«Tur-Porcar, Ana; Mestre, Vicenta; Llorca, Anna Parenting: Psychometric analysis of two studies in Spanish population Anuario de Psicología, vol. 45, ...»
Anuario de Psicología
Universitat de Barcelona
Tur-Porcar, Ana; Mestre, Vicenta; Llorca, Anna
Parenting: Psychometric analysis of two studies in Spanish population
Anuario de Psicología, vol. 45, núm. 3, diciembre, 2015, pp. 347-359
Universitat de Barcelona
Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=97044008007
How to cite
Scientific Information System
More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Anuario de Psicología/The UB Journal of Psychology 2015, vol. 45, nº 3, 347-359 © 2015, Facultat de Psicologia Universitat de Barcelona Parenting: Psychometric analysis of two studies in Spanish population* Ana Tur-Porcar Vicenta Mestre Anna Llorca Universitat de València Parenting styles set the pace and quality of parent-child relationships and parenting practices. This empirical research consisted of three studies based on the Child Reports of Parental Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; Schaefer,
1965) and was conducted in Spain. The analysis checks the typology and styles of parenting, bearing in mind both parents in a differentiated way. The first study involved 762 adolescents of 12-17 years (mean age=13.69 y SD= 1.40;
52.7% boys). A total of 824 children of 8-11 years participated in the second study (mean age=9.28 y SD= 1.34; 47.8% boys). The results of the exploratory and confirmatory factorial analyses show a four-factor model: Support and communications, Negative psychological control, Permissiveness, and Negligence, for both the mother and the father, which determine parenting from the children’s perception. The fit indexes are within the established limits to consider this an appropriate questionnaire to assess parenting styles in childhood and adolescence in Spanish populations.
Estilos parentales: análisis psicométrico de dos estudios en población española Los estilos de crianza van marcando el ritmo y la calidad de las relaciones entre padres e hijos, así como las prácticas de crianza. Este trabajo analiza los * Acknowledgements: R+D project for excelling research groups (Reference PROMETEO 2011/009) Valencian Government, Spain. R+D project of the Ministry of Science and Techonology (Reference PSI2011-27158) and the Excellence Network ISIC/2013/001 of the Valencian Community, Spain.
Correspondence: Ana Tur-Porcar, Facultad de Psicología, Universitat de València. 46010 Valencia (Spain). E-mail:
firstname.lastname@example.org 348 Parenting: Psychometric analysis resultados de los análisis factoriales exploratorio y confirmatorio del cuestionario Child Reports of Parental Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; Schaefer, 1965) realizado en dos estudios en población española. El estudio contempla la tipología y estilos de crianza, teniendo presente a ambos progenitores de forma diferenciada. En el primer estudio han participado 762 adolescentes de 12-17 años (M=13,69 y DT= 1,40; 52,7% varones). En el segundo estudio han participado 824 niños y niñas de 8-11 años (M=9,28 y DT= 1,34; 47,8% varones). Los resultados de los análisis factoriales exploratorio y confirmatorio muestran un modelo de cuatro factores referidos a Apoyo y comunicación, Control psicológico negativo, Permisividad y Negligencia, tanto para la madre como para el padre. Los índices de ajuste se sitúan dentro de los límites establecidos para considerar que se trata de un cuestionario adecuado para evaluar los estilos de crianza en la infancia y adolescencia en población española.
Palabras clave: crianza, análisis factorial, adolescencia, infancia tardía, preadolescencia.
Parenting styles determine parent-child interaction and they are therefore linked to the emotional atmosphere between parents and children (Darling & Steinberg, 1993). This way, parenting styles set the pace and the quality of parentchild relation-ships, as well as parenting practices, which pursue the children’s adequate behavior.
The initial tridimensional model of parenting styles (Baumrind, 1968,
1996) classifies them into authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive. This typological approach yields an orthogonal bidimensional perspective, defined by an affective-attitudinal axis and a demand-control one (Maccoby & Martin, 1983).
Interaction between both dimensions, demand-control and affection-support and love, results in a quadripartite typology of parenting patterns. This multidimensional character sets a rather inductive or rather punitive parenting style (Hoffman, 1977, Wahl & Metzner, 2012). Currently, the classification into authoritative or competent, authoritarian, indulgent, and negligent is widely accepted (Barnhart, Raval, Jansari & Raval, 2013; Carlo, Mestre, Samper, Tur & Armenta, 2011; Sorkhabi, 2012).
Inductive parenting – Punitive parenting
Inductive parenting is based on affection and communication, and on setting limits, which are defined by behavior control, and promoting autonomy (Hoffman, 1977; Parra & Oliva, 2006). Parents act according to criteria, respecting their children’s feelings. This inductive style has had positive effects on the development of children in practically every culture (Barnhart et al., 2013; Sorkhabi, 2012).
Conversely, more punitive, authoritarian parenting is based on unidirectional orders from the parents towards their children. With this style, the negative, psychological control involves a lack of confidence, disqualifications and humiliations towards the children, which has negative effects on the children’s process of development (Wahl & Metzner, 2012).
Gender differences in parenting
Before the 1960s, research on parenting invisibilized the role of the father in parenting. Later on, papers start to appear taking both parents into account, checking for father-child and mother-child same-quality bonds (Silverstein & Auerbach, 1999). Still, research offers contradictory results.
On the one hand, it has been proved that a father’s love can be the best predictor of the children’s psychosocial development and functioning, both as young children and as adults (Rohner & Veneziano, 2001). On the other, it has been proved that mothers are more involved in parenting and that children perceive a stronger involvement of mothers (Laible & Carlo, 2004). Likewise, it has been proved that the mothers’ expressivity has positive effects on the children’s development (Eisenberg et al., 2003).
To sum up, although there are no conclusive results, it seems that mothers can have a significant influence on parenting, regardless of the children’s sex.
These responsibilities seem to spread both to the factors pertaining to inductive discipline (love, autonomy, and control), and to those pertaining to a punitive parenting style (hostility, negligence, and permissiveness) (Tur-Porcar, Mestre, Samper & Malonda, 2012).
Moreover, the parents’ parenting style has proved to be quite stable and subject to few changes throughout adolescence (Rodríguez, Del Barrio & Carrasco, 2009), which seems to support the existence of the family interaction patterns characteristic of certain households. For example, controlling parents still want to control their children regardless of their age (Parra & Oliva, 2006). Even so, as the children grow up, parents tend to decrease their control and increase their autonomy. This might be due to the inherent needs of adolescent children. In adolescence, a process of extension of the social networks takes place which requires greater progressive autonomy (Parra & Oliva, 2006; Spera, 2005). Likewise, it has been proved that the children’s perception of parenting styles is usually a reliable source of information and even more coherent than that provided by the parents (Silk, Morris, Kanaya & Steinberg, 2003), among other reasons, because it is less subject to social desirability (Roa & del Barrio, 2002).
The differences between the father and the mother justify the fact that this research is conducted separately for the mother and the father, which strengthens this paper.
Anuario de Psicología/The UB Journal of Psychology, vol. 45, nº 3, diciembre 2015, pp. 347-359 © 2015, Universitat de Barcelona, Facultat de Psicologia 350 Parenting: Psychometric analysis Therefore, the goal of the current study is to analyze the dimensions and the structure of the Child Reports of Parental Behavior Inventory (CRPBI) (Schaefer, 1965), and to observe to what extent they fit into the theoretical model mentioned in the introduction.
The analyses were conducted bearing in mind the father’s and the mother’s parenting, from the children’s perception, in two studies covering from late childhood to adolescence. A factor analysis of this same questionnaire has been conducted previously (Samper, Cortés, Náche & Tur, 2006). However, now we have
more information. It is advisable to update these analyses for two reasons basically:
one, to simplify the factorial structure into four factors, following the aforementioned model (Baumrind, 1968, 1996; Maccoby & Martin, 1983); and another, because of the reliability of some of the previous papers.
Method Participants Study 1 The participants were selected with simple randomness criteria, taking into account the geographical location so as to consider different zonal districts. The participants were 762 adolescents aged between 12-17 years (M=13.69 and SD=1.40), attending school at 4 different centers (2 public and 2 charter schools subsidized by the Valencian Government). A 52.7% were male and 47.3% women. Of the total sample, 541 lived with both parents (71%), while 221 belonged to single-parent families. With respect to the fathers’ level of education: university studies (40.5%), high school diploma or vocational training (31.7%), primary school (4.2%), and uneducated (8.9%). Mothers: university (41%), high school or equivalent (35.5%), primary (3.5%), and uneducated (3.5%). Non-defined in fathers (3.4%) and mothers (0.9%).
The population comprised 824 boys (47.8%) and girls (52.2%) aged between 8-11 years (M=9.28 and SD=1.34), attending school at 5 public centers. Of the total sample, 71.1% lived with both parents and 28.9 with one of them (single-parent families). The presence of the mother or the father stood at 98% in both cases.
Fathers’ level of education: university studies (19.4%), high school diploma or vocational training (17.7%), primary school (27.8%), and uneducated (8.9%).
Mother: university (19.9%), high school or equivalent (16.1%), primary (24.7%) and uneducated (9.5%). Non-defined in fathers (26%) and mothers (29.7%).
Instruments The Child’s Report of Parent Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; Schaefer, 1965;
Samper et al., 2006). It evaluates the rules of parent-child interaction perceived by the children, both with respect to the father and the mother. The initial questionnaire includes 52 items (distributed into 8 factors for the father and 8 for the mother), which present typical situations of everyday life and family education. A three-choice scale is presented (never, sometimes, always). These are the dimensions: a) Permissiveness: total freedom without rules or limits; b) Autonomy and Love: sociability and independent thought is stimulated; c) Love: positive evaluation, expressing affection, emotional support; d) Love and Control: intellectual stimulation of the children, discipline focused on the child; e) Control: intrusiveness, control through blame and paternal guidance; f) Control and Hostility: applying strict rules and punishments; g) Hostility: predominance of irritability, negative evaluation and rejection; h) Hostility and Negligence: hostility and, at the same time, extreme autonomy, where the children perceive a lack of attention to their needs. These are the average reliabilities of the four molar dimensions – obtained through the Kuder-Richarson-20 test: Love =.84; Hostility =.78; Autonomy =.69; Control =.66 (Schaefer, 1965).
In both studies the process started with information for the teachers and the families, who gave their consent. Confidentiality and anonymity were preserved. The application of the instrument took place in the schools in a collective way. In both studies the instrument was part of a longer file, for which reason the sessions were 45minutes long. Statistic processing was conducted with SPSS 19.0 and AMOS 6.0.
First of all, we divided the participating population into two subsamples: one comprised the boys and girls who lived with their fathers on a daily basis (defined as “presence of the father”) and the other comprised those who lived with their mothers (defined as “presence of the mother”) As has been proved, the perception Anuario de Psicología/The UB Journal of Psychology, vol. 45, nº 3, diciembre 2015, pp. 347-359 © 2015, Universitat de Barcelona, Facultat de Psicologia 352 Parenting: Psychometric analysis of the role of the father or the mother may depend on the time of cohabitation (Bravo & Del Valle, 2009).
Then, for each subsample, we conducted exploratory factor analyses by means of principal component analyses with Promax rotation (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994; Rennie, 1997), along with the item-factor correlation, and the items with low correlations were discarded (below.40, although they can be accepted below.30) (Hair, Black, Rabin, Anderson & Tatham, 2006). The Kaiser-MeyerOlkin index (KMO) and Bartlett’s sphericity test made the data fit for factorization. The acceptance of four factors was defined by the sedimentation graph (Cattell’s scree test) and the total explained variance (Henson & Roberts, 2006; Bernabé-Valero, García-Alandete & Gallego-Pérez, 2014).
The items were discarded and the factors reduced according to the following criteria: a) items with a loading below.40 (Hair et al., 2006); b) items with a loading over.40, which saturated in two or more factors similarly – the item was preserved when it saturated in two factors but the differences were noticeable and one of them had a loading over.50; c) the item’s internal consistency had to present an alpha α ≥.60 (Lathan & Wexley, 1994).