The Direct and Mediated Role of Father Engagement on 36-Month-Old Developmental Outcomes

• In Event: Fathers’ Positive Parenting and Coparenting Quality: Complex Links in Economically Disadvantaged Families of Young Children

Abstract

It is well-established in the parenting and child development literature that the relationship between co-parents shapes the parenting behaviors of the parents in that relationship (Cabrera et al., 2009; Kopystynska et al., 2020). Fathers in particular are believed to have a strong connection between their relationship with their co-parent and their actual parenting behaviors (Cummings et al., 2010). There also exists the potential for reciprocal effects, wherein parenting affects the relationship (Masarik & Conger, 2017). Both parenting and the co-parental relationship in turn can influence child development (Altenburger & Schoppe-Sullivan, 2021). Multidimensional Family Development Theory (MFDT; Crapo & Bradford, 2021) offers tools and concepts that can help untangle the interconnectivity of what the theory terms dimensions of development (personal, couple, vocational, and generative) and their impact on child development.

Using MFDT as a guide, we explored the cross-dimensional impact of fathers’ generative dimension on his other three dimensions of development, and their direct and mediating role across the family dimensional space on children’s development. Specifically, we tested whether father engagement predicted later co-parenting, conflict, depression, and financial support, and whether those in turn were associated with mothers’ report of child internalizing behaviors, externalizing behaviors, and empathy, using mediation analysis. Data consisted of 3,426 parent reports from the first and second waves of the Building Strong Families project. Data were analyzed using SEM. A latent variable for father engagement was specified using the results of an EFA of the eight engagement items used in the first wave.

Our preliminary model demonstrated acceptable fit χ2(14) = 68.71, p < .001, CFI= .99, TLI =.98, RMSEA = .03, SRMR = .01. Parameters suggest a nuanced and reciprocal nature of the dimensions of development in fathers, specifically in regard to how their parenting behaviors influence future trajectories in other dimensions, and how these relate across the family developmental space to influence child development. Co-parenting (B*= .17, p < .001), destructive conflict (B*= -.17, p < .001), depression (B*= .08, p < .001), and financial support (B*= .13, p <.001) at W2 were predicted by engagement at W1. In turn, child internalizing behaviors were predicted by father depression (B*= -.04, p = .040); child externalizing behaviors were predicted by destructive conflict (B* = .06, p = .014) and father financial contributions (B* = -.09, p <.001); and child empathy was predicted by co-parenting (B* = .07, p = .003) and financial contributions (B* = -.14, p <.001). Contrary to expectations, engagement at W1 failed to reach significance in predicting any child outcomes at W2. There were tiny, albeit significant, indirect influences on externalizing behaviors through conflict (B* = -.01, p = .018) and financial contribution (B* = -.01, p < .001), and indirect influences on empathy through co-parenting (B* = .01, p = .004) and financial contribution (B* = -.01, p = .001); there were no indirect effects to internalizing behavior. These findings suggest father engagement on the mother’s report of child development is completely mediated by its influence on his other dimensions of development.

Authors

• J. Scott Crapo, Utah State University
  Presenting Author

• Olena Kopystynska, Southern Utah University