This article was downloaded by: [natasha cabrera]
On: 24 January 2012, At: 06:45
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Family Science
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rfsc20
Father residence and father-child relationship quality:
Peer relationships and externalizing behavioral
problems
a
b
c
Natasha J. Cabrera , Gina A. Cook , Karen E. McFadden & Robert H. Bradley
d
a
College of Education, University of Maryland, 3304 Benjamin Bldg, College Park, MD,
20742, USA
b
Center for Persons with Disabilities, Utah State University, 6880 Old Main Hill, Logan,
Utah, 84322-6880, USA
c
New York University, New York, USA
d
Family & Human Dynamics Research Institute, Arizona State University, USA
Available online: 16 Jan 2012
To cite this article: Natasha J. Cabrera, Gina A. Cook, Karen E. McFadden & Robert H. Bradley (2012): Father residence
and father-child relationship quality: Peer relationships and externalizing behavioral problems, Family Science,
DOI:10.1080/19424620.2011.639143
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19424620.2011.639143
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Family Science
2012, 1–11, iFirst
Father residence and father-child relationship quality: Peer relationships and externalizing
behavioral problems
Natasha J. Cabreraa*, Gina A. Cookb , Karen E. McFaddenc and Robert H. Bradleyd
a
College of Education, University of Maryland, 3304 Benjamin Bldg, College Park, MD 20742, USA; b Center for Persons with
Disabilities, Utah State University, 6880 Old Main Hill, Logan, Utah 84322-6880, USA; c New York University, New York, USA; d Family
& Human Dynamics Research Institute, Arizona State University, USA
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
(Received 1 August 2011; final version received 1 November 2011)
Using longitudinal data from the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Study, we examined links between early fathers’
residence and father-child relationship quality and children’s social development. Participants were 508 ethnically diverse
children and their fathers and mothers in low-income families. Fathers reported on their residence during early childhood
(age 2- pre K); mothers reported on children’s externalizing behavioral problems and on father residence when children
were in 5th grade; and 5th graders reported on the quality of their relationships with fathers and on their relationships with
peers. The long-term link between early father residence and the quality of the father-child relationship in 5th grade was
significant and partially mediated by father residence during 5th grade. Early father residence or father residence at 5th
grade did not predict children’s behavioral problems and peer relationships in 5th grade. Only the father-child relationship
quality was directly linked to children’s peer relationships and behavioral problems. Early father residence had no long-term
links to children’s social development; however, during middle childhood the quality of the father-child relationship was an
important predictor of children’s social adjustment.
Keywords: low-income fathers; middle childhood; peer relationships; behavior problems
For decades scholars have argued, with some empirical
support, that father residence was an important contributor of children’s social development (Dawson, 1991;
McLanahan, 1997; Sigle-Rushton & McLanahan, 2002).
Compared to children in stepparent or cohabiting families, children living with both biological parents are less
likely to drop out of school, be suspended or expelled,
or exhibit behavior problems and are more likely to
score lowest on measures of shyness and aggression and
highest on measures of sociability and initiative (SigleRushton & McLanahan, 2002; Teachman, Day, Passch,
Carver, & Call, 1998, Thompson, Hanson, & McLanahan,
1994). However, a recent analysis has shown few significant associations between living arrangements (e.g.,
father present, blended, mother only) and child development (Foster & Kalil, 2007). These mixed findings
reflect the diversity in the developmental contexts of children and suggest that any adverse effects associated with
father absence may not simply derive from a lack of
paternal financial support or even to lack of time spent
with the child, as has been proposed. Rather, there is
mounting evidence that the “benefits” of paternal presence may derive from the quality of the father-child
relationship. Compared to nonresident fathers, fathers
who live with their children have more opportunities to
develop emotionally supportive relationships with them,
*Corresponding author. Email: ncabrera@umd.edu
ISSN 1942-4620 print/ISSN 1942-4639 online
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19424620.2011.639143
http://www.tandfonline.com
which are central in supporting children’s social development (Cabrera, Shannon, & Tamis-LeMonda, 2007; Cook,
Dick, Jones, & Singh, 2005; Flouri, 2007; Lamb, 2010;
Tamis-LeMonda, Shannon, Cabrera, & Lamb, 2004). Thus,
the father-child relationship may promote productive patterns of engagement in activities and positive affiliations
with others.
With some exceptions, most of what is known about the
links between father residence and father-child relationship
quality and children’s wellbeing pertains to young children
and adolescents (Cabrera, Fagan, & Farrie, 2008; Day &
Padilla-Walker, 2009; Flouri, 2007; Ihinger-Tallman &
Cooney, 2005; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2004). Fewer studies
have examined the father’s role during middle childhood, a
time of increased autonomy, when peer relationships take
more prominence and children begin to spend less time
in direct contact with their parents. To better understand
how fathers are implicated in children’s development during middle childhood, we examine two different aspects of
development: peer relationships and externalizing behaviors. Positive peer relationships during middle childhood
are critical for the development of social skills and positive self-concept and are likely to contribute to later
academic and psychological adjustment over time (Rubin,
Bukowski, & Parker, 1998). Similarly, externalizing problems during middle childhood often foreshadow problems
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
2
N. Cabrera et al.
with adjustment, employment, and family functioning in
adulthood (Lynam, Caspi, Moffitt, Loeber, & StouthamerLoeber, 2007).
Using data from the Early Head Start Research and
Evaluation study (EHSRE), we examine how early father
residence (i.e., during early childhood) and the quality of the father-child relationship are related directly
and indirectly to children’s social development during middle childhood. More specifically, we address
the following research questions: (1) Controlling for
child and family background characteristics, does father
residence in middle childhood mediate the association between early father residence and the quality
of the father-child relationship in middle childhood?
(2) Controlling for child and family background characteristics, does the quality of the father-child relationship during middle childhood mediate the association
between early father residence and children’s behavioral
problems in middle childhood? And, (3) does the quality of the father-child relationship during middle childhood mediate the association between early father residence and children’s positive peer relationships in middle
childhood?
Theoretical framework
This study is guided by family systems theory that family members (e.g., fathers, mothers, children) are interdependent and influence each other in such a way that
one individual can never be fully understood independent of the larger family system (Cox & Paley, 1997).
Individuals affect one another through their own characteristics (e.g., marital status) and the quality of their
relationships with other subsystems (e.g., parent-child
interactions) (Burchinal, Vernon-Feagans, & Cox, 2008;
Cox & Paley, 1997; McHale et al., 2002; McLloyd, 1990;
Minuchin, 1974). Family systems theory suggests that
within-family processes (e.g., parent-child interactions)
and family context (e.g., family structure) are likely to
determine how time spent with children results in children’s adaptive functioning. Individuals who live together
have many opportunities to interact directly with one
another and develop relationships that influence individual and family functioning (Brody, McBride, Kim, &
Brown, 2002; Burchinal et al., 2008). Fathers who engage
with their children in positive ways develop warm and
caring relationships, which, in turn, support children’s
social development. Consistent with social learning theory, children learn to regulate their emotions, take turns,
and, through feedback mechanisms, develop positive ways
of interacting with others in the context of the parentchild relationship (Bandura, 1997). These skills are central
to children’s ability to form relationships and get along
with others. In this study, we examine how one aspect
of the family context, father residence, influences the
quality of the father-child relationship (parent subsystem)
as well as how the quality of the father-child relationship
influences children’s social adjustment (child subsystem)
over time.
Father residence and father-child relationship quality
When a parent and child have a good relationship, the child
exhibits warmth in interactions with the parent, expresses
feelings of closeness, and feels secure in what the parent will do to foster the child’s wellbeing (Rossi & Rossi,
1990; Steinberg, 2001). To develop a warm and close relationship with their children, fathers must spend time with
them engaging in meaningful interactions. From a family
systems perspective, fathers who reside with their children
have many opportunities to interact and develop a relationship with them. Although it is possible that involved and
committed nonresidential fathers also build close relationships with their children, co-residence has been found to
be a strong correlate of the quality of the father-child relationship (McLanahan, 1997; Sigle-Rushton & McLanahan,
2002). A recent study based on a nationally representative sample of mothers and their children found that the
quality of relationships with nonresidential fathers had a
significant association with adolescent distress for adolescents only in blended families where adolescent lived with
a step father or father figure (Falci, 2006). These findings
are difficult to interpret, but they suggest that adolescents’
functioning is linked to the consistent presence of a resident parent, who can monitor and support the child on
daily basis.
Although relationships develop in the context of shared
time spent together, it is less clear whether there is an
optimal time where relationships must be formed and
developed to have long-term benefits on children. Because
important developmental and socialization processes take
place during early childhood, time spent during this period
is considered to be important for the development of the
father-child bond in later years (Almeida & Galambos,
1991; Trautmann-Villalba, Gschwendt, Schmidt, & Laucht,
2006). Support for this view comes from studies showing that fathers who reside with their children during early
childhood are more likely to develop close relationships
with them and, thus, more likely to remain involved later on
in their lives than those fathers who do not reside with their
children early on (Belsky, 1984). Studies have also shown
that fathers who are resident and are prenatally involved
(i.e., resided with the child’s partner, attended doctor’s
visits) are more likely to be involved with their children
later on than fathers who were less involved (Cabrera
et al., 2008; Shannon, Cabrera, & Tamis-LeMonda, 2009).
Moreover, this association seems to be mediated by the
status of the couple relationship; that is, fathers who are
prenatally involved are more likely to stay involved in
their children’s lives later on because they tend to move
Family Science
into more stable family structures (e.g., from cohabiting
to marriage) (Cabrera et al., 2008). These studies suggest that father residence during early childhood, and even
before children are born, provides an important context for
fathers to become attached to their children and develop
long-lasting relationships.
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
Fathers and children’s peer relationships and behavioral
problems
The emotional ties between children and their parents have
clear implications for children’s wellbeing. When children
feel loved by their parents and trust that their parents will
care for them, they develop a sense of emotional security.
Feeling secure helps children cope with stress and makes
them less anxious (Davies & Cummings, 1994). Research
on two-parent families shows that feelings of closeness
between fathers and children are associated with positive
child outcomes, such as low levels of distress and delinquency and fewer internalizing and externalizing problems
(Day & Padilla-Walker, 2009; Pleck, 1997; Veneziano &
Rohner, 1998). Moreover, children who feel close to their
parents are more likely to obey parent rules and emulate parental behavior (Bandura, 1997). A meta-analysis
from 63 studies of nonresident fathers and their children
found that feelings of closeness rather than frequency of
contact were associated with children’s academic success
and negatively associated with children’s externalizing and
internalizing problems (Amato & Gilbreth, 1999).
Studies using parents’ reports of father-child relationship quality report similar findings. In a recent study of
minority youth and their fathers and mothers, level of father
conflict was significantly linked to boys’ internalizing
symptoms and girls’ internalizing and externalizing symptoms (Crean, 2008). These findings are similar to those
with white middle-class samples showing that the most
socially competent children had fathers who were sensitive and supportive of their children’s autonomy (National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early
Child Care Research Network, 2004).
In terms of peer relationships, observational studies of
fathers and their young children have shown that fathers
who exhibited high levels of positive physical play and used
fewer directive or coercive tactics had children who were
rated as more popular and less aggressive, more competent,
and better liked by their peers (Leidy, Schofield, & Parke, in
press; McDowell & Parke, 2009). In a study of children and
their fathers, positive father-child relationship at age 3 was
associated with more positive friendships at age 5, whereas
more negative father-child relationships forecast less satisfactory friendships (Youngblade & Belsky, 1992). Studies
with older children have shown that fathers’ influence
children’s peer relationships through the lessons children
learn in the context of the father-child relationship, fathers’
direct advice concerning peer relationships, and fathers’
3
regulation of access to peers and peer-related activities
(McDowell & Parke, 2009). However, most of these studies, as with studies linking fathering to children’s behavior
problems, have not parsed out the influence that other
aspects of the early home environment, including father
residence during the early years, maternal responsiveness
and family conflict and risk, have on children’s outcomes.
Thus it is difficult to discern the independent effect of the
father-child relationship on children’s behaviors.
There is also evidence that the quality of the fatherchild relationship may partially account for the observed
association between father residence and children’s behavioral problems (Carlson & Corcoran, 1991; McLanahan,
1997). A recent study based on a nationally representative sample of early and middle adolescents found that
by controlling for the quality of parent-child relationships
and for family background characteristics, the association
between family structure (father residence) and adolescent
wellbeing is significantly reduced (Falci, 2006). Moreover,
the quality of residential parent-adolescent relationships
explained the most variation in adolescent psychological
distress (Falci, 2006). Consistent with a family system
perspective, it appears that father residence is linked to
children’s wellbeing because of its association with the
quality of the father-child relationship, which has been
shown to facilitate emotional and behavioral adjustment.
Father residence during the early childhood period may
also be linked to children’s outcomes through father residence at a later point in time. Research has shown that
fathers who reside with their children early on in their lives
are more likely to do so later on (Cabrera et al., 2008).
Current study
In this study, we examine whether father residence during
early childhood is related long-term to the quality of the
father-child relationship and to children’s social behaviors.
It also examines whether father residence in middle childhood mediates the association between father residence
during early childhood and the quality of the father-child
relationship in middle childhood. We also examine whether
the quality of the father-child relationship and father residence during middle childhood mediate the association
between father residence during early childhood and children’s behavioral problems and positive peer relationships
in middle childhood. Based on the review of the literature, we hypothesize that school-age children who resided
with their fathers during early childhood are more likely to
report having a close relationship with them during middle childhood because they are more likely to reside with
their fathers in middle childhood than children who did
not reside with their fathers earlier in childhood. We also
hypothesize that children who resided with their fathers
during early childhood will have fewer behavior problems and more positive peer relationships because they are
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
4
N. Cabrera et al.
more likely to reside with them currently and are more
likely to feel close to them during middle childhood than
children who do not. This is one of the first studies to
examine long-term associations between early father residence and children’s later relationships with their fathers
and social development in middle childhood in a sample
of low-income families. We focus on low-income children because they are an understudied group. Although
many low-income children are at risk-for school failure,
behavioral problems, and lower social functioning, many
do not exhibit these difficulties. The reasons for this are
not clear. It is possible that economically disadvantaged
children who perform better academically do so because
they have involved fathers. This study is an important step
toward understanding how father residence and father-child
relationship quality might contribute to children’s social
functioning.
and 28% of mothers had less than a high school education, a high school diploma, and some college or more,
respectively. At the time of the focus child’s birth, fathers
ranged in age from 14 to 49 (M = 26.6, SD = 6.7) and
were 50% White, 28% Latino, 20% African American, and
2% Other (Asian, Native American, and bi-racial). Fiftyseven percent, 18%, and 25% of fathers had less than a
high school education, a high school diploma, and some
college or more, respectively. More than half of fathers
resided with their children in early childhood (57%), but by
the time children were in 5th grade, only 48% of all fathers
had resided in children’s households at both points in time.
An additional 10% of fathers resided with their children
at 5th grade though they had been non-residents in early
childhood. Children were between nine and 12 years old in
5th grade (M = 10.6, SD = .51), and approximately half
were male (49%).
Method
Data source
Procedures
Mothers were interviewed when they applied to receive
services (i.e., at baseline), and during home visits conducted when children were 14, 24, and 36 months old,
at the end of the pre-school period (55–60 months of
age), and in 5th grade. Home visits consisted of a parent
interview, direct assessments of children’s language and
cognitive/academic skills, and a 10-minute semi-structured
videotaped session of mother-child play. Written consent to
participate in the EHS study and family baseline data (e.g.,
maternal age, race, and ethnicity) was obtained from mothers at the start of the research. Mothers were given $40 and
a small gift for their children for participating in each wave
of the research study.
In cases where mothers had given written permission
for the study to contact fathers, researchers contacted these
men, described the purpose of the research project, and
scheduled a time for a visit to their homes. Visits with
fathers were conducted when children were 24, 36, and
at the end of the pre-school period. During visits, written
consent was obtained from fathers, who were then administered face-to-face interviews. Surveys assessed a range of
father involvement dimensions as well as other father characteristics. Fathers were given $20 and a small gift for their
children for participating. When children were in 5th grade,
direct assessments of children’s academic skills were conducted. At this time point, children’s primary caretaker (in
all cases but one, children’s mothers) completed surveys
and children also completed surveys that asked about their
relationships with their mothers and fathers.
Data from this study come from EHSRE, an experimental study that evaluated the EHS program in the United
States (see Administration for Children and Families, 2002;
Love et al., 2005; Raikes, Chazan-Cohen, Love, & BrooksGunn, 2010). Families were recruited into the Early Head
Start (EHS) study when they applied for EHS services
at 17 sites across the United States and qualified for the
program based on family income at or below the federal poverty level, as EHS is a federal program targeted
to low-income families (see Administration for Children
and Families, 2002). In 14 of the 17 sites, mothers were
asked whether children’s biological fathers had seen them
within the past three months, and if so, permission was
requested to contact children’s fathers. Of the 80% of families where children had contact with their biological fathers
(N = 1426), 69% of mothers (N = 984) gave permission for fathers to be contacted, and 85% (N = 838) of
these fathers completed at least 1 wave of data collection.
In general, families in which both mothers and fathers participated in the EHS study were more likely to be White
or Latino, to have completed more years of education,
and to be employed than families in which fathers did not
participate (see Cabrera et al., 2004 and Tamis-LeMonda
et al., 2004 for more detailed analysis of selection bias).
Participants
The final analytical sample consisted of 508 mothers,
fathers, and their children for whom data were available at
the 24 and 36 months and 5th grade visits. At the time of
the focus child’s birth, mothers in the study ranged in age
from 13 to 42 (M = 23.1, SD = 5.7) and were 52% White,
23% Latino, 21% African American, and 4% Other (Asian,
Native American, and bi-racial). Thirty-nine percent, 33%,
Measures
The measures for this study were selected for their
psychometric properties and applicability to low-income
populations.
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
Family Science
Father-child relationship quality. During the 5th grade
assessment, children were asked to identify two caregivers
(either parent(s) or the people who otherwise take care of
them). Once children identified a caregiver or caregivers,
they were asked to report on the quality of their relationship
to the individual(s). Children reported on the quality of their
relationship with their primary caregiver, and if applicable
on a second caregiver, across eight items. Examples of items
include “He/she understands me”, “I like him/her”, “he/she
likes me”, and “we get along well”. Children responded to
items on a 1–4 scale (1 = “not at all true”, 2 = “a little
bit true”, 3 = “mostly true”, 4 = “very true”). From these
interviews, the quality of the father-child was computed by
averaging across the eight items for children who described
a relationship with a father as one of their caregivers. Scores
ranged from 1.5 to 4 (M = 3.48, SD = .55).
Children’s behavior problems. When children were
in 5th grade, mothers reported on children’s behavior problems on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL;
Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1983). The CBCL is a reliable
and validated scale of 118 problem behaviors reported on a
three point scale (not at all, sometimes, or very often true
of child). The “Externalizing” sub-scale was used in the
current study to assess children’s externalizing behavior
problems; the internal consistency for this subscale is .92.
Children’s peer relationships. When in 5th grade, children reported on their relations with their peers across
12 items. Examples of items include “I get in trouble for
fighting with other kids”, “I make friends easily”, and
“I worry about having someone to play with at school”.
Children responded to items on a 1–4 scale (1 = “not
at all true”, 2 = “a little bit true”, 3 = “mostly true”,
4 = “very true”). Items representing negative peer relations
(e.g., fighting with other kids) were reverse-coded such that
all items used represented positive peer relations. An average was taken across items to create a measure of children’s
peer relations for the current study; the internal consistency
for this scale is .62.
Father residence in early childhood and at 5th grade.
Fathers reported whether they resided with their children
in surveys completed when children were two years old,
three years old, and of preschool age. Due to missing data
across waves of data collection in early childhood, it was
not possible to chart father residence across children’s first
years. If father reported living with the child never, only
at one point of data collection, or at two points, they were
coded as 0, 1, and 2, respectively. Only a small percentage of
fathers for whom at least two waves of data were available
(5%) had changes in residence over children’s first years.
We classified fathers who ever lived with their children
over their first years as resident fathers in early childhood.
Because fathers did not complete surveys during the
5th grade data collection wave, mothers’ report of father
residence status when their children were in 5th grade was
used. Fathers who lived with their children in 5th grade
5
were classified as resident fathers at the 5th grade data
collection time point.
Control variables. In addition to the main variables
of interest, we used other child and family characteristics
to control for possible biasing factors. We controlled
for child gender at time 1, family risk, father ethnicity, mother supportiveness at age 2, family conflict,
and father-child supportive relationship at age 3 (Ayoub
et al., 2009; Cummings, Goeke-Morey, & Raymond, 2004;
Hoglund & Leadbeater, 2004; Rubin & Burgess, 2002;
Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2004). We were not able to use
the same observational measure for mother and father supportiveness because there were a lot fewer father-child
observations than there were father reports of father-child
relationship. Family conflict was assessed when children
were two years old. Mothers reported on the amount
of conflict that took place among family members in
the household on the Family Environment Scale (FES);
the internal consistency for the subscale was .75 (FES;
Moos & Moos, 1986). Family risk was constructed from
the information provided by mothers during the interview
at enrollment. Mothers received 1 point for answering in
the affirmative to any of the following five items: (1) being
a teenager at the time of their child’s birth; (2) being a
single parent; (3) having less than a high school education; (4) being on welfare; and (5) not currently working.
Thus family risk had a potential range of 0 to 5 for the
measure. Maternal supportiveness was coded from videotaped interactions of mother-child play when children were
two years old along several dimensions, including maternal supportiveness, on the Child-Parent Interaction Rating
Scales for the Three-Bag Assessment (Administration for
Children & Families, 2000). Coders rated items on a
seven-point scale ranging from 1-very low incidence of
behavior to 7-very high incidence of behavior. Inter-rater
reliability and agreement was established at least 85%;
alpha = .83 at 24 months and .82 at 36 months (see ACF,
2002). Father-child supportive relationship was assessed
when children were three years old. Fathers reported on
their relationships with their children on the Parenting
Stress Inventory (PSI; Abidin, 1986). The PSI is a standardized and validated measure of parenting stress, and
consists of three sub-scales-Parental Distress, Parent-Child
Dysfunctional Interaction, and Difficult Child. The ParentChild Dysfunctional Interaction sub-scale was reversed
coded and used to assess father-child supportive relationship in the current study and has an internal consistency
of .78. Fathers reported on 12 items on a five-point scale
(1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree).
Results
Analytic strategy
The primary goal of the analyses was to assess whether
fathers’ residence during early childhood was predictive
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
6
N. Cabrera et al.
of father-child relationship quality and children’s social
development in middle childhood. Fathers’ residence could
be linked with father-child relationship and children’s
development through a variety of mechanisms. Fathers’
residence might directly be linked to the quality of the
father-child relationship and directly promote children’s
social development. However, father residence and child
functioning could also be linked through child behaviors
(Bell, 1968; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). In our study,
we use two approaches to isolate the effect of fathers’ residence. First, we control for a range of child and family
characteristics that might be linked to our variables of interest. Second, we used lagged models, controlling for child
age and gender, to provide controls for the links between
children’s characteristics and parenting (e.g., child-driven
parenting). Models also controlled for mothers’ supportiveness, isolating the independent effects of fathers’ residence.
The correlation matrix (Table 1) shows that fathers’
residence during early childhood and at 5th grade was positively and significantly correlated with father-child relationship at 5th grade. At 5th grade, father-child relationship
was positively correlated with peer relationship scores and
negatively correlated with externalizing scores. Father residence was not correlated with family income (r = .00 at
the end of the preschool period and r = −.05 at 5th grade),
thus it was not considered a proxy for family income.
Descriptive statistics
Table 2 shows descriptive statistics for this sample of
children and their fathers from low-income families. The
average family annual income at enrollment and at 5th
grade was $10,170 and $13,275, respectively. Mothers
and fathers had similar levels of education at enrollment
(M = 11.90 and 11.83 years, respectively) and were of
similar age (M = 23.08 and 26.60 years of age, respectively). Table 3 presents descriptive statistics on research
variables. The average scores for children’s peer relationship was 3.11 (range = 1–4), higher scores mean better
peer relationships and 7.70 (range = 0–42) for externalizing behaviors in 5th grade, lower scores mean fewer
behavioral problems. However, 23% of the children had
Table 1. Inter-correlations of parental interactions and child externalizing and peer relations at 5th grade.
1. Family risk
2. Maternal supportiveness 24m
3. Family conflict 24m
4. Father-child supportive relationship 36m
5. Child relationship with father 5th grade
6. Child externalizing behavior 5th grade
7. Child peer relationships 5th grade
8. Father residence to Prek
9. Father residence at 5th grade
∗p
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
−.27∗∗
−.01
−.06
.01
.13∗∗
.00
−.26∗∗
−.25∗∗
−.06
.18∗∗∗
.04
−.05
−.06
.13∗∗
.07
−.19∗∗∗
−.08
.11∗
.04
−.06
−.03
.02
−.25∗∗∗
−.03
.04
.04
−.21∗∗
.20∗∗
.10∗
.20∗∗
−.09∗
−.03
−.12∗∗
−.04
.02
.70∗∗∗
< .05, ∗∗ p < .01, ∗∗∗ p < .000.
Table 2. Sample description.
Maternal age at
enrollment
Paternal age at
enrollment
Maternal education at
enrollment
Maternal education at
5th grade
(categorical)
Paternal education at
enrollment
Paternal education at
5th grade
(categorical)
Family annual income
at enrollment
Family annual income
at 5th grade
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. deviation
13
42
23.08
5.66
14
49
26.60
6.71
4
17
11.90
2.32
Less than 8th grade
Master’s Degree
4
17
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$0
$68,401
$10,170
$7974
$6
$270,000
$13,275
$32,230
Some college or technical
training/no degree or
certificate
11.83
3.03
2.52
Family Science
7
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
Table 3. Descriptive statistics for research variables.
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std.deviation
1.00
1.00
12
1.00
1.00
7.00
4.00
45
4.00
4.00
4.15
1.67
36.63
3.49
3.43
1.01
.50
7.74
.53
.59
1.00
4.00
3.50
.53
Maternal supportiveness 24m
Family conflict 24m
Father-child supportive relationship 36m
Child relationship with father 5th grade
Child relationship with father 5th grade – father
not living with child during early years
Child relationship with father 5th grade – father
lives with child during early years
Externalizing behavior 5th grade
Externalizing behavior for those children with a
close relationship with their father
Externalizing behavior for those children without
a close relationship with their father
Peer relationships 5th grade
Peer relationships for those children with a close
relationship with their father
Peer relationships for those children without a
close relationship with their father
0
0
42
35
7.70
7.14
7.31
6.71
0
42
10.12
9.20
1.00
1.18
4.00
4.00
3.11
3.15
.62
.59
1.00
4.00
2.92
.61
scores above the clinical cutoff of 9, which places them
at risk for later aggression problems. The average maternal
supportiveness scores was 4.15 (range = 1 to 7) and the
average fathers’ scores on the father-child supportive relationship was 36.63 (range = 12–45), higher scores means
fathers reported having fewer problems with their children
(See Table 3).
childhood to test whether it made an additional contribution
to father-child relationship quality at 5th grade. The results
show that our covariates did not predict the father-child
relationship. However, father residence during early childhood showed significant and positive long-term links to
father-child relationship quality (B = .08, p < .01). Fathers
who lived with their children during early childhood had
children who reported feeling close to them in 5th grade.
However, in the third model when father residence at 5th
grade was added to the model, early father residence was no
longer significant. Regarding effect size, 7% of the variability in the dependent variable was explained, or accounted
for, by the independent variables. The association of father
residence during early childhood on children’s 5th grade
report of their relationship with their father was mediated by father residence at 5th grade, as indicated by a
significant mediation test, Sobel test = 2.44, p = .01, and
a reduction in the path coefficient from .13, p < .01, to
Additive and mediated models
A series of multiple regression models was tested to
address our research questions.
Predicting to father-child relationship quality. The
first model (see Table 4) included our covariates child
gender, family risk during infancy, father ethnicity, maternal supportiveness at age 2, family conflict at age 2, and
father-child supportive relationship scores at age 3. In the
second model, we entered father residence during early
Table 4. Multiple regression models predicting father-child relationship quality at 5th grade (n = 485).
Model 1
Child gender
Family risk
Father ethnicity
Maternal supportiveness 24m
Family conflict 24m
Father-child supportive relationship 36m
Father residence during early childhood
Father residence at 5th grade
1.R = .12, F = 1.07, p = .379.
2.R = .17, F = 1.92, p = .065.
3.R = .27, F = 4.27, p < .001.
∗ p < .05, ∗∗ p < .01, ∗∗∗ p < .001.
Model 2
Model 3Mediated Model
B
SE
Beta
B
SE
Beta
B
SE
Beta
.07
.02
.00
.03
−.07
.00
.05
.04
.00
.03
.05
.00
.07
.03
.04
.06
−.07
.02
.08
.05
.00
.03
−.07
.00
.08
.05
.04
.00
.03
.05
.00
.03
.07
.07
.03
.05
−.06
.02
.13∗∗
.09
.07
.00
.04
−.06
.00
−.03
.32
.05
.04
.00
.03
.05
.00
.04
.07
.08
.09
.01
.07
−.06
.01
−.05
.28∗∗∗
8
N. Cabrera et al.
Table 5. Multiple regression models predicting externalizing behavior at 5th grade (n = 393).
Model 1
Child gender
Family risk
Father ethnicity
Maternal supportiveness 24m
Family conflict 24m
Child aggression 36m
Father-child supportive relationship 36m
Father residence during early childhood
Father residence at 5th grade
Father-child relationship at 5th grade
Model 2
Model 3mediated model
B
SE
Beta
B
SE
Beta
B
SE
Beta
1.82
1.14
−1.35
−.44
.70
.31
−.12
.24
.68
.48
.34
.38
.68
.06
.05
.40
.12∗∗
.12∗
−.19∗∗
−.06
.05
.28∗∗∗
−.12∗
.03
1.79
1.10
−1.32
−.44
.70
.31
−.12
.44
−.58
.68
.48
.35
.38
.68
.06
.05
.51
.93
.12∗∗
.11∗
−.18∗∗∗
−.06
.05
.28∗∗∗
−.12∗
.05
−.04
2.11
1.27
−1.16
−.28
.49
.31
−.12
.31
.11
−2.70
.67
.47
.34
.37
.67
.06
.05
.50
.93
.64
.14∗∗
.13∗∗
−.16∗∗
−.04
.03
.28∗∗∗
.12∗
.04
.01
−.20∗∗∗
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
1. R = .46, F = 12.60, p < .001.
2. R = .46, F = 11.23, p < .001.
3. R = .49, F = 12.31, p < .001.
∗ p < .05, ∗∗ p < .01, ∗∗∗ p < .001.
−.05, n.s. These results suggest that father residence in
5th grade explained the association between father residence during early childhood and children’s relationship
with their father.
Predicting to children’s externalizing behaviors in 5th
grade. Model 1 (see Table 5) included the same set of
covariates we used in earlier analysis as well as child
aggression scores at 36 months. In Model 2, we tested
the influence of father residence on children’s externalizing behavior problems in 5th grade. Independent of our
covariates, early father residence was not related to behavior problems in 5th grade, but father residence in 5th grade
was related to 5th grade outcomes. At 5th grade, children
who lived with their fathers were reported to exhibit fewer
behavioral problems than children who did not. However,
father-child supportive behaviors during early childhood
showed significant and negative long-term links to behavioral problems. Children whose fathers reported having
a supportive relationship during early childhood were
reported to have fewer behavioral problems in 5th grade.
In Model 3, we tested whether father-child relationship at
5th grade mediated the association between early father
residence and children’s externalizing behavioral problems, independent of our covariates. Neither early father
residence nor residence at 5th grade was related to children’s externalizing problems in 5th grade. We found that,
at 5th grade, the quality of the father-child relationship
(as reported by the child) contributed uniquely and negatively to externalizing problems (B = −2.70, p < .001).
Regarding effect size, 16% of the variability in the dependent variable was explained, or accounted for, by the
independent variables.
Predicting to children’s peer relationships. Table 6
shows the results of our last set of regression models to
test the association between our covariates and our father
variables on children’s peer relationships. In Model 1, we
entered the same set of covariates used in earlier analyses. In Model 2, we entered father residence at 5th grade.
Table 6. Multiple regression models predicting peer relations at 5th grade (n = 458).
Model 1
Child gender
Family risk
Father ethnicity
Maternal supportiveness 24m
Family conflict 24m
Father-child supportive relationship 36m
Father residence during early childhood
Father residence at 5th grade
Father-child relationship at 5th grade
1. R = .08, F = .36, p = .927.
2. R = .10, F = .50, p = .858.
3. R = .23, F = 2.76, p < .01.
∗ p < .05, ∗∗ p < .01, ∗∗∗ p < .001.
Model 2
Model 3
B
SE
Beta
B
SE
Beta
B
SE
Beta
.03
.00
.00
−.03
.05
.00
−.01
.06
.04
.00
.03
.06
.00
.03
.02
.00
−.01
−.05
.04
−.02
−.01
.03
.01
.00
−.03
.05
.00
−.04
.10
.06
.04
.00
.03
.06
.00
.05
.08
.02
.01
−.01
−.04
.04
−.02
−.06
.08
.01
−.01
.00
−.04
.06
.00
−.03
.02
.25
.06
.04
.00
.03
.06
.00
.04
.08
.06
.01
−.01
−.02
−.06
.05
−.02
−.05
.02
.22∗∗∗
Family Science
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
In Model 3, controlling for variables in Models 1 and 2,
we entered father-child relationship quality into the model.
The results show that our covariates did not predict children’s peer relations in 5th grade. Neither early father
residence nor residence at 5th grade was related to children’s peer relations in 5th grade. However, father-child
supportive relationship (father report) was uniquely and
positively related to children’s positive peer relationships
(B = .25, p < .001). Regarding effect size, 6% of the
variability in the dependent variable was explained, or
accounted for, by the independent variables.
Discussion
The main contribution of the current study is the identification of longitudinal links between early paternal residence
and father-child relationship and children’s social development in low-income families. Consistent with past findings,
results provide evidence of the importance of fathers’ residence during early childhood for the development of the
quality father-child relationship into middle childhood.
That is, children in 5th grade were more likely to say they
felt close to their fathers when they resided with them during early childhood. Furthermore, results showed that the
mechanism by which early paternal residence was linked
long term to the quality of the father-child relationship
was through father residence in middle childhood. The
results also show that paternal residence per se, either during early childhood or later on in 5th grade, was not related
longitudinally to children’s behavior problems and peer
relationships in 5th grade. Rather, consistent with past findings with adolescents, children in middle childhood exhibit
fewer behavioral problems and report more positive peer
relationships when they report feeling close to their fathers,
irrespective of whether they lived with their fathers during their early childhood years or at 5th grade (Day &
Padilla-Walkier, 2009; Flouri, 2007; Pleck, 1997 Tremblay,
Tremblay, & Saucier, 2004; Veneziano & Rohner, 1998).
In other words, the quality of the father-child relationship is predictive of children’s social development; father
residence had no direct effect on children’s outcomes.
However, it is likely that father residence facilitates the
development of feelings of closeness and connectedness
between fathers and children. In our own study, we found
that children who feel close to their fathers lived with them
during the early years. Moreover, other studies with adolescents have found no nonresident biological father effect on
children’s outcomes in adolescence (Flouri, 2007).
This research is based on a randomly selected sample of children who were approximately 14 months
at baseline and addressed several methodological and
measurement weaknesses of previous research. The statistical models controlled for measured child characteristics,
including early child aggression, thus providing controls
for child-driven effects and shared genetic variation (Bell,
9
1968). Importantly, models also controlled for maternal
supportiveness, father-child supportive relationships, family risk and conflict, and economic resources in an effort to
estimate unique and independent links between father presence and children’s functioning. Measures were drawn from
multiple reporters and from validated, reliable instruments.
Collectively, the findings suggest that father presence and
father-child relationship quality can serve as a buffer or as
a risk to low-income children’s social development.
It is important to point out that children’s perceptions of
how close they are to their fathers in middle childhood may
be influenced by father residence; that is, children may feel
less close to a father who does not live with them. Thus the
meaning of these subjective items (e.g., He (father) understands me) may especially vary. It could be that children
who do not live with their fathers expect less of them and
thus have lower expectations for father behavior in order to
consider the relationship to be close. This is an important
area of future research.
It is also important to highlight the limitations of
this research. First, there are concerns over unobserved
heterogeneity (Cherlin, 1999). Because individuals select
themselves into particular types of families by background
variables other than the ones assessed in this study, the
effects of father residence might be overstated. It is possible that other factors not assessed here such as fathers’
mental health might be more important for children’s outcomes. At the same time, the criteria used to determine the
sample used in the current study also influence results in
that findings are only based on children with data from
early childhood and who reported on their relationship
with a father during middle childhood; children who only
reported on their relationship with their mother or caregivers other than fathers are not included in the study.
Given our findings and those of previous literature, it is
likely that children who do not report even having a relationship with their fathers are higher on behavior problems
and lower on positive peer relationships than their counterparts (e.g., McLanahan, 1997). Future research should
examine a larger sample of children in middle childhood,
including those who do not report having a relationship
with their fathers. This may be particularly important in
low-income families, as children living in poverty are
less likely to live with a father than children from more
socio-economically advantaged backgrounds (McLanahan,
1997). A second limitation is related to the measures used
in this study. Children reported on both their peer relationships and on the closeness of their relationships with
their fathers, thereby creating shared variance that may
overestimate the effects. Future studies need to include
observational measures of father-child relationships and/or
control for children’s psychological status (for example,
whether they are experiencing symptoms of depression).
Despite these limitations, this research is important in
that it explores the long-term links between early father
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
10
N. Cabrera et al.
presence and children’s quality of their relationship with
their father and their social functioning in middle childhood, an important period for children and their parents as
children begin the transition into adolescence. Our findings
suggest that although low-income families face numerous
challenges and stresses, fathers who live with their children during early childhood may provide a central source of
security and closeness with their children over time, which
is significantly predictive of children’s feeling of closeness toward their fathers. However, our findings also show
that although the early childhood period is important for
developing children’s sense of closeness to their fathers, it
is the quality of the father-child relationship that is more
important for children’s social functioning. Children who
feel their fathers like them and understand them are better adjusted (exhibit fewer behavioral problems and say
they have more positive friendships) in middle childhood
than children who do not. Together results from this study
provide evidence that supports policies and programs seeking to increase fathers’ engagement in positive parenting
during early childhood and beyond.
References
Abidin, R.R. (1986). Parenting Stress Index. Charlottesville, VA:
Pediatric Psychology Press.
Achenbach, T.M., & Edelbrock, C. (1983). Manual for the child
behavior checklist and profile. Burlington, VT: University of
Vermont.
Administration for Children and Families. (2000). Early
Head Start Research and Evaluation Project: Child-Parent
Interaction Rating Scales for the Three-Bag Assessment.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
Administration for Children and Families. (2002). Making a difference in the lives of infants and toddlers and their families:
The impacts of Early Head Start. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
Almeida, D.M., & Galambos, N.L. (1991). Examining father
involvement and the quality of father-adolescent relations.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1, 155–172.
Amato, P.R., & Gilbreth, J.G. (1999). Nonresident fathers and
children’s well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage
and the Family, 61, 557–573.
Ayoub, C., O’Connor, E., Rappolt-Schlictmann, G., Vallotton,
C., Raikes, H., & Chazan-Cohen, R. (2009). Cognitive skill
performance among young children living in poverty: Risk,
change, and the promotive effects of Early Head Start. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 24, 289–305.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
New York: Freeman.
Bell, R.Q. (1968). A reinterpretation of the direction of
effects in studies of socialization. Psychological Review, 75,
81–95.
Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: A process
model. Child Development, 55, 83–96.
Brody, G.H., McBride Murry, V., Kim, S., & Brown, A.C.
(2002). Longitudinal pathways to competence and psychological adjustment among African American children living
in rural single-parent households. Child Development, 73(5),
1505–1516.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P.A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon (Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 993–1028). New York: Wiley.
Burchinal, M., Vernon-Feagans, L., & Cox, M (2008). Cumulative
social risk, parenting, and infant development in rural lowincome communities. Parenting: Science and Practice, 8(1),
41–69.
Cabrera, N.J., Fagan, J., & Farrie, D. (2008). Explaining the
long reach of fathers’ prenatal involvement on later paternal engagement. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(5),
1094–1107.
Cabrera, N.J., Ryan, R.M., Shannon, J.D., Brooks-Gunn, J., Vogel,
C., Raikes, H., et al. (2004). Low-income fathers’ involvement in their toddlers’ lives: Biological fathers from the
Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Study. Fathering,
Special Issue: Fathers in Early Head Start, 2(1), 5–36.
Cabrera, N.J., Shannon, J.D., & Tamis-LeMonda, C. (2007).
Fathers’ influence on their children’s cognitive and emotional development: From toddlers to pre-K. Applied
Developmental Science, 11, 208–213.
Cherlin, A.J. (1999). Going to extremes: Family structure, children’s well-being, and social science. Demography, 36,
421–428.
Cook, J.L., Jones, R.M., Dick, A.J., & Singh, A. (2005).
Revisiting men’s role in father involvement: The importance
of personal expectations. Fathering, 3(2), 165–178.
Cox, M.J., & Paley, B. (1997). Families as systems. Annual
Review of Psychology, 48, 243–267.
Crean, H.F. (2008). Conflict in the Latino parent-youth dyad: The
role of emotional support from the opposite parent. Journal
of Family Psychology, 22(3), 484–493.
Cummings, E.M., Goeke-Morey, M.C., & Raymond, J.L. (2004).
Fathers in family context: Effects of marital quality and marital conflict. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in
child development (4th ed., pp. 196–221. Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley.
Davies, P.T., & Cummings, E.M. (1994). Marital conflict
and child adjustment: An emotional security hypothesis.
Psychological Bulletin, 116(3), 387–411.
Dawson, D.A. (1991). Family structure and children’s health and
well-being: Data from the 1988 National Health Interview
Survey on Child Health. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53,
573–584.
Day, R., & Padilla-Walker, L.M. (2009). Mother and father
connectedness and involvement during early adolescence.
Journal of Family Psychology, 23(6), 900–904.
Falci, C. (2006). Family structure, closeness to residential and
nonresidential parents, and psychological distress in early
and middle adolescence. The Sociological Quarterly, 47,
123–146.
Fiese, B.H., & Skillman, G. (2000). Gender differences in family
stories: Moderating influence of parent gender role and child
gender. Sex Roles, 43(5/6), 267–283.
Flouri, E. (2007). Fathering and adolescent psychological adjustment: The role of fathers’ involvement, residence and biology
status. International Journal of Behavioral Development,
28(2), 148–156.
Foster, M., & Kalil, A. (2007). Living arrangements and children’s development in low-income White, Black, and Latino
Families. Child Development, 78(6), 1657–1764.
Hoglund, W.L., & Leadbeater, B.J. (2004). The effects of family, school, and classroom ecologies on changes in children’s
social competence and emotional and behavioral problems in
first grade. Developmental Psychology, 40(4), 533–544.
Ihinger-Tallman, M., & Cooney, T.M. (2005). Families in context.
Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing.
Downloaded by [natasha cabrera] at 06:45 24 January 2012
Family Science
Lamb, M.E. (2010). The role of the father in child development
(5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Leidy, M., Schofield, T., & Parke, R. (in press). Fathers’ contributions to children’s social development. In N.J. Cabrera
& C.S. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (2nd ed.). New York:
Routledge.
Love, J.M., Kisker, E.E., Ross, C., Raikes, H., Constantine, J.,
Boller, K., . . . Vogel, C. (2005). The effectiveness of
Early Head Start for 3-year-old children and their parents:
Lessons for policy and programs. Developmental Psychology,
41, 885–901.
McDowell, D.J., & Parke, R.D. (2009). Parental correlates of children’s peer relations: An empirical test of a tripartite model.
Developmental Psychology, 45, 224–235.
McHale, J., Khazan, I., Erera, P., Rotman, T., DeCourcey, W.,
& McConnell, M. (2002). Coparenting in diverse family
systems. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting:
Vol. 3: Being and becoming a parent (2nd ed., pp. 75–107).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McLanahan, S.S. (1997). Parent absence or poverty: Which
matters more? In G.J. Duncan & J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.),
Consequences of growing up poor (pp. 35–48). New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
McLloyd, V.C. (1990). The impact of economic hardship on
Black families and children: Psychological distress, parenting
and socioemotional development. Child Development, 61,
311–246.
Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Moos, R.H., & Moos, B.H. (1986). Family Environment Scale
manual (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists
Press.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early
Child Care Research Network. (2004). Fathers‘ and mothers’ parenting behavior and beliefs as predictors of children’s
social adjustment in the transition to school. Journal of
Family Psychology, 18(4), 628–638.
Owen, M., Norris, C., Houssan, M., Wetzel, S., Mason, J., &
Ohba, C. (1993, September). Twenty-four month mother-child
interaction rating scales for the three boxes procedure. Paper
presented at the NICHD Study of Early Child Care Research
Consortium, Richardson, TX.
Pleck, J.H. (1997). Paternal involvement: Levels, sources, and
consequences. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in
child development (3rd ed., pp. 66–103). Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley.
Rossi, A., & Rossi, P. (1990). Of human bonding: Parent-child
relations across the life course. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
11
Rubin, K.H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J.G. (1998). Peer
interactions, relationships, and groups. In W. Damon & N.
Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol 3:
Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed.,
pp. 619–700). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Rubin, K.H., & Burgess, K.B. (2002). Parents of aggressive
and withdrawn children. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook
of parenting: Vol. 1: Children and parenting (2nd ed.,
(pp. 383–418). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Shannon, J., Cabrera, N., Tamis-LeMonda, C., & Lamb, M.
(2009). Who stays and who leaves? Father accessibility across
children’s first five years. Parenting, Special Issue: Transition
to Parenthood, 2, 78–100.
Sigle-Rushton, W., & McLanahan, S. (2002). Father absence
and child well-being: A critical review. Center for Research
on Child Wellbeing, Working Paper #02–20. Retrieved
11 September, 2011, from http://www.pearsonhighered.com/
pearsonhigheredus/educator/catalog/index.page
Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things: Parent–adolescent
relationships in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research
on Adolescence, 11(1), 1–19.
Tamis-LeMonda, C.S., Shannon, J.D., Cabrera, N.J., & Lamb,
M.E. (2004). Fathers and mothers at play with their 2- and
3-year olds: Contributions to language and cognitive development. Child Development, 75(6), 1806–1820.
Teachman, J., Day, R., Paasch, K., Carver, K., & Call, V. (1998).
Sibling resemblance in behavioral and cognitive outcomes:
The role of father presence. Journal of Marriage & the
Family, 60(4), 835–848.
Thompson, E., Hanson, L., & McLanahan. S. (1994). Family
structure and child well-being: economic resources vs.
parental behaviors. Social Forces, 73, 221–242.
Trautmann-Villalba, P., Gschwendt, M., Schmidt, M., & Laucht,
M. (2006). Father-infant interaction patterns ass precursors of children’s later externalizing behavior problems.
European Arch Psychiatry Clinical Neuroscience, 256,
344–349.
Tremblay, G., Tremblay, R., & Saucier, J. (2004). The development of parent-child relationship perceptions in boys
from childhood hood to adolescence A comparison between
disruptive and non-disruptive boys. Child and Adolescent
Social Work Journal, 21(4), 407–430.
Veneziano, R.A., & Rohner, R.P. (1998). Perceived paternal
acceptance, paternal involvement, and youths’ psychological
adjustment in a rural, biracial southern community. Journal
of Marriage & the Family, 60(2), 335–343.
Youngblade, L.M., & Belsky, J. (1992). Parent-child antecedents
of 5-year-olds’ close friendships: A longitudinal analysis.
Developmental Psychology, 28, 700–713.