Paternal Depression: Associations with Paternal Parenting
Behaviors
Kimberly F. Davis
Research Proposal completed in fulfillment
of the requirements of the
Honors Program in Psychological Sciences
Under the Direction of Dr. Bruce E. Compas
Vanderbilt University
April 7, 2010
Abstract
Research on parental depression is beginning to recognize the importance of studying fathers with
depression and the effects this depression can have on their parenting behaviors. The current study
provides insight into the effects that paternal depression can have on specific mechanisms of paternal
parenting behaviors.
In this study, paternal depression is hypothesized to correlate with increased
irritability and increased withdrawing parenting behaviors. The current study examined the effects of
paternal depression on paternal parenting behaviors, as well as if paternal depression affects fathers’
parenting behaviors differently than maternal depression affects mothers’ parenting behaviors. This study
used information from written questionnaires, interviews, as well as from parent-child interactions.
Correlation statistics were used to analyze the obtained data for the specific hypotheses of this study.
Results showed stronger correlations between paternal depressive symptoms and both intrusive and
withdrawn parenting behaviors than these same correlations ran with depressed mothers.
A major
limitation to this study is the small sample size of fathers; however, the numbers for this study are
comparable to previous research that has been able to find significant results for the effects of paternal
depression
on
child
outcomes,
despite
1
the
small
samples
sizes
of
fathers
Davis
available.
Major Depression is a problematic mental health condition that has a significant impact on a
considerable proportion of individuals in the United States. In a study of over 9,000 subjects,
from the National Comorbidity Survey, it was found that Major Depression affects 16.2% of the
general population over their life time (Spector, 2006). This finding would suggest that over a
lifespan, there is a national estimate of between 32 and 35 million individuals nationwide in the
United States who are affected by Major Depression (Spector, 2006); this number includes both
men and women. It has further been found that amongst this affected portion of the population,
Major Depression affects women at a rate of about twice that of men; that is, about one in five
women compared to one in ten men (Elgar et al., 2007).
With Major Depression affecting so many Americans, it is important to note that this mental
illness affects more than just adults. When Major Depression is found in adults who are parents,
it also has profound implications for psychopathological and behavioral risks on their offspring.
Among children and adolescents of depressed parents, these psychopathological risk factors
include a higher susceptibility to more emotional and behavioral problems as well as a higher
susceptibility to Major Depression, at a rate of approximately four times that of children of nondepressed parents (Compas, 1997; Jacob et al., 2001). Other risk factors include problems in
multiple areas of daily functioning. These problems include, but are not exclusive to, impaired
school performance, lower social competence, lower levels of self-esteem, increased risk for
higher levels of medical utilization, increased numbers of suicide attempts, and higher rates of
substance abuse disorders (Compas, 2003).
It has also been found that these risk factors and the risk for psychopathology among children
with depressed parents are increased by irritability, inconsistent discipline, less warmth, less
praise, and less nurturance shown by the depressed parent (Compas, 2003). It is interesting to
2
Davis
note, however, that while both men and women with depression present with dysphoric mood
and a decrease in activity level, significantly more men experience social withdrawal,
indecisiveness, and irritability (Spector, 2006). Such behaviors have been found, for example, to
correlate with child internalizing and externalizing problems (Elgar et al., 2007) and increased
father-child conflict during interactions (Kane et al., 2004).
To expand on the findings regarding the effects of depression on fathers’ parenting styles,
it is important to look at the past research studies that have focused on this issue. One of the
major problems with the available research conducted on parental depression is that most of the
current research has focused primarily on the effects of maternal depression on their parenting
styles and how this can have negative implications for their children. In the past 11 years,
however, more of an emphasis has been placed on the effects on parenting in fathers suffering
from depression (Davé et al., 2008; Elgar et al., 2007; Jacob et al., 1997; Jacob et al., 2001;
Spector, 2006).
One of the first studies to examine the effects of paternal depression on fathers’ parenting
styles and the effects this can have on child outcomes was a study conducted by Jacob et al.
(1997) using questionnaire measures accompanied by observations of parent-child interactions.
The specific scales they used in this study were: the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), which
was used to assess emotional and behavioral problems in the participating child; the Beck
Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory Scale 2
(MMPI-II), which were used to assess parental depressive symptoms; and the Areas of Change
Questionnaire (ACQ), which lists 34 areas of common family conflict. Parents and children of
the same family were asked to rate the degree of change desired in each area. Topics for further
family discussion were chosen from the endorsed areas of conflict. Fifteen-minute Parent-Child
3
Davis
problem-solving interactions, in which family members were asked to try to work towards a
resolution to the areas of conflict indicated on the ACQ, were then conducted.
One of the major findings of this study was that children of depressed parents exhibited
higher levels of depression, total behavior problems, and greater internalizing and externalizing
problems than children of non-depressed parents. In looking at the differences between mothers
and fathers with depression, Jacob et al. (1997) found that it was specifically paternal depression
that was a significant predictor of CBCL depression and total behavior problems, both
internalizing and externalizing in the children. With regards to behaviors expressed by the fathers
towards their children within the interactions that might have influenced the children, Jacob et al.
(1997) found that fathers expressed less positivity, less negativity, and less congeniality to their
children than depressed mothers. This was found to affect paternal communications during the
parent-child problem-solving interactions. As a result, Jacob et al. found that it was the lack of
positivity and lack of congeniality within the father-child communications that were significant
predictors of CBCL depression and internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. This
finding suggests that paternal communication mediates the impact of paternal depression on
child depression.
Following the original study, Jacob et al. (2001) conducted a similar study to look at the
mechanisms of parental depression that affect fathers’ parenting styles and how these effects can
have negative impacts on their offspring. In this study, they used the CBCL to assess emotional
and behavioral problems of the participating child; the Areas of Change Questionnaire, the Beck
Depression Inventory and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory Scale 2, which
assessed the severity of parental depression; and parent-child problem-solving interactions,
4
Davis
which were used to determine how parental depression affects parental communication styles
and how these styles effect child behaviors.
As in their previous study, Jacob et al. (2001) looked at both the effects of maternal and
paternal depression. They found specific results that were relevant solely to depression in fathers.
They were able to replicate the findings from their previous study, finding that paternal
depression was correlated with greater positivity suppression compared with families with a
depressed mother. This is to say that during father-child interactions paternal depression was
correlated with less positive statements following a positive statement made by a child. This in
turn was inversely correlated with behavior problem scores, which indicated that lower positivity
suppression was associated with higher rates of child problem behavior. The low positivity
scores found in father-child communications were also found to be inversely related to CBCL
Depression and behavior problem scores in the children. Jacob et al. (2000) were also able to
replicate their finding from their previous research that paternal negativity was not significantly
associated with child status. This is to say that when fathers with depression followed a positive
statement made by a child with a negative statement, this did not have a significant impact on
child behavior problems or child depression.
Kane et al. (2004) used a meta-analysis of previous research to determine the effects of
paternal depression on fathers’ parenting styles and how this relates to child psychopathology
and father-child conflict. This analysis found that overall, depression in mothers and fathers are
related to maladaptive child outcomes. However, specifically it was found that depression in
fathers is significantly and positively associated with internalizing and externalizing symptoms
in children as well as with father-child conflict. Kane et al. also found that after controlling for
maternal depressive symptoms, paternal depression predicted children’s behavioral and
5
Davis
emotional problems. In relation to the effects of maternal depression on child outcomes, it was
found that the mental health of fathers might exacerbate the effects of maternal depression
through genetic or environmental means. Thus, from this finding it would appear that paternal
depression might have a greater impact on child outcomes than maternal depression does.
As with Kane et al. (2004), Spector (2006) employed a literature review to compile an
evaluation of subsequent effects upon a family in relation to paternal depression. It was found
that when a father suffers from depression, there is a 45% increase in depression among the
offspring as well as a 26% greater likelihood that the offspring will suffer from any psychiatric
disorder, including alcohol dependence. In looking at a twin registry study, Spector found a link
between paternal depression and posttraumatic stress disorder in their offspring. It was also
found that with higher levels of paternal depression there were higher levels of paternal trait
anger, outward anger expression, as well as inward anger expression. Consequently,
externalizing behavior of children was positively correlated with paternal expression of anger;
however, it was found that sons were more directly impacted than daughters were. Spector also
looked at studies that focused on father-child interactions and found that conflicts between father
and child within the interactions are a prime predictor of delinquency in the offspring. Within
these studies, Spector also found that paternal depression was correlated to lower paternal care.
In turn, it was found that paternal depression increases the likelihood of depression among the
children as future adults.
In another recent study, Elgar et al. (2007) looked at how depressive symptoms in both
mothers and fathers affected child maladjustment. In this study children’s perceptions of their
relationships with their parents and parental supervision were measured using a 23- item scale,
which was part of the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY) school
6
Davis
questionnaire that was administered by teachers in classroom settings. Within this scale seven
items measured parental nurturance, seven items measured parental rejection, and five items
measured parental monitoring. The NLSCY school questionnaire was also used to measure child
adjustment problems such as internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and prosocial
behavior using items that were developed for the Montreal Longitudinal Survey and Ontario
Child Health Study. The NYSCY school questionnaire measured internalizing problems using
seven items that described symptoms of depression and anxiety. Externalizing problems were
measured using 17 items that describe physical and indirect aggression and property offenses.
Lastly, prosocial behaviors were measured within this scale using ten items such as, “I show
sympathy for a child who has made a mistake.” Telephone interviews were used to collect initial
parent data; however, a 12-item version of the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression
Scale (CES-D-12) was later used to gather information of parental depressive symptoms. On this
scale, parents indicated how well 12 statements described their mood over the previous 2 weeks.
Elgar et al. (2007) reported effects for both maternal and paternal depressive symptoms
on children’s adjustment; however, they also found effects specific to paternal depression.
Overall, this study found that depressive symptoms in both mothers and fathers were positively
correlated to child internalizing and externalizing problems and negatively correlated with child
prosocial behaviors. Elgar et al. found that these problems were correlated with less nurturance
and monitoring by both parents, and with more rejection particularly among fathers. Specifically
it was found that this rejection by fathers as well as low nurturance and monitoring and high
rejection by depressed fathers was positively correlated with child internalizing and externalizing
problems and negatively correlated with prosocial behavior. Thus, this study shows the
7
Davis
importance of looking at paternal parenting styles that are predictive of their depressive
symptoms.
In a more recent study on the effects of paternal depression, Davé et al. (2008) used
measures to obtain information about current paternal depressive symptoms, child behavioral and
emotional adjustment to paternal depression, paternal involvement with their child, and stressful
life events experienced by the family. Specifically this study used the Patient Health
Questionnaire (PHQ), which assesses DSM-IV symptoms for depression, somatoform disorders,
anxiety, alcohol and eating disorders, and is useful for identifying psychiatric impairment in
primary care givers. This study also used The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to
determine child behavioral and emotional adjustment to paternal depression. The SDQ looked at
conduct problems, hyperactivity, emotional symptoms, peer problems, and prosocial behaviors in
order to determine how paternal depression affects children with depressed fathers. Father
engagement with the child was also examined in this study. This was assessed using the 28-item
Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project father-child activity scale. Within this scale,
fathers indicated how frequently in the past month they had engaged in 25 activities with their
child using a 6-point Likert-type scale, which ranged from “more than once a day” to “not at all.”
The scale yields scores for four subscales of involvement, which include care giving,
socialization, physical play, and didactic interaction. Other paternal indices were measured using
a father parental stress scale, which is comprised of 14-items that measure personal
communication. The father rated the degree to which he agreed with the 14 statements using a 4point Likert-type scale. This scale revealed three factors, which include bonding with the child,
perceptions of the child, and paternal role stress. Finally, mothers indicated recent life events by
8
Davis
having them indicate which potentially stressful life events the family had experienced in the
past year from a list of 21 items.
The findings of this study are quite striking. Overall, Davé et al. (2008) found that
paternal Major Depression was associated with conduct problems, prosocial problems, peer
problems, and total difficulties among their offspring. However, when Davé and colleagues
controlled for possible confounding variables, only child prosocial behavior problems and peer
problems were related to paternal Major Depression. Specifically, the most highly significant
relationship was found for peer problems in which 38% of fathers with a major depressive
syndrome had a child with a peer problem compared with only 4% of mothers with a major
depressive syndrome. This is to say that paternal Major Depression was associated with a 9 times
greater likelihood of child peer problems suggesting that fathers play an important role in the
socialization of their children and thus, affect children’s peer relationships via experience of the
father-child relationship. These findings were related to the amount of attachment to the father,
father-child interactions, as well as to the amount of the father’s direct advice and regulations
regarding peer relations and access to peers. Promising findings were found, however, when
looking at father engagement in socialization activities with the child. Davé et al. found that
when father engagement with the child was on the rise, it significantly predicted lower peer
problems.
Davé et al. (2008) also reported interesting findings for child prosocial behavior
problems. This study found that paternal Major Depressive Disorder was associated with an 8
times greater likelihood of prosocial behavior problems, which was defined as “having problems
with the enduring tendency to think about the welfare and rights of other people, having
problems with feeling concern and empathy for others, and problems acting in a way that
9
Davis
benefits others”. Interestingly enough however, Davé et al. found that increased father
engagement with the child in socialization activities was associated with a 22% lower likelihood
of prosocial behavior problems.
Rational for Studying the Effects of Paternal Depression on Fathers’ Parenting. These seven
studies have concluded with some significant findings regarding the effects of paternal
depression on child behavioral and psychological functioning. Most of these studies, with the
exception of Davé et al. (2008) and Jacob et al. (1997, 2001), failed to analyze which of the
specific mechanisms of the depressed fathers’ parenting styles cause these problems in the
offspring. In the two studies performed by Jacob et al. (1997, 2001), father-child interactions
proved to be an important measure in determining the effects of paternal depression on gaining
important information regarding how depressed fathers communicate with their children, giving
insight to some of their parenting styles (either withdrawn and less nurturing, or more intrusive
through displays of outward anger). Thus, parent-child interactions were used in the current
research model to look at communication patterns between depressed fathers and their children
as well as to look at the specific parenting styles that depressed fathers may present with that
might mediate or moderate the effects on child outcomes. Many of these studies also used
questionnaires to determine child internalizing and externalizing problems as well as to gather
information regarding parental depressive symptoms. Most of the studies that have used
questionnaires (Davé et al., 2008; Elgar et al., 2007; Jacob et al., 1997; Jacob et al., 2001) have
failed to correlate the findings of these questionnaires with parent-child interactions, with the
exception for the studies by Jacob et al. (1997, 2001), which looked at both questionnaires and
interactions and related the findings of the interactions with child CBCL depression.
10
Davis
In the current study, both questionnaires and parent-child interactions were used; however,
the comparisons between the two measures went beyond the comparisons performed by Jacob et
al. (1997, 2001). In the current research, comparisons were made to determine the effects of
paternal depressive symptoms on the parenting styles of fathers with depression in hopes of
building on the finings made by Davé et al., 2008; Elgar, et al., 2007; Jacob, et al, 1997; and
Jacob, et al., 2001. The current study looked at how paternal depression affects specific paternal
behaviors in hopes of giving some insight to the particular mechanisms that may have an effect
on child outcomes.
Hypotheses. Based on previous research, the current research tested the following
hypotheses: (1) There will be more negative parenting styles in depressed fathers than depressed
mothers; more specifically, when compared to mothers, depressed fathers will present with
increased Hostility shown through outward expression of anger, irritability, and rejection, more
Intrusiveness, and more Negative Discipline. (2) Paternal depressive symptoms will be more
strongly correlated with more withdrawn parenting when compared to mothers shown through
lack of positivity, lack of nurturance, lack of monitoring, and lack of quality time spent with their
child, as well as with Withdrawn Parenting, low Positive Involvement, and Deficient Monitoring.
(3) Paternal depressive symptoms will be more positively correlated with poor communication
with their offspring than maternal depressive symptoms; more specifically depressed fathers will
present with less Listener Responsiveness and less Communication. (4) Fathers will present with
more dysphoric mood than depressed mothers, shown through less Positive Mood as well as less
Prosocial behaviors.
The present study used data obtained from an ongoing research project, Family
Cognitive-Behavioral Prevention of Depression, which is a randomized control study that makes
11
Davis
use of cognitive-behavioral intervention and self-study written information condition (control) to
reduce the incidence of internalizing and externalizing behavioral problems in children of
depressed parents as well as to positively change parenting styles of depressed parents (Compas
et al., 2009). With exploratory analyses, the current study examined the mechanisms of paternal
depression that are hypothesized to lead to negative changes in child emotional and behavioral
problems. The specific mechanisms of paternal depression that are hypothesized to lead to
negative outcomes in children are the parenting styles, communication styles, and depressive
symptoms found to be associated with depressed fathers. The proposed study could help to give
insight into the specificities of these mechanisms that seem to have the greatest impact on child
behavioral and psychological functioning.
Method
Participants
The participants for the current study consisted of 17 fathers (mean age = 48.76, SD =
7.82) and 31 mothers (mean age = 40.84, SD = 6.78) with current or a past history of Major
Depression. Levene’s Test for Equality of Variance showed the variance in age within the
groups was not significant, however a t-test for the equality of means showed there was a
significant difference between the means (p < .001). This difference was the result of one outlier
father who was 63 years of age. In this sample, there were 26 sons (mean age = 12.8, SD = 2.16)
and 22 daughters (mean age = 11.42, SD = 1.996). Of the children of fathers, there were 9 sons
(52.9%) and 8 daughters (47.1%). For mothers in this sample there were 17 sons (54.8%) and 14
daughters (45.2%).
Selection of sample of mothers. The sample of depressed mothers used in this study
was drawn form a larger pool of 95 mothers in the larger study. The chosen mothers were
12
Davis
matched with the sample of depressed fathers based on four criteria: depressive symptoms on the
Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), marital status, income, and employment. These criteria were
chosen as it could be argued that these particular demographics could add to, or reduce, the
stressors caused by Major Depression in the participants.
The BDI scores were the first criteria to be analyzed. Mothers with a BDI score within
the range of +/-1 point of the BDI score of each father were retained in the sample to be paired
down further. The next step was to compare the mothers and fathers with similar BDI scores on
the variables of marital status, income, and employment taken together. Of the 17 fathers, 11
matched exactly on all four variables with 20 of the mothers. When fathers and mothers differed
only on the income variable, 2 to 4 mothers were retained as the closest matches (one or two
with the income level above the father and one or two below so that the average of the incomes
would be that of the father’s actual income). This was the case for 2 fathers, to which 6 mothers
were matched in this way.
One father had a BDI score of 26.25, was divorced, employed fulltime for pay, and
made $90,000-179,999 per year. The only comparable mother within the BDI range of +/-1 was
a mother who had a BDI score of 26, was divorced, employed fulltime for pay, but only had an
income of $25-39,999 per year. Attempts were made to rectify this difference with other
mothers with a BDI score +/-1 of the father; however, other mothers differed on more than one
variable and thus were not as comparable of a match to this particular father.
Another case involved a father with a BDI score of 12.0, who was married, made
$90,000-179,999, and was employed fulltime for pay. In the sample of mothers who matched
with this father on the BDI score, there were not any mothers with a comparable income level;
13
Davis
thus 2 mothers were kept with an income level below ($60,000-89,999) and who were also
married and employed fulltime for pay.
Finally, there was one father who could only be matched to one mother that differed on
all but the BDI score and employment status. This particular father had a BDI score of 31, was
divorced, had an income of $60,000-89,999, and was employed fulltime for pay. All of the
mothers in the range of his BDI score were married and employed part time or were housewives,
and made considerably less money (e.g. $10,000-14,999) except for one mother. This mother
was separated and employed fulltime, though she only had an annual income of $25-39,999. The
decision was made to keep this mother since the rationale could be made that separation could
cause problems similar to divorce, which thus made her more similar than some of the other
mothers this father could have been matched with.
Sample Demographics
Employment. Of the 17 fathers, 14 (82.4%) were employed fulltime, 1 (5.9%) was
employed part-time, 1 (5.9%) was retired, and 1 (5.9%) was employed with other work.
Comparatively, of the 31 mothers, 16 (51.6%) were employed full-time, 9 (29%) were employed
part-time, 4 (12.9%) were homemakers, and 2 (6.5%) were employed with other work. Thus,
88.3% of fathers were employed for pay compared to 80.6% of mothers who were employed for
pay.
Marital Status. Of the 17 fathers, 14 (82.4%) were married or living with someone as if
married and 3 (17.6%) were divorced or annulled. Out of the 31 mothers, 27 (87.1%) were
married or living with someone as if married, 3 (9.7%) were divorced or annulled, and 1 (3.2%)
was separated.
14
Davis
Household Gross Annual Income. Of the 17 fathers, 1 (5.9%) had an income of
$15,000-24,999, 3 (17.6%) had an income between $25,000-39,999, 3 (17.6%) had an income of
$40,000-59,999, 4 (23.5%) had an income between $60,000-89,999, 4 (23.5%) had an income of
$90,000-179,999, and 1 (5.9%) had an income of over $180,000. Comparably, of the 31
mothers, 1 (3.2%) had an income of $10,000-14,999, 3 (9.7%) had an income between $15,00024,999, 6 (19.4%) had an income of $25,000-39,999, 6 (19.4%) had an income of $40,00059,999, 11 (35.5%) had an income of $60,000-89,999, 3 (9.7%) had an income of $90,000179,999, and 1 (3.2%) had an income over $180,000. Thus, this sample was comparable in this
measure with 47% of fathers and 54.9% of mothers having a gross annual income of $40,00089,000.
Measures
Parental Depressive Symptoms: Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Parents’ current
depressive symptoms were assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory-II, a standardized and
widely used self-report checklist of depressive symptoms that has adequate internal consistency
for this sample.
Parenting Styles of Depressed Families: Response to Stress Questionnaire-Parental
Depression Version (RSQ). As outlined previously, the RSQ can measure parental withdrawal,
intrusiveness, and marital conflict. The specific measure that were considered for this study are
the parental withdrawal and parental intrusiveness measures, since these two parenting styles
have been shown to have negative effects on child outcomes. Both the child and parent reports
were adequately reliable ( = .79,  = .82) for this sample.
Alabama Parenting Questionnaire. Parents and adolescents separately completed this
measure, which is a 42-item measure of multiple positive and negative dimensions of parenting.
15
Davis
The APQ was scored based on a three-factor model, which includes Positive Involvement,
Negative Discipline, and Deficient Monitoring (Compas et al., 2009). Children’s reports on the
APQ were used in the current analyses and were adequately reliable (=. 79).
Stressful Parent-Child Interactions. Parents and their children participated in two 15minute interactions. In the first interaction the parent-child pair discussed a recent pleasant
activity their family participated in together (Compas, 2003). Prior to the second interaction, the
parent-child pair reviewed the list of stressful interactions that are included in the RSQ. Upon
reviewing this list, the pair rated the interactions that have occurred in their family in the
previous 6 months (Compas, 2003). Upon completion of this step, the experimenter selected a
stressful parent-child interaction that both the parent and the child endorsed and the experimenter
then instructed the pair to spend 15 minutes discussing this source of stress (Compas, 2003).
Both the parent and child were told to discuss when this stressor occurred and what they each did
to try to cope with it (Compas, 2003). Upon completion of the two interactions, trained coders
then used the IFIRS to independently code for levels of emotion, communication, and problemsolving behaviors discussed above. This method was useful to current study in that it allowed for
comparison of the results with previous findings from Jacob et al. (1997, 2001), which used
parent-child problem-solving interactions to determine the effects of paternal depression on child
behaviors.
Iowa Family Interaction Rating Scales (IFIRS). The Iowa Family Interaction Rating
Scales (IFIRS) was used as the manual for coding communications in the parent-child
interactions (Compas, 2003). Several aspects of the parent-child interaction and individual
characteristics were rated with a score ranging from 1 (“the behavior is not at all characteristic of
the observed person”) to 9 (“the behavior is very characteristic of the observed person”), which
16
Davis
allowed the trained observer to distinguish certain aspects of the parent-child interaction such as
individual characteristics, parenting style, interaction style, prosocial and antisocial behaviors,
and problem solving behaviors (Compas, 2003).
Although it is important to look at all of the
coding scales, the parenting codes as well as the Hostility, Positive Mood, and Prosocial
interaction style codes were the most helpful in distinguishing parenting styles and interaction
styles found in the midst of paternal depression.
To gauge intrusive and withdrawal parenting behaviors, Hostility (HS), Sensitive/ChildCentered (CC), Child Monitoring (CM), Positive Reinforcement (PO), Quality Time (QT),
Listener Responsiveness (LR), and Communication (CO) were used.
Below are brief
descriptions of each code (Melby et al., 1998):
Hostility (HS): the extent to which hostile, angry, critical, disapproving, rejecting
or contemptuous behavior is directed toward another interactor’s behavior (actions),
appearance, or personal characteristics.
Sensitive/Child-Centered (CC): parent’s responses to child are appropriate and
based on child’s behavior and speech; they offer the right mix of support and
independence so child can experience mastery, success, pride, and develop effective selfregulatory skills.
Child Monitoring (CM): the extent of the parent’s specific knowledge and
information concerning the child’s life and daily activities. Indicates the extent to which
the parent accurately tracks the behaviors, activities, and social involvements of the child.
Positive Reinforcement (PO): the extent to which the parent responds positively to
the child’s “appropriate” behavior or behavior that meets specific parental standards.
17
Davis
Quality Time (QT): the extent of the parent’s regular involvement with the child in
settings that promote opportunities for conversation, companionship, and mutual
enjoyment.
Communication (CO): the speaker’s ability to neutrally or positively express his/her
own point of view, needs, wants, etc., in a clear, appropriate, and reasonable manner, and
to demonstrate consideration of the other interactor’s point of view. The good
communicator promotes rather than inhibits exchange of information.
Listener Responsiveness (LR): the parent’s nonverbal and verbal responsiveness as a
listener to the verbalizations of the other interactor through behaviors that validate and
indicate attentiveness to the speaker.
To gauge Dysphoric mood, the Positive Mood and Prosocial codes were used.
Below are brief descriptions of each code (Melby et al., 1998):
Positive Mood (PM): expressions of contentment, happiness, and optimism toward
self, others, or things in general.
Prosocial (PR): demonstrations
of
helpfulness,
sensitivity
toward
others,
cooperation, sympathy, and respectfulness toward others in an age-appropriate manner.
Reflects a level of maturity appropriate to one’s age.
Design and Procedure
In the larger study, information is gathered at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 24
months (Compas, 2003; Compas, 2008), however, only the baseline data was used for this study
since parental depression and parenting behaviors could be assessed at this time point before any
intervention had taken place. Assessment data was obtained on standard paper-and-pencil forms
for questionnaires; all interviews were audio-recorded and responses were recorded on standard
18
Davis
forms; and parent-child interactions were videotaped (Comas, 2003). Each of the 15-minute
interactions was watched through 5 times by the coder in order to obtain IFIRS scores on the
codes noted previously. The first time watching the video, the coder simply watched the video
through without writing any information down to get a general idea about the interaction and to
give overall rater scores to each the parent and the child. During second and third viewings, the
coder watched either solely the parent or solely the child and makes indications under the
specific codes on a coding sheet of statements that the person made that would fit each category.
The fourth and fifth viewings are the same as the second and third viewings, only during these
viewings, the coder focuses on the other individual in the interaction that was not focused on
previously. A second coder then performed the same procedures, giving their own scores for all
codes. Consensus was performed between the two coders and they conferred with each other to
come up with a score on any codes in which the two coders’ scores were more than 2 points off
from one another. When all consensuses had been completed and all questionnaires had been
filled out, all data was entered using SPSS software and stored on computers (Compas, 2003).
Subjects were identified by alphanumeric codes only; names and other possible identifiers were
not included in the electronic database. Subject identification numbers were used that did not
reveal the identity of subjects (e.g., no use of birthdates, initials, social security numbers, etc.)
(Compas, 2003).
Data Analytic Approach
Data for this study was gathered at baseline and therefore the measures of depressive
symptoms and parenting behaviors were collected before any intervention had taken place. Using
this information, comparisons were made between paternal and maternal depressive symptoms
using the BDI measures as well as between paternal parenting behaviors and maternal parenting
19
Davis
styles using the RSQ, APQ and IFIRS coding. Individual correlation analyses were used to
analyze correlations between paternal depressive symptoms (measured on the BDI) and paternal
parenting behaviors (measured on the RSQ, APQ, and IFIRS coding) as well as between
maternal depressive symptoms and maternal parenting behaviors (measured on the RSQ, APQ,
and IFIRS coding).
Intrusiveness Parenting. To test whether there is a correlation between fathers’ depression
and increased intrusiveness shown through increased outward expression of anger, irritability,
and rejection, correlations were run to see if paternal depression (measured on the BDI) is related
to paternal and Hostility (rated on IFIRS coding), Intrusiveness (measured on the RSQ), and
Negative Discipline (measured on the APQ).
Withdrawal Parenting. To test if there is a correlation between paternal depression and
increased withdrawal parenting shown through lack of positivity, lack of nurturance, lack of
monitoring, and lack of time spent with their children, correlations were run to see if parental
depression (measured on the BDI) affects paternal Positive Reinforcement, Child Centered
behaviors, Child Monitoring, Quality Time, and (measured with IFIRS coding); as well as with
Withdrawal parenting (measured on the RSQ), Positive Involvement (measured on the APQ),
and Deficient Monitoring (measured on the APQ).
Poor Communication. To test if paternal depression was positively correlated with poor
communication with their offspring, correlations were run between paternal depressive
symptoms (measured on the BDI) and Listener Responsiveness and Communication (measured
with IFIRS coding).
20
Davis
Dysphoric Mood. To test the hypothesis that depressed fathers will present with more
dysphoric mood, correlations were run between paternal depressive symptoms (measured on the
BDI) and Positive Mood and Prosocial behavior (measured with the IFIRS coding).
Comparison with Mothers. Comparisons were made between fathers and mothers on all
measures using independent sample t-tests, to see if fathers significantly differed from mothers
on these variables.
Results
BDI Score. Fathers in this study had a mean BDI score of 18.21 (SD = 12.44), and the
mothers presented with a mean BDI score of 18.67 (SD = 11.42); tests for both equality of
variance and equality of means showed that mothers and fathers did not significantly differ on
this measure.
Intrusive Parenting. Correlations between fathers’ depression and intrusiveness shown
through expression of anger, irritability and rejection were analyzed. These tests were run to see
if parental depressive symptoms (measured on the BDI) were correlated with increased Hostility
(measured with IFIRS coding), Intrusiveness (measured on parent and child reports of the RSQ),
and Negative Discipline (measured on the child reports of the APQ) (see Table 1 and Graph 1).
Two-tailed t-tests were performed to analyze whether there were significant differences between
fathers and mothers on these intrusive parenting attributes (see Table 2 and Graph 2).
Results of the bivariate correlation analysis showed that paternal depressive symptoms
were significantly correlated to paternal Hostility in task 1, (r =. 53, p < .05); however, this
correlation was not seen with paternal Hostility in task 2. Paternal depressive symptoms were
not significantly correlated with the RSQ measures of Intrusiveness or the APQ measure of
Negative Discipline. It is interesting to note that for fathers, the APQ measure of Negative
21
Davis
Discipline was significantly correlated to the Child report of RSQ Parental Intrusiveness measure
(r = .66, p < .01). When looking at mothers on these variables, their depressive symptoms were
not significantly correlated with any of the measures of intrusive parenting. It is interesting to
note that while a positive correlation was found between Hostility and their depressive symptoms
on task 1 for fathers, this correlation was not significant for mothers. It is also interesting to note
that Intrusiveness measured on the child report of the RSQ was positively correlated maternal
Hostility on task 2 (r = .46, p < .05).
Two-tailed t-tests revealed that there were no significant differences between mothers
and fathers on these measures of intrusive parenting. It can be noted that the difference between
fathers and mothers on the measure of APQ Negative Discipline approached significance (t =
1.85, p = .071). Mean score for fathers was 17.92 (SD = 7.64) and mean score for mothers was
14.88 (SD = 3.36).
Withdrawn Parenting. Correlation statistics were use to examine correlations between
paternal depressive symptoms and withdrawn parenting shown through lack of positivity, lack of
nurturance, lack of monitoring, and lack of time spent with their children (see Table 3 and Graph
3). Two-tailed t-tests were performed to analyze whether there was a significant difference
between fathers and mothers on these withdrawal-parenting attributes (see Table 4 and Graph 4).
Results of the bivariate correlation analysis showed that paternal depressive symptoms
were significantly inversely correlated with paternal Positive Reinforcement on Task 2 (r = -.61,
p < .05); however, no other measures were significantly correlated with paternal depressive
symptoms. It is interesting to note that Poor Monitoring measured on the APQ was positively
correlated to Parental Withdrawal scores reported by the child on the RSQ (r = .79, p < .01).
When looking at mothers, maternal depressive symptoms were significantly inversely correlated
22
Davis
with maternal Child Centered behaviors on task 2 (r = -.39, p < .05) as well as inversely
correlated with maternal Child Monitoring on task 2 (r = -.52, p < .01). No other measures of
withdrawal parenting were significantly correlated with maternal depressive symptoms. It is
interesting to note that maternal Child Monitoring on task 2 was significantly inversely
correlated with Poor Monitoring measured on child reports on the APQ (r = -.38, p < .05).
Two-tailed t-tests revealed that there were no significant differences between mothers
and fathers on these measure of withdrawal parenting, however, the difference between fathers
and mothers on the measure of Withdrawal parenting measured on the child reports of the RSQ
approached significance (t = -.673, p = .054).
Poor Communication. Correlations were ran between paternal depressive symptoms
measured on the BDI and Listener Responsiveness and Communication (measured with IFIRS
coding) to test if parental depressive symptoms were associated with poor communication with
offspring, (See Table 5 and Graph 5). Two-tailed t-tests were performed to analyze whether
there were significant differences between fathers and mother on these attributes of poor
communication (see Table 6 and Graph 6).
Results of bivariate correlations showed that paternal depressive symptoms were
inversely correlated with paternal Communication in task 1 (r = -.57, p < .05) as well as
inversely correlated with paternal Listener Responsiveness in task 2 (r = -.56, p < .05). There
were no correlations between maternal depressive symptoms and the measures of poor
communication.
Two-tailed t-tests revealed that there were no significant differences between mothers
and fathers on these measures of poor communication.
23
Davis
Dysphoric Mood. To test whether depressed fathers present with more dysphoric mood
and anhedonia than depressed mothers, correlation statistics were ran between parental
depressive symptoms (measured on the BDI) and Positive Mood and Prosocial behavior
(measured with IFIRS coding) (see Table 7). Two-tailed t-tests were performed to analyze
whether there were significant differences between fathers and mothers on these attributes of
dysphoric mood (see Table 8).
Results of bivariate correlations showed that paternal depressive symptoms were
significantly inversely correlated with paternal Prosocial behaviors on task 1 (r = -.26, p < .05),
paternal Prosocial behaviors on task 2 (r = -.56, p < .05), paternal Positive Mood in task 1 (r = .51, p < .05), as well as paternal Positive Mood in task 2 (r = -.51, p < .05). Interestingly, when
looking at mothers, maternal depressive symptoms were only significantly inversely correlated
with maternal Prosocial behaviors in task 2 (r = -.41, p < .05)
Two-tailed t-tests revealed that there were no significant differences between mothers
and fathers on these measures of dysphoric mood and anhedonia.
Discussion
Though there were not any significant differences between mothers and fathers on any
measure when two-tailed t-tests were performed, the results of this study provide new
information regarding the associations between paternal depressive symptoms and specific
paternal behaviors.
Fathers’ depressive symptoms were correlated with increased intrusive
parenting behaviors with the fathers presenting with more Hostility, which was not seen in
depressed mothers. Fathers’ depressive symptoms were also correlated with more withdrawal
behaviors, which was not the case for mothers. More specifically, fathers’ depressive symptoms
were correlated with less Positive Reinforcement, less Communication, and less Listener
24
Davis
Responsiveness; however, these results were not found in depressed mothers. However, it
should be noted that mothers’ depressive symptoms did correlate with less Child Centered
behaviors and less Child Monitoring, while depressed fathers did not.
Finally, fathers’
depressive symptoms correlated with more dysphoric mood shown through their lack of
Prosocial behavior and Positive mood, which was not found for mothers. Thus, even though
there were no significant differences between mothers and fathers when they were compared on
these measures, there were significant findings regarding the correlates of paternal depressive
symptoms that can have an effect on paternal behavior.
In the first hypothesis, it was proposed that in comparisons with mothers, there would be
a greater positive correlation between paternal depressive symptoms and increased intrusiveness
shown through outward expressions of anger, irritability, and rejection. This hypothesis was
supported in one of the three measures used. Though not significantly correlated with the
Intrusiveness measure on the RSQ or the Negative Discipline measure on the APQ, paternal
depressive symptoms did correlate with paternal Hostility in task 1, the positive interaction. This
finding suggests that when interacting in a positive manner with their children, depressed fathers
may show more anger and irritability instead of positivity. Since mothers did not present with
higher level of Hostility, it also suggests that paternal depressive symptoms may be related to
fathers’ behavior in a way that is associated with more angry, cynical, and rejecting behaviors
towards their child more so than mothers.
These findings expand upon what Elgar et al. (2007) and Kane et al. (2004) have shown
in their studies who have found increased father-child conflict within interaction between fathers
and their children. Results of this research have been able to show that paternal depressive
symptoms correlate with increased hostility shown by the father within interactions with their
25
Davis
children, and perhaps this is one source of stress that causes the conflict found by Elgar et al. and
Kane et al. This hostility could be detrimental to child outcomes. With increased anger and
rejection presented by fathers to their children, this could perhaps lead to less prosocial behaviors
carried out by the children of depressed fathers within their interactions with other children. It is
also interesting to note that while neither the child APQ measure of Negative Discipline nor the
Parental Intrusiveness score measured on the RSQ positively correlated with paternal depressive
symptoms, they did correlate significantly with each other. This implies that the more negative
discipline a father uses on his child, the more the children perceive their father as being intrusive.
When comparing the mothers and fathers on measures of intrusive parenting behaviors, the mean
difference on the measure of RSQ Intrusiveness approached significance, however no significant
differences were found between mothers and fathers on any the measures of intrusive parenting.
Thus, it would appear that though mothers and fathers do not differ in comparison with one
another at a mean score level, fathers’ depressive symptoms do appear to be more closely
associated with their intrusive behavior than mothers.
The second hypothesis proposed that in comparison with mothers, fathers’ depressive
symptoms would be more strongly correlated with more withdrawal parenting shown through
lack of positivity, or Positive Reinforcement, lack of nurturance, or Child Centered behaviors,
lack of Child Monitoring and lack of Quality Time spent with their child. Stronger results were
found when comparing the fathers’ depressive symptoms with measures of parent-child
interactions than when these symptoms were compared with questionnaire data. Results showed
that paternal depressive symptoms significantly correlated with less Positive Reinforcement on
task 2, the negative interaction, which was not seen with depressed mothers. Results also
showed, however, that paternal depressive symptoms did not correlate with measures of Child
26
Davis
Centered behaviors, Child Monitoring behaviors, or measures of Quality Time. This finding for
decreased positive reinforcement builds on the findings by Jacob et al. (1997, 2001), who found
that paternal depression correlates with less positivity who showed that fathers are less likely to
follow a child’s positive statement with a positive statement of their own. In this research,
results showed that depressive symptoms also correlate with less positive praise given to the
child for age appropriate behaviors. The fact that paternal depressive symptoms negatively
correlated with Positive Reinforcement during the negative interaction suggests that when
interacting with their child about a difficult situation, depressed fathers showed less warmth and
less praise to their child, perhaps when they may need it the most. This could negatively impact
the child both psychologically and behaviorally, possibly leading to lower self-esteem in the
child, which should further be analyzed. The current results further showed that mothers, and
not fathers, presented with less Child Monitoring and less Child Centered behaviors during task
2. However, it should be noted that while fathers’ depressive symptoms did not correlate with
these measures, child measures of Poor Monitoring on the APQ correlated with child measures
of Parental Withdrawal on the RSQ for fathers. This suggests that the children rated their fathers
as showing less monitoring behaviors, perhaps making them appear more withdrawn to the child.
When comparing mothers and fathers on these measures of withdrawal parenting, the only
measure that approached significance was the Withdrawal score rated on the RSQ. What can be
drawn from the results of this hypothesis is that even though the mean level differences were not
present between mothers and fathers, depression does appear to correlate with mothers and
fathers behaviors differently. Mothers appear to be less child centered and show less monitoring
for their children, while fathers show less positivity towards their children. Further research is
needed to determine whether these differences have varying effects on child outcomes.
27
Davis
The third hypothesis proposed that when compared with mothers, fathers’ depressive
symptoms would be more strongly correlated with poor communication with their child as
measured with Listener Responsiveness and Communication IFIRS coding. Based on results of
the correlation statistics, fathers’ depressive symptoms were correlated with less Communication
in the positive interaction, task 1, but not task 2. This suggests that fathers may have a more
difficult time communicating with their children about pleasant activities than they do about
negative situations. This would suggest that depressed fathers have an easier time talking about
negative or stressful topics rather than pleasant topics. The results also show that fathers’
depressive symptoms correlate with less Listener Responsive in task 2, the negative interaction.
Accordingly, even though fathers may have more to say during the negative interaction,
depressed fathers may have a hard time showing verbal or nonverbal responsiveness to children
in a way that shows they are taking what their child is saying into consideration. This may
indicate that though it is easier for depressed fathers to talk during negative interactions with
their child, it may be harder for them to hear their child talk about the negative topics they are
discussing. The lack of positive communication could perhaps lead to a negative outlook on life
taken up by children of depressed fathers. Mothers’ depressive symptoms did not correlate with
either less communication or less listener responsiveness, though when mothers and fathers were
compared on these measures, the mean levels did not significantly differ. It is clear, despite this
fact, that depression is related to fathers’ behavior differently than mothers. It is associated with
poorer communication in positive interactions, as well as less listener responsiveness when
discussing difficult topics with their children. Further studies should analyze how these aspects
of communication impacts the psychological and behavioral outcomes of children of depressed
fathers.
28
Davis
Finally, the fourth hypothesis proposed that when compared to mothers, fathers presented
with more dysphoric mood, shown through less Positive Mood as well as less Prosocial
behaviors. Dysphoria is an unpleasant or uncomfortable mood shown though sadness, anxiety,
irritability, or restlessness (i.e., less Prosocial behavior) and anhedonia is the inability to feel
pleasure (i.e., less Positive Mood). Results showed that the more depressive symptoms fathers
presented with, the less Prosocial behavior and the less Positive Mood they presented with in
both task 1 and task 2. Mothers only showed such a correlation with less Prosocial behavior in
task 2. When comparisons were run between mothers and fathers, there were no significant
differences between the mean levels of their scores. However, the results suggest that, generally,
depressive symptoms found in fathers may be associated with a more dysphoric mood and
greater levels of anhedonia whereas mothers only show more dysphoric mood in the negative
interactions with their children, which might be expected.
Thus, it would appear through the results of this study, that although the mean score
differences between mothers and fathers did not significantly differ on any measure, depressive
symptoms may be associated with a wider array of fathers’ behaviors than mothers’ behaviors.
Depression was associated with six negative behaviors in fathers with them showing more
hostility, less positive reinforcement, less communication, less listener responsiveness, less
positive mood, and less prosocial behavior. Mothers’ depressive symptoms were only associated
with three negative behaviors (less child centered behaviors, less child monitoring, and less
prosocial behaviors). Consequently, it appears that depression may be associated with fathers’
behaviors on a larger scale than mothers’ behavior. Further research should be conducted to test
how these negative behaviors presented by fathers effects child behaviors and psychological
outcomes.
29
Davis
A major constraint to this study was the limited number of fathers that was available to
run data analyses on. With this limited sample size, statistical power was low. Had there been a
larger sample of fathers, perhaps there would have been some significant differences found
between fathers and mothers on these negative behaviors. Future research on this topic would
greatly benefit from a larger sample of fathers that would be more soundly matched with its
sample of mothers. Future research should also analyze whether these negative behaviors found
in depressed fathers correlate with child depression, internalizing and externalizing problems, as
well as behavioral problem. This direction would be very helpful to the current body of research,
since not many studies have focused solely on the affects of paternal depression on child
outcomes.
30
Davis
References
Compas, Bruce, E. (2003). Depression Prevention Grant.
Compas, B.E., Forehand, Rex, Keller, Gary, Champion, Jennifer E., Rakow, Aaron, Reeslund,
Kristen L., McKee, Laura, Fear, Jessica M., Colletti, Christina J. M., Hardcastle, Emily,
Merchant, Mary Jane, Roberts, Lori, Potts, Jennifer, Garai, Emily, Coffelt, Nicole,
Roland, Erin and Cole, David A. (2009). Randomized Controlled Trial of a Family
Cognitive-Behavioral Preventive Intervention for Children of Depressed Parents. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 1007-1020.
Compas, B.E. et al. (2009). Mediators of 12-Month Outcomes of a Family Group CognitiveBehavioral Preventive Intervention with Families of Depressed Parents.
Davé, S., Sherr, L., Senior, R., & Nazareth, I. (2008). Associations between paternal depression
and behaviour problems in children of 4-6 years. European Child Adolescent Psychiatry.
17, 306-315.
Elgar, F. J., Mills, R. S. L., McGrath, P. J., Waschbusch, D. A., and Brownridge, D. A. (2007).
Maternal and Paternal Depressive Symptoms and Child Maladjustment: The Mediating
Role of Parental Behavior. Abnormal Child Psychology. 35, 943-955.
Jacob, T., Johnson, S. L. (1997). Parent-Child Interaction Among Depressed Fathers and
Mothers: Impact on Child Functioning. Journal of Family Psychology. 11, 391-409.
Jacob, T., Johnson, S. L. (2001). Sequential Interactions in the Parent-Child Communications of
Depressed Fathers and Depressed Mothers. Journal of Family Psychology. 15, 38-52.
Kaslow, N. J., Deering, C. G., Racusin, G. R. (1994). Depressed Children and their Families.
Clinical Psychology Review. 14, 39-59.
Melby, J. N., Conger, R. D., Book, R., Rueter, M., Lucy, L., Repinski, D., Rogers, S., Rogers,
31
Davis
B., & Scaramella, L. (1998). The Iowa Family Interaction Rating Scales (5th ed.)
Unpublished manuscript, Institute for Social and Behavioral Research, Iowa State
University, Ames.
Spector, A. Z. (2006). Fatherhood and Depression: A review of risks, effects, and clinical
application. Issues in Mental Health Nursing. 27, 867-883.
(Bruce E. Compas, 2009)
32
Davis
33
Davis
Table 1. Correlations Among Measures of Parental Depressive Symptoms, Hostility (HS), RSQ Intrusiveness, and APQ Negative Discipline.
Gender of Target Parent: Male
1
1. BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
--
2
3
4
5
2. Parent HS, Task 1, consensus code
.529*
--
3. Parent HS, Task 2, consensus code
.177
.054
--
4. RSQ, TP on Child, Prorated Sum Intrusiveness score, Baseline
.051
.335
.285
--
5. RSQ, Child, Prorated Sum Parental Intrusiveness score, Baseline
.420
.107
.395
.142
--
6. APQ, Child, Prorated Sum Negative Discipline score, Baseline
.179
.182
.362
.034
.656**
Gender of Target Parent: Female
1
2
3
4
5
1. BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
--
2. Parent HS, Task 1, consensus code
-.085
--
3. Parent HS, Task 2, consensus code
.274
.312
--
4. RSQ, TP on Child, Prorated Sum Intrusiveness score, Baseline
.261
.001
.462*
--
5. APQ, Child, Prorated Sum Negative Discipline score, Baseline
.107
.258
.126
.108
Note.* p < .05. ** p < .01.
34
Davis
Table 2. Comparisons Between Fathers and Mothers on Depressive Symptoms, Hostility, RSQ Intrusiveness, and APQ Negative Discipline.
Gender of Target Parent
Mean
SD
t

Male
18.21
12.44
-.128
.899
Female
18.67
11.42
Male
2.88
1.32
.340
.736
Female
2.74
1.46
Male
3.44
2.16
-.527
.601
-.270
.789
1.853
.071
BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
HS, Task 1, consensus code
HS, Task 2, consensus code
Female
RSQ TP on Child, Prorated Sum Intrusiveness score, Baseline
APQ, Child, Prorated Negative Discipline Sum, Baseline
35
3.79
2.08
Male
4.82
2.21
Female
5.01
2.41
Male
17.92
7.64
Female
14.88
3.36
Davis
Table 3. Correlations Among Measures of Parental Depressive Symptoms, RSQ Withdrawal, APQ Involvement, APQ Positive Involvement, APQ Poor Monitoring/Supervision, Parent Positive
Reinforcement (PO), Parent Child Centered Behaviors (CC), Parent Child Monitoring (CM), and Parent Quality Time (QT)
Gender of Target Parent
Male
1. BDI Prorated Sum TP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
--
Baseline
2. RSQ child, Prorated
*
.142
--
-.005
.337
--
-.146
-.271
-.224
--
-.011
.312
.969**
-.242
--
.272
.795**
.187
-.221
.102
--
-.274
-.004
-.233
.053
-.067
-.114
Sum Parental Withdrawal
score, Baseline
3. APQ Prorated Child,
*
Involvement, Baseline
4. RSQ TP on Child,
Prorated Sum TP on
Child Withdrawal score,
Baseline
5. APQ Prorated Positive
Involvement Sum Child
Baseline
6. APQ Prorated Child,
Poor
Monitoring/Supervision,
Baseline
7. Parent PO, Task 1,
--
consensus code
36
Davis
.
14
8. Parent CC, Task 1,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
-.161
.192
-.007
-.086
.089
.021
.427
--
-.479
.307
.418
-.023
.367
.273
.009
.417
--
-.198
.332
.617*
-.423
.650**
.029
.284
.174
.417
--
-.605*
-.248
-.257
.192
-.163
-.449
.553*
.314
.152
.141
--
-.367
-.510*
.262
-.301
.316
-.650**
.265
.291
.237
.542*
.295
--
-.359
.176
.417
-.518*
.384
-.058
.091
-.045
.166
.621*
.334
.386
--
-.089
-.384
.319
.263
.405
-.535*
.094
-.099
.105
.378
.248
.463
.005
14
consensus code
9. Parent CM, Task 1,
consensus code
10. Parent QT, Task 1,
consensus code
11. Parent PO, Task 2,
consensus code
12. Parent CC, Task 2,
consensus code
13. Parent CM, Task 2,
consensus code
14. Parent QT, Task 2,
consensus code
37
Davis
--
1
Female 1. BDI Prorated Sum TP
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
--
Baseline
2. RSQ child, Prorated
.010
--
-.229
-.283
--
.260
.006
-.217
--
5. APQ Prorated Positive -.312
-.394*
.951**
-.172
--
-.062
.333
-.006
-.046
-.031
--
-.050
-.263
.293
-.103
.395*
-.063
--
-.112
-.123
.578**
-.390*
.626**
-.009
.453*
--
-.242
-.010
.485*
-.304
.511**
.170
.279
.730**
Sum Parental Withdrawal
score, Baseline
3. APQ Prorated Child,
Involvement, Baseline
4. RSQ TP on Child,
Prorated Sum TP on
Child Withdrawal score,
Baseline
Involvement Sum Child
Baseline
6. APQ Prorated Child,
Poor
Monitoring/Supervision,
Baseline
7. Parent PO, Task 1,
consensus code
8. Parent CC, Task 1,
consensus code
9. Parent CM, Task 1,
--
consensus code
38
Davis
10
11
12
13
14
10. Parent QT, Task 1,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.247
-.243
.165
.298
.175
.069
.273
.341
.446*
--
.032
.006
.117
.210
.200
-.231
.405*
.135
.193
.384*
--
-.385*
-.272
.568**
-.308
.544**
-.302
.286
.499**
.345
.034
.211
--
-521**
-.116
.383
-.318
.451*
-.383*
.341
.478*
.235
-.095
.372
.672**
--
-.207
.120
.185
-.196
.179
-.232
-.138
.024
.079
.136
-.109
.112
.055
14
consensus code
11. Parent PO, Task 2,
consensus code
12. Parent CC, Task 2,
consensus code
13. Parent CM, Task 2,
consensus code
14. Parent QT, Task 2,
consensus code
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
39
Davis
--
Table 4. Comparisons Between Fathers and Mothers on Parental Depressive Symptoms, RSQ Withdrawal, APQ Involvement, APQ Positive Involvement, APQ
Poor Monitoring/Supervision, Parent Positive Reinforcement (PO), Parent Child Centered Behaviors (CC), Parent Child Monitoring (CM), and Parent Quality
Time (QT)
Gender of Target Parent
Mean
SD
t
p
Male
18.21
12.44
-.128
.899
Female
18.67
11.42
Male
21.63
9.82
2.32*
.025
Female
16.76
4.28
57.40
12.15
-.304
.763
.194
.847
-.673
.054
.003
.997
-1.137
.262
BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
APQ, Child, Prorated Poor Monitoring/Supervision, Baseline
APQ, Child, Prorated Positive Involvement Sum, Baseline
Male
Female
RSQ, Child, Prorated Sum Parental Withdrawal score, Baseline
RSQ, TP on Child, Prorated Sum Withdrawal score, Baseline
Parent PO, Task 1, consensus code
Parent PO, Task 2, consensus code
40
58.497
10.52
Male
2.49
2.80
Female
2.33
2.397
Male
4.18
1.74
Female
4.56
1.92
Male
2.65
2.06
Female
2.65
1.799
Male
1.94
1.29
Female
2.43
1.43
Davis
Parent CC, Task 1, consensus code
Parent CC, Task 2, consensus code
Parent CM, Task 1, consensus code
Parent CM, Task 2, consensus code
Parent QT, Task 1, consensus code
Parent QT, Task 2, consensus code
41
Male
6.35
.86
Female
6.39
1.11
Male
5.94
1.39
Female
6.04
1.43
Male
5.88
.99
Female
5.84
1.68
Male
5.13
1.26
Female
5.68
1.25
Male
4.35
1.62
Female
4.71
1.01
Male
1.94
1.24
Female
1.61
.79
Davis
-.109
.913
-.222
.826
.098
.922
-1.408
.169
-.943
.351
1.085
.284
Table 5. Correlations Among Measures of Parental Depressive Symptoms, Communication (CO), and Listener Responsiveness (LR).
Gender of Target Parent: Male
1
1. BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
--
2
3
4
5
2. Parent CO, Task 1, consensus code
-.566*
--
3. Parent CO, Task 2, consensus code
.-.361
.144
--
4. Parent LR, Task 1, consensus code
-.362
.560*
.174
--
5. Parent LR, Task 2, consensus code
-.562*
.344
1.44
.336
--
Gender of Target Parent: Female
1
2
3
4
5
1. BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
--
2. Parent CO, Task 1, consensus code
-.057
--
3. Parent CO, Task 2, consensus code
-.174
.564
--
4. Parent LR, Task 1, consensus code
.004
.729
.632
--
5. Parent LR, Task 2, consensus code
-.302
.277
.734
.601
Note.* p < .05. ** p < .01.
42
Davis
--
Table 6. Comparisons Between Fathers and Mothers on Parental Depressive Symptoms, Communication (CO), and Listener
Responsiveness (LR).
Gender of Target Parent
Mean
SD
t
p
Male
18.21
12.44
-.128
.899
Female
18.67
11.42
Male
7.06
.659
1.192
.239
Female
6.68
1.22
Male
6.75
1.13
.485
.630
-1.278
.208
.055
.957
BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
CO Task 1, consensus code
CO, Task 2, consensus code
Female
LR, Task 1, consensus code
LR, Task 2, consensus code
43
6.57
1.199
Male
6.06
1.34
Female
6.52
1.09
Male
6.06
1.53
Female
6.04
1.57
Davis
Table 7. Correlations Among Measures of Parental Depressive Symptoms, Prosocial Behaviors (PR), and Positive Mood (PM).
Gender of Target Parent: Male
1
1. BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
--
2
3
4
5
2. Parent PR, Task 1, consensus code
-.259*
--
3. Parent PR, Task 2, consensus code
-.557*
-.050
--
4. Parent PM, Task 1, consensus code
-.505*
.568*
.252
--
5. Parent PM, Task 2, consensus code
-.512*
.120
.532*
-.050
--
Gender of Target Parent: Female
1
2
3
4
5
1. BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
--
2. Parent PR, Task 1, consensus code
.072
--
3. Parent PR, Task 2, consensus code
-.409*
.167
--
4. Parent PM, Task 1, consensus code
.024
.465**
.186
--
5. Parent PM, Task 2, consensus code
-.269
.034
.466*
.365
Note.* p < .05. ** p < .01.
44
Davis
--
Table 8. Comparisons Between Fathers and Mothers on Parental Depressive Symptoms, Prosocial Behaviors (PR), and Positive Mood (PM).
Gender of Target Parent
Mean
SD
t
p
Male
18.21
12.44
-.128
.899
Female
18.67
11.42
Male
6.35
.786
-1.72
.864
Female
6.42
1.48
Male
6.19
1.47
.247
.806
-1.45
.153
-.252
.803
BDI Prorated Sum TP Baseline
PR Task 1, consensus code
PR, Task 2, consensus code
Female
PM, Task 1, consensus code
PM Task 2, consensus code
45
6.07
1.51
Male
5.53
.786
Female
6.097
1.48
Male
3.75
1.34
Female
3.86
1.38
Davis
Table 1
Table 2
46
Davis
Table 3
Table 4
47
Davis
Table 5
Table 6
48
Davis