Effects of Family Structure, Family Process, and Father Involvement on Psychosocial Outcomes among African American Adolescents Author(s): Deborah A. Salem, Marc A. Zimmerman, Paul C. Notaro Source: Family Relations, Vol. 47, No. 4, The Family as a Context for Health and Well-Being (Oct., 1998), pp. 331-341 Published by: National Council on Family RelationsNational Council on Family Relations Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/585264 Accessed: 09/12/2010 16:43 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfr. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Family Relations.
http://www.jstor.org
Effects of Family Structure,Family Process, and FatherInvolvementon Psychosocial Outcomes Among AfricanAmericanAdolescents* Deborah A. Salem,"* Marc A. Zimmerman, and Paul C. Notaro Psychosocial outcomesandfamily processes were comparedacrossfive family constellationsamong 634 AfricanAmericanadolescents. Theonly significantfamily structureeffect-higher marijuanause among youths living with their mothersand extended family disappearedwhen age was enteredas a covariate. Familyprocess and youths' relationshipswith theirfathers were correlated with psychosocial outcomes. The effects of father involvementon psychosocial outcomes were mediated by family process. Finally,manyfathers who did not live with their childrenwerefound to be present in their lives. These resultschallenge the assumptionsthat nonresidentfathers are absentfrom their children's lives, and that living with single mothersadversely atffects psychosocial developmentof AfricanAmericanyouths.
he rising number of children who now live in singlemother households has led to considerableinterest in the effects of family structure on adolescent development. Living with a single mother has been associated with children's delinquency (Dornbusch et al., 1985; Ensminger, Kellum, & Rubin, 1983; Sampson, 1987; Steinberg,1987), alcohol and substance use (Brook, Whiteman, & Gordon, 1985; Castro, Maddahian, Newcomb, & Bentler, 1987; Covey & Tam 1990; Murray,Roche, Goldman, & Whitbeck, 1988; Stern, Northman, & Van Slyck, 1984), lower self-esteem (Harper& Ryder, 1986; Parish, 1991; Parish& Taylor,1979), psychiatricproblems(Barbarin & Soler, 1993), earlier initiation of sexual intercourse (Newcomer & Udry, 1987) and leaving school before graduation (Zimilies & Lee, 1991). The large number of single-mother households within the AfricanAmericancommunityhas been a particularfocus of negative attention(Auletta, 1982; Coontz, 1992; Moynihan, 1965). A growingnumberof researcherssuggest, however,that living in a' single-mother family may have very different meanings for Whiteand AfricanAmericanyouths.Greateracceptanceof singlemotherfamilies(Wilson& Tolson, 1988), extendedfamily support (Chatters,Taylor,& Jayakody,1994; Taylor,Chatters,Tucker,& Lewis, 1990), and involvement of nonresident fathers (Mott, 1990; Zimmerman,Salem, & Maton, 1995) within the African American community may significantly alter the experience of living in a single-motherhouseholdfor AfricanAmericanyouths as comparedto White youths. Much of the researchwhich has found detrimentaleffects of living with a single mother has been conducted with middleclass, White samples (Barber& Eccles, 1992). Research on the role of family structurefor African American adolescent developmenthas been more limited, and the resultshave been equivocal. Some researchers have found family structureeffects for AfricanAmericanyouths. Dornbuschet al. (1985) found that living in a single-parenthome had a detrimentalimpact regardless of race. Cooper, Pierce, and Tidwell (1995) also concluded that living in a single-parentor stepparentfamily was a risk factorfor increased drug and alcohol use for both African American and White youths. McLanahan(1985) found high-school drop-outto be associatedwith fathers'absence for AfricanAmericanyouths. Jemmott and Jemmott (1992), in a study of African American adolescent males, demonstratedthat while family structurewas not relatedto the frequencyof sexual intercourseor the number of sexual partners,it was related to condom use and chances of fatheringa child. Flewelling and Bauman (1990) studied family T
1998, Vol. 47, No. 4
structureeffects among early adolescents.They found thatfamily structurewas relatedto substanceuse and sexual intercoursefor both Whites and nonWhites,but nonWhiteswere less affectedby family structurethanWhites. In contrastto the studies described above, many investigators have failed to find that living with a single motherwas associated with detrimental outcomes among African American youths. Family structurehas been found to be unrelatedto delinquency (Austin, 1992; Farnworth,1984; Gray-Ray& Ray, 1990; Thomas, Farrell,& Barnes, 1996; Zimmermanet al., 1995), precocious sexual behavior(Ensminger,1990), substanceuse (Ensminger,1990;Fomey,Fomey,Davis, VanHoose, Cafferty,& Allen, 1984;Thomaset al., 1996;Zimmermanet al., 1995),psychological distress(Zimmermanet al., 1995), school performance(Dombusch, Ritter,& Steinberg, 1991), and high-school drop-out(Ensminger & Slusarcick,1992) for AfricanAmericanyouths. In fact, Byram and Fly (1984) found that alcohol use was lower for African American adolescents who lived in single-motherhomes than it was for those who lived with both parents.These studiesraise the question of whether or not living in a single-motherhousehold has the same meaning for African American and White youths (Zimmermanet al., 1995). Severalfactors,such as involvementof extendedfamily members(Chatterset al., 1994), and the fact that AfricanAmericanfamily life has long been characterizedby a diversity of family structures(Wilson & Tolson, 1988) suggest that application of a family deficit model (Partridge & Kotler, 1987)-the notionthatliving with a single motherhas detrimental effects for adolescent development-may not be relevant for AfricanAmericanyouths.
*This research was supportedby the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Gran. No. DA07484. The researchreportedhere does not representthe views or policies ot the National Instituteon Drug Abuse. We would like to thankthe Project fji- lJrbananldRegional Affairs,the Universityof Michigan-Flint, Flint communitysciuh,Y officials, and the youths who participatedin this research.We would also like to thank SarahMangelsdorfand Jean Rhodes for their thoughtful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript and Richard DeShon for his consultationregardingdataanalysis. **Address correspondenceto: Deborah Salem, Michigan State University, Department of Psychology, 135 SnyderHall, East Lansing, Michigan,48824; telephone:517-3535015; fax: 517-432-2945; e-mail: deborah.salem@ssc.msu.edu Key Words: African American adolescents, family process, family structure, ftJther inlvwoement.
(FamilY Relationis, 1998, 47. 331-341)
331
A growing body of researchsuggests that factors other than family structuremay be more influential in the developmentof psychosocial problemsamong adolescents.These include family process (Baumrind, 1991; Partridge & Kotler, 1987; Turner, Irwin, & Millstein, 1991; Zimmermanet al., 1995) and the role of fathersin youths' lives (Thomas et al., 1996; Zimmermanet al., 1995). Family process refersto the natureand qualityof family dynamicsand relationships(e.g., parentalsupport,family conflict). Researchers have examined the relative contributionsof family structureand family process to psychosocial outcomes among adolescents. Most of this research indicates that family process plays a more importantrole thanfamily structurefor adolescent development.Turnerand colleagues (Turneret al., 1991; Turner,Irwin, Tschann, & Millstein, 1993) found that both family structureand family process were directly related to experimenting with substances, substance use, sexual behavior and fighting in samples of ethnically diverse youths. Malkus (1994), in a study of substanceuse among White youths, found main effects for both family structureand family process. When both family process and family structurewere accountedfor, however, only family process variableswere relatedto substanceuse. Partridge & Kotler(1987) also demonstratedthatfamily process was a strongerpredictorof adolescents' self-esteem and adjustment thanfamily structure. Three domains of family process-parental support,parental monitoring,andfamilyconflict-have been foundto be particularly relevant for adolescent development. Several researchershave foundthatlow levels of parentalsupportwere associatedwith alcohol and substance use (Brook, Brook, Gordon, Whiteman, & Cohen, 1990; Maton & Zimmerman,1992; Wills, 1986; Windle, 1992), internalizing problems (Windle, 1992; Zimmerman, Ramirez-Valles,Zapert,& Maton, 1998), and academicproblems (Forehandet al., 1991). Taylor (1996) found parent support of school was associatedwith less problembehaviorand psychological distress,andmoreschool engagementamongAfricanAmerican youths. Zimmerman,Steinman,and Rowe (in press) also reported that parental support helped to protect youths from risks (e.g., friends'behavior)associatedwith violentbehavior. Parentalmonitoring,supervision,and controlhave also been found to delay or preventproblembehaviorsamong adolescents (e.g., Chilcoat & Anthony, 1996; Forehand, Miller, Dutra, & Chance, 1997; Vazsonyi& Flannery,1997). Buchanan,Maccoby, and Dornbusch(1996) studied adolescent developmentafter divorce and concluded that parental monitoring was one of the strongest predictors of depressed mood and problem behavior among adolescents.Gray-Rayand Ray (1990), while discovering no family structureeffects for AfricanAmericanmales, concluded that lower levels of parentalsupervisionand controlwere associated with mild delinquentbehaviorssuch as truancy,curfewviolations, and incorrigibility.Taylor,Casten, and Flickinger (1993) reportedthat authoritativeparentingpractices-warm, accepting, and firmbehavioralcontroland monitoring-were associatedwith adolescentpsychosocialadjustmentin AfricanAmericanfamilies. Steinberg,Mounts, Lamborn,and Dornbusch(1991) also found that authoritativeparentingwas relatedto highergrade-pointaverages, greaterself-reliance,less psychological distress, and lower delinquencyfor youths living in many differentecological niches (definedby family structure,ethnicityand social class). Finally, researchershave found that marital(or postmarital) conflict is more predictiveof adolescent adjustmentthan family structure(Amato& Keith, 1991). Amato (1993) reviewedresearch 332
examining differentexplanationsof children'sadjustmentto divorce. He concluded that parentalconflict providedthe best explanationfor why children may adjust poorly to the divorce of their parents.These findings suggest that family process may be more relevantfor predictingadolescentpsychological well-being and problembehaviorsthanfamily structure. While few researchershave studiedthe role of fathersin the development of psychosocial problems (Kotelchuck, 1976; Levine & Pitt, 1995; Phares, 1992), researchon normativechild developmenthas demonstratedthat fathershave a vital influence on the healthy development of their children (Lamb, 1986; Levine & Pitt, 1995). Researchershave consistently found that childrenseem betteroff in terms of cognitive, sex-role, and psychosocial developmentwhen they have a close and supportiverelationshipwith theirfathers,regardlessof where their fatherslive (Lamb, 1986). Those studies that have consideredthe role of fathersin the development of psychosocial problems have tended to study them only in terms of their absence (Levine & Pitt, 1995). A growing literature,however, suggests that for African American youths, fathersabsence from the home can not be equated with absence from their children'slives. Danziger and Radin (1990), in a study of nonresident fathers' involvement in teen-mother families, found that minority mothers (most of whom were AfricanAmerican)reportedmore fatherparticipationthanWhite mothers.Mott (1990) conductedan in-depthexaminationof the flow of fathers' presence and absence. He found that African American fatherswere more likely to be absent from the home than White fathers. He also found, however, that nonresident African Americanfatherswere more likely to live near and visit their children than White nonresidentfathers. Steir and Tienda (1993) conducteda studythatexaminedvisitationamong African American, Latino, and White nonresident fathers. They found that African American fathers visited their children more than any other group. Thirty-onepercent said they visited their children daily compared to 18% for White, 9% for Mexican, and 15% for Puerto Rican fathers. Zimmermanet al. (1995), in a study of high-risk, urban, African American male adolescents, also found that many fathers who did not live with their sons were involved in their lives. They found that while youths who lived with both parents spent more time with their fathers than youths from other family constellations, youths from singlemother and/or extended family households spent an average of between 4 and 7 hoursper week with their fathers.Notably,25% of youths who did not live with their fathers reportedthat they spent 10 or more hours per week together.For youths who lived with their single mothersand/orextendedfamilies, between 42% and 55% said they received emotional supportfrom their fathers, and between 40% and 56% nominatedtheir fathersas their role models. Thus, father's involvement,regardlessof whether he is coresident, may influence both adolescent outcomes and family processes. Few studies have empiricallyexamined the positive role fathers, particularlynonresident fathers, may play in their children'slives. The resultsof those studies thathave exploredfather involvement are somewhat equivocal. Zimmermanet al. (1995) found that for African Americanmale adolescents,family structure was not relatedto psychosocial outcomes, but spendingtime with their fathers was related to lower levels of depression and anxiety,and receivingemotionalsupportfrom fatherswas related to greater life satisfaction and self-esteem, and lower levels of Family Relations
depression. Cooksey and Fondell (1996), in a study of fathers who reside with their children,found that time spent with fathers was related to academic achievement. Thomas et al., (1996), using a representativehouseholdsample, found thatthe effects of nonresidentfather involvementvaried depending on the adolescent's race and sex. They found thatWhite adolescentmales who lived with single mothersand had no contactwith nonresidentfathers reported higher levels of delinquency and substance use than those who lived with both parents or with single mothers and had contact with their nonresident fathers. In contrast, African Americanmales who lived with single mothersand had contact with their nonresidentfathers reportedhigher levels of substance use and delinquency than those who lived with both parentsor with single mothersand had no contactwith theirnonresident fathers. King (1994) examined data from the National LongitudinalStudy of Youth,and found no effects for fathervisitationon problembehaviors,self-esteem,or academicachievement. Althoughthe results of these studies are mixed, overall they suggest that fathers'involvementinfluences the psychosocial developmentof theirchildren.Regardlessof whetheror not they live in the same home, fathersmay influence their childrendirectly, as well as throughtheir influence on the overallparentalsupport, monitoring, and family conflict experienced by their children. King (1994) arguesthat more rigorousresearchis needed regarding the potential for parentalconflict and nature of the fatherchild relationshipto mediatethe impactof fatherinvolvement. The extant literaturecalls into questionthe popularassumptions that living with a single mothernecessarilyhas detrimental effects on the developmentof AfricanAmericanadolescents,and that the nonresidentfathers of African Americanyouths do not play an active and influential role in their lives. In the present study, we examine the relationshipbetween family structureand a variety of psychosocial outcomes. In addition, we examine other aspects of family life-family process and youths' relationships with their fathers-found to be relatedto adolescentdevelopment. This study builds on the work of other researchersin severalways. First,to explore the role of family structure,we examine the relationshipbetween adolescentoutcomes and five different family constellations. Most studies of the structure of African Americanfamilies have not examinedthe importantrole played by the extendedfamily within the AfricanAmericancommunity.Extendedfamily members,particularlygrandmothers,residing both in and out of the home, have been found to play significant support and parenting roles within many African American families (Chatterset al., 1994; Pearson, Hunter,Ensminger,& Kellam, 1990; Taylor,1996; Tayloret al., 1993; Taylor & Rogers, 1995; Wilson & Tolson, 1988). To reflect the involvement of extended family, we included two family constellations that are relativelycommon within the AfricanAmericancommunity, but are rarely studied:(a) youths who live with motherand extended family, and (b) youths who live with extended family only. Second, we explore youths' relationshipswith their fathers regardlessof whether or not they live together.Ratherthan assumingthat a father'srole is reflectedin the family structure(i.e., whetheror not the fatherlives in the home), we examine aspects of youths' relationshipwith their fathersthat are not necessarily dependenton whetheror not they live in the same home. Third, the sample is composed exclusively of AfricanAmericanyouths. We seek to explore within-grouprelationships,ratherthan making comparisonsto otherethnic groupsin which family structure may not have the same meaning. 1998, Vol. 47, No. 4
Three sets of questions are examinedin this study.The first set examinedfamily structureeffects. We tested severalhypotheses which explore the applicabilityof the family deficit model (Partridge& Kotler,1987) to AfricanAmericanfamilies.We tested the hypothesisthatyouths from single-motherhomes do not have worse outcomes (e.g., reportmore problembehavior)thanyouths from otherfamily constellations.We also questionedthe assumption, often implicit in family structureresearch,that fathers' absence from the home implies that fatherswere absent from their children'slives. We expected to find that a significantnumberof nonresidentfatherswere involved with theirchildren.Finally,we explored the hypothesis that youths from differentfamily structures would report different family processes. We expected to find that family processes reportedby youths from single-mother households would be similar to those reportedby youths from otherhouseholdconstellations. The second set of questions explored the relationship between family process and psychosocial outcomes. Specifically, we hypothesized that lower levels of parental support and parentalmonitoring,and higher levels of family conflict would be relatedto negativepsychosocialoutcomes. The third set of questions addressedthe hypothesis that fathers played a positive role in their children'slives, even if they were not coresident. We expected to find youths' relationships with their fathers to be related to healthier psychosocial outcomes. We operationalizedthe relationshipwith fathersas spending time with fathersand viewing fathersas playing a significant role in their children'slives. In addition,we examinedthe mediating effects of family process on the relationshipbetween father involvementand psychosocial outcomes. We expected the effects of father involvement on adolescent development would be explainedthroughtheirinfluenceon family process. Finally,we examineddifferencesbetween males and females for all of our hypotheses.Many writershave suggestedthatmales and females are differentiallyimpactedby parentalrelationships and family process. For example, it has been arguedthat mothers play a more importantrole in socializing daughters(Cooksey & Fondell, 1996; Thomaset al., 1996). Fatherinvolvement,both directly and indirectly,throughits influence on family process may be less importantfor females than for males. While the literature on gender differences is not consistent, males and females have been found to differ with regardto how they are treatedby their fathers, how they are influenced by family process and family structure,and how they manifesttheir distress.First, fathershave been found to interact differently with sons and daughters (McAdoo, 1981; Shulman& Seiffge-Krenke,1997; Siegal, 1987; Wilson, 1986). Fathers,for example, are reportedto be more controlling, demanding, and supportivein their relationships with their sons than with their daughters (Wilson, 1986; McAdoo, 1981). Second, gender differences have been reportedwith regardto the impactof both family structureandprocess on adolescent outcomes. Thomas et al. (1996), for example, found that family structure(operationalizedto include the involvement of nonresident fathers) was related to delinquency and substance use for boys, but not for girls. With regard to family process, Weintrauband Gold (1991) found that parentalmonitoringwas related to delinquencyfor boys, but not for girls. Finally, males may be more likely to react to distressby externalizingtheir behaviors, whereas females may be more likely to internalizetheir reactions (Furstenberg,1990; Pearson, Lalongo,Hunter,& Kellam, 1994). Taken together, these findings suggest that family 333
structure,family process, and father involvementmay have differentialinfluences on psychosocial outcomes for males and females.
Methods Sample Ninth-gradestudentsfrom four public high schools in one of the largest school districts in Michigan were selected for the study. Studentsenrolled in the school system at the start of the fall of 1994, with grade-pointaveragesof 3.0 and below were selected. This gradecutoff was used because one goal of the larger study was to examine youths at risk for leaving school before graduation.Students who were diagnosed as being either emotionally impairedor developmentallydisabled were not included in the study.The sample included 679 African Americanyouths (50%_female;n = 340). They ranged in age from 14 to 17 years old (X = 14.6; SD = .66), with 91% (n = 573) being 14 or 15 years old.
Procedure Face-to-face interviews were conducted by trained African Americanand White, male and female interviewers.Interviewers were not matched to respondents by race or sex because the schools wanted us to collect data efficiently to minimize disruption. Studentswere called from their regularclassrooms and interviewed in private rooms within the school. Interviews lasted for 50-60 minutes. Youths were informed that all information they provided was confidential and was subpoena protected. When the face-to-face portion of the interview was completed, students were asked to complete a self-administered series of questions about their alcohol and substanceuse. Nine youths refused to participatein the study.
Measures Family structure.Youths identified all the individuals with whom they lived and their ages. Five family constellationswere developed:(a) single mother(male n = 119; female n = 145); (b) both biological parents(male n = 101; female n = 72); (c) biological mother and stepfather (male n = 37; female n = 32); (d) motherwith extendedfamily members(male n = 29; female n = 44); and (e) extendedfamily membersonly (male n = 24; female n = 31). Constellationswith few cases [youths living with single fathers (n = 20), with biological father and stepmother(n = 9), with father and extended family (n = 4), with siblings only (n = 5), with only friends(n = 2), and in a foster family (n = 3)], were omitted.Two youths were also omitteddue to missing data. Relationship with father. Participants' relationships with their fatherswere assessed on two dimensions:(a) time spent involved in sharedactivities(time with father),and (b) significance of father'srole (significance of father).Time with fatherwas assessed with one item, "In an average week how much time do you spend with your fatherin sharedactivities?"Responses were recordedusing a 6-point Likert scale rangingfrom 1 (none) to 6 (a lot of time) (16 or more hours per week). The sample mean was 2.26 (SD = 1.57). Significance of father was a composite variableconsisting of whetheror not youths nominatedtheir fathers as theirmale role models, and/oras the first or second most importantperson raising them. Scores on this variable ranged from 0 (fathernominatedin neitherrole) to 2 (fathernominated 334
Table I CorrelationsAmongPsychosocial Variables
Alcohol use Cigaretteuse Marijuanause Delinquency Depression Anxiety Self-acceptance Active coping
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
.55* .68* .41* .23* .22* -.10* -.01
.62* .37* .20* .16* -.09* -.05
.48* .17* .13* -.07 .01
.30* .22* -.09* -.02
.73* -.32* -.08*
-.26* -.06
.21*
*p <.05.
in both roles). If youths indicatedthat they consideredtheir stepfather to be their father,relationshipwith stepfatherratherthan biological father was assessed. Nine percent of the youths (n = 54) said they consideredtheir stepfatherto be their father.Twothirds of these youths lived with their stepfathers(n = 34). The mean for significanceof fatherwas .88 (SD = .83). Family process variables. Three family process variables were measured:family conflict, parental support, and parental monitoring.Family conflict was assessed with the 5-item family conflict subscale from the Family EnvironmentScale (Moos & Moos, 1981). The mean family conflict score was 1.80 (SD = .45) and the Cronbachalpha was .77. Parentalsupportwas assessed using 5 items from Procidanoand Heller's (1983) parents' scale (X = 3.96; SD = 1.02). The Cronbach alpha for parental supportwas .88. Parentalmonitoringwas assessed by askingparticipants the time of their week-night curfew. A four-category variablewas createdbecause the distributionof the item was bimodal. The four groups were: (a) no curfew time; (b) 10:01 pm or later;(c) 8:01-10:00 pm; and (d) 8:00 pm or earlier(X = 2.49; SD = .95). Psychosocial variables. The psychosocial variables studied were groupedinto two categories:(a) problembehaviorsand (b) psychological well-being. The correlations among the psychosocial variablesarepresentedin Table 1. Problem behaviors. Frequency of alcohol, cigarette, and marijuanause was assessed. Alcohol use was measuredby the sum of z scores from four self-reportitems using a yes-no and a 7-point Likert format (1 = never, 7 = 40+ times). Youths were asked, "Have you ever had any beer, wine, or liquor to drink (yes/no); how many times have you had alcoholic beverages to drink:in your lifetime, duringthe last 12 months, and duringthe last 30 days?" The mean for alcohol use was 4.90 (SD = 4.68). Cigaretteuse was measuredby the sum of z scores from the following two questions:(a) have you ever smoked cigarettes(1 = never, 5 = regularlynow) and (b) how often have you smoked cigarettesduringthe last 30 days (1 = not at all, 7 = two packs or more per day). The mean cigarette use score was 5.71 (SD = 2.95). Marijuanause was measuredby the sum of z scores from threeself-reportitems using a 7-pointLikertformat(1 = never,7 = 40+ times): lifetime use, last 12 months' use, and last 30 days' use (X = 4.76; SD = 5.44). A four was added to all z-score composite variablesso all scores would be above zero. Delinquency was assessed with 17 items which askedhow often (1 = no times, 5 = 3+ times) in the last year youths had engaged in behaviors such as propertytheft or damage, fighting, and weapon carrying (X = 1.33; SD = .49). The Cronbachalpha for the delinquency measurewas .87. Psychological well-being. Four psychological well-being variables were measured: depression, anxiety, self-acceptance Family Relations
and active coping. Subscales from the Brief Symptom Inventory (Derogatis & Spencer, 1982) were used to assess anxiety (X = 1.59;SD = .63) anddepression(X = 1.65;SD = .70). The Cronbach alphasfor anxiety and depressionwere both .79. Self-acceptance was measuredwith 4 items using a 5-point scale from the Bentler PersonalityInventory(Stein,Newcomb,& Bentler,1986). Students were askedto choose fromopposingstatements(1 = firststatement true, 5 = second statementtrue) concerning whether they were happy or unhappywith themselves, discouragedor pleased with themselves, liked or disliked themselves, and regarded themselves as a failure or a success. The mean score was 4.51 (SD = .71) and the Cronbachalphawas .65. Coping was measuredwith eight 3-point Likertformatitems which assessed youth's beliefs about hard work leading to achievement (X = 4.19; SD = .57). This measure,used in comparativestudies of race and hypertension (James, Strogatz,Wing, & Ramsey, 1987), had a Cronbach alphaof .69 in this sample. Demographics.Youth'sage and parentaleducationwere also assessed. Youths were asked to indicate their father's and mother's level of education. If the level of education was provided for both parents,the highest level completedby either one was used for analysis. For 6% (n = 36) of youths, neither their mother or father completed high school, 35% (n = 209) had at least one parentwho completedhigh school, 33% (n = 199) had at least one parent with some post high-school education, and 25% (n = 151) had at least one parentwith a college or graduate degree.Youth'sage was determinedby theirreportedbirthdate.
AnalyticProcedure The first set of analyses used multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA)to investigatedifferencesin psychosocial outcomes, relationshipswith fathers,and family process across the five family structuresand sex. We examinedboth main effects for family structureand interactioneffects between family structureand sex in a 5 x 2 MANOVA.The second set of analyses used correlations to examine associations between family process and psychosocial outcomes.The thirdset of analysesused correlationsto
examine associationsbetween youths' relationshipswith theirfathers and psychosocial outcomes. Finally,we conductedanalyses to explore the possible mediatingeffects of family process variables for the relationshipbetween fatherinvolvementand each of the psychosocial outcomes studied. We followed the procedure described by Baron and Kenny (1986) to test for mediating effects. They explain that a mediationalmodel may be tested by regressing: (a) the mediating variable (family process) on the independent variable (father involvement); (b) the dependent variable (psychosocial variables) on the independent variable; and (c) the dependentvariableon both the independentand mediating variables.Mediationis establishedif all threeequationsare statisticallysignificantas hypothesized,and if the effects for the independentvariableon the dependentare less (drop below significance) when computed with the mediator (equation 3) than withoutit (equation2).
Results FamilyStructureAnalysis Univariate analyses of variance (ANOVA) examining parental education and age differences across the five family structureswere conducted.The groups differed on both parental education [F(4, 590) = 3.58; p < .05] and on youth's age [F(4, 623) = 6.54; p < .05]. Youths who lived with extended family only (X = 3.9, SD = 1.42) had parentswho had completeda lower level of education than youths who lived with both biological parents(X = 4.68; SD = 1.33). Youthswho lived with their mothers and extended family (X = 14.90; SD = .79) were older than youths who lived with mothersonly (X = 14.58; SD = .66), both biological parents(X = 14.44; SD = .62), or extendedfamily only (X = 14.44; SD = .57). Psychosocial outcomes.Family structureeffects for problem behaviorapproachedsignificance [Wilks' Lambda= .96; approx. F(16, 1815) = 1.7; p = .052]. Univariateanalyses indicatedthat only marijuanause differedacross groups. Scheffe post hoc tests
Table2 Means and StandardDeviationsfor Psychosocial VariablesAcross Five Family Constellations HouseholdType Single mother (n=265) Problembehaviorsa Cigaretteuse Alcohol use Marijuanauseb Delinquency Psychological well-beinga Depression Anxiety Active coping Self-acceptance
Mom and stepdad (n=68)
Two biological parents (n= 171)
Extended family only (n=55)
Mom and extendedfamily (n=69)
male female male female male female male female
6.08 5.78 5.33 5.12 5.76 4.33 1.45 1.23
(3.25) (2.72) (4.93) (4.44) (5.97) (5.03) ( .54) ( .30)
6.05 6.15 5.23 5.60 5.19 5.23 1.39 1.28
(3.34) (3.50) (5.69) (4.12) (6.48) (4.69) ( .48) ( .38)
5.02 5.22 3.66 4.61 3.66 3.48 1.28 1.28
(2.59) (2.85) (3.57) (4.63) (4.36) (4.43) ( .42) ( .55)
5.28 6.08 4.42 4.71 4.54 4.97 1.69 1.26
(2.84) (2.95) (5.37) (4.89) (5.56) (5.81) ( .87) ( .32)
6.24 5.72 5.22 5.88 6.49 6.23 1.39 1.47
(3.17) (2.59) (5.11) (6.03) (6.66) (7.14) ( .50) ( .63)
male female male female male female male female
1.52 1.87 1.50 1.71 4.22 4.22 4.56 4.46
( ( ( ( ( ( ( (
1.37 1.74 1.33 1.75 4.33 4.15 4.71 4.38
( ( ( ( ( ( ( (
1.40 1.75 1.46 1.66 4.13 4.03 4.65 4.35
( ( ( ( ( ( ( (
1.56 1.80 1.46 1.72 4.26 4.12 4.49 4.30
( ( ( ( ( ( ( (
1.55 1.73 1.46 1.72 4.30 4.30 4.68 4.56
( .56) ( .86) ( .42) ( .83) ( .53) ( .55) ( .51) ( .64)
.54) .81) .54) .70) .58) .59) .69) .80)
.49) .63) .41) .63) .40) .58) .49) .64)
.45) .84) .53) .72) .54) .64) .51) .85)
.57) .88) .34) .77) .47) .57) .60) .89)
aTherewere no significantfamily structurex sex interactions. bOnlymarijuanause differed across groups. Youth in mother and extended families reportedsignificantly more marijuanause than youth living with both biological parents.[F(4, 610) = 3.7; p < .05].
1998, Vol. 47, No. 4
335
Table 3 Means (and Standard)Deviationsfor FamilyProcess and Father VariablesAcross Five Family Constellations HouseholdType Single mother (n = 264) Fatherinvolvement Time with fathera Significance of fatherb Family process Parentsupportc Parentmonitoring Family conflict
Mom and stepdad (n =69)
Two biological parents (n = 173)
Extended family only (n =55)
Mom and extendedfamily (n = 69)
male female male female
1.69 1.61 .63 .51
(1.28) (1.20) ( .80) ( .73)
2.62 2.21 1.15 1.17
(1.50) (1.26) ( .67) ( .77)
3.62 2.97 1.64 1.35
(1.50) (1.44) ( .58) ( .63)
2.58 1.90 .54 .43
(1.77) (1.68) ( .78) ( .57)
1.95 1.81 .53 .48
(1.51) (1.65) ( .70) ( .68)
male female male female male female
4.02 3.71 2.59 2.36 1.76 1.91
( .98)
4.24 3.79 2.65 2.55 1.75 1.70
( ( ( ( ( (
4.29 3.87 2.55 2.39 1.75 1.86
( .88) (1.07) ( .92) (1.13) ( .43) ( .47)
3.55 3.92 2.75 2.32 1.77 1.63
(1.12) (1.03) ( .94) (1.05) ( .38) ( .32)
4.13 4.26 2.65 2.34 1.79 1.86
( ( ( ( ( (
(1.15) ( .83) (1.00) ( .41) ( .50)
.71) .97) .75) .97) .27) .36)
.83) .85) .89) .94) .47) .55)
aYouthwho live with both biological parentsspent more time with fatherthan any other group. Youthliving with stepfathersspent more time with fatherthanyouth living with mothersonly. bYouthwho live with both biological parentsreportedmore father significance than any other group. Youth living with stepfathersreportedmore father significance thanthose who live with motherand/orextendedfamily. cParentalsupportdifferedacross groups,but groupcomparisonsusing the Sheffe post hoc test identifiedno differencebetween groups.
indicatedthat youths who lived with their mothersand extended family reportedmore marijuanause than youths who lived with both biological parents[F(4, 610) = 3.70; p < .05]. Family structure effects, however,disappearedwhen age was enteredas a covariate[Wilks'Lambda= .96; approx.F(16, 1812) = 1.52; ns]. No family structurex sex interactioneffects were found for problem behaviors[Wilks'Lambda= .96; approx.F(16, 1815) = 1.54; ns]. No family structure[Wilks' Lambda = .97; approx. F(16, 1858) = 1.14; ns] or family structureby sex interactioneffects [Wilks' Lambda= .98; approx.F(16, 1858) = .72; ns] were found for psychological well-being. Table2 reportsthe means and standarddeviationsfor all psychosocialvariablesacrossthe five family constellations.The results for problembehaviorand psychological well-beingwere the same when parentaleducationwas entered as a covariate. Father involvement.Both time with father and significance of father differed across groups [Wilks' Lambda= .66; approx. F(8, 1210) = 34.97; p < .05]. Univariate analyses using the Scheffe post hoc test indicatedthat time with father and significance of father differed across household constellations [F(4, 623) = 39.18; p < .05; F(4, 611) = 59.66; p < .05; respectively]. Youths living with both biological parentsspent more time with their fathers and were more likely to report that their fathers played a significant role in their lives than youths living in any other group. Youths living with their mothers and stepfathers were more likely to reportthat their fathersplayed a significant role in their lives than youths who lived with mothersand/orextended family members(i.e., single motheronly, mother and extended family, extended family only). In addition,youths living with their mothers and stepfathersreportedspending more time with theirfathersthanyouths living with their single mothers.No sex x family structureinteractionwas found [Wilks' Lambda= .99; approx.F(8, 1234) = .93; ns]. Table 3 reportsthe means and standarddeviationsfor the fathervariablesacross the five family constellations. Family process. Family processes differed across family structure[Wilks' Lambda= .96; approx.F(12, 1596) = 1.9; p < .05]. Univariateanalyses indicatedonly parentalsupportdiffered across family structuregroups [F(4, 621) = 3.14; p < .05], but the Scheffe post hoc comparisonstest indicated that no two family 336
constellationsdiffered.No family structureby sex interactioneffects were found [Wilks' Lambda= .97; approx.F(12, 1596) = 1.4; ns]. Table3 reportsthe means and standarddeviationsfor the family process variablesacross the five family constellations.
RelationshipBetweenFamilyProcess and Psychosocial Outcomes Relationshipsbetween the family process variablesand the psychosocial outcomes for the total sample, males, and females are reportedin Table 4. Parentalsupportwas correlatedwith all of the psychosocial outcomes for the total sample.Parentalmonitoring was correlatedwith all of the psychosocial outcomes except active coping and cigaretteuse, for the total sample. Family Table4 Bivariate Correlations Between Family Process and Psychosocial Outcome Measures Family Process
Psychosocial outcomes Total Alcohol Male Female Total Cigarettes Male Female Total Marijuana Male Female Total Delinquency Male Female Total Depression Male Female Total Anxiety Male Female Total Self-acceptance Male Female Total Active coping Male Female
Parental support
Parental monitoring
Family conflict
-.16* -.16* -.15 -.15* -.13* -.16* -.16* -.24* -.10 -.20* -.27* -.18* -.25* -.14* -.27* -.14* -.09 -.14* .27* .27* .25* .26* .26* .24*
-.19* -.23* -.16* -.04 -.08 -.01 -.12* -.22* -.05 -.12* -.17* I.11* -.16* -.08 -.17* -.15* -.14* -.13* .08* -.02 .11* .03 -.02 .06
.21* .23* .20* .09* .12* .06 .17* .21* .14* .16* .17* .19* .25* .15* .29* .20* .18* .19* -.15* -.11 * -.16* -.02 .07 -.08
*p< .05.
Family Relations
conflict was correlatedwith all psychosocial outcomes except active coping, for the total sample. Several relationshipsbetween family process variablesand problembehaviorswere significant for males, but not for females. These included:parentalsupport with alcohol use and marijuanause; parental monitoring with marijuanause; and family conflict with cigaretteuse. The following relationshipsbetween family process and psychological wellbeing were significant for females, but not males: parental support with anxiety and parental monitoring with depression and self-acceptance.
RelationshipBetweenFather Variables and Psychosocial Outcomes Variablesdescribing youths' relationshipswith their fathers are presentedin Table 5. For the sample as a whole, 63% of the youths reportedthatthey spend at least some time participatingin sharedactivities with their fathers(70% of males and 57% of females). Twenty-fourpercentreportedspendingmorethan7 hours a week in shared activities with their fathers. At least 43% of youths in all family constellations reportedengaging in shared activitieswith theirfathersat least one to threehoursper week. Thirty-six percent of the youths nominated their fathers as their male role models (43% of males and 29% of females). Fifty-one percent of the total sample nominatedtheir fathers as one of the two most important persons raising them (56% of males and 48% of females). Fifty-ninepercentof the total sample nominatedtheirfathersas theirmale role models and/oras one of the two most importantpersons raising them (63% of males and 55% of females). At least 39% of youths in all family constellations nominatedtheir fathersas their role models, and/orone of the two most importantpeople raising them. Table 5 reportsthe percentageof youths in each fathertime and role categoryacross the five family constellations. Timewithfather Time with father was inversely correlated with marijuanause (r = -.13; p < .05), cigaretteuse (r = -.13; p < .05), alcohol use (r = -.12; p < .05), and depression(r = -.13; p < .05) for the total sample. It was inversely correlatedwith marijuanause (r = -.20; p < .05) and cigaretteuse for males (r = -.12; p < .05), and with alcohol use (r = -.12; p < .05) and cigaretteuse for females (r = -.12; p < .05). No other variableswere significantly correlatedfor the total sample,males, or females.
We also examinedthe relationshipbetween time with father and psychosocial outcomes after partialingout family structure. We created a dichotomous variablefor family structure-father absent or fatherpresentin the household-for these analyses. In these analyses, time with fatherwas inverselycorrelatedwith alcohol use (r = -.11; p < .05), cigaretteuse (r = -.10; p < .05), depression (r = -.08; p < .05), and marijuanause (r = -.09; p < .05) for the totalsample;marijuanause (r = -.12; p < .05) for males;and alcohol use (r = - .13; p < .05), and cigaretteuse (r = -.14; p < .05) for females. No othervariableswere significantlycorrelated for the total sample,males, or females. Significance of father. Significance of father was inversely correlatedwith alcohol use (r = -.1 1;p < .05), marijuanause (r = -.08; p < .05), delinquency(r = -.10; p < .05), anxiety (r = -.09; p < .05), and depression(r = -.12; p < .05) for the total sample.It was inversely correlatedwith marijuanause (r = -.15; p < .05), and delinquency(r = -.14; p < .05) for males. Among females, significance of fatherwas correlatedwith anxiety (r = -.13; p < .05), depression(r = -.13; p < .05), andactivecoping (r = -.14; p < .05). No othervariableswere significantlycorrelatedfor the total sample,males, or females. We again examinedthe relationshipbetween significance of father and psychosocial outcomes, controlling for family structure (as describedabove). In these analyses, significanceof father was inversely correlatedwith alcohol use (r = -.17; p < .05) for the total sample, and with alcohol use (r = -.11; p < .05) and anxiety (r = -.12; p < .05) for females. No other variableswere significantlycorrelatedfor the total sample,males, or females.
MediationalAnalyses For all cases in which a fatherinvolvementvariablesignificantly predicted one of the independent variables and significantly predicted one of the family process variables, the mediatingeffects of the family process variableswere then tested in a regression equation that included both the family process variable and the father involvement variable. These analyses were conductedfor the total sample,males, and females. Significanceoffather The relationshipbetween significance of father and psychosocial outcomes was mediated by family process for the total sample, males, and females. For the total sample,parentalsupport,family conflict, and parentalmonitoring
Table 5 Description of RelationshipWithFatherAcross Family Constellations HouseholdType
Time with father none 1-3 hours/week 4-7 hours/week >7 hours/week Significance of father Fatherrole model Yes No Importanceof father Yes No Fatherrole model/importance Yes No
1998, Vol. 47, No. 4
Single mother (n = 264)
Mom and stepdad (n = 69)
Two biological parents (n = 173)
Extended family only (n = 55)
Mom and extendedfamily (n = 73)
Total (n = 634)
57% 26% 8% 9%
26% 38% 14% 23%
7% 22% 26% 45%
47% 25% 8% 20%
42% 15% 15% 29%
37% 25% 14% 24%
21% 79%
45% 55%
62% 38%
22% 78%
30% 70%
36% 64%
34% 66%
57% 43%
90% 10%
29% 71%
18% 82%
51% 49%
40% 60%
81% 19%
94% 6%
41% 59%
39% 61%
59% 41%
337
all mediatedthe relationshipsbetween significance of fatherand anxiety, marijuanause, and delinquency. Parental support and family conflict also mediated the relationship with depression. For females, parentalsupport,family conflict and parentalmonitoring mediated the relationshipswith alcohol use, anxiety, and depression.For males, parentalsupportand family conflict mediated the relationshipswith alcohol use and delinquency.Parental supportalso mediatedthe relationshipwith delinquency.Parental monitoring did not mediate between significance of father and psychosocialoutcomes. Time with father Fewer mediated relationshipswere found for time with father than for significance of father.For the total sample, parentalsupportmediatedthe relationshipbetween time with fatherand depression.For females, parentalsupport,family conflict, and parentalmonitoringmediated the relationshipwith alcohol use. Parentalsupportalso mediatedthe relationshipwith cigaretteuse. For males, only parentalsupportwas found to be a mediator(alcohol use and cigaretteuse).
Discussion The results of this study indicate that family structureis not related to psychosocial outcomes for the African American youths in our sample. Youthswho live with theirmothersand extendedfamily membersreportedmore marijuanause thanyouths who live with both parents.Adolescents in this family structure, however, were significantly older than youths in most of the other structures.When age was statisticallycontrolledfor this effect disappeared,suggesting thatincreaseddruguse in this group may be attributableto the youths' age and not householdcomposition. This is consistent with Turneret al.'s (1991) finding that older adolescentsare more likely to experimentwith substances. These findings are consistent with other researcherswho have examined the role of family structure in the lives of African Americanyouths (e.g., Austin, 1992; Farnworth,1984; Gray-Ray & Ray, 1990; Thomas et al., 1996; Zimmermanet al., 1995). Although we should be cautious interpretingthe null hypothesis (i.e., no family structureeffect) to be true, severalfactors suggest thatfailing to reject the null hypothesismay, indeed, mean no effects in this instance. These factors include consistency with our hypotheses, replication with other research, supportingof other hypothesizedrelationshipsin the sample, adequatedistributionof variables,similar findings across differentmeasures,and homoscedasticity across groups. In addition, the sample size across groups indicated sufficientpower (i.e., > .80) to detect small effects (as evidencedby our otherfindings). The notion that living with a single motherwill have a detrimental effect on psychosocial outcomes is based, in part, on the assumptionthat fathers who do not live with their children are absent from their lives. Our results are consistent with those of other researcherswho have found that this assumptionmay not accurately describe nonresident African American fathers (Danziger & Radin, 1990; Mott, 1990; Steir & Tienda, 1993; Zimmermanet al., 1995). As Danziger and Radin (1990) argue "father-absencefrom the home may not be as strongly equated with father-absencein the child's life for minorityyouth, as is the case for White youth"(p. 640). While psychosocial problemswere not predictedby fathers' absence from the home, they were predictedby fathers'presence in youths' lives. Spending time with their fathers and viewing them as significant figures in their lives was related to psycho338
social outcomes for both male and female adolescents.Controlling for family structurehad little effect on the relationshipsbetween time with fatherand psychosocialoutcomes (only cigarette use for males was no longer significant).The numberof relationships between significance of father and psychosocial outcomes was diminishedonce family structureeffects were taken into account. One reason family structureeffects explained away some of the findings for significance of fathermay be due to the way we measuredthis variable.It is likely thatyouths living with their fatherswould say he was one of the two most importantpeople raising them. The fact that we found that significance of father explained additionalvariance for any outcome after controlling for fathers' residency status could be interpretedas evidence of the importanceof the role fathersmay play in adolescentdevelopment. These findings are consistent with Phares' (1992) conclusions thatthe qualityof youths' relationshipswith theirfathers is vital for theirwell-being. Fathersappearto have somewhat distinct influences on the development of their sons and daughters. Father involvement may be most relevantfor helping sons avoid problembehaviors, whereasfor daughtersit may be more integralin preventingpsychological distress. Time spent with and significance of father were associated only with problem behaviors (marijuanause, cigarette use, delinquency) for males, but were associated with both problem behaviors (cigaretteand alcohol use) and psychological well-being (anxiety, depression, active coping) for females. These findings are consistent with others who found that characteristicsof fathersare associatedwith externalizingbehaviors (e.g., marijuanause, aggression) for males (Brook, Whiteman, Gordon, & Brook, 1983; Neapolitan, 1981) and to externalizing(e.g., marijuanause) (Brook,Whiteman,Gordon,& Brook, 1986) and internalizingbehaviors (e.g., depression) for females (Forehand& Smith, 1986). The results of the mediational analyses suggest that the mechanisms by which father involvementinfluences adolescent developmentmay differ somewhat for girls and boys. For girls, almost all of the relationshipsbetween father involvement and psychosocial outcomes were mediatedby all threefamily process variables.For boys, parentalsupportmediatedmost of the significant relationshipsbetween fatherinvolvementand psychosocial outcomes. Family conflict, however,was only a mediatorfor significanceof father,and parentalmonitoringdid not mediateeither fatherinvolvementvariable.While these aspectsof family process are relatedto psychosocialoutcomesfor sons, they do not explain the influenceof fatherinvolvement,as they do for daughters. The fact that all three family process variables(i.e., parental support,family conflict, and parentalmonitoring)were relatedto almost all psychosocial outcomesfor the total sample,males, and females providescompelling evidence for the influence of family process on adolescentoutcomes. Overall,our findings are consistent with past researchwhich has found that it is the quality of family relationships,not the structure,that influences adolescent development(Gray-Ray& Ray, 1990). For both boys and girls, living in a supportive,positive, and controlled family environment is associated with fewer problem behaviors and positive psychological well-being. Further,it appears that family processes may be significantlyinfluenced by involved fathers who do not live in the home. Several limitations of the study should be noted. First, the associations we found for father involviemeixtand the psychosocial outcomes were relativelymodest. The findings were conFamily Relations
sistent across two measuresof fatherinvolvement(time and role) and with other research (Zimmermanet al., 1995, 1998), however. As Abelson (1985) pointed out, the percent variance accounted for may be a misleading index of influence, because it does not consider the notion that cumulativeinfluence may produce meaningfuloutcomes. Second, we must be cautious in generalizing our findings. Our sample included only urban youths with grade-pointaverages under 3.0. Consequently,our results may not replicate for more highly achieving youths or for youths who live in other psychosocial contexts. It is importantto note, however, that the characteristicsof our sample provideuseful insights abouta subpopulation of African American youth (i.e., low academic achievingurbanyouth) identifiedas being at risk for severalnegative outcomes (Wilson, 1991). It is also noteworthythat most of the study variables were adequately distributed and included ample varianceto explain. Third,the participantsin this study are relativelyyoung, and may not yet be fully engaged in more serious problembehaviors such as marijuanause and delinquency.Nevertheless,the youth did reportinvolvementin these behaviors.In addition the measures had adequate variance and were not highly skewed. Furthermore,we found theoretically meaningful associations with those variables that may have had the most restrictedrange. In fact, if we had a more representative sample of youths and greatervariancein our variables,we may have found strongereffects of fatherinvolvementthanthose reported. Fourth, our measures of father involvement are somewhat limited. One reason we found only modest correlationsbetween time with father and the psychosocial outcomes may be due to the way we operationalizedtime with father.Our measuremay have underestimatedthe actual amount of time that youths are with their fathers.The fact that the item referredto involvement in shared activities may have created a more stringentcriterion for youths' estimates. They may not have considered the time spent while at their fathers' homes unless they were actually doing something together. Future research may benefit from a more in-depth analysis of how time is spent with fathers. It would also be useful to collect informationfrom both mothers and fathers to obtain more detailed informationabout their involvementwith their children.Informationfrom mothersand fathers will not only help reduce method variance, but it will provide an opportunityto examine how relationships between parents may affect adolescent development (Davies & Cummings, 1994; McLoyd, 1990). Finally,time with fatherand parentalmonitoringwere measuredwith single items. Single-itemmeasurescan be problematic because they are often less reliable than multi-itemindices. The implicationof this is that single items containso much errorvariance that the likelihood of finding hypothesizedrelationshipsis reduced. The fact that these variableswere correlatedwith several psychosocial outcomes and the resultswere consistentacross differentmeasuresof the constructsadds to the confidenceof our findings. In sum, our results suggest that it is inappropriateto apply a family deficit model, which was developedprimarilyusing White samples, to the African American youth in our sample. In a culture where extended family involvement is the norm rather than the exception (Chatters et al., 1994; Farnworth, 1984; Tienda& Angel, 1982), where single-motherhouseholds are not 1998, Vol. 47, No. 4
necessarily viewed as pathological (Allen, 1978; Ogbu, 1981), and where many nonresidentfathersare involved with their children (Zimmermanet al., 1995), African American youth living with a single mother may have a very differentmeaning than it has for White youth. To understandfamily influences on African Americanyouth, we need to develop alternative,more culturally relevantmodels. These models may need to focus on the positive role played by fathers,ratherthanon their absence, and the quality of family relationships(Baumrind,1991; Lambom, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991; Steinberg, Elmen, & Mounts, 1989; Steinberget al., 1991; Stice, Barrera,& Chassin, 1993). The fact that many of the youth in our sample did not live with their fathers, but still nominatedthem as role models and among the most importantpeople raisingthem, suggests that significant family relationshipsand processes may span residential boundaries.The finding that the relationshipbetween father involvement and psychosocial outcomes was mediated by family processprovidesfurthersupportfor this point.Nonresidentfathers (Zimmermanet al., 1995), extendedfamily members(Farnworth, 1984; Tienda& Angel, 1982; Wilson, 1986), fictive kin (Chatters et al., 1994), and other supportiveadults (Rhodes & Jason, 1990; Werner& Smith, 1992) have all been found to be influentialin adolescentdevelopment.It may be more useful for understanding African American youth development to explore the nature of youths' relationships with central adult figures in their lives, ratherthan stressinghouseholdcomposition.This would shift our researchfocus from ethnocentricassumptionsabout what families should look like, to how adults and adolescents interactto provide youths the support,guidance, and feedback necessaryto develop into healthy, well-functioning adults. Relationshipsundoubtedly transcend residential boundaries, and so must our models of familialinfluenceson adolescentdevelopment.
Implications for Practice The results of this study have significant implications for practitioners.Policy makersand programdevelopersmay need to alter their assumptions about family structure, single-mother households, and the role of fathers in adolescent development, especially when they are addressing issues related to African American adolescents. Policies and programsmay benefit from defining families more broadly to include nonresident fathers. This redefinition could help to change everyday practices and policies that fail to acknowledgethe role these fathersmay play in their children'slives. School officials, for example, could send reportcards to nonresidentfathersto keep them informedabout their children's academic progress. It would also redirect who might be involved in family-centeredinterventions.Practitioners might consider developing strategies for including nonresident fathersin their programs.In addition,programscould be developed that help to involve fathersin their children's lives. These programscould create settings for increasing opportunitiesfor positive father-adolescent interaction, such as involvement in sharedrecreationalactivities or communityprojects. Our results suggest that it may be advantageousto consider fathers as resources in efforts to improve developmental outcomes among adolescents.Effortsto increasethe focus on fathersand theirrole in healthy adolescent developmentmay be a useful strategyfor family interventionand policy.
339
References Abelson, R. (1985). A variance paradox: When a little is a lot. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 129-133. Allen, W. (1978). The searchfor applicabletheories of Black family life. Journal of Marriageand the Family,1, 117-129. Amato, P. R. (1993). Children'sadjustmentto divorce:Theories, hypotheses, and empiricalsupport.Journal of Marriageand the Family,55, 23-38. Amato, P. R., & Keith, B. (1991). Parentaldivorce and the well-being of children:A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 100, 26-46. Auletta, K. (1982). The underclass.New York:RandomHouse. Austin, R. L. (1992). Race, female headship, and delinquency: A longitudinal analysis.Justice Quarterly,9, 585-607. Barbarin,0. A., & Soler, R. E. (1993). Behavioral,emotional, and academic adjustment in a probabilitysample of African American children age, gender, and family structure.Journal of Black Psychology, 19, 42-56. Barber,B. L., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). Long-terminfluences of divorce and single parentingon adolescent family- and work-relatedvalues, beliefs, and aspirations. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 108-126. Baron, R. M., & Kenny,D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediatorvariabledistinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology,51, 1173-1182. Baumrind,D. (1991). The influence of parentingstyle on adolescentcompetence and substanceuse. Journal of EarlyAdolescence, 11(1), 56-95. Brook, J. S., Brook, D. W., Gordon, A. S., Whiteman,M., & Cohen, P. (1990). The psychosocial etiology of adolescent drug use: A family interactionalapproach.Psychology Monographs,116, 111-267. Brook, J. S., Whiteman,M., & Gordon, A. S. (1985). Fatherabsence, perceived family characteristics,and stage of druguse in adolescence. BritishJournal of DevelopmentalPsychology,3, 87-94. Brook, J. S., Whiteman,M., Gordon,A. S., & Brook, D. W. (1983). Parentalcorrelates of adolescent marijuana use in the context of the mother-son and parentaldyads. Genetic Psychology Monographs,108, 197-213. Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., Gordon, A. S., & Brook, D. W. (1986). Fatherdaughteridentificationand its impact on her personalityand drug use. DevelopmentalPsychology,20, 1111-1119. Buchanan,C. M., Maccoby,E. E., & Dornbusch,S. M. (1996). Adolescents after divorce. Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress. Byram, 0. W., & Fly, J. W. (1984). Family structure,race, and adolescents' alcohol use: A researchnote. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 10, 467-478. Castro,F. G., Maddahian,E., Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler,P. M. (1987). A multivariatemodel of the determinantsof cigarette smoking among adolescents. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,28, 273-289. Chatters,L. M., Taylor,R. J., & Jayakody,R. (1994). Fictive kinship relationsin Black extended families. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 25, 297313. Chilcoat, H. D., & Anthony,J. C. (1996). Impact of parentmonitoringon initiations of drug use through late childhood. Journal of American Academy of Child and AdolescentPsychiatry,35, 91-100. Cooksey, E. C., & Fondell, M. M. (1996). Spending time with his kids: Effects of family structureon fathers' and children's lives. Journal of Marriage and the Family,58, 693-707. Coontz, S. (1992). The way we never were: Americanfamilies and the nostalgia trap. New York:Basic Books. Cooper, M. L., Pierce, R. S., & Tidwell, M. C. 0. (1995). Parental drinking problems and adolescent offspring substance use: Moderatingeffects of demographicand familial factors.Psychology of AddictiveBehaviors, 9, 36-52. Covey, L. S., & Tam, 0. (1990). Depressive mood, the single-parenthome, and adolescent cigarette smoking. American Journal of Public Health, 80, 13301333. Danziger, S. K., & Radin, N. (1990). Absent does not equal uninvolved:Predictors of fatheringin teen motherfamilies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 636-642. Davies, P. T., & Cummings,E. M. (1994). Maritalconflict and child adjustment: An emotional securityhypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 387-411. Derogatis, L. R., & Spencer, P. M. (1982). The Brief SymptomInventory(BSI): Administration,scoring and procedures manual-I. Baltimore, MD: Division of Medical Psychology, Johns HopkinsUniversity School of Medicine. Dornbusch,S. M., Carlsmith,J. M., Bushwall, S. J., Ritter,P. L., Leiderman,H., Hastorf, A. H., & Gross, R. T. (1985). Single parents, extended households, and the control of adolescents. ChildDevelopment,45, 326-341. Dornbusch,S. M., Rlitter,P. L., & Steinberg,L. (1991). Communityinfluences on the relation of family statuses to adolescent school performance:Differences between African Americans and non-HispanicWhites. AmericanJournal of Education,99, 543-567.
340
Ensminger,M. E. (1990). Sexual activity and problem behaviors among Black urbanadolescents.Child Development,61, 2032-2046. Ensminger,M. E., Kellum, S. G., & Rubin,B. R. (1983). School and family origins of delinquency:Comparisonsby sex. In K. T. Van Dusen & S. Mednick (Eds.), Prospective studies of crime and delinquency (pp. 73-97). Boston, MA: KluwerNijhoff. Ensminger,M. E., & Slusarcick,A. L. (1992). Paths to high school dropout:A longitudinalstudy of a first-gradecohort. Sociology of Education,65, 95-113. Farnworth,M. (1984). Family structure,family attributes,and delinquencyin a sample of low-income, minority males and females. Journal of Youthand Adolescence, 13, 349-364. Flewelling, R. L., & Bauman, K. E. (1990). Family structureas a predictorof initial substance use and sexual intercoursein early adolescence. Journal of Marriageand the Family,52, 171-181. Forehand,R., Miller, K. S., Dutra, R., & Chance, M. W. (1997). Role of parenting in adolescent deviant behavior:Replication across and within two ethnic groups.Journalof Consultingand Clinical Psychology,65(6), 1036-1041. Forehand,R., & Smith, K. A. (1986). Who depresses whom? A look at the relationship between adolescent mood and maternal and paternal mood. Child StudyJournal, 16, 19-23. Forehand, R., Wierson, M., Thomas, A. M., Armistead, L., Kempton, T., & Neighbors, B. (1991). The role of family stressorsand parentrelationshipson adolescent functioning. Journal of AmericanAcademy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,30, 316-322. Forney,M. A., Forney,P. D., Davis, H., Van Hoose, J., Cafferty,T., & Allen, H. (1984). A discriminantanalysis of adolescent problem drinking. Journal of Drug Education,14, 347-355. Furstenberg,F. F. (1990). Divorce and the American family. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 379-403. Gray-Ray,P., & Ray, M. C. (1990). Juvenile delinquencyin the Black community. Youthand Society,22, 67-84. Harper,J. F., & Ryder,J. M. (1986). Parentalbonding, self-esteem, and peer acceptance in father-absentmale adolescents. AustralianJournal of Sex, Marriage, and Family,7, 17-26. James, S. A., Strogatz, D. S., Wing, S. B., & Ramsey, D. L. (1987). Socioeconomic status, John Henryism,and hypertensionin Blacks and Whites. American Journalof Epidemiology,126, 664-673. Jemmott, L. S., & Jemmott, J. B. (1992). Family structure,parentalstrictness, and sexual behavior among inner-city Black male adolescents. Journal of AdolescentResearch, 7, 192-207. King, V. (1994). Nonresidentfatherinvolvementand child well-being. Journalof FamilyIssues, 15, 78-96. Kotelchuck,M. (1976). The infant'srelationshipto the father:Experimentalevidence. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of thefather in child development(pp. 329-344). New York:Wiley. Lamb, M. E. (1986). The changingroles of fathers.In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), Thefather's role: Appliedperspectives(pp. 3-27). New York:Wiley. Lamborn,S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg,L., & Dornbusch,S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustmentamong adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian,indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62, 1049-1065. Levine, J. A., & Pitt, E. W. (1995). New expectations:Communitystrategiesfor responsiblefatherhood. New York:Families and WorkInstitute. Malkus, B. M. (1994). Family dynamic and structuralcorrelates of adolescent substanceabuse:A comparisonof families of non-substanceabusersand substance abusers.Journalof Childand AdolescentSubstanceAbuse, 3, 39-52. Maton, K. I., & Zimmerman,M. A. (1992). Psychosocial predictorsof substance use among urbanBlack male adolescents.Drugs and Society,6, 79-113. McAdoo, J. (1981). Black fathers and child interaction.In L. Gray (Ed.), Black men (pp. 115-130). NewburyPark,CA: Sage. McLanahan, S. S. (1985). Family structure and the reproduction of poverty. AmericanJournalof Sociology, 90, 873-901. McLoyd, V. C. (1990). The impact of economic hardshipon Black families and children:Psychological distress, parenting,and socioemotional development. Child Development,61, 311-346. Moynihan,D. P. (1965). The Negrofamily: The case for national action. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Planning and Research, U.S. Department of Labor. Moos, R. H., & Moos, D. S. (1981). Family EnvironmentScale manual. Palo Alto, CA: ConsultingPsychologists. Mott, F. L. (1990). When is a fatherreally gone? Paternalchild contactin fatherabsenthomes. Demography,27, 499-517. Murray,D. M., Roche, L. M., Goldman,A. I., & Whitbeck,J. (1988). Smokeless tobacco use among ninth gradersin a north-centralmetropolitanpopulation: Cross-sectional and prospective associations with age, gender, race, famXXy structure,and other druguse. PreventiveMedicine, 17, 449-460.
Family Relations
Neapolitan,J. (1981). Parentalinfluences on aggressive behavior:A social learning approach.Adolescence, 16, 831-840. Newcomer, S., & Udry,J. R. (1987). Parentalmaritalstatuseffects on adolescent sexual behavior.Journalof Marriage and the Family,49, 235-240. Ogbu, J. V. (1981). Origins of human competence: A cultural-ecological perspective. ChildDevelopment,52, 413-429. Parish,T. S. (1991). Ratings of self and parentsby youth: Are they affected by family status,genderand birthorder?Adolescence, 26, 105-112. Parish,T. S., & Taylor,J. C. (1979). The impactof divorce and subsequentfather absence on children's and adolescents' self-concepts. Journal of Youthand Adolescence, 8, 427-432. Partridge,S., & Kotler, T. (1987). Self-esteem and adjustmentin adolescents from bereaved,divorced, and intact families: Family type versus family environment.AustralianJournalof Psychology,39, 223-234. Pearson,J. L., Hunter,A. G., Ensminger,M. E., & Kellam, S. G. (1990). Black grandmothersin multigenerationalhouseholds: Diversity in family structure and parentinginvolvementin the Woodlawncommunity.Child Development, 61, 434-442. Pearson, J. L., lalongo, N. S., Hunter,A. G., & Kellam, S. G. (1994). Family structureand aggressive behaviorin a populationof urbanelementaryschool children.Journal of the AmericanAcademyof Child and AdolescentPsychiatry,33, 540-548. Phares,V. (1992). Where'spoppa?The relativelack of attentionto the role of fathers in child and adolescent psychopathology.American Psychologist, 47, 656-664. Procidano, M. E., & Heller, K. (1983). Measures of perceived social support from friends and from family: Three validationstudies. AmericanJournal of CommunityPsychology, 11, 1-24. Rhodes, J. E., & Jason, L. A. (1990). A social stress model of substanceabuse. Journalof Consultingand Clinical Psychology,58, 395-401. Sampson,R. J. (1987). UrbanBlack violence: The effect of male joblessness and family disruption.AmericanJournalof Sociology, 93, 348-382. Shulman, S., & Seiffge-Krenke, I. (1997). Fathers and adolescents: Developmental and clinical perspectives. New York:Routledge. Siegal, M. (1987). Are sons and daughterstreated more differently by fathers than by mothers?DevelopmentalReview,7, 183-209. Stein, J. A., Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler P. M. (1986). Stability and change in personality:A longitudinalstudy from early adolescence to young adulthood. Journalof Researchin Personality,20, 276-29 1. Steinberg,L. (1987). Single parents,stepparents,and the susceptibilityof adolescents to antisocialpeer pressure.ChildDevelopment,58, 269-275. Steinberg, L., Elmen, J. D., & Mounts, N. S. (1989). Authoritativeparenting, psychosocial maturity,and academic success among adolescents. Child Development,60, 1424-1436. Steinberg,L., Mounts, N. S., Lamborn,S. D., & Dornbusch,S. M. (1991). Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Journalof Researchon Adolescence, 1, 19-36. Steir, H., & Tienda, M. (1993). Are men marginalto the family? In J. C. Hood (Ed.), Men, workandfamily (pp. 23-44). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage. Stern,M., Northman,J. E., & Van Slyck, M. R. (1984). Fatherabsence and adolescent problem behaviors:Alcohol consumption,drug use, and sexual activity. Adolescence, 19, 301-312. Stice, E., Barrera,M., & Chassin, L. (1993). Relation of parentalsupportand control to adolescents' externalizing symptomatology and substance use: A longitudinal examination of curvilinear effects. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,21(6), 609-629. Taylor, R. D. (1996). Adolescents' perceptions of kinship support and family management practices: Association with adolescent adjustment in African Americanfamilies. DevelopmentalPsychology,32, 687-695. Taylor, R., Casten, R., & Flickinger, S. M. (1993). Influence of kinship social supporton the parentingexperiences and psychosocial adjustmentof African Americanadolescents.DevelopmentalPsychology,29, 382-388. Taylor,R. J., Chatters,L. M., Tucker,M. B., & Lewis, E. (1990). Developments in researchon Black families: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family,52, 993-1014. Taylor,R. D., & Rogers, D. (1995). Kinshipsupportand maternaland adolescent well-being in economically disadvantagedAfrican American families. Child Development,66, 1585-1597.
1998, Vol. 47, No. 4
Thomas, G., Farrell,M. P., & Barnes, G. M. (1996). The effects of single-mother families and nonresidentfatherson delinquencyand substanceabuse in Black and White adolescents.Journalof Marriage and the Fanmily, 58, 884-894. Tienda, M., & Angel, R. (1982). Headship and household composition among Blacks, Hispanics, and otherWhites. Social Forces, 61, 508-531. Turner,R. A., Irwin,C. E. Jr.,& Millstein, S. G. (1991). Family structure,family process, and experimentingwith substances during adolescence. Journal of Researchon Adolescence, 1, 93-105. Turner,R. A., Irwin,C. E., Tschann,J. M., & Millstein, S. G. (1993). Autonomy, relatedness, and the early initiation of health risk behaviors in early adolescence. Health Psychology,12, 200-208. Vazsonyi,A. T., & Flannery,D. J. (1997). Early adolescentdelinquentbehaviors: Associations with family and school domains. Journal of Early Adolescence, 17, 271-293. Weintraub,K. J., & Gold, M. (1991). Monitoringand delinquency.CriminalBehavior and Mental Health, 1, 266-281. Werner,E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcomingthe odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood.Ithaca,NY: CornellUniversityPress. Wills, T. A. (1986). Stress and coping in early adolescence: Relationshipto substance abusein urbanschool samples.Health Psychology, 18, 383-406. Wilson, M. N. (1986). Perceivedparentalactivity of mothers,fathers,and grandmothers in three-generationalBlack families. The Journal of Black Psychology, 12, 43-59. Wilson, M. N., & Tolson, T. F. J. (1988). Single parentingin the context of threegenerationalBlack families. In E. M. Hetherington& J. D. Arasteh(Eds.) Impact of divorce, single parenting, and stepparenting on children (pp. 215-241). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Wilson, W. J. (1991). Studying inner-city social dislocations: The challenge of public agendaresearch.AmericanSociological Review,56, 1-14. Windle, M. (1992). A longitudinalstudy of stress bufferingfor adolescentproblem behaviors.DevelopmentalPsychology,28, 522-530. Zimilies, H., & Lee, V. (1991). Adolescent family structure and educational progress.DevelopmentalPsychology,27, 314-320. Zimmerman,M. A., Ramirez-Valles,J., Zapert,K. M., & Maton, K. I. (1998). A longitudinalstudy of stress-bufferingeffectsfor urbanAfricanAmericanmale adolescentproblembehaviors.Manuscriptsubmittedfor publication. Zimmerman,M. A., Salem, D. A., & Maton, K. I. (1995). Family structureand psychosocial correlates among urban African American adolescent males. ChildDevelopment,66, 1598-1613. Zimmerman,M. A., Steinman,K. J., & Rowe, K. J. (in press). Violence among urbanAfrican American adolescents: The protective effects of parentalsupport. In X. B. Arriaga& S. Oskamp(Eds.), Addressingcommunityproblems: Researchand intervention.ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.
Deborah A. Salem is an Assistant Professor in the EcologicalCommunityPsychology Programat Michigan State University. Her researchfocuses on naturaland alternativecommunity supports for high-riskpopulations. Marc A. Zimmermanis an Associate Professorin the School of Public Health Departmentof Health Behavior and Health Education and the CombinedProgramin Educationand Psychology at the University of Michigan. His research interests include adolescenthealth and resiliency, and empowermenttheory.He is editorof Health Education& Behavior Paul C. Notaroreceived his Ph.D. in DevelopmentalPsychology from the University of Michigan. His researchinterests include attachmentrelationshipsacross the lifespan, and children's understandingof psychogenic illness. Received 3-23-1998 Revised & Resubmitted6-2-1998 Accepted 6-4-1998
341