Presenters
“A Dad by Any Other Name is Not a Dad: Antecedents and
Consequences of What Adolescents Call Their Stepfathers”
Karina R. Sokol, Priscila Diaz, William V. Fabricius, and
Brandon Moak
“Do I Matter to my Dad? The role of adolescent attributions”
Melinda E. Baham, Delia S. Saenz, and Sanford L. Braver
“Reframing Fathers: Others’ Messages About Fathers’
Behavior and their Effects on Adolescent Outcomes”
Sandi Dial & Sanford L. Braver
“A Good Dad Does It All”
Amy Weimer, Melinda Baham, and William V. Fabricius
1
Naming, framing, and blaming: How
adolescents construct their fathers
Chair:
Presenters:
Delia Saenz, Ph.D.
Priscila Diaz
Melinda Baham
Sandi Dial
Amy Weimer
Arizona State University
2
Parents & Youth Study: PAYS
Arizona State University: Sanford Braver,
Ph.D., Bill Fabricius, Ph.D., Toni Genalo, &
Karina Sokol
UC-Riverside: Scott Coltrane, Ph.D., Ross
Parke, Ph.D., & students
San Francisco State University: Jeff
Cookston, Ph.D.
3
Parents & Youth Study: PAYS
Funded by NIMH, NICHD
Research foci:
Role of fathers in adolescent development
Mediators that predict the effect of fathers’ behavior on
adolescent mental health and academic outcomes
Variations in family characteristics (culture, intact vs.
step-families)
4
Parents & Youth Study: PAYS
5-year longitudinal study
Target participants are adolescents in transition
from middle school to high school
2 sites: Phoenix, AZ & San Bernardino, CA
200 families per site (final n = 393)
5
PAYS Demographics
49% of the sample Mexican American
45% step-families (child, bio mom, stepdad)
52% girls
12.5 years mean age (range 11-14)
$40K modal income (4.2K to 430K)
6
PAYS Methodological Approach
Interviews with target child, biological mom,
father/stepfather
3 Waves of data collection
Wave 1 (2004) 2-hour in-home interviews
Wave 2 (2005) 90-minute phone interviews
Wave 3 (2006-) 2-hour in-home interviews
7
Social constructions of fathers
Role of labeling
Role of attributions
Use of reframing
Impact of normative fathering patterns
8
9
A Dad by Any Other
Name is Not a Dad:
Antecedents and Consequences of What
Adolescents Call Their Stepfathers
Karina R. Sokol, Priscila Diaz, Brandon
Moak, & William V. Fabricius, Ph.D.
Parents and Youth Study (PAYS)
Arizona State University
April 29, 2006
10
Overview

Introduction




Method



Measures
Hypotheses
Results



Why study stepfathers?
Social Construction of Stepfathers
Research questions
Antecedents
Consequences
Discussion
11
Why Study Stepfathers?

Almost 1/3 of children will have stepfathers
sometime in their life
(e.g. Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 2000)

Recent research reveals that adolescents in
stepfather families are at a higher risk for
mental health disorders and behavioral
problems
(e.g. Bray, 1999)
12
Social Construction of Stepfathers

Cognitive, category-based judgments
(Moshman, 1998)

Parental identity and status
(e.g.,Marsiglio, 2004)

Parental claim or investment
(e.g., Hofferth, 2003)

Parental role (e.g. Fine, 1998)
13
What is in a name?



“First of all, what do you call him?”
Familial labels
Significance of language
14
Research Questions


What are the relationship and contextual
variables that predict what adolescents call
their stepfather?
What are the differential outcomes between
adolescents who refer to their stepfather as
“Dad” versus those who do not?
15
Measures- Antecedents

Contact with Bio Dad


Years lived with Stepfather


Response scale of 1(No contact in the past three years
or more) to 7 (Contact almost everyday)
Measured in years, range= 1-14
Overall Relationship with Stepfather
(α = .79)

e.g. “How well do you get along with your stepdad?”

Response 1(Not well at all) to 5(Extremely well)
16
Measures- Consequences (Adolescent)

Adolescent report of Externalizing Behavior
(α = .82)


Modification of Behavior Problems Index (8 items)
e.g. “In the past month you argued alot.”

Response scale 1 (not true), 2 (Somewhat true), 3 (Very true)
17
Measures- Consequences (teacher)

Teacher Report of Behavior Problems

Single items

1) “How often have you talked with this child about
behavior, psychological, or emotional problems?



Response scale 1(Never) to 4 (More than 5 times)
2) “Have you ever spoken to your Principal or Vice
principal about this child’s emotional, psychological, or
behavior problems?
3) “If all the students who are in the same class were
asked about this child, would the MAJORITY of them
say that this child is always getting into trouble?”

1 = No, 2 = Yes
18
Hypotheses- Antecedents
Contact w/
Bio Dad
_
Years
Lived w/
Step-dad
+
“DAD”
+
Relationship
w/ Step-dad
19
Hypotheses- Consequences
_
_
“DAD”
Externalizing
Spoke w/
Child
_
_
Spoke w/
principal
Peers
20
Method of Analysis

Results were ONLY on stepfamilies


N = 140-175
Antecedents

Logistic Regression


Three variables
Consequences

One way ANOVA


Adolescent externalizing
Teacher behavior problem items
21
Results- Antecendents

Overall model significant

2 (3) = 27.52, p < .001, Nagelkerke R2 = .25
Predictor
B
p
Odds Ratio
Contact w/ Bio Dad
-.18
.05*
1/.84=1.19
Years lived with Stepfather
.16
.023*
1.18
Overall Relationship
.45
< .001***
1.56
*p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.001.
22
Classification Analysis
Predicted
“Dad”
“Other”
PC
“Dad”
71
25
74
“Other”
12
32
72.7
Observed
PAC = 74%
Sensitivity
Specificity
23
Results- Consequences

Trend for those who called their stepfather by
“dad” had less externalizing behavior
(reported by adolescent)


p = .079
Trend for those who called their stepfather by
“dad” were on average talked to less about
their behavior problems by teachers

p = .076
24
Teacher spoke with principal
Principal
1.12
1.08
1.04
1
0.96
Dad
Other
What you call your stepdad
p = .019
25
Peers believe always in trouble
(teacher report)
1.24
Peers
1.16
1.08
1
0.92
Dad
Other
What you call your stepdad
p =.011
26
Discussion




What adolescent calls stepfather is
determined by context and relationship
Provides evidence that the label “DAD” has
important implications for adolescent
behavior problems
Future research will allow us to explore how
they might predict other adolescent outcomes
Further exploration of familial labeling is
meaningful
27
Thank you!
28
29
Do I Matter to My Dad: The Role of
Adolescent Attributions
Melinda E. Baham,
Delia S. Saenz, &
Sanford L. Braver
Arizona State University
30
Fathers are Important



31
Fathers have traditionally been understudied
Fathering makes a substantial difference in
child outcomes over and above the influence
of mothering
An aspect of the father-child relationship that
deserves further study is how much the child
feels he/she matters to his/her father
What is Mattering?



32
Mattering involves the idea that a person is
important to, and is cared about by, another
individual
Mattering to one’s parents relates to levels of
self esteem, depression, anxiety, and overall
wellness in adolescents
Mattering to parents and friends explained
differences in self concept and behavioral
misconduct in adolescents
What matters to mattering?



33
Since mattering to others is highly predictive of
important child outcomes, this leads to the
question: How does this sense of mattering
arise?
The majority of mattering research to date
examines the impact of mattering as a predictor
for various outcomes
We wondered: When mattering is viewed as an
outcome, what psychological phenomena
influence mattering?
Reasons Given for Behaviors





34
One potential explanation of how a child determines
that he matters to his father might be the reasons a
child gives for his father’s behaviors
For example, imagine a child’s father works long
hours
One child might say his father works all the time
because his father doesn’t care about him
Another child might say her father works all the time
because her father cares for her so much that her
father works long hours
These reasons, or attributions, may influence the
child’s perceived mattering to his father
Attributions




35
Attributions are the reasons that people give for
various events and behaviors
Attributions answer the “why” questions
Attributions are made about a wide variety of
behavioral events, but the attributions
themselves vary along only a few causal
dimensions
Our focus is Stability - is the attributed cause of
the behavior stable or unstable?
Children’s Attributions of Parents




36
Few studies have examined children’s attributions of
parent behaviors
One study found children’s stable (among other)
attributions of negative parent behaviors were negatively
correlated with positivity in the parent-child relationships
Also, the more a child endorsed stable attributions of the
father’s negative behavior, the less positive the observed
interaction between father and child
Other studies report children’s stable attributions of
negative parental behavior related to ineffective
communication between the child and the parent
Types of Attribution-Eliciting Events




37
When considering the behavioral events that
participants are asked to make attributions
about, two questions emerge:
Are the events real or hypothetical?
Are the events positive or negative?
Very few studies have included positive
events, and even fewer studies included
events that were real
The Present Study
This study had several aims:
 To investigate aspects of the father-child
relationship, specifically mattering
 To investigate what factors may lead to mattering
 To elicit attributions made about real events, and
about both positive and negative behaviors
 To determine if adolescents’ attributions of fathers’
behaviors significantly predict mattering
38
Hypotheses
Stable Positive
Attributions
Unstable Positive
Attributions
Stable Negative
Attributions
Unstable Negative
Attributions
39
+
?
Mattering
?
Measures - Mattering Questionnaire



40
Adolescents responded to how much they agree
each statement describes their relationship with their
father on a 5 point scale ranging from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)
7 items were added in order to create one variable
that measures overall feelings of mattering, where
the higher the value, the more one feels he matters
(minimum score of 7, max. score of 35)
This scale has high internal consistency (Cronbach’s
alpha = .86)
Mattering Questionnaire Items
Sample Items:
 My [dad/step-dad] really cares about me.
 I believe I really matter to my [dad/stepdad].
 I know my [dad/step-dad] loves me.
 I am one of the most important things in the
world to my [dad/step-dad].
41
Measures - Attribution Questionnaire



42
Adolescents were asked to think of a time their
father did or said something nice, and a time he did
or said something mean
After each behavior, adolescents were asked to rate
how much the behavior was due to several reasons
on a 1-5 scale, where 1 was not at all the reason,
and 5 was exactly the reason
The reasons were designed to tap the causal
dimension of stability
Reasons for positive behavior
Stable
 He’s a positive or nice kind of person?
 He likes to make you happy?
 He cares about you?
Unstable
 You really deserved it?
 He happened to be in a good mood?
 Someone else told him to or wanted him to?
43
Reasons for negative behavior
Stable
 He’s a mean or difficult person?
 He’s ALWAYS down on you?
 He doesn’t care if something he says bothers or hurts
you?
Unstable
 You really deserved it?
 He happened to be in a bad mood?
 It was just one of those times that he really got upset?
44
Data Reduction of Attribution Measure
Four new variables were created:




45
The extent to which a child endorsed stable
causes for any type of positive father behavior
The extent to which a child endorsed unstable
reasons for any type of positive father behavior
The extent to which a child endorsed stable
causes for any type of negative father behavior
The extent to which a child endorsed unstable
causes for any type of negative father behavior
Results

46
Of the 393 adolescents who participated, 27
adolescents could not think of examples of
their fathers’ behaviors (either verbal
statements or behavioral actions), thus the
final sample consisted of 366 adolescents.
47
Mean
Standard Deviation
Stable Attributions for
Positive Behaviors
4.28
0.70
Unstable Attributions
for Positive Behaviors
2.76
0.61
Stable Attributions for
Negative Behaviors
1.57
0.72
Unstable Attributions for
Negative Behaviors
2.50
0.76
Mattering to Father
31.40
4.53
Primary Analysis



48
Investigated if the extent to which adolescents
endorsed stable and unstable attributions for positive
and negative events could predict perceived
mattering to fathers
A hierarchical regression analysis was conducted in
which the two positive attributions were entered as
the first block, and the two negative attributions were
entered in a second block to predict mattering
This allowed for a direct comparison of how
attributions about positive behaviors and attributions
about negative behaviors potentially differentially
impact mattering
Results of Primary Analysis
 The
four attribution variables
significantly predicted perceived
mattering to father, F (4, 361) =
81.60, p < .001, and accounted for
47.5% of the variance
49
Regression Intercept
Standardized
B
BETA
23.92
t
16.28***
Stable positive attributions
2.95
0.46
9.79***
Unstable positive attributions
-0.46
-0.06
-1.45
Stable negative attributions
-2.14
-0.34
-7.10***
Unstable negative attributions
-0.20
-0.03
-0.83
R Square
*** p < .001
50
Unstand.
.48
Results of Primary Analysis con.
51

The stable and unstable attributions for negative
behaviors significantly added to the prediction in
mattering over and above stable and unstable attributions
for positive behaviors, F (2, 361) = 29.86, p < .001.

A second hierarchical OLS regression analysis found that
attributions for positive behaviors account for variance in
mattering over and above variance accounted for by
attributions for negative behaviors, F (2, 361) = 50.31, p <
.001.
Discussion




52
The purpose of this study was to investigate the
relationship between the attributions adolescents make
about their fathers’ behaviors and the adolescents’
perceived mattering to their fathers
Overall, the results of the study support the hypotheses.
As adolescents increased their endorsement for stable
attributions for positive father behaviors, the more they
perceived they mattered to their fathers
As adolescents increased their endorsement for stable
attributions for negative father behaviors, the less they
perceived they mattered to their fathers
These findings suggest a partial explanation for how
feelings of mattering to one’s father might come about
Discussion continued





53
This study illustrates that differences in mattering
can be explained by attributions of fathers’
behaviors,
Stable attributions about either positive or negative
behaviors explain much more about mattering than
do unstable attributions
Positive attributions had a slightly stronger
relationship with mattering than did negative
attributions
Both positive and negative attributions uniquely
contributed to predict mattering
Highlights the need to include both positive and
negative events when eliciting attributions
Future Directions


54
Continue using positive and negative
behaviors to elicit attributions, and focus on
positive outcomes, such as perceived
mattering to fathers
Further exploration of the causal direction of
attributions, of gender differences, and of
ethnicity differences are warranted
THANK YOU!
55
56
Reframing Fathers: Other’s Messages
About Fathers’ Behavior and Their
Effects on Adolescent Outcomes
Sandi Dial & Sanford L. Braver, Ph.D.
Arizona State University
57
Overview
Existing definitions of reframing
Reframing in the Literature
Reframing as defined by PAYS
Measures Descriptions
Research Questions and Results
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
I.
II.
III.
VI.
Research Question 1 and Results
Research Question 2 and Results
Research Questions 3 and Results
Discussion
58
Reframing


Reinterpreting or
reappraising a
situation
Generally
conceptualized as
a positive process
59
Reframing and Children in the
Literature

Maternal reframing was found to mediate
parenting stress and attachment with
infants (McKelvey, 2004)

Maternal use of reframing viewed more
positively by sons compared to paternal use
of reframing (Kliewer, et al., 1996)
60
Reframing in the Current
Study

The nature of messages mothers, fathers,
and non-parents provide to an adolescent
and s/he is upset or bothered about the
relationship to the (step-)father or about the
things he says or does
 This definition will possibly allow the current
study to answer questions raised by past
researchers
 Thought to be generally beneficial
61
Outcome Measures

Mother and father report of internalizing and
externalizing adapted from Behavior Problems
Index (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1983; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001;
Peterson & Zill, 1986)

Child report of externalizing adapted from
Youth Self Report (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001; Peterson &
Zill, 1986)

Child report of internalizing a mean of
standardized scores from questions adapted
from the Child Depression Inventory (CDI;
Kovacs, 1992) and the Revised Children’s
Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS; Reynolds & Richmond,
1979; Reynolds & Paget, 1981)
– Moderate reliability (α =.65 and .67 respectively)
62
Outcome Measures

Mother, father and child report of fatherchild relationship from the Overall
Relationship Quality Scale
– 2-item scale assessing how well father and
child get along
63
Research Question 1
How are the characteristics of reframing
correlated with the adolescent’s outcomes?
 Characteristics of reframing:

–
–
–
–
Frequency of reframing
Frequency of a reason given
Type of reframe (e.g., criticize vs. support)
Child’s feelings about the father and relationship
with him after reframing
– Child’s feelings about self after reframing

Outcome Measures
– Internalizing behaviors
– Externalizing behaviors
– Father-child relationship quality
64
Patterns of Results for Correlations

Many significant correlations
 Nearly all significant correlations were in
expected directions, i.e., reframing enhanced
adolescent well-being
– Correlation of mother’s frequency of giving a
reason for father’s behavior with father’s report of
adolescent externalizing (r = -.20, p < .01)
– Correlation of adolescent’s feelings about father
after mother’s reframe and adolescent’s report of
father-child relationship (r = .31, p < .01)

Largest correlation (r = .43, p < .01) was
between non-parent’s support of father and
adolescent’s report of father-child relationship65
Research Question 2

How do the types of reframes given by
mothers about the (step-)father’s behavior
compare to the reframes given by fathers?

If there is a difference, what effect does this
difference have on the relationship quality
with the father as well as the adolescent’s
outcomes?
66
Parental Differences in Reframing
Fathers
Means
Reframing Question
Mother
Father
F
How frequently do you talk to this person
about your (step-)father’s behavior?
4.54
4.56
.01
How frequently does this person give you a
reason for your (step-)father’s behavior?
5.26
5.39
.98
Does this person criticize or support your
(step-)father’s behavior?
3.20
2.23
58.75**
How do you feel about your (step-)father
after this person reframes his behavior?
4.03
4.09
.59
How do you feel about yourself after this
person reframes your (step-)father’s
behavior?
3.82
4.00
4.20*
67
Moderation Plot for Research
Question 2
Child's Report of Externalizing Behavior
17
Father Apologizes
16.5
Father Equal Apologizes
and Defends Himself
16
Father Defends Himself
15.5
15
14.5
14
13.5
13
12.5
1
2
3
4
5
Mother's Reframe of Father's Behavior:
Low = Criticize, High = Support
68
Research Question 3

Is there a difference in the reframes
afforded to children in stepfamilies
versus intact families?
69
Fisher’s r-to-Z Comparisons of
Correlations by Family Type
Reframing
Variable
Outcome
Variable
Reporter
r for
intact
r for
step
Zdifference
Feelings about
father after
mother reframe
Externalizing
Father
.01
-.24
2.13*
Feelings about
self after mother
reframe
Externalizing
Child
-.05
-.28
1.95*
Feelings about
father after
mother reframe
Father-child
relationship
Child
.10
.48
-3.46***
Frequency of
reframing by
father
Father-child
relationship
Father
-.05
.45
-3.19***
70
Discussion
Reframing is generally beneficial
 Adolescents in stepfamilies should be
encouraged to seek out reframing
 Future research should aim to identify
the specific content of reframes and
how that content affects outcomes

71
72
A Good Dad Does It All
Amy A. Weimer, Melinda E. Baham,
and William V. Fabricius
Arizona State University
73
Overview
• Introduction
– Research questions
• Method
– Measures
1. Behavioral Evidence
2. Relationship Scripts
• Results
– Relationship between Behavioral Evidence &
Relationship Scripts
• Discussion & Conclusions
74
Purpose
• To assess the child’s view of father-child
relationships through two unique measures:
1) Behavioral Evidence
2) Relationship Scripts
75
Introduction
• Fathers are important to adolescents’
behavioral and mental health outcomes
• Research is needed to assess the quality of
father-child relationships among Mexican- and
Anglo-American step and intact families
76
Research Questions
1) Are there different dimensions of father
behaviors, or do dads do it all?
2) Do scores on objective measures correlate
with open-ended qualitative measures of
parent-child relationships?
77
Method
1) Behavioral Evidence: survey measure asking
adolescents how often their (step)father provides
“behavioral evidence” that he considers them
important in his life
2) Relationship Scripts: open-ended questions
prompting children to tell us “the story” of their
relationship with their father, using their own
words
78
1. Behavioral Evidence
• Developed for PAYS project to assess the actions of
father/stepfathers toward their adolescent child
• Responses ranged from 1 to 5, on a 5-point scale,
from Never to Very often
• Summed scores had good reliability: Alpha = .94
• Higher scores indicate fathers more often displayed
positive parenting behaviors
79
Sample Items on Behavioral Evidence measure:
How often does dad . . .
• spend time with you?
• listen and talk with you?
• do fun things?
• listen to your side of the argument?
• hug you, pat you on the back, or show other
signs of physical affection?
• encourage you to feel better when you're feeling
upset?
• give you money and/or other things?
• act interested in you or what you have to say?
• help you when you need help?
80
Results: Behavioral Evidence
Frequency of Positive Parent Behavior
Mean Differences by Family Type & Ethnic Group
94
92
90
88
86
84
82
80
78
76
74
Mex-Am
Anglo-Am
Step
Family type
Intact
Main effects of family type and ethnic group, but no
interaction effect (controlling for SES)
81
Collapsed across family type & ethnic groups
Children’s
average
response
was “3”
indicating
that on
average all
dads
“often”
engaged in
positive
behaviors
82
How related are items on Behavioral
Evidence Measure?
• A single underlying factor explained most (52%) of
the variance observed among the 22 Behavioral
Evidence items
• Suggests that dads “do it all”
83
2. Relationship Scripts
• Children produced rich, script-like descriptions about their
relationship with father or stepfather
• Three themes appeared in almost every child’s script:
(1) Investment (IN), the child’s evaluation of the time and
energy the parent invests in the relationship
(2) Emotional quality (EQ), the positive versus negative
emotions the child feels toward the parent relationship
(3) Responsiveness (RE), the child’s evaluation of the
parent’s responsiveness to needs or requests
(4) Provisioning (PR), the child’s evaluation of how good
a provider or source of financial support the parent is
84
Coding Scripts
• Qualitative data was quantified on these 4
dimensions
1. Parsed into smallest meaningful statements
2. Identified dimensions the statement was about, if
any
3. Rated dimensions of statements as low, medium,
or high
• Interrater reliability was calculated by correlating 6
coders’ average scores on 60 scripts, coded by PAYS
researchers. Reliability was acceptable:
• IN =.91, EQ = .94, RE = .84
85
Sample Relationship Script
[My father] is one of those people who likes to do things for
others, who is very nice (EQ3) // and respectful (EQ3) // and
he is just a good person (EQ3). // If I have a problem, like he
will be the one who will sit down and talk to me about it
(RE3), // and he talks to me in a nice way (EQ3, RE3). He
helps me sometimes with things (RE2) // and even when he is
busy, he will take time for me (IN3).
86
Results: Relationship Scripts
Intercorrelations Among Dimensions
Investment
Investment
Emotional
Quality
Responsiveness
1.0
Emotional
Quality Responsiveness
.41**
.25**
1.0
.41**
1.0
** p < .01
87
Dimension Ratings
by Family Type and Ethnic Groups
Average Dimension Rating
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.4
MA Intact
AA Intact
MA Step
AA Step
2.3
IN = Investment
2.2
EQ= Emotional Quality
2.6
2.5
IN
EQ
RE
RE = Responsiveness
Marginally significant main effects of family type (controlling for
SES): Intact families (blue) > Stepfamilies (red)
RE, p=.06, IN, p= .07
88
Results: Relating Behavior Evidence
to Relationship Script Dimensions:
• Mean scores on Behavioral Evidence positively
correlated with dimensions of children’s relationship
scripts:
1) Investment r = .44
2) Emotional quality r = .50
3) Responsiveness r = .40
89
Discussion
1) Are there different dimensions of father behaviors, or
do dads do it all?
• Single Factor on Behavioral Evidence
• Suggests that dads are involved in many aspects of
child rearing.
2) Do objective measures correlate with open-ended
qualitative measures of parent-child relationships?
• Suggests validity of measures
• Good dads (dads who children perceive as spending
more time and energy, providing for emotional
comfort, and who respond to their needs) participate
in many parenting behaviors
90
Limitations & Future Research
• First wave of data only
• Used self-identified ethnic groups (could
examine based on continuum of cultural
values)
• Could compare to mom
91
Conclusions
• Have developed two promising new measures
of adolescent relationships with their fathers
• Demonstrated that fathers participate broadly
in child rearing behavior
• Shown that these behaviors relate to how child
feels about him
92
Thank You
93