role o f both affection
and conflict in the spillover of marital into parent-child relationships. This study
examined the reports of mothers, fathers, and children regarding affection and
conflict in marital and parent-child relationships. A community sample of 87
families, consisting of a mother, a father, and a nine- or ten-year-old child, completed
self-report measures. All reporters indicated that marital affection was related to
parent-child affection. Significant correlations between marital conflict and parent-
child conflict were found in reports of mothers and children, but not fathers. Fathers’
reports pointed to marital conflict as a moderator of the relation between marital
affection and parent-child affection. There were no moderators of the relation
between marital conflict and parent-child conflict. These results suggest that conflict
and affection are distinct yet related features of marital and parent-child
relationships.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
Introduction
A great deal of research has supported the relationship between marital and
parent-child conflict, and between marital and parent-child affection, but the effect of
conflict on affection and vice versa is less well known. Erel and Burman (1995)
conducted a meta-analysis which indicated that negative marital relationships are
strongly related to negative parent-child relationships. Marital conflict and negative
parent-child relations have been connected in laboratory observations (Lindahl &
Malik, 1999), global self-reports (Margolin & John, 1997), and daily self-reports
(Margolin, Christensen, & John. 1996). In addition, the importance of studying
conflict is enhanced by the fact that marital conflict (O'Brien. Margolin, & John.
1995) and marital violence (Jouriles. Murphy. & O'Leary. 1989), as well as parent-
child conflict (Moore & Pepler, 1998) and negative parenting (Wagner, Cohen, &
Brook, 1996), have all been related to increased behavior problems in children. Katz
and Gottman (1995) found that parenting mediated the effect of marital conflict on
child adjustment: marital conflict and negative parenting both predict behavior
problems, but the effects vary depending on the extent to which parenting is
influenced by the marriage.
Although most families experience some conflict, affection is another, more
frequent, aspect of family interactions. Observations of interaction have revealed that
families’ interactions are often characterized more by positive than by negative
behaviors (Margolin & Wampold, 1981), sometimes as much as five times more
(Gottman, 1993). As with conflict, positive marital interaction seems to spill over
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2
into parent-child relationships (Erel & Burman, 1995). Affectionate couples have
warmer relationships with their children (Miller, Cowan, Cowan, Hetherington, &
Clingempeel, 1993). Mothers in communicative and affectionate marriages enjoy
their children and their maternal role more (Engfer, 1988). Parents in harmonious
marriages give their children more approval and physical affection (Easterbrooks &
Emde, 1988).
One theory which explains the relationship between marital and parent-child
relationships is transmission of affect, or '‘spillover.'’ This transmission of affect may
work via several mechanisms (Margolin, Oliver. & Medina, in press). Easterbrooks
and Emde (1988) describe a socialization mechanism of spillover, in which marital
discord leads to inconsistent parenting and decreased emotional availability to
children. In turn, social learning takes place as children enact the affective behaviors
their parents have modeled. Another explanation, the role strain mechanism, says that
each relationship in the family can place stress on other relationships and that
external stressors can have a negative impact on both marital and parent-child
relationships (Margolin, 1981). The common-factor mechanism suggests that one
person’s personality characteristics can influence all interactions (Engfer, 1988). For
example, an individual characterized by high levels of anger may exhibit negative
affect with a spouse and with children, as well as with people outside the family.
Regardless of the theorized mechanism, there is overwhelming evidence for spillover
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
of both negative and positive affect of marital relationships into parent-child
relationships (Erel & Burman, 1995).
Less is known about the interaction between affection and conflict. Fincham
suggests that “investigating conflict or support behavior alone is likely to yield an
incomplete, and possibly misleading, picture of the link between marital behavior
and child development” (Fincham, 1998, p. 555). In their meta-analysis, Erel and
Burman (1995) conclude that positive parent-child relationships are difficult to
achieve in the presence of high marital conflict. Many studies have found that
conflict is negatively associated with affection or positive relations (Lindahl,
Clements, & Markman. 1997; Margolin. Burman, & John, 1989; Metzler. Biglan.
Ary. & Li, 1998; Owen & Cox, 1997; Shuntich. Loh, & Katz, 1998). However, most
of these studies looked only at marital conflict in relation to parent-child affection
(Lindahl et al.. 1997; Owen & Cox. 1997) or at conflict and affection within only one
relationship (Margolin et al., 1989; Owen & Cox. 1997). Shuntich et al. (1998) found
a negative correlation when examining affection and conflict simultaneously in
marital and parent-child relationships, but some caution is warranted because reports
were retrospective accounts by college students.
Contrary to the findings in many studies that affection and conflict are
negatively related, verbal marital conflict induced in the laboratory has been found to
increase positive mother-son interaction. It is theorized that mothers acted more
empathically with their sons to counteract the negative affect they had experienced
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4
with their husbands (Mahoney. Boggio, & Jouriles, 1996). It should also be noted
that because children in the latter study were not witnesses to the marital conflict,
mothers were better able to isolate the two interactions than they would be if they had
to manage their sons’ negative responses to the conflict along with their own.
Although many studies indicate a deleterious effect o f marital conflict on child
behavior problems (Katz & Gottman, 1993: Reid & Crisafuili, 1990), parent-child
warmth (Burman, John, & Margolin, 1987) and negative parent-child interactions
(Fauber, Forehand, Thomas, & Wierson, 1990) have both been found to mediate the
relationship between marital conflict and child adjustment.
Although most studies have found a negative relationship between affection
and conflict, Gottman (1993) has discovered a more complicated link between the
two. He developed a typology of five kinds of marital relationships, based on both
positive and negative affect. He analyzed speaker and listener behaviors during
couples’ discussions, and extracted five types of couples: avoider, validator, volatile,
hostile, and hostile-detached. The three stable types who stay married — avoider,
validator, and volatile — are characterized by a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative
behaviors. The two unstable types, hostile and hostile-detached, are characterized by
a .8:1 positive: negative ratio. Within the stable types, there is a great deal of
variation in the amount of affection and conflict the couples show. As the name
suggests, avoiders rarely engage in conflict, but they also show little companionship
or sharing; they tend to value independence in the marriage. Validators experience
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5
conflict only over important issues in the marriage, and show a fair amount of
companionship and sharing; they tend to value '“ we-ness.” Volatile couples thrive on
conflict, but also experience a great deal of laughter and passion. Gottman defines
hostile couples as more emotionally engaged than hostile-detached couples.
The impact of conflict on affection and vice versa has not yet been studied
across family relationships. In marriages, the presence of negative affect is not
sufficient to predict instability; there must also be an absence of positive affect
(Carrere & Gottman, 1999). It would seem to follow that the presence of negative
affect would have more impact on parent-child relationships when combined with
low levels of positive affect. It is unclear whether the negative impact of marital
conflict on parent-child relationships will still exist when taking into account the
positive interactions of the parents, or whether parent-child affection will be related
to marital affection in the presence of marital conflict. It is clear, however, that the
roles of affection and conflict are not as separate or clear as previously assumed.
The identity of the reporter appears to be crucial in examining the role of
affection and conflict in family relationships. Examining an extreme form of conflict,
physical violence, Holden and Ritchie (1991) found that battered women report their
husbands to be less affectionate than do nonabused women; however, battered and
nonabused women did not differ in reports of their own affection. White (1999)
found a spillover of both warmth and tension from marital to parent-child
relationships when reported by parents but not children.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
6
The importance of the reporters identity is further exacerbated by the
repeated finding that family members often disagree about the presence and extent of
family conflict and violence (Jouriles & O'Leary, 1985; Moffitt et al., 1997; O'Brien,
John, Margolin, & Erel, 1994; Paikoff, Carlton-Ford, & Brooks-Gunn, 1993;
Sternberg, Lamb, & Dawud-Noursi, 1998; Sugarman & Hotaling, 1997) as well as
affection and positive behaviors (Hetherington & Clingempeel, 1992; Jacobson &
Moore, 1981; McCloskey, Figueredo, & Koss, 1995). Thus, it is important to
examine the relationship between affection and conflict from the point of view of
each family member, to determine whether that relationship is experienced
differently by different people.
The present study is the first to examine the role of both affection and conflict
in the spillover of marital into parent-child relationships. It should be noted that the
term spillover is used to parallel the research literature, rather than to indicate a
temporal connection. Because data about marital and parent-child relationships were
gathered simultaneously, it cannot be assumed that the current levels o f affection and
conflict in the marital relationship preceded those in the parent-child relationship.
The hypotheses are: (1) marital affection will be positively correlated with parent-
child affection; (2) marital conflict will be positively correlated with parent-child
conflict; (3) marital conflict will moderate the relationship between marital affection
and parent-child affection; (4) marital affection will moderate the relationship
between marital conflict and parent-child conflict; and (5) the present study will
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
7
replicate Gottman’s couple typology (avoider, validator, volatile, hostile, hostile-
detached; Gottman, 1993). Because identity of the reporter has been shown to affect
ratings of affection and conflict, and because the identity of the reporter would
probably also affect the connection between affection and conflict, the present study
compared reports of mothers, fathers, and children.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
8
Methods
Overview
This study was being conducted within the context o f a larger longitudinal
investigation of the effects of family and community stressors and supports on
children and on family relationships.
Participants
Participants were 87 two-parent families with a nine- or ten-year-old child
(52 boys, 35 girls). Families were recruited from schools, community centers,
libraries, offices such as pediatricians and dentists, and advertisements. Participating
families met the following phone screening criteria: (a) Couples and children have
lived together for at least 3 years; and (b) all family members speak and read English
fluently enough to complete the measures and interviews. Families received $ 150 for
their participation in the study. Full participation consisted of a 3- to 5-hour
laboratory visit by both parents and the child, as well as two weeks of daily diaries at
home by each family member. The present investigation only used data from
laboratory visits, which consisted of interviews and a series of self-report measures
completed on a computer. Informed consent was obtained from both parents, and
assent was obtained from children. Ail participants were informed that their
participation was voluntary and could be discontinued at any time.
The sample was fairly representative of the Los Angeles population in terms
of ethnicity and socio-economic status. Ethnicity o f parents was 11% Asian/Pacific
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
9
Islander, 24% African-American, 28% Caucasian, 29% Hispanic, 1% other, and 7%
mixed. African-Americans were overrepresented in the current sample, probably
reflecting the high proportion of African-Americans in the area surrounding the
university. Hispanics were underrepresented, reflecting study requirements that all
family members be able to speak and read English fluently. Otherwise, ethnic
composition of participants was similar to that of Los Angeles County according to
the 2000 Census (County of Los Angeles, 2001). Reported gross family income
ranged from $0 to $165,000 with a mean o f $69,982 (SD = 34,587.7). This mean is
significantly higher than $52,100. the median family income of Los Angeles County
according to the 2000 Census. Average years of education was 14.2 (SD = 2.4),
which is somewhat higher than 13.0, the median years of school according to the
1990 Census. Education levels ranged from completion of grade 7 to graduate
degrees such as Ph.D. and M.D. Nearly all of the couples were married, n = 85
(98%). Couples had been living together for an average of 14.0 years (SD = 4.3,
range 6-25 years). Both partners were the biological parents of the child in 93% of
the families. Average age was 38.8 years (SD = 5.4, range 25.6-53.5) for mothers and
40.9 years (SD = 6.5, range 24.3-56.6) for fathers. Children^ ages ranged from 9.0 to
11.0 years, with a mean of 10.0 years (SD = .6).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
10
Measures
Affection
Marital and parent-child affection. The brief version of the Family
Assessment Measure (FAM; Skinner, Steinhauer, & Santa-Barbara, 1995) was
administered to all family members. The FAM is a self-report instrument designed to
examine family relationships. The FAM consists of statements such as, “My family
tries to run my life,” and, “We take the time to listen to each other,” which family
members rate as “strongly agree,” “agree,” “disagree,” or “strongly disagree.”
Although the original version of the FAM has seven subscales plus social desirability
and defensiveness scales, a meta-analysis (Gondoli & Jacob, 1993) found a single
underlying factor, affection, in the seven subscales. As a result, a brief FAM was
developed by Skinner and colleagues (Skinner, Steinhauer, & Santa-Barbara, 1995),
and in the present study that version was used as a measure of affection.
The FAM has three forms: a General form, in which each respondent rates the
emotional climate of the family as a whole; a Dyadic form, in which each respondent
rates his/her relationship with each other family member; and a Self form, in which
each respondent rates his/her own role in the family. Each form of the brief FAM has
14 items. The present study focused on the Dyadic form for each relationship
(mother-father, parent-child), as reported by each participant o f each dyad. Children’s
reports of mother-child and father-child affection were averaged to create a parent-
child affection score.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
11
Item-total correlations of r = .49 to r — .75 have been found between the brief
and full versions of the FAM. Median correlations are r = .59 for the General scale, r
= .71 for the Dyadic scale, and r = .52 for the Self scale. Correlations for the total
scores (which will be used in analyses for the present study) on the brief and fiill
versions range from r = .94 to r = .97 for the different forms. Within the normative
sample, Cronbach’s alphas for the different forms range from .80 to .93, indicating
that the scales have good internal consistency (Skinner et al., 1995). Within the
current sample, Cronbach’s alphas were .91 for the Dyadic Spouse-Spouse version,
.84 for the Dyadic Parent-Child version (parent report), .87 for the Dyadic Parent-
Child version (child report).
When typically used, higher FAM scores indicate increased problems, i.e.,
decreased affection. In order for the FAM to be comparable to other measures of
affection, scores were reversed for the present study so that higher scores indicated
increased affection.
Marital affection. Children completed the Child’s View (Margolin, 2000), a
65-item measure of parent-child and family relations. Children rated each statement
on a five-point scale, ranging from '‘never” to “always.” The Child’s View contains
items concerning parental involvement, emotional attunement, monitoring, chaos,
discipline, family traditions, involvement of the child in marital issues, positive
marital interaction, parent-child conflict. The seven positive marital interaction
questions were used in the present study (”My parents say loving things to each
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
12
other;” “My parents have fun together;” “My parents are affectionate with each
other;” “My parents enjoy being together,” “My parents like each other;” “My
parents make each other happy;” “My parents work together as a team”). Internal
consistency for the seven-item scale was .83 in the current sample.
Conflict
Marital conflict. Parents completed a revised version of the Domestic
Conflict Inventory (DCI; Margolin, Burman, John, & O’ Brien, 2000). The DCI is a
6 1-item measure of marital conflict based on the Conflict Tactic Scales (Straus,
L979) and the Revised Conflict Tactic Scales (Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, &
Sugarman, 1995). Each spouse completed the DCI twice: once for the spouse’s
behavior, and once for his/her own. Items range from verbal conflict (e.g., “Has your
spouse screamed or yelled at you?”) to mild physical conflict (e.g., “Has your spouse
pushed, grabbed, or shoved you?”) to severe physical conflict (e.g., “Has your spouse
threatened you with a knife or gun?”). Respondents indicate whether the behavior
has ever happened, and if so, whether it has happened in front of their child and how
many times it has occurred in the past 12 months. Frequency responses include “Not
at all,” “Once,” “2-5 times a year,” “6-12 times per year,” “2-4 times per month,” and
“more than once per week.” Frequencies for each partner were summed within
reporter to yield a marital conflict score. Internal consistency for the 56 negative
items was .92 in the current sample.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13
Children completed the Children’s Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale
(CPIC; Grych, Seid, & Fincham, 1992). The CPIC consists of 48 statements about
parents’ marital conflict, which the child rates as “true,” “sort of or sometimes true,”
or “false.” Examples of the statements include, “They may not think I know it, but
my parents argue or disagree a lot.” and, “When my parents argue I worry that one of
them will get hurt.” The statements load on three factors: Conflict Properties, Threat,
and Self-Blame. The Conflict Properties scale was used in the current study as the
measure of marital conflict. Internal consistencies of .89 and .90 were found in two
normative samples, and the two-week test-retest correlation was .70. Internal
consistency for the Conflict Properties scale was .89 in the current sample.
Significant correlations between the Conflict Properties scale and two parent-
reported scales of marital conflict, the Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus, 1979) and the
O’Leary-Porter Scale (Porter & O’ Leary, 1980) indicated satisfactory concurrent
validity. The Conflict Properties scale was also better correlated with several
measures of children’s adjustment than other indices of marital interaction.
Parent-child conflict. Parents completed the Parenting Questionnaire, a 117-
item measure of parenting. Parents rate each statement on a 5-point scale, ranging
from “not at all descriptive of me or my child” to “extremely descriptive of me or my
child.” The Parenting Questionnaire contains items concerning monitoring,
enjoyment of the child, values, instrumental involvement, emotional involvement/
attunement, encouragement of mastery/ maturity/ sociability, rejection, positive
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
14
discipline, consistency/ inconsistent discipline, and conflict. The six parent-child
conflict questions were used in the present study: “I easily lose my temper with my
child;” “When my child expresses negative feelings, I am negative in return;” “I
often feel angry at my child;” “I often nag my child;” “I scream or yell at my child
when he/she has done something wrong;” and “My child and I disagree and quarrel.”
Internal consistency for the six-item scale was .83 in this sample.
The six parent-child conflict questions on the Child’s View (Margolin, 2000)
will be used to assess children’s perceptions of parent-child conflict. Examples of
conflict items include, “My parents and I argue.” “I am angry at one or both of my
parents,” “My parents and I handle disagreements calmly (reverse-scored),” “My
parents scream or yell at me,” "I get blamed or criticized,” and “I yell at my parents.”
Internal consistency for the six-item scale was .71 in the current sample.
Results
Descriptive Statistics
Affection
Marital Affection. Table I presents descriptive statistics for all measures. To
provide a context for these scores, non-reversed FAM scores were compared to the
normative sample. Twelve percent o f mothers (n = 10) and 8% of fathers (n = 7) had
scores equivalent to a T-score over 70, indicating that they were very low in
affection. Mothers’ and fathers’ average scores were equivalent to T-scores of 54 and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
15
52, respectively, and they did not differ significantly from each other, t(85) = -.42, p
= .68.
On the marital affection subscale of the Child’s View Questionnaire, children
averaged 30.4, indicating that overall children viewed their parents as high in marital
affection.
Parent-Child Affection. Mothers, fathers, and children reported similar levels
of parent-child affection. There was a lower instance of FAM scores reaching clinical
levels o f low affection among parent-child than among marital relationships. No
mothers or children rated parent-child affection as equivalent to a T-score above 70,
but 2% of fathers (n = 2) had T-scores equivalent to 70 or above. There were no
significant differences across reporters.
Conflict
Marital Conflict. Mothers and fathers reported similar levels of marital
conflict. Children’s ratings of marital conflict on the Conflict Properties scale of the
CPIC cannot be directly compared to parents* reports, because of the use of different
measures.
Parent-Child Conflict. Mothers reported more parent-child conflict than
fathers, f(85) = 2.10,p < .05, on the Parent-Child Conflict subscale of the Parenting
Questionnaire. Again, children’s reports cannot be directly compared because they
completed a different measure of parent-child conflict.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics for Measures o f Affection and Conflict for Mothers, Fathers, and Children (N = 87)
Measure
Mean
Mothers
SD Range Mean
Fathers
SD Range Mean
Children
SD Range
Maximum
Possible
Marital Affection
Marital FAM 28.2 6.9 14-41 27.9 7.0 10-42 42
Child’s View 30.4 4.3 16-35 35
Parent-Child Affection
FAM 31.0 4.8 20-41 30.1 5.2 15-39 31.3 4.7 17-42 42
Marital Conflict
DCI Self-Report 37.8 28.9 1-150 37.6 34.7 0-155 560
CPIC Conflict Properties 34.6 7.0 21-49 57
Parent-Child Conflict
Parenting 7.2 4.3 0-17 6.2 4.1 0-21 24
Child’s View 11.4 3.5 6-21 30
17
Correlations
Affection
Marital Affection. Mothers' and fathers' reports of marital affection on the
FAM Dyadic were highly correlated, and children’s reports according to the Child’s
View were also correlated with mothers' and fathers’ reports. Table 2 presents
intercorrelations among family members' reports of affection and conflict in the
different relationships.
Parent-Child Affection. Children's reports of mother-child and father-child
affection were strongly correlated, indicating that most children viewed their
relationships with their parents similarly. Because of their high correlation and for
the sake of simplicity, children’s reports of mother-child and father-child affection
were combined for regression analyses.
Mothers' reports of mother-child affection correlated with fathers' reports of
father-child affection, suggesting that the parents agreed with children’s assessments
that they had similar levels of affection in their relationships with each parent.
Conflict
M arital Conflict. Children's ratings correlated with mothers’ and fathers’
reports of marital conflict, and mothers' combined DCI scores for both partners'
behaviors correlated with fathers' scores.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 2
lntercorrelatiom among Family M embers' Reports o f Affection and Conflict (N = 87)
Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12
Marital Affection
1, Mother
—
2. Father
.63*** —
3. Child
.38*** .38*** —
Parent-Child Affection
4. Mother
.48*** .19 .10 —
5. Father .24* .47*** .29** .31** —
6. Child -.04 .02 .29** .01 .03 —
Marital Conflict
7. Mother
-.58*** -.53*** -.31** -.15 -.15 -.04 —
8. Father
-.43*** -.53*** -.36** -.02 -.09 -.05 .56*** —
9. Child -.43*** -.37**
-39***
-.04 -.10 -.17
47***
.42*** —
Parent-Child Conflict
10. Mother -.23* -.08 -.19 -.40*** -.08 -.02 .37** .07 .18 —
11. Father
-.09 -.22* -.15 -.29** -.49*** -.18 ,17 .03 .19 .42*** —
12. Child -.20 -.19 -.41*** -.05 -.10 -.29** .20 .21 .43*** .28* .28* —
Note: * p < ,05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
00
19
Parent-Child Conflict. Mothers' and fathers’ reports of parent-child conflict
were correlated, although mothers’ scores were higher as a group than fathers’.
Children’s reports of parent-child conflict were correlated with mothers’ and fathers’
reports.
Hypothesis I
As predicted, marital affection was positively correlated with parent-child
affection according to mothers, fathers, and children (see Table 2).
Hypothesis 2
As predicted, marital conflict was positively correlated with parent-child
conflict according to mothers and children. However, there was no correlation
according to fathers (see Table 2).
Hypothesis 3
Table 3 presents regression results for predictors o f parent-child affection.
Separate linear regression analyses of mothers’, fathers’, and children’s reports were
performed, with parent-child affection as the dependent variable and three predictor
variables: marital affection, marital conflict, and the interaction between marital
affection and marital conflict. As specified by Aiken and West (1991), the interaction
term was obtained by multiplying the z scores of the marital affection and marital
conflict variables. Regressions were performed stepwise, with marital affection and
marital conflict entered as the first step, and the interaction term added in the second
step.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 3
Summary o f Stepwise Regression Analyses fo r Variables Predicting Parent-Child Affection (N = 87)
Predictor B
P
t F R2 adjusted R2
Mother report
Marital affection ,613 .607 5.249**
Marital conflict .201 .200 1.731
Marital affection x marital conflict -.102 -.116 -1.045
Total equation 10.401 ** .278 .251
Father report
Marital affection .582 .586 5.142**
Marital conflict .216 .217 1.902
Marital affection x marital conflict -.203 -.216 -2.090*
Total equation 10.949** .296 .269
Child report
Marital affection .267 ,267 2.357*
Marital conflict -.006 -.061 -.538
Marital affection x marital conflict .006 .067 .574
Total equation 2.786* .091 .059
Notes; *p < ,05, **p < .001
d f = (3, 84) for Mother report; (3, 81) for Father report; (3, 86) for Child report
Marital affection and marital conflict were entered in Step 1, and marital affection x marital conflict was added in Step 2.
to
o
21
In mothers’ reports, marital affection was the only significant predictor
variable for parent-child affection. Marital conflict did not moderate the relationship
between marital and parent-child affection. In the total equation, all predictors
together contributed to 23.1% of the variance. Marital affection explained 21.3% of
the variance in parent-child affection. Marital conflict and the interaction term did
not contribute significant unique variance.
Fathers’ reports indicated that marital affection was a significant predictors of
parent-child affection, but that marital conflict alone had no predictive value. The
interaction term was also a significant predictor, indicating that marital conflict
moderated the relationship between marital affection and parent-child affection
according to fathers.
Similar to mothers, children indicated that marital affection, but not marital
conflict or the interaction term, was a significant predictor of parent-child affection.
Marital conflict did not moderate the relationship between marital and parent-child
affection. According to children, all predictors together accounted for 4.6% of the
variance, with marital affection explaining 3.8% of the variance, and marital conflict
and the interaction term adding no significant variance.
Examining the significant moderator found in fathers' reports, Figure 1
depicts a plot of the effect o f marital affection on parent-child affection at high and
low levels of marital conflict. At low levels of marital conflict (operationalized as
one standard deviation below the mean), there is a relatively steep slope, indicating
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
that when marital affection is low, parent-child affection is similarly low, and when
marital affection is high, parent-child affection is also similarly high. However, at
high levels of marital conflict (one standard deviation above the mean), the slope is
shallower, suggesting a more random relationship between marital affection and
parent-child affection than at low levels of marital conflict.
Figure I
Plot o f High and Low Levels o f Marital Conflict as a Moderator fo r the Effect o f
M arital Affection on Parent-Child Affection
£ 0.5
e
&
*
B
e
-0.5
0 I
-— — Low
Marital
Conflict
- - - High
Marital
Conflict
Marital Affection Z-Score
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
23
Figure 2 depicts plots of the data, at low and high levels of marital conflict.
Low and high levels were operationalized as .75 standard deviations below and
above the mean, respectively. While Figure I presents a mathematical model, Figure
2 shows that the actual data are accurately reflected by the model. For fathers
reporting low marital conflict, the relation between marital affection and parent-child
affection is a steep slope with data tightly centered around the regression line. For
fathers, reporting high marital conflict, the slope is much flatter, and points are more
spread out. These data also show that while fathers at high and low levels of marital
conflict report a similar range of parent-child affection, this is not the case for marital
affection. Specifically, fathers at low levels of marital conflict generally report much
higher marital affection than fathers at high levels of marital conflict.
According to fathers' reports, all predictors together accounted for 31.0% of the total
variance. Marital affection contributed 25.8% of the unique variance, and the
interaction term added 3.9% of the variance. Marital conflict did not account for any
significant percentage of the variance.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
24
Figure 2
M arital Versus Parent-Child Affection, Split by Low and High Levels o f Marital
Conflict According to Fathers
Low Marital Conflict
< U
w
O
u
zn
2
<
s
o
C J
2
IS
u
I
s
«
b.
C S
40
f ▼
30
20
1 0
0
10 20 30 40 50
Marital Affection (FAM Score)
High Marital Conflict
o
o
V3
<
o
0
<
2
IS
u
1
s
1 >
w
a
C -
50
40
20
1 0
0
20 0 1 0 30 40 50
Marital Affection (FAM Score)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
25
Hypothesis 4
Linear regression analyses, presented in Table 4, of mothers’, fathers’, and
children’s reports regarding parent-child conflict were conducted in the same way as
those for parent-child affection. Specifically, parent-child conflict was the dependent
variable, and marital conflict, marital affection, and the interaction between marital
conflict and marital affection were again the three predictor variables. The interaction
term was again obtained by multiplying the z scores of the marital conflict and
marital affection variables. Marital conflict and marital affection were entered in the
first step, and the interaction term was added in the second step (Aiken & West,
1991).
Mothers’ reports indicated that marital conflict significantly predicted parent-
child conflict, but that marital affection and the interaction term did not. There was
no evidence of marital affection as a moderator. The total equation using mothers’
reports shows that all of the predictors together explained 5.1% of the variance in
parent-child conflict. Marital conflict accounted for 2.5% of the variance. Marital
affection and the interaction term, marital conflict x marital affection, did not add
unique variance.
Contrary to mothers’ reports, fathers indicated that marital conflict did not
predict parent-child conflict, and that instead, marital affection was a negative
predictor of parent-child conflict. The interaction term was not a significant
predictor, since there was no relationship between marital and parent-child conflict
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
for marital affection to moderate. In the total equation according to fathers’ reports,
all of the predictors together explained 6.6% of the variance in parent-child conflict
Marital affection explained 5.5%, and neither marital conflict nor the interaction term
added any unique variance.
According to children, both marital conflict and marital affection significantly
predicted parent-child conflict, and marital affection was a predictor in the negative
direction. The interaction term was not significant, suggesting that marital affection
is a direct negative predictor rather than a moderator. In the total equation, all of the
predictors together explained 13.5% of the variance, with marital conflict adding
8.3% and marital affection accounting for 5.0% of the variance.
Hypothesis 5
None of the results indicated that affection and conflict had a direct
relationship, that is, that low levels of conflict were associated with low levels of
affection and that high levels o f conflict were associated with high levels of
affection. Instead, results suggested that affection was generally inversely related to
conflict, such that low levels of conflict tended to be associated with high levels of
affection, for example. Because Gottman’s typology (1993) is based on a direct
relationship between affection and conflict, further analyses were not conducted to
attempt to replicate the typology.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 4
Summary o f stepwise regression analyses fo r variables predicting parent-child conflict (N = 87)
Predictor B
P
t F R2 adjusted R2
Mother report
Marital conflict .302 .308 2.458*
Marital affection -.107 -.109 -.868
Marital conflict x marital affection -.113 -.132 -1.094
Total equation 5.002** .158 .126
Father report
Marital conflict -.108 -.107
t
o o
U J
o
Marital affection -.280 -.278 -2.168*
Marital conflict x marital affection -.004 -.042 -.351
Total equation 1.633 .059 .023
Child report
Marital conflict .310 .310 3.018**
Marital affection -.293 -.293 -2.851**
Marital conflict x marital affection -.004
<
©
-.480
Total equation 9.456*** .255 .228
Note: *p < ,05, **p < ,01, ***/? < .001
df = (3, 83) for Mother report; (3, 81) for Father report; (3,86) for Child report
Marital affection and marital conflict were entered in Step I, and marital affection x marital conflict was added in Step 2.
to
o
28
Discussion
Overall, the present study suggests that although affection and conflict are
often inversely related, they remain distinct characteristics of family relationships.
All family members’ reports indicated a correlation between marital and parent-child
affection, and mothers’ and children’s reports pointed to a correlation between
marital and parent-child conflict. Thus, most reports support the notion of a spillover
of both conflict and affection from marital to parent-child relationships. Marital
conflict moderated the connection between marital affection and parent-child
affection according to fathers. No family members identified marital affection as a
moderator between marital conflict and parent-child conflict. These results ran
counter to Gottman’s (1993) finding of a generality of affect; rather than affection
and conflict being at high levels in some relationships and low levels in others, in
most relationships they were inversely related. Particular strengths of this study
include its multiple informant approach, its use of children within a small age range
to ensure less developmental heterogeneity, and its use of a community sample with
the accompanying variability in both affection and conflict in family relationships.
The current study underscores the complexity of examining family
relationships. First, although overall these results support the spillover hypothesis,
some results suggest more than just a direct spillover. Although all family members
agreed that marital affection was related to parent-child affection, fathers did not
agree with mothers and children that marital conflict relates to parent-child conflict.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
29
Furthermore, children’s reports indicated complexity in that both marital conflict and
lower marital affection were correlates of parent-child conflict, rather than marital
conflict alone. Perhaps the clearest evidence against a straightforward spillover
mechanism is the emergence in fathers’ reports of marital conflict as a moderator
between marital and parent-child affection. The current study confirms previous
evidence that affection and conflict are distinct constructs — affection cannot be
defined as merely the absence of conflict, nor is conflict the absence of affection
(Carrere & Gottman, 1999). The two types of interactions can and do coexist in
almost all marital and parent-child relationships.
Second, obtaining reports from different family members is crucial. The only
finding agreed on by all family members was that marital affection is related to
parent-child affection. Mothers and children agreed that marital conflict relates to
parent-child conflict, but fathers saw no relationship. Regression analyses indicated
that although all three reporters agreed that marital affection was related to parent-
child affection, only fathers’ reports pointed to marital conflict as a moderator. Data
from different reporters highlight different variables related to parent-child conflict,
with mothers viewing marital conflict as a correlate, fathers looking toward lower
levels of marital affection as a correlate, and children feeling that both marital
conflict and lower marital affection related to parent-child conflict. These findings
point to the importance in fixture research to gather the perspectives of all family
members when assessing family relationships.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
Why did marital conflict moderate affection only according to fathers? One
possibility is that marital conflict has been found to affect fathering more than
mothering (see Coiro, 1998, for a review). For example, Brody, Pillegrini, and Sigel
(1986) did not find main effects of parent gender or marital distress on any of their
eight parenting variables. However, there were interactions between parent gender
and marital distress, such as the finding that fathers from nondistressed marriages
gave their children more positive feedback than fathers from distressed marriages;
this was not the case for mothers.
The existence of different results when different family members report raises
the issue of agreement among family members. Family members tended to be similar
in their reports of marital conflict, with all correlations between family members in
the .4 to .5 range. In contrast, mothers and fathers agreed with each other more than
with their children when describing both marital affection and parent-child conflict.
Some of the discrepancy may result from parents completing different questionnaires
than children for both of these constructs, though it should be noted that the same
was true for marital conflict, which did not show a similar discrepancy. The findings
for parent-child affection are more complicated. Mothers did not agree with children
about mother-child affection, nor did fathers agree with children about father-child
affection. However, children's reports of mother-child and father-child affection
were quite similar, with a correlation over .7, and mothers' reports o f mother-child
affection were significantly correlated with fathers' reports of father-child affection,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
31
with a correlation around .3. This suggests that children’s relationships with each
parent are fairly similar, according to the children themselves as well as their parents,
but that somehow the parents and children cannot agree with each other regarding
parent-child affection. Interestingly, parent-child affection is the only construct for
which all family members completed the same measure. Perhaps it is more difficult
to report on the quality of a relationship, as with the questions about parent-child
affection, than on specific behaviors, such as with the reports of marital conflict. This
is a question of methodology which is hard to solve without operationalizing
affection as specific behaviors, which may not capture the true construct. Affection
encompasses behaviors such as expressions of physical and verbal love, as well as
qualities such as closeness and enjoyment. Future research should examine factors
behind the disagreement among family members’ reports, as well as additional
methodologies for assessing individuals’ as well as outsiders’ perceptions of
affection and conflict in family relationships.
Another limitation of the current study is the restricted range of affection
reported. Children reported high levels of affection in their parents’ marriages, even
when the parents reported low levels of affection. Parent-child relationships were
usually deemed high in affection according to all reporters. Although this may
present a limitation to the study in terms of restricted variance as well as possible
social desirability bias, it may also reflect an enormous strength in the relationships
themselves. That is, it is in a child’s best interest to believe that his relationship with
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
32
his or her parents and their relationship with each other is characterized by a great
deal of love. Similarly, it may be that parents who believe the best about their
relationships with their children act in kind; this is an empirical question for future
exploration. Although it is very likely that some of these family’s relationships would
not be judged as high in affection if rated by observers, family members think about
their relationships in isolation, rather than as part of a distribution. Future research
should combine observations by trained raters with the evaluations of each family
member.
Observations of family interactions might also enable replication of
Gottman’s typology (1993), which was developed using marital interactions rather
than self-report questionnaires. Though it may be true that family members see an
inverse relationship between affection and conflict, it may also be the case that there
is a direct relation between the two in terms of the amount of affect expressed. It is
crucial to obtain reports from multiple informants — not only those within the family,
but also observers outside the family. Such raters can evaluate each family on its own
as well as within the context of all families in the sample.
Another factor that may have prevented replication of Gottman’s typology is
differences between the two samples. Gottman’s sample had been married for an
average of 5.2 years (Gottman & Levenson, 1992). For the present sample, we used
time living together rather than length of marriage since many of the couples either
were not married (n = 2, or 2% of sample) or had not been married for the full
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
33
duration of their cohabitation (n = 26, or 30% of sample); the average time living
together in the present sample was 14.0 years. Because the couples in our sample had
been together so much longer than those in Gottman’s sample, it may be that many of
the couples Gottman would label hostile or hostile-detached had already separated or
divorced before they would have a 9- or 10-year-old child and thus be eligible to be
participants in our study.
The present study provides important information about the connections
among positive and negative affect in marital and parent-child relationships. The
study extends findings from previous studies which have focused only on marital or
parent-child relationships, as well as only on conflict or affection. Perhaps most
important, the study underscores the importance of evaluating the unique perspective
of each family member.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
34
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting
interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Brody, G. H., Pellegrini, A. D., & Sigel, I. E. (1986). Marital quality and mother-
child and father-child interactions with school-aged children. Developmental
Psychology, 22(3), 291-296.
Burman, B., John, R. S., & Margolin, G. (1987). Effects of marital and parent-child
relations on children's adjustment. Journal o f Family Psychology, 7(1), 91-108.
Carrere, S., & Gottman, J. M. (1999). Predicting the future of marriages. In E. M.
Hetherington (Ed.), Coping with divorce, single parenting, and remarriage: A
risk and resiliency perspective (pp. 3-22). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Coiro, M. J., & Emery, R. E. (1998). Do marriage problems affect fathering more
than mothering? A quantitative and qualitative review. Clinical Child and Family
Psychology Review, I, 23-40.
County of Los Angeles. (2001). County of Los Angeles Statistical Data : Retrieved
from http://www.co.la.ca.us/statistics.htm.
Easterbrooks, M. A.. & Emde, R. N. (1988). Marital and parent-child relationships:
The role of affect in the family system. In R. A. Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde
(Eds.), Relationships within fam ilies: Mutual influences (pp. 83-103). Oxford:
Clarendon.
Engfer, A. (1988). The interrelatedness of marriage and the mother-child
relationship. In R. A. Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), Relationships within
fam ilies: Mutual influences (pp. 105-118). Oxford: Clarendon.
Erel, O., & Burman, B. (1995). Interrelatedness of marital relations and parent-child
relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 7/5(1), 108-132.
Fauber, R., Forehand, R., Thomas, A. M., & Wierson, M. (1990). A mediational
model of the impact of marital conflict on adolescent adjustment in intact and
divorced families: The role of disrupted parenting. Child Development, 61, 1112-
1123.
Fincham, F. D. (1998). Child development and marital relations. Child Development,
69(2), 543-574.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
35
Gondoli, D. M., & Jacob, T. (1993). Factor structure within and across three family-
assessment procedures. Journal o f Family Psychology, 6(3), 278-289.
Gottman, J. M. (1993). The roles of conflict engagement, escalation, and avoidance
in marital interaction: A longitudinal view of five types of couples. Journal o f
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 6/(1), 6-15.
Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predictive of later
dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health. Journal o f Personality and Social
Psychology, 63(2), 221-233.
Grych, J. H., Seid, M., & Fincham, F. D. (1992). Assessing marital conflict from the
child's perspective: The Children’ s Perception of Interparental Conflict scale.
Child Development, 63, 558-572.
Hetherington, E. M., & Clingempeel, W. G. (1992). Coping with marital transitions.
Monographs o f the Society fo r Research in Child Development, 57(2-3), 1-242.
Holden, G. W., & Ritchie, K. L. (1991). Linking extreme marital discord, child
rearing, and child behavior problems: Evidence from battered women. Child
Development, 62, 311-327.
Jacobson, N. S., & Moore, D. (1981). Spouses as observers of the events in their
relationship. Journal o f Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49(2), 269-277.
Jouriles, E. N., Murphy, C. M., & O'Leary, K. D. (1989). Interspousal aggression,
marital discord, and child problems. Journal o f Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 57(3), 453-455.
Jouriles, E. N., & O'Leary, K. D. (1985). Interspousal reliability of reports of marital
violence. Journal o f Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(3), 419-421.
Katz, L. F., & Gottman, J. M. (1993). Patterns of marital conflict predict children’ s
internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 29(6),
940-950.
Katz, L. F., & Gottman, J. M. (1995). Marital interaction and child outcomes: A
longitudinal study of mediating and moderating processes. In D. Cicchetti & S. L.
Toth (Eds.), Emotion, cognition, and representation (Vol. 6, pp. 301-342).
Rochester, NY: University o f Rochester Press.
Lindahl, K. M., Clements, M., & Markman, H. (1997). Predicting marital and parent
functioning in dyads and triads: A longitudinal investigation of marital processes.
Journal o f Family Psychology, 11(2), 139-151.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
36
Lindahl, K. M., & Malik, N. M. (1999). Observations of marital conflict and power:
Relations with parenting in the triad. Journal o f Marriage and the Family, 61,
320-330.
Mahoney, A., Boggio, R. M., & Jouriles, E. N. (1996). Effects o f verbal marital
conflict on subsequent mother-son interactions in a child clinical sample. Journal
o f Clinical Child Psychology, 25(3), 262-271.
Margolin, G. (1981). The reciprocal relationship between marital and child problems.
Advances in Family Intervention: Assessment and Theory, 2, 131-182.
Margolin, G. (2000). Child's View Questionnaire . Los Angeles: University of
Southern California.
Margolin, G., Burman, B., & John, R. S. (1989). Home observations of married
couples reenacting naturalistic conflicts. Behavioral Assessment, 11(1), 101-118.
Margolin, G., Burman, B., John, R. S., & O'Brien, M. (2000). Domestic Conflict
Index. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.
Margolin, G., Christensen, A.. & John, R. S. (1996). The continuance and spillover
of everyday tensions in distressed and nondistressed families. Journal o f Family
Psychology, 10(3), 304-321.
Margolin, G., & John, R. S. (1997). Children's exposure to marital aggression: Direct
and mediated effects. In G. K. Kantor, J. L. Jasinski, & e. al. (Eds.), Out o f
darkness: Contemporary perspectives on fam ily violence (pp. 90-104). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Margolin, G., Oliver, P. H., & Medina, A. M. (in press). Conceptual issues in
understanding the relation between interparental conflict and child adjustment:
Integrating developmental psychopathology and risk/resilience perspectives. In J.
H. Grych & F. D. Fincham (Eds.), Child development and interparental co n flict.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Margolin, G., & Wampold, B. E. (1981). Sequential analysis of conflict and accord
in distressed and nondistressed marital partners. Journal o f Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 49(4), 554-567.
McCIoskey, L. A., Figueredo, A. J., & Koss, M. P. (1995). The effects o f systemic
family violence on children's mental health. Child Development, 6 6 ,1239-1261.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
37
Metzler, C. W., Biglan, A., Ary, D. V., & Li, F. (1998). The stability and validity o f
early adolescents’ reports of parenting constructs. Journal o f Family Psychology,
12(4), 600-619.
Miller, N. B., Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., Hetherington, E. M., & Clingempeel, W.
G. (1993). Externalizing in preschoolers and early adolescents: A cross-study
replication of a family model. Developmental Psychology, 29(1), 3-18.
Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Krueger, R. F., Magdol, L., Margolin, G., Silva, P. A., &
Sydney, R. (1997). Do partners agree about abuse in their relationship? A
psychometric evaluation of interpartner agreement. Psychological Assessment,
9(1), 47-56.
Moore, T. E., & Pepler, D. J. (1998). Correlates of adjustment in children at risk. In
G. W. Holden, R. Geffoer, & E. N. Jouriles (Eds.), Children exposed to marital
violence: Theory, research, and applied issues (pp. 157-184). Washington, DC:
APA.
O’ Brien, M., John, R. S., Margolin, G., & Erel, O. (1994). Reliability and diagnostic
efficacy of parents' reports regarding children's exposure to marital aggression.
Violence and Victims, 9(1), 45-62.
O’ Brien, M., Margolin, G., & John, R. S. (1995). Relation among marital conflict,
child coping, and child adjustment. Journal o f Clinical Child Psychology, 2 4 0 ),
346-361.
Owen, M. T., & Cox, M. J. (1997). Marital conflict and the development of infant-
parent attachment relationships. Journal o f Family Psychology, 11(2), 152-164.
Paikoff, R. L., Cariton-Ford, S., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1993). Mother-daughter dyads
view the family: Associations between divergent perceptions and daughter well
being. Journal o f Youth and Adolescence, 22(5), 473-492.
Porter, B., & O’ Leary, K. D. (1980). Marital discord and child behavior problems.
Journal o f Abnormal Child Psychology, 8 ,287-295.
Reid, W. J., & Crisafulli, A. (1990). Marital discord and child behavior problems: A
meta-analysis. Journal o f Abnormal Child Psychology, 18(1), 105-117.
Shuntich, R. J., Loh, D., & Katz, D. (1998). Some relationships among affection,
aggression and alcohol abuse in the family setting. Perceptual and Motor Skills,
86, 1051-1060.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
38
Skinner, H. A., Steinhauer, P. D., & Santa-Barbara, J. (1995). Family Assessment
Measure - III. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems.
Sternberg, K. J., Lamb, M. E., & Dawud-Noursi, S. (1998). Using multiple
informants to understand domestic violence and its effects. In G. W. Holden, R.
Geffher, & E. N. Jouriles (Eds.), Children exposed to marital violence: Theory,
research, and applied issues (pp. 121-156). Washington, DC: APA.
Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict
Tactics (CT) Scales. Journal o f Marriage and the Family, 41, 75-88.
Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1995). The
Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2) . Durham, NH: Family Research
Laboratory.
Sugarman, D. B., & Hotaling, G. T. (1997). Intimate violence and social desirability.
Journal o f Interpersonal Violence, 12(2), 275-290.
Wagner, B. M., Cohen, P., & Brook, J. S. (1996). Parent/adolescent relationships:
Moderators of the effects of stressful life events. Journal o f Adolescent Research
17(3), 347-374.
White, L. (1999). Contagion in family affection: Mothers, fathers, and young adult
children. Journal o f Marriage and the Family, 6 1 ,284-294.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Content analysis of articulated thoughts of chronic worriers

PDF

Emotion regulation as a mediator between family-of-origin aggression and marital aggression

PDF

A typology of maritally violent men and correlates of violence

PDF

The Emotional, Physiological, And Cognitive Reactions Of Boys And Girls From High-Conflict And Low-Conflict Homes To Simulated Marital Conflict

PDF

Children's immediate reactions to interparental conflict

PDF

Hostile family environments and children's perceptions of social support

PDF

Articulated thoughts about intentions to commit anti-gay hate crimes

PDF

Applying the theory of reasoned action to condom use: The effect of immediate consequences on intention-behavior consistency

PDF

Hedonic aspects of conditioned taste aversion in rats and humans

PDF

Expectancies for alternative behaviors predict drinking problems: A test of a cognitive reformulation of the matching law

PDF

Violent environments and their effects on children

PDF

Depression and suicidality in Latino adolescents: A study of acculturation and gender role beliefs

PDF

Aging and the use of context and frequency information in ambiguity resolution

PDF

An integrative analysis of racism and quality of life: A comparison of multidimensional moderators in an ethnically diverse sample

PDF

Comparative analysis of the stress process in AIDS caregivers: Gay male partners, Anglo women, and Latinas

PDF

Depressed children and the social and behavioral attributes of their best friend

PDF

Articulated thoughts regarding cognitions toward older adults

PDF

Intergenerational conflict, family functioning, and acculturation experienced by Asian American community college students

PDF

Head injury and dementia: A co-twin control study of Swedish twins

PDF

Dyslexic's development of word recognition and phonological skill over time

Asset Metadata

Creator Fauchier, Angele Calista (author)

Core Title Affection and conflict in family relationships

School Graduate School

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Psychology

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,psychology, clinical,psychology, social,sociology, individual and family studies

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Margolin, Gayla (committee chair), [illegible] (committee member), Davison, Gerald C. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-294086

Unique identifier UC11336783

Identifier 1411024.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-294086 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 1411024.pdf

Dmrecord 294086

Document Type Thesis

Rights Fauchier, Angele Calista

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA