Search

According to environmental sensitivity models, children vary in responsivity to parenting. However, different models propose different patterns, with responsivity to primarily: (1) adverse parenting (adverse sensitive); or (2) supportive parenting (vantage sensitive); or (3) to both (differentially susceptible). This preregistered study tested whether these three responsivity patterns coexist. We used intensive longitudinal data of Dutch adolescents (N = 256, Mage = 14.8, 72% female) who bi-weekly reported on adverse and supportive parenting and their psychological functioning (tmean = 17.7, tmax = 26). Dynamic Structural Equation Models (DSEM) indeed revealed differential parenting effects. As hypothesized, we found that all three responsivity patterns coexisted in our sample: 5% were adverse sensitive, 3% vantage sensitive, and 26% differentially susceptible. No adolescent appeared unsusceptible, however. Instead, we labeled 28% as unperceptive, because they did not perceive any changes in parenting and scored lower on trait environmental sensitivity than others. Furthermore, unexpected patterns emerged, with 37% responding contrary to parenting theories (e.g., decreased psychological functioning after more parental support). Sensitivity analyses with concurrent effects and parent-reported parenting were performed. Overall, findings indicate that theorized responsivity-to-parenting patterns might coexist in the population, and that there are other, previously undetected patterns that go beyond environmental sensitivity models.

In this dissertation, Savannah Boele aimed to unravel how adolescents’ functioning is influenced by parenting and vice versa. Specifically, she examined how such parenting processes in adolescence unfold within families on various timescales and differ across families. Her findings indicate that, on average, key dimensions of parenting (i.e., warmth, autonomy support, and behavioral and psychological control) are linked to adolescents’ functioning within a family on various timescales. Intriguingly, when moving beyond ‘the average family’ and zooming into individual families, substantial heterogeneity in families’ parenting processes was revealed. The ways in which parenting dimensions (or practices) seemed to influence adolescents’ functioning, and vice versa, varied from family to family. Overall, the findings align with long-held theoretical beliefs that parenting processes are idiosyncratic. Therefore, the findings of this dissertation call for a paradigm shift in parenting research – one that prioritizes the individual family instead of ‘the average family’ – to truly understand how parenting processes operate within real existing families.

According to environmental sensitivity models, children vary in responsivity to parenting. However, different models propose different patterns, with responsivity to primarily: (1) adverse parenting (adverse sensitive); or (2) supportive parenting (vantage sensitive); or (3) to both (differentially susceptible). This preregistered study tested whether these three responsivity patterns coexist. We used intensive longitudinal data of Dutch adolescents (N = 256, M-age = 14.8, 72% female) who bi-weekly reported on adverse and supportive parenting and their psychological functioning (t(mean) = 17.7, t(max) = 26). Dynamic Structural Equation Models (DSEM) indeed revealed differential parenting effects. As hypothesized, we found that all three responsivity patterns coexisted in our sample: 5% were adverse sensitive, 3% vantage sensitive, and 26% differentially susceptible. No adolescent appeared unsusceptible, however. Instead, we labeled 28% as unperceptive, because they did not perceive any changes in parenting and scored lower on trait environmental sensitivity than others. Furthermore, unexpected patterns emerged, with 37% responding contrary to parenting theories (e.g., decreased psychological functioning after more parental support). Sensitivity analyses with concurrent effects and parent-reported parenting were performed. Overall, findings indicate that theorized responsivity-to-parenting patterns might coexist in the population, and that there are other, previously undetected patterns that go beyond environmental sensitivity models.

Background: Parent–adolescent relationship quality is theorized to be an important correlate of adolescent affective well-being. Little is known about the within-family processes underlying parent–adolescent relationship quality and affective well-being over a period of months. This three-wave, preregistered study examined within- and between-family associations between parent–adolescent relationship quality (support and conflict) and adolescent well-being (negative and positive affect). In addition, we examined whether the associations differed between mothers and fathers, and for adolescents' affective well-being in different social contexts (at home, at school, with peers). Methods: The sample consisted of 244 Dutch adolescents (61.5% girls; age range: 12–17 years; mean age = 13.8 years). Random-intercept cross-lagged panel models were used. Results: At the between-family level, higher levels of support and lower levels of conflict were associated with higher levels of positive affect and lower levels of negative affect. At the within-family level, increases in support and decreases in conflict were concurrently associated with increases in positive affect and decreases in negative affect. More parent–adolescent conflict than typical also predicted increases in negative affect, 3 months later, and more negative affect and less positive affect than typical predicted increased conflict, 3 months later. These within-family effects were largely similar for fathers and mothers. Associations for conflict occurred through bidirectional processes: Parent–adolescent conflict shaped and was shaped by adolescents' emotions at home, at school, and with peers. Conclusion: Results suggest that parent–adolescent relationship quality (especially conflict) and adolescent affective well-being cofluctuate and predict each other over time within families.

Background. While there is ample theoretical and empirical interest in overparenting, little is known about how overparenting of adolescents operates in everyday family life. This study describes the development and validation of a novel instrument to assess overparenting with Experience Sampling Methods – The Momentary Overparenting (MOP) scale. Methods. Following 143 (Belgian and Dutch) adolescents for 7 subsequent days, we measured overparenting (i.e., worry, interference, and unnecessary help), autonomy support and psychological control 5 to 6 times per day. Using multilevel structural equation modeling on 1865 parent-adolescent interactions, we investigated the scale’s psychometric properties: within-family and between-family reliability, convergent and divergent validity. Results. Overparenting was characterized by both stable differences between families (46%), as well as dynamic fluctuations within families over time (54% of the variance). The MOP could reliably assess such real-time dynamics in overparenting. Momentary assessments correlated meaningfully with established instruments for overparenting at the between-family level. Within families, adolescents experienced interactions with more overparenting as more psychologically controlling and less autonomy supportive. Between families, overparenting correlated negatively with mothers’ autonomy support and positively with mothers’ psychological control. Conclusion. Worry, interference, and unnecessary help may be important expressions of overparenting in everyday family life – which can now be reliably measured from moment-to-moment as a distinct parenting construct.

Numerous theories suggest that parents and adolescents influence each other in diverse ways; however, whether these influences differ between subgroups or are unique to each family remains uncertain. Therefore, this study explored whether data-driven subgroups of families emerged that exhibited a similar daily interplay between parenting and adolescent affective well-being. To do so, Subgrouping Group Iterative Multiple Model Estimation (S-GIMME) was used to estimate family-specific dynamic network models, containing same- and next-day associations among five parenting practices (i.e., warmth, autonomy support, psychological control, strictness, monitoring) and adolescent positive and negative affect. These family-specific networks were estimated for 129 adolescents (M age = 13.3, SD age = 1.2, 64% female, 87% Dutch), who reported each day on parenting and their affect for 100 consecutive days. The findings of S-GIMME did not identify data-driven subgroups sharing similar parenting-affect associations. Instead, each family displayed a unique pattern of temporal associations between the different practices and adolescent affect. Thus, the ways in which parenting practices were related to adolescents’ affect in everyday life were family specific.

This preregistered longitudinal study examined changes in adolescents' depressive and anxiety symptoms before and during the COVID-19 pandemic using latent additive piece-wise growth models. It also assessed whether support from and conflict with mothers, fathers, siblings, and best friends explained heterogeneity in change patterns. One hundred and ninety-two Dutch adolescents (Mean age: 14.3 years; 68.8% female) completed online biweekly questionnaires for a year (November 2019–October 2020), consisting of a prepandemic, lockdown, and reopening phase. Depressive symptoms increased following the lockdown and decreased upon reopening. Anxiety symptoms showed an immediate decrease followed by a gradual increase in the reopening phase. Prepandemic family and best friend support and conflict did not explain heterogeneity in depressive and anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Transactional processes between parental support and adolescents’ depressive symptoms might differ in the short term versus long term. Therefore, this multi-sample study tested bidirectional within-family associations between perceived parental support and depressive symptoms in adolescents with datasets with varying measurement intervals: Daily (N = 244, Mage = 13.8 years, 38% male), bi-weekly (N = 256, Mage = 14.4 years, 29% male), three-monthly (N = 245, Mage = 13.9 years, 38% male), annual (N = 1,664, Mage = 11.1 years, 51% male), and biennial (N = 502, Mage = 13.8 years, 48% male). Preregistered random-intercept cross-lagged panel models (RI-CLPMs) showed negative between- and within-family correlations. Moreover, although the preregistered models showed no within-family lagged effect from perceived parental support to adolescent depressive symptoms at any timescale, an exploratory model demonstrated a negative lagged effect at a biennial timescale with the annual dataset. Concerning the reverse within-family lagged effect, increases in adolescent depressive symptoms predicted decreases in perceived parental support 2 weeks and 3 months later (relationship erosion effect). Most cross-lagged effects were not moderated by adolescent sex or neuroticism trait level. Thus, the findings mostly support adolescent-driven effects at understudied timescales and illustrate that within-family lagged effects do not generalize across timescales.

This preregistered longitudinal study examined changes in adolescents' depressive and anxiety symptoms before and during the COVID-19 pandemic using latent additive piece-wise growth models. It also assessed whether support from and conflict with mothers, fathers, siblings, and best friends explained heterogeneity in change patterns. One hundred and ninety-two Dutch adolescents (Mean age: 14.3 years; 68.8% female) completed online biweekly questionnaires for a year (November 2019–October 2020), consisting of a prepandemic, lockdown, and reopening phase. Depressive symptoms increased following the lockdown and decreased upon reopening. Anxiety symptoms showed an immediate decrease followed by a gradual increase in the reopening phase. Prepandemic family and best friend support and conflict did not explain heterogeneity in depressive and anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Transactional processes between parental support and adolescents' depressive symptoms might differ in the short term versus long term. Therefore, this multi-sample study tested bidirectional within-family associations between perceived parental support and depressive symptoms in adolescents with datasets with varying measurement intervals: Daily (N = 244, M (age) = 13.8 years, 38% male), bi-weekly (N = 256, M (age) = 14.4 years, 29% male), three-monthly (N = 245, M (age) = 13.9 years, 38% male), annual (N = 1,664, M (age) = 11.1 years, 51% male), and biennial (N = 502, M (age) = 13.8 years, 48% male). Preregistered random-intercept cross-lagged panel models (RI-CLPMs) showed negative between- and within-family correlations. Moreover, although the preregistered models showed no within-family lagged effect from perceived parental support to adolescent depressive symptoms at any timescale, an exploratory model demonstrated a negative lagged effect at a biennial timescale with the annual dataset. Concerning the reverse within-family lagged effect, increases in adolescent depressive symptoms predicted decreases in perceived parental support 2 weeks and 3 months later (relationship erosion effect). Most cross-lagged effects were not moderated by adolescent sex or neuroticism trait level. Thus, the findings mostly support adolescent-driven effects at understudied timescales and illustrate that within-family lagged effects do not generalize across timescales.

Introduction: The corona virus (COVID-19) pandemic may have a prolonged impact on people's lives, with multiple waves of infections and lockdowns, but how a lockdown may alter emotional functioning is still hardly understood. Methods: In this 100-daily diaries study, we examined how to affect intensity and variability of adolescents (N = 159, Mage = 13.3, 61.6% female) and parents (N = 159, Mage = 45.3, 79.9% female) changed after the onset and during (>50 days) the second COVID-19 lockdown in the Netherlands, using preregistered piecewise growth models. Results: We found only an unexpected increase in parents' positive affect intensity after the lockdown onset, but no immediate changes in negative affect intensity or variability. However, both adolescents and parents reported gradual increases in negative affect intensity and variability as the lockdown prolonged. Lockdown effects did not differ between adolescents and parents. However, within groups, individuals differed. The individual differences in the effects were partly explained by life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and self-reported lockdown impact. Conclusions: Overall, these findings suggests that a lockdown triggers changes in daily affective well-being especially as the lockdown prolongs. Individual differences in the effects indicate heterogeneity in the impact of the lockdown on daily affect that was partly explained by baseline life satisfaction and depressive symptoms. However, more knowledge on the causes of this heterogeneity is needed to be able to increase resilience to lockdown effects in the population.

Person–environment interactions might ultimately drive longer term development. This experience sampling study (Data collection: 2019/20 the Netherlands) assessed short-term linkages between parent–adolescent interaction quality and affect during 2281 interactions of 124 adolescents (M age = 15.80, SD age= 1.69, 59% girls, 92% Dutch, Education: 25% low, 31% middle, 35% high, 9% other). Adolescents reported on parent–adolescent interaction quality (i.e., warmth and conflict) and momentary positive and negative affect five to six times a day, for 14 days. Preregistered dynamic structural equation models (DSEM) revealed within-family associations between parent–adolescent interaction quality and adolescent affect (concurrently: r = −.22 to.39; lagged effects: ß = −.17 to.15). These effects varied significantly between families. These findings stress the need for more person-specific research on parenting processes.

Even though each adolescent is unique, some ingredients for development may still be universal. According to Self-Determination Theory, every adolescent’s well-being should benefit when parents provide warmth and autonomy. To rigorously test this idea that each family has similar mechanisms, we followed 159 Dutch parent-adolescent dyads (parent: Mage = 45.34, 79% mothers; adolescent: Mage = 13.31, 62% female) for more than three months, and collected 100 consecutive daily reports of parental warmth, autonomy support, positive and negative affect. Positive effects of parental warmth and autonomy support upon well-being were found in 91–98% of the families. Preregistered analysis of 14,546 daily reports confirmed that effects of parenting differed in strength (i.e., some adolescents benefited more than others), but were universal in their direction (i.e., in fewer than 1% of families effects were in an unexpected direction). Albeit stronger with child-reported parenting, similar patterns were found with parent-reports. Adolescents who benefited most from need-supportive parenting in daily life were characterized by higher overall sensitivity to environmental influences. Whereas recent work suggests that each child and each family have unique developmental mechanisms, this study suggests that need-supportive parenting promotes adolescent well-being in most families.

Few people are as important for an adolescent's development as their parents. However, most research on parent–adolescent relationships describes long-term population-wide effects. Therefore, little is known about everyday interactions between adolescents and parents in individual families. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) measures families several times a day as they go through daily life. This approach provides ecologically valid insights into which interactions took place and how they were experienced. State-of-the-art EMA studies suggest that within-family fluctuations in parenting may trigger changes in an adolescent's well-being and behaviors. In practice, moreover, EMA may strengthen family support and intervention research. This article reviews recent empirical work, highlights the (un)used theoretical and practical promise of EMA and identifies key-challenges to unlock this full potential.

Person–environment interactions might ultimately drive longer term development. This experience sampling study (Data collection: 2019/20 the Netherlands) assessed short-term linkages between parent–adolescent interaction quality and affect during 2281 interactions of 124 adolescents (Mage = 15.80, SDage = 1.69, 59% girls, 92% Dutch, Education: 25% low, 31% middle, 35% high, 9% other). In Adolescents reported on parent–adolescent interaction quality (i.e., warmth and conflict) and momentary positive and negative affect five to six times a day, for 14 days. Preregistered dynamic structural equation models (DSEM) revealed within-family associations between parent–adolescent interaction quality and adolescent affect (concurrently: r = −.22 to .39; lagged effects: ß = −.17 to .15). These effects varied significantly between families. These findings stress the need for more person-specific research on parenting processes.