Reciprocal Associations between Adolescent-Parent Communication and Adolescent Emotional Reactivity

• In Event: Poster Session 10
  In Poster Session: PS 10 Topic - Family Context & Processes

Abstract

Emotional reactivity (ER) refers to changes that occur in emotional responses following internal or external environmental stimulation (Gratz et al., 2010). Poor ER is theorized to contribute to the development of internalizing problems (Martin & Dahlen, 2005). Therefore, an individual’s development of effective ER strategies has the potential to have lifelong implications for psychological adjustment and wellbeing. Recently, researchers have postulated that adolescence may be a influential period for the development of ER-related skills (Van Lissa et al., 2014). The bioecological model of human development suggests that negative experiences with family, particularly parents, may significantly impact an adolescent’s ability to develop healthy ER strategies. In particular, communication with parental figures may serve to reinforce poor ER (Bariola et al., 2011). The present study aims to examine reciprocal relationships between problems in communication with parents and ER during adolescence.

Participants were middle school students (N=1,341, Mage=12.75, SD=.69, 51% girls, 51% White) recruited from public schools in the Northeastern United States. Data collection began in the fall of 2016 and continued over 2 and ½ years (lag = 6 months). The Parent-Adolescent Communication Scale (PACS; Barnes & Olsen, 2003, α=.76-.86) was used to assess adolescent-perceived problems in communication between adolescents and their parents. Emotional reactivity was assessed using the Emotional Reactivity Scale (ERS; Nock et al., 2008, α=.89-.92).

Two cross-lagged panel models were constructed to examine reciprocal associations between problems in communication with both mothers and fathers and ER difficulties across six time points. The first of these models (Figure 1) examined associations between problems in communication with mothers and ER. Fit for this model was close (X2(20)=24.21, p<.001, RMSEA=.01, CFI=.99) and significant associations were found between both variables only from Time 3 to Time 4.The second model (Figure 2) examined problems in communication with fathers and ER. Fit for this model was close (X2(20)=20.16, p<.001, RMSEA=.01, CFI=.99). ER significantly predicted problems in communication with fathers from Time 1 to Time 2, from Time 2 to Time 3, and from Time 3 to Time 4. Problems in communication with fathers significantly predicted ER from Time 3 to Time 4 and from Time 4 to Time 5. As with the first model, a bidirectional effect was found from Time 3 to Time 4.

Results indicate that poor ER is reciprocally associated with problems in communication with both parents. This relationship was pronounced between Time 3 and Time 4, when participants were in their early teens. Therefore, it may be that communication with parental figures is particularly important for the development of positive ER strategies during that period. These results may be of particular importance for fathers. Given that previous studies have shown that fathers a) respond more harshly to negative emotionality than mothers, and b) are more encouraging of adolescent risk-taking (Paquette, 2004) it may be that fathers are overall more influential in the development of positive ER strategies during adolescence, making adolescent relationships with fathers a potential target for ER-related interventions during adolescence. The impact of adolescent gender differences will be discussed.

Authors

• Rachel M Taylor, University of Georgia
  Presenting Author

• Christine McCauley Ohannessian, Florida State University
  Non-Presenting Author