'CHAPTER 1 Parent-Child Relationships During Adolescence BRETT LAURSEK AND W ANDREW COLLINS No aspect of adolescent development ha& received more attention from the public and from researchers than parent-child relationships. Much of the research indicates that despite altered patterns of interaction, relationships with parents remain important social and emotional resources well beyond the childhood years (for recent reviews, see Collins & Steinberg, 2006; Smetana, Campione-Barr, & Metzger, 2006). Yet it is a challenge to reconcile this conclusion with the widespread perception that parent-child relationships decline in quality and influence over the course of the adolescent years. The aim of this chapter is to specify the characteristics and processes of parent-child relationships that sustain the centrality of the family amid the extensive changes of adolescence. We will argue that it is the content and the quality ofthese relationships, rather than the actions of either parent or adolescent alone, that determine the nature and extent of family influences on adolescent development. We will also argue that divergence between academic prescriptions and public perceptions about parent-adolescent relationships can be traced to the relative emphasis that each places on potential individual differences. The chapter reflects three premises that have emerged from the sizable literature on parent-child relationships during adolescence. First, relationships with parents undergo transformations across the adolescent years that set the stage for less hierarchical interactions during adulthood. Second, family relationships have far-reaching implications for concurrent and long-term relationships with friends. romantic partners. teacher~. and other adults, as well as for individual mental health, psychosocial adjustment school performance. and eventual occupational choice and success. Third, contextual and cultural variations significantly shape family relationships and experiences that, in turn, affect the course and outcomes of development both during and beyond adolescence. The chapter is divided into four main sections. The first section outlines theoretical views of parent-adolescent relationships and their developmental significance. The second section focuses on the behavior of parents and children and on interpersonal processes between them. with particular attention given to the distinctive characteristics of parentchild relationships and how these relationships change during adolescence. The third section considers whether and how parent-child relationships and their transformations are significant for adolescent development. The fourth section focuses on variability in parentchild relationships during adolescence as' a function of structural. economic. and demographic distinctions among families. THEORIES OF PARENT-ADOLESCENT RELATIONSHIPS AND THEIR INFLUENCE For heuristic purposes. we have divided theories of parent-adolescent relationships into two groups: those that describe changes in 3 4 Parent-Child Relationships During Adolescence relationships acros~ the adolescent years and those thaI describe the influence of parenting and parenH:hild relationships. The first set of theories i~ dedicated to explaining the significant transformations that take place in parent~ adolescent relationships. The second set of theories is dedicated to explaining the contributions that parents and parent~child relationships make to individual adolescent adjustment. Theories Addressing Relationship Transformations Conceptual models oftransformation in parentadolescent relationships vary in whether their primary focus is on the adolescent or on the relationship (Laursen & Collins, 20(4). The prevalent perspective for most of the last century was that adolescents' physical. cognitive, and social maturation undermined patterns of interaction in close relationships that were established during childhood. The implications of individual change varied from one theoretical perspective to another, the common focus being the relative turbulence and instability of relationships during adolescence relative to those during childhood. More recent models emphasize stable features of parent-child relationships. Enduring bonds forged between parents and children are assumed to be the foundation for continuity in the functional properties of the relationship that transcend age-related changes in the characteristics of participants and alterations in the content and form of their interactions. Models ofIndividual Change Theories of individual change focus on disruptions caused by adolescent maturation and their potential to destabilize parent-child relationships. These models hold that changes in adolescents provoke changes in families. Maturationisl models assume that a period of diminished closeness and heightened conflict accompanies adolescent maturation and that these perturbations continue until parent-adolescent relationships and roles are renegotiated. Most models hold that a rapprochement follows this period of normative relationship turbulence (Collins. 1(95). Conflict should become less frequent and better managed, closeness should increase. and social interactions should grow more sophisticated and constructive as a result of transformations in relationships. Psychoanalytic theorists (A. Freud, 1958; S. Freud, 1(2111949) assumed that hormonal changes at puberty give rise to unwelcome Oedipal urges that foster impulse control problems and anxiety, as well as rebelliousne~s and distance from the family. More recent psychoanalytic formulations place greater emphasis on adolescent autonomy striving and ego identity development than on impulse control (BIos, 1979; Erikson. 1(68). These later models converge on the dual contentions that awareness of parental fallibility (deidealization) and psychic emancipation drive a wedge between parents and children thal is exacerbated by the inner turmoil brought on by adolescent hormonal fluetuations. This account implies that heightened conflict and diminished closeness inevitably follow maturational changes. as adolescents grapple with psychic disturbances. Child withdrawal and disengagement should continue into young adulthood, although a measure of closeness may be reestablished after parents are no longer perceived as a threat to the ego, sometime after identity achievement is complete and intimate relationships with peers are established. Evolutionary views also emphasize the role of puberty in transforming relationships, but propose that change processes stem from physical and cognitive advances that are .designed to encourage adolescents to separate from the family in order to seek mates elsewhere (Steinberg, 1(89). In this view, adolescent maturation threatens parental dominance, resulting in heightened conflict with and diminished closeness to parents. This prompts youth to turn away from their family to be comfOlted by peers who are experiencing similar relationship disruptions. Some envision a reciprocal process. whereby independence hastens pubertal maturation and vice versa Theories of Parent-Adolescent Relationships and Their Innuence 5 (Belsky, Steinberg. & Draper, 1991). Although evolutionary views stipulate no mechanism for reestablishing parent-child closeness during young adulthood, it may be that parental investment in offspring and the warmth experienced in earlier periods provide a foundation of positive affect and regard that enables both parties to transcend the difficulties of adolescence (Gray & Steinberg, 1999). Improved relations should follow the child's transition to parenthood to the extent that grandparents are interested in providing resources and assistance to help ensure the survival and reproductive success of the next generation (Crosnoe & Elder, 2002; Smith & Drew, 2002). Other maturational models give cognitive development a central role in parent-adolescent relationship changes. In these accounts, advances in abstract and complex reasoning foster a more nuanced appreciation of interpersonal distinctions and an increasingly egalitarian view of relationships that were previously . oriented around the unilateral authority of adults (e.g., Selman, 1980; Youniss & Smollar, 1985). As a result. adolescents increasingly aspire to reciprocity and equal power in their interactions with parents. The same cognitive advances underlie the emerging tendency to consider certain issues as matters of personal volition, even though they previously were under parental jurisdiction (Smetana, 1988). Parents' reluctance to transform the hierarchical relationships established in childhood into more egalitarian ones creates conflict and curtails closeness. Eventually, familial roles are renegotiated to acknowledge the child's enhanced status and maturity. Conflict should dissipate as relationship roles and expectations are realigned, but the long-term implications for relationship closeness and harmony depend on whether parents and children are successful in revising their relationship in a mutually satisfactory manner. Afourth group of theorists view physical and cognitive maturation as sources of constraints and demands on adolescents but give equal emphasis to changes in social expectations and the need to adapt to a variety of new situations during age-graded transition~. Four kinds of moderated maturationist models typify this approach. The first set of models implicates changes in parents as the source of alterationi> in parent-adolescent relationships (Steinberg. 2001). Parents' developmental issues related to careers, per!>onal goals. and future orientation can exacerbate the difficulty of the adjustments required in parent-adolescent relationships. Parents are also confronted with diminished or extinguished physical and reproductive capabilities and fading allure at a time when adolescent sexuality and attractiveness are blossoming, both of which may aggravate conflict and dis, engagement (Steinberg & Steinberg, 1994). A strong orientation toward work and investments in other nonfamilial domains could mean that parents view adolescents' movement toward autonomy as positive, ameliorating some of the obstacles to relationship transformation (Silverberg & Steinberg. 1990). Reestablishing positive relationship ties may be difficult for those who experience the most disruption, particularly if parents are unable or unwilling to addre3s factors in their own lives that exacerbated transitional turmoil. Two related theories emphasize the role of parents' beliefs and expectations in moderating age-related changes in relationships with adolescent children. Generalized or categorybased beliefs models (Eccles, 1992; Holmbeck, 1996) posit a straightforward link between parents' stereotypes and expectations about adolescence in general and parents' relations with their own adolescent children. Beliefs become a self-fulfilling prophesy: Those who expect adolescence to be a period of turmoil are more likely to behave in a manner that provokes relationship deterioration compared with those who expect adolescence to be relatively benign. The expectancy violation-realignment model (Collins, 1995) begins with the assumption that interactions between parents and children are mediated by cognitive and emotional processes associated with expectancies about the behavior of the other person. In periods Ii Parent-Child nclationships During Adolescence of rapid developmental change. :,uch as the transition to adole&cence. parent~' expectancie~ often are violated. In younger age groups. change may occur more gradually. so that discrepancies are both les" common and les~ salient than in periods of rapid multiple changes. such as adolescence, Expectancy violations are assumed to be a source of conflict that eventually stimulate~ parents to realign their expectations, It follows that changes in the tenor of parent-{;hild relationships over the course ofadolescence will vary as afunction of the accuracy of parental expectations; those with unrealistic expectations should experience frequent violations and more relationship disruption than those with accurate expectations. Expectancie" should also shape relationship recovery. Parents who foresee improved relations. particularly those who anticipate altered expressions of relationship closeness, are more likely to successfully repair relationship~ than those who expect irreparable damage and those who expect a return to the perceived tranquility of childhood. The second set of moderated maturationist models implicates changes in parent-older sibling relationships in alterations in parentyounger sibling relationships, Models differ in terms of their postulated consequences. for younger siblings. According to the spillover model. changes in relations between firstborn children and parents dictate the timing of changes in relations between later born children and parents (Larson & Almeida, 1999). Relationships with later born children deteriorate and are renegotiated concurrent with (or shortly after) relationships with firstborn children. Thu~. child maturation is more strongly related to parent-child relationship change in firstborn than in later born adolescents. Several mechani~m~ besides child maturation may be responsible for changes in relationships between later born children and parents. including sibling modeling and imitation. and a parental desire 10 avoid differential treatment. Parent-adolescent relationship decline and recovery may depend on the extent to which firstborn and later born children share the burden of conflict and role renegotiation, Relationships between parents and "me too" children should be more resilient because firstborns are apt to bear the brunt of negativity with parents and because younger children may continue to look to parents to satisfy more of their emotional needs (Whiteman. McHale. & erouter. 2003 J. A related theory also postulates birth order differences in changes in parent-adolescent relationships, The learning-from-experience model argues that parents hone their skiJl~ with fIrstborn children and are thus better able to cope constructively with developmental changes in later born children (Whiteman el al.. 2(03). According to this view. it is the magnitude of parent-child transitions that differs between firstborns and later borns. not the timing of change. Declines in warmth and increases in conflict should be greater for parents and firstborn children than for parenb and later born children because parents have learned how to navigate transitions during adolescence, Improved parenting skills should not only minimize relationship disruption but should also help relationships with later born children recover more quickly and perhaps more satisfactorily than relationships with firstborn children. The third moderated maturationist model implicates parent and child gender in changes in parent-{;hild relationships. The gender intensification model argues that with the onset of pUberty. parents increasingly assume responsibility for the socialization of same-sex offspring (Hill & Lynch. 1983), The original model suggested that parent--<:hild closeness increases in same-sex dyads and decreases in other-sex dyads. Another possibility. however, is that same-sex parent-{;hild relationships become closer than other-sex relationships because. although absolute levels of closeness decline in both. the latter deteriorates more than the former. The model also has implications for parenl-{;hild connict: With the advent of puberty. :-.ame-sex parent--<:hild relationships should experience 7Theories of Parent-Adolescent Relationships and Their Influence greater tunnoil than other-sex relationships. as conflict and role negotiation are focused on the parent who has most of the socialization responsibilities. Notwithstanding these different interpretations. there is general agreement that by the end of the adolescent yearE, children should have better relations with their same-sex parent than with their other-sex parent. The fourth moderated maturationist model implicates schools and other extrafamilial peer settings in alterations in pareat-adolescent relationships (Simmons & Blyth, 1987). According to this view, maturity-related expectations vary across peer contexts, accelerating or delaying demands for realigning relationships with parents. Settings that encourage contact between early adolescents and late adolescents may elicit parent-child relationship disturbance earlier than settings that limit contacts to same-age adolescents because the fonner may prompt young adolescents to seek greater rights and privileges than the latter. Thus, exposure to older peers may hasten the onset of parent-child relationship change and lengthen the period of estrangement and heightened conflict with parents. Reestablishing positive parent-child relationships after eady, off-time transformations may be difficult in cases where closeness was discontinued prematurely and followed by ~ prolonged period of discord and dissatisfaction. Models ofRelationship Continuity Some models of parent-adolescent relationships focus on forces that promote stability within the dyad, rather than on the impact of individual change on the dyad. The most prominent example, attachment theory. emphasizes the strong emotional ties between parents and adolescents. As a mutually regulated system, parents and children work jointly to maintain the relationship in a manner consistent with cognitive representations derived from their history of interactions with significant others (Bowlby, 1969). Thus, the quality of parent-child relationships is presumed to be stable over time. Manifestations of attachment undergo gradual developmental transformations, but these changes are consistent with the underlying quality of the relationship, which tends to be durable (Ainsworth, J989). Attachment in adolescence is distinctive from attachment in earlier relationships, both behaviorally and cognitively. Strong emotional ties to parents may be indicated in subtle and private ways, including friendly teasing and small acts of concern, as well as in more obvious connections such as shared activities (particularly with fathers) and selfdisclosure (particularly to mothers). Cognitive advances in adolescence make possible an integrated, overarching view regarding experiences that involve caregiving, caretaking, and confidence in the availability of significant others (Allen & Land, 1999). Consequently, whereas younger children view attachment in terms that are more specific to the parent-child relationship, adolescents are increasingly attuned to the similarities and differences between relationships with parents, other significant adults, friends, and romantic partners. The. functions of attachment relationships for adolescents, however, are parallel to those for young children. In both cases, parents serve as a secure base for exploring the environment. Whereas security facilitates the toddler's exploration of the immediate environment, security affords the adolescent a sense of confidence in family support for explorations outside of the family, including the formation of new relationships. Security also allows adolescents an opportunity to explore intellectual and emotional autonomy from the family, which includes the realization that parents are fallible and an appreciation of the advantages of amicably resolving disagreements (Allen el aI., 2003). Put simply, the form of secure base behavior changes with age but the function remains essentially the same. A key implication of attachment formulations is that relationship reorganization occurs gradually. Adolescents and parents with a history of sensitive, responsive interactions 8 Parent-Child Relati(Jnship~ During Adolescence and ~trong emotional bond~ should mall1tain these posillve features throughout adolescence. although supportive interactions may be reformulated a., the child matures. Adolescents and parents with a history of difficult. unresponsive interactions are abo likely to experience continuity in the quality of their interactions. Dismissi \'e youth may seek to distance themselves from parents as soon as possibk. whereas preoccupied youth may be unwilling or unable to embrace demands for greater autonomy made by parents. The:-,e families may experience an increase in connict and a decline in warmth. but this does Ilol necessarily signal worsening relationships. but may instead represent a new manifestation of insecurity. Attachment theory docs not rule out the possibility that increasing adolescent autonomy may gi ve rise to modest age-related changes in the frequency with which affection and disagreement are expressed, but these changes are thought to reflect shifts in forms of expression, not in the fundamental quality of relationships between parents and children (Allen & Land. 1999: Allen & Manning, 2007; Carlivati & Collins, 2007). Greater significance is attached to the tenor of interactions between parents and children and the degree to which participants treat each other with mutual regard. These and other indices of relationship quality are directly tied to attachment security. Stability in attachment security implies stability in relationship quality both over time and across individuals. Similar predictions characterize develop, mental applications of interdependence and social relations models (Laursen & Bukowski. 1997: Reis. Collins. & Berscheid, 2(00). Interdependence is a hallmark of all close relationships and is manifested in frequent. strong. and diverse interconnections maintained over an extended time (Kelley et aI., 191<3). In an interdependent relationship. partners engage in mutually influential exchanges and share the belief that their connections are reciprocal and enduring. These enduring interconnections are internalized by participants and organized into mental schema~ that shape expectation~ concerning future interactions. Cognitive ad\ances during adolescence give rise to u realization that the rules of reciprocity and social exchange govern interaction~ with friends but not parents (Youniss & Smollar. 19X5), Greater autonomy provide~ an impetus for adolescenb to seek changes in reiation"hips with parent~ so that interaction;; incorporate many of the same principles of sucial exchange. Although the affiliation remains involuntary or obligatory. there is great variability in the degree to which parents and chi Idren remain interconnected during late adolescence and early adulthood. To the extent that affiliations become increasingly voluntary. exchanges may be revised to better reflect their costs and benefits to participants. The magnitude of change depends on the potential for children to lead independent lives: Children (of all ages) who are utterly dependent on theil' parents are less likely to insist upon equitable exchanges than children who are (potentially) self-sufficient. Patterns of communication and interdependence established during childhood are assumed to carry forward into adolescence. As the child becomes more autonomous. the degree to which parent-child relationships change depends on the degree to which participants consider their exchanges to be fair. which is closely linked to perceptions of relationship quality (Laursen & Collins. 2004). Increased connict may occur in poor quality relationships, along with adec1ine in closeness. as adolescents expres1' a growing dissatisfaction with unequal treatment and unfavorable outcomes (Smetana. 19(9). Participants in tllese relationships are usually ill equipped to navigate these challenges hecause they lack a history of collaborative interactions and a constructive process for resolving disputes. High-quality relationships. however. may change little during adolescence. or may even improve. as participants build on beneficent interaction~ to adjust exchanges in a mutually satisfactory manner. In sum. patterns of ~ocial Theories of Parent-Adolescent Relationships and Their Influence '" exchange in close relationships are resistant to change because they are sustained by a web of interdependencies. When adolescents push to revise interactions with parents, change comes slowly and in a manner that typically extends trajectories of relationship quality from antecedent periods. Interplay between continuiry and discontinuity is a feature of parent-child relationships across the life span. Most models of parent-adolescent relationships acknowledge this interplay: few emphasize one without the other. Our depiction of models in terms of their relative emphasis on relationship change and stability obscures many theoretical subtleties, but it underscores an important conceptual distinction. Theories that focus on individual development inevitably emphasize universal changes in adolescents and their concomitant effects on relationships with parents. Theories that focus on relationship development inevitably focus on distinctive trajectories of parent-child relationships and their continuity with prior relationship functioning. These different orientations have important implications for models that describe the role parent-child relationships play in adolescent outcomes. Conceptual Models of the Influence of Parents and Parent-Child Relationships on Adolescent Development In this section we summarize conceptual models that address associations between parents, parent-child relationships, and adolescent development. Most models share the assumption that parents (and relationships with parents) shape adolescent outcomes, but there is little agreement on the particulars. We begin with a description of the various modes of influence, followed by an overview of proposed influence mechanisms. We then discuss hypotheses concerning the direction and magnitude of influence attributable to parents and parent-child relationships, closing with a summary of theories describing developmental variations in patterns of influence. Modes of Influence Approaches that describe modes of influence attempt to trace the paths through which parents shape child outcomes. Theories tend to be written in terms of concepts and processes, using the vocabulary of ordinary language. This differs from tests of hypotheses, which model links among variables using analyric terms. Consequently, the conceptual underpinnings of analytic models of modes of influence tend to be implicit rather than explicit. An explication of these analytic assumptions follows. Perhaps the most obvious distinction in the analytic approach is that between correlated paths and causal paths. Some may be surprised that this issue remains a point of contention, given the extensive literature on parent-child relationships, but the issue continues to generate vigorous and legitimate debate. The argument thar parent socialization contributes little to child outcomes hinges largely on the assertion that (I) most research on the topic is correlational; (2) causal designs yield sparse effects: and (3) genetically informed designs attribute minimal variance in child outcomes to shared environments (Harris, 1998). Scholars making the case that parents play an important role in child outcomes respond that (I) nonexperimental longitudinal designs reveal meaningful changes in child outcomes as a function of antecedent parent influence; (2) natural experiments and interventions reveal pronounced effects for parenting: and (3) traditional studies of heredity overlook gene-environment interactions and correlations, thereby underestimating parent socialization effects (Collins, Maccoby, Steinberg, Hetherington, & Bornstein, 2000). Both sides agree that little new can be learned from cross-sectionaL correlational studies of parent behaviors and child outcomes. In the most frequently proposed and tested models, parenting or parent-adolescent relationships are treated as predictor variables. Strictly speaking, parents are posited to be causal influences in these models, particularly (as is usualiy the case) when paths are not j ~~. III Parenl-t:hild Relatiunships Durin/.: Adolescence re\ erseu to con,ider parent behaviors as outcome variable;.. Influence paths may be direct or mediated, Direct paths imply that changes in parent behaviors or in parent-adolescent relationships are responsible for changes in adoie,cent outcomes, whereas indirect paths suggest thaI parent \'ariables act on proximal variable., (e.g,. home environment) thaL in turn. havc conseyuences for youth development. Mediated modeb have also been proposed in which parent variable;. serve as mediators, typically between contextual variables (e,g.. neighborhood distress) and adolescent outcome", Linear and nonlinear relations between parent variables and adolescent development have been proposed for both direct and mediated models. In linear models, incremental changes in parenting or in parent-adolescent relationships are associated with commensurate changes in adolescent outcomes. In nonlinear models. the effects of the parent variable are not constant across its range. Often, the relation posited is one in which parenting or parenl--adolescent relationships have linear (or even exponential) effects below a certain threshold. but above that threshold, effects of the parent variable are weak, nonexistent, or reversed (Hoff. Laursen, & Bridges, in press). Consider parent-adolescent conflict. which is thought to be beneficial at moderate levels. but detrimental at high levels (Adams & Laursen, 2(07). Analytic models are not always as they appear: Studies that focus on one part of the range of a parenting variable (e.g.. harsh parenting) and ignore difrerences outside that range implicitly model nonlinear or threshold eHects. despite the appearance of tesling a simple linear model. Direct and mediated parental effects may be ascribed 10 heredity and to socialization. The once common practice of assessing effects with an additive model that apportions unique \ariance to genes (plus error). shared environments (parent innuence). and nonshared ellvironmellts (nonparemal influence) has given way to more nuanced strategies. As a conseyuence. COil temporary approaches recognize the need for multipie methodologies to pull apart variables that typically go together (Rutter. Pickles. Murray. & Eaves. 200 I ). Although few dispute the conclusion that genes shape child outcomes, the claim that nonshared environmental eflect'> outweigh shared environmental effects (Plomin & Daniels. 1987) has been challenged for several reasons cape. such a, parent psychological controt. Most learning theory modeb of eoen:ive training. inept parenting. and deviant modeling also fall iI\to thi" category: the contributions made by temperamental difficultie~ in offspring have been added to recent formulatioll~. but the research is overwhelmingly parent-driven. particularly as it applies to the second decade oj life. Child-driven or evocative models have ~!reaLer currency in the study of young children thall ill the study of adolescents. In these models. otTspring with certain characteristics or behaviors eli<.:it particular responses from parents. which. in turn. shape child outcomes. The development of antisocial behavior in temperamentally difficult children is one example. Parents tend 10 respond to disruptive, aggressive children by withdrawing atlection and reducing monitoring. which increases the risk of alienation and affiliation with deviant peers (Lytton. ~OOO). Child-driven models applied to adolescence typically focus on the influence of personality and emotional regulation. One recent model suggests that adolescent openness and disclosure elicits parent behaviors that are usually operationalized as monitoring (Kerr. Stattin, & Pakalniskiene. 2006). In this view, parent reactions to adolescent engagement and withdrawal shape subsequent adolescent outcomes and behaviors. This may strike some as circular causality, but the process is clearly categorized as child driven. Considerable interest surrounds bidirectional modeb that address concurrent and over-time int1uence~ between children and parenb. These models include child-driven effects and parent-driven effects. but it is one thing to hypothesize a model in which both participants in a relationship are agents of influence. and it is another thing to apply this model to actual data. Statistical obstacles have long plagued efforts to identify bidirectional effects as scholars have struggled to test reciprocal and joint influences (Laursen. 2(05). Most conventional analytic procedures cannot easily incorporate data from both participants: those thai do typically plu\'lde biased or misspecifie(i resulb. Recent advance, in dyadic data analyses can oven,:ol11e these limitations. which will help to bridge the gap between theory and research (Card. Little. &: Selig. 200ls: Kenny. Ka~hy. &: Cook. 20(6). It is important to note that although dyadic analytic technique:-. were initially developed to de;..cribe the influence of one partner on another over the course of a specific interchange. they have been successfully applied to global perception.s oj concurrent parent-adolescent relationships. including attachment security (Cook & Kenny. 2l)O)) and perceived social SUpP(lrt (Branje. van Lieshou!. & van Aken. 2005 J. Modifications for longitudinal data have been propo:-.cd that will permit the analyses of nonindependent data across multiple time points (Kashy & Donnellan. 2008: Laursen. Pupp. Burk. Kerr. & Stattin. 2(03). Relationship models start from the premise that parent--child relationships are more than the sum ofthe child's behavior and the parent'; behavior. As a consequence. relationships are hypothesized to be important influence agents. Relationship influence mechanisms range from global indices of relationship quality (such as attachment security and support). to composites that describe positive thought. In keeping with the notion of domain specificity, different curvilinear trajectories may apply to different outcomes (Berndt, 1979). For instance, normative increases in delinquent activity between early and mid-adolescence should accompany increases in peer pressure to experiment with deviant behavior; these pressures subside by late adolescence and so does the prestige of youth engaged in delinquent acts. Similar developmental trends would not be anticipated in peer pressure concerning internalizing problems or prosocial behavior. Berndt (] 999) offers an imponant caveat to the coda. It is typically assumed that parents and peers are opposing sources of influence. Adolescents are thought to be buffeted between the competing interests of family and friends. An alternative scenario holds that parents and peers are generally complementary sources of int1uence, providing a consistent message concerning adolescent behavior. Parents are hypothesized to have considerable direct and indirect leverage over the child's selection of friends (Parke & Buriel, 2006), so we should expect parents to encourage youth to befriend those who share their values. Another possibility holds that parent and peer int1uences are distinct during the early adolescent years, as adolescents struggle to establish and maintain unique identities, but that parent and peer relationships (and their influence) become gradually more integrated over time (Collins & Laursen, 2000). After youth establish an independent sense of self, sometime during midadolescence. peer group cohesion should decline and adolescents should spend more time in mixed-sex cliques and with romantic partners. By late adolescence, family and 14 I'arent-{ 'hild l~l'Iati()nship~ !)"ring Ad()le~l"ent:e friend relationships are rell1tegrated w, youth prepare for tne challenges of young adulthood. This "ugge,>h that parents and peer" become increasinl!l~ complementary forces acro,s the adolescent year". Magnitude (~l b~flllefl(:e Until recently. the notion that parentinl! played a "il:!nificHlll role in adoiescellt outcomes was taken for granted. Even tmlay. after two decades or evidence suggesting that heredity . E\ent~based construct;. may be less prone [0 hias from relationship cognitHm, but. as a conseyllence. they are le~s reli~ able and poorer predictor;.. of outcome'" (Burk. Dennissen. van Doorn. Branje. & Laursen. in pres;..). Construets thaI arc highly "tabk also tend to yield small effect;, because they have insu1ficien[ variahility tn predict change in outcome variahles. Finally. syslenllc models arc apt to yield greater effect;, than individualistic models because the former em;ol1lpass a wider range of nlriahles than the laller. By the same token, interpreting "ystenlic effects can he more difficult than interpreting individualistic effects because influence mechanisms may he less obvious. A final point is that theorie" of relationship transformation have implications for models of parenl influence on adolescent outcomes. Conceptualizations that emphasize change in parent-child relationships in response to the maturation of the child do not speak directly to patterns of adulescent adjustment because an accounting of normative changes experienced by all youth cannot anticipate individual dif~ ferences in outcomes. Approaches that emphasize enduring eh<.lnlcteristic:-. of relationships should help to explain pallerns of adolescent adj ustmel1l hecause they are predicated on the notion that some parents and some relation.. ships arc better equipped than others tll help children successfully navigate the challenges of adolescence. Maturational models assuille that all familie, experience a period of heightened connict and diminished closeness associated with ado~ lescent physical Hnd cognitive deveiopmellL LJifference, in adjustment outcomes Illay be traced to the extent to which maturation is nor~ mative. both in its com"e and its liming. The Interpersonal Processes and Relationship Perceptions 15 notion that adolescence il> a period of normative disturbance (Bios, 1979: A. Freud. 1958: Hall, 1904) stands in contrast with more recent assertions that youth whose physical development is internally asynchronous (e.g., pubertal maturation in the absence of emotional maturation) and youth who are off-time relative to peers are at risk for adjustment difficultie~ (Simmons & Blyth. 1987). The general premise that variation in parenting and parent-child relationships is a product of adolescent development, rather than a cause of maladaptive development, contrasts with theories of relationship continuity. These latter models do not assume that adolescence is inevitably a time of troubled parent-child relationships. Rather, they are predicated on the view that parenting and parent-child relationships at the outset of adolescence anticipate changes in individual adjustment over the course of adolescence: Youth in secure, supportive relationships should experience few difficulties coping with maturational changes. Youth in poor quality relationships may lack resources to cope with maturation and thus may experience an upsurge in interpersonal difficulties that heighten the risk of adjustment problems. These difficulties do not spring up overnight. Escalating conflict and emotional alienation are thought to be symptomatic of relationship distress that is evident in the years leading up to adolescence. INTERPERSONAL PROCESSES AND RELATIONSHIP PERCEPTIONS These theoretical views underscore a fundamental but often neglected point: Despite a long-standing orientation to the impact of parental actions, the significance of relationships with parents derives from joint action patterns. The meaning of most parental actions depends on the history of interactions between parent and adolescent and the immediate context of the action of each toward the other (Maccoby, 1992). This suggests that a focus on behavior alone provides a less-than-complete picture of the relationship; we must abo consider how participants perceive their own behavior and that of their partner. There are systematic differences between parents and children in perceptions of their relationship. There are also individual difference~ in views of relationship~. Put simply. interaction~ differ across relationships and these interaction~ are interpreted differently by parents and children. and by individuals with specific attribute~. In this section we will describe these behavioral and perceptual differences and discuss some of their ramifications. Most of the developmental research on parent-child relationships has focused on identifying aspects of the relationship that are subject to change and to charting the course of these normative alterations. As is the case in relationships generally, parent-adolescent dyads vary in the content or kinds of interactions: the patterning. or distribution of positive and negative exchanges; the quality. or the degree of responsiveness that each shows to the other: and the cognitive and emotional responses of each individual toward the partner and his or her behavior. In this section, we will describe continuity and change in parent-child relationships during adolescence and review the available evidence concerning age-related trends in parent and adolescent behaviors and perceptions as well as individual differences that affect them. Parents and Adolescents as Relationship Participants and as Relationship Reporters Thirty years ago. Olson (1977) made an important distinction between insider and outsider views of the family. The point is wonh repeating (and the chapter is worth rereading), because it contains many subtle di!-.tinctions that tend to be lost or overlooked. There is widespread acknowledgment that family members experience family relationships differently. But what. exactly. does this mean? For starters, it means that mothers. fathers. and adolescent children have different H. PllTent-Child Itdlltionships Huring Adole.<'cencc l'Xpet:LilllOn~ about their relati()nship~. Fathers e.xpeCl the fumil y 10 be a respite from work: mothers antIcipate family obligations to be a major ,Durce of stress and gratification: adolescent;,. whose emotional energies tend to be focused un peers. tend to hold utilitarian views of the rami Iy (Larson & Richards. IVV4). These expectations are a product of schema. cog:nitiw structures that interpret experiences on the basis of past interactions and that construct scriPh that guide future interactions (Baldwin. 1992). Ditlerences in relationship schenw ari"e because the nature and the content 01 interactions differ across family memhers: Mother, have more mUlldane socializing interactions with children than fathers. and a much higher percentage of mother-child interactions fall into this category than father-child interactions. In contrast. fathers devote a higher proportion of their time with adole<,cents to recreational activities. These distinctions are amplified in h()u~ehold~ with more than one child. Panicipant~ interpret these interaction~ in terms of their relationship schema: fathers. looking to relax. seek to minimize socialization hassles with children. whereas mothers. who often experience negative affective spillover from work. may invest considerable emotion in otberwise mundane interaction~ with children. Differences in schemas and have impol1ant implications for reports about family relationships and interactions. Olson (1977) noles that reports differ not only between members of a family. but abo between family members and observers. The relationship schema held by observers are not the .~ame as tl10se held by parents or children because observers have 110 common relationship history on which to base expectations and no emotional stake in the interaction. Docs this mean that observer reports are Illore accurate') Not Ilecessarily because. although ohservers rnay be less biased. they '0. there is considerable continuity between positive features of relationships during adok"cence and tho;,e earlier in life. despite alterations in interaction. affect. and cognition. Early "tlldie~ pilling parents against peers found that the latter steadily .!!ained intluence at the expeme of the iormer aerm,s the transition into adole,cence and beyond (Bowerman &. Kinch. 1l)5Sl J. Sub"equent work underscored the limitations of this h;.draulic perspective, rc\ealing that relative parent and peer influences \ acros~ the course of adolescence. but firstborns also report the steepest drops in warmth from early adolescence to midadolescence (Shanahan, McHale, Crouter, & Osgood, 2(07), Maternal experiences with older siblings predict subse4uent maternal perceptions of relations with younger siblings: parents who have unsatisfactory relationships with older sibling;.. tend to have similarly unsatisfactory relationship!> with younger siblings (Whiteman & Buchanan. 2002). It is important to note. however. that descriptive data on age-related declines in closeness may overstate the significance of changes in parent-adolescent relationships. Many of the changes reflect a declining dependence on parents, but not necessarily erosion in the positive features or the importance of these relationships. This point may be obscured because research typically focuses on accumulated estimates of change at the group level without considering change at the level of the family. Longitudinal data from the Pittsburgh Youth Study revealed moderate to high levels of stability in parent and child reports of relationship 4ualities (Loeber et al.. 2000). Across childhood and adolescence, the relative ordering offamilies on various dimensions of closeness remained fairly constant from one year to the next even though the mean level of each variable fell. Other findings show that despite decreases across the adolescent years. pill'ents remain second only to friends or romantic partners in perceived support during late adolescence (Furman & Buhrmester, 1989). Almost 20% of late adolescents nominated a parent as their closest relationship partner. and 259( rated these relationships as their most interdependent (Laursen & Williams, 1997). Taken together. the available finding~ portray 20 Pan'nl-Child ]{claliOllsilip.' During Adolc~C~l1tT a cumpie\ dynamic 01 rclauol]';hljJ continuity and 1'11an~e tllat belies the conventional Vle\\. or an abrupt de~cei1t to'>'> ard di~taJ1cc and alienatioll. Parent and aduie"celll view~ of the family are notable lor their di vergence. particularly dUrllIg carly aUule"cence. In generaL l:hildrel1 tenu to ~ee the family In term, qllite differcnt from parellls. iYlaternal and paternal report', or their 0'>'>11 n:lalionshlps with all adolescent child agree mon: than the child'" reports ,~nd that 01 either parent (Cook & Goldstein. 1l)93 J. Where llIotilers and lathers see unique relatiollships. adolescents see Illonolithic ones. Parents. espcclally mothers. tend to appraise the fami I) more positi\el y than adolescent;, do (Laursen &: Collin,. 2004)..'v1other:-- routinely report more wurmth and affection among family member:-- than adoieseellls do (Nolier & Calla!1. I ()gX L which may be an attempt to ward o1l tile decline in maternal life satisfaction thm accompanics incrcasin1! adolesccnt autollomy (Silverbcrg & Sleinherg. 1(40) Another expiunation of perceptual discrepancies is rootcd in the different orientation, of parents and children, Based on a round-rohin. Social Relatiml'; Model design (Cook & Kenny. 2()05 J. recent findings indicate that adolescents' perceptions of family support wcre primarily driven by their gcneral vicws of the family. whereas parcnts' grealer weight to evalul1tion:. of specific relationships (Branje. van Aken. & van Lieshout. 20(2). Discrepant expectations and mismatched perceptions or cohesion. expressiveness. and suppon are highest at the outset of adolescence: parent and child views gradually converge over lillie (Collin.,. Lwrsell, Mortensen. Luebkc!. & I;erreira. 19i.)7: Seiffge-Krenke. 19(9). Closeness varies from one adolescent to another and from one adole~cent-parelJt pair 10 another. Adok,eenls "pend more tillle with their mother, lind are more likely to share 1eelings with them. Adolescents are more likely to disc!o"e information ahout personal matler~ to Illother~ than 10 rather~ (Smetana. Mevger. Gellman. & Campione-BurL 20(6). Father~ arc ohen ~()m;:;what di~tal11 figure" \'.ho tcnJ he eonsuited primaril) fur inlormatj()11 and material ~upport. SOIl~ and daughters havc Similar!:: warm relatitlilships with Illother~. bUt fathers are typical I) clu,er to ,on, than daughter, ISmetana. CamplOne-Barr. & iYlel!.ger. 2()()6!. The,e trenu, accelerate acrm, chilJhood and au()le~cence. Olle longitudinal study shm'ved that parent il1vulvel1lent dUring childhood predicted closenes" during adole;,cence. with stronger links between early father invol vement and c!m,eness to father at age 16 lor girls than fllr hoys (Flouri & Buchanan. 2()()2 I. Adolescent pubertal maturation. <,hove lind heyond age. has also heen implicated in increaseu family distance. hut the effects are slllail anLi lI1consistent (Su~man & Rogol. 20(4): the tIming of puberty appears to be a more potent predictor of change, in c!menes~ than physical maturation per se. Families adapt ![) inLiividual and rela[iOll~ ship changes in varying ways. Mo.,t families capitali/e t'fl gre,lIer ad()lescent maturity by fostering patterns of sustained interaction that promo!e a psychological closeness that depends less on frequency of interactions than was the case in childhood. They do so by adjusting interaction patterns to meet demands for adolescent autollomy (Collins. 1(95). Families with a history of interpersonal problems. however. may Jack the adaptive patte'TIS needed for new torms of closeness during periods of relative distance and Ihu., may be unable to surmount the barriers to effective relationships during adolescence (Groll'Van! & Cooper. 1986: Hauser. PO\'vers. & NO<.lI1l. 199 I). LongilUdinal evidence is consistent with tlie notion that ,lHliC families cApcriencc ).!remer diminution, in warmth and closeness thall others. YoUlh who report tile highest levels or sUflflort from mothers at the outset of adolescence experience little or no dedine ill perceived support acro"" ages II to 13. whereas those who percellc the lowest initial levels 01 perceived support report steep drops 111 subsequelll support (Adams. 2()O:'\). Similar finding" emerge from measures 01 allachlllcllt. interpersonal Processes and Relationship Perceptions 21 ~JIere the general trend indicating a decline inparent-child attachment across the adoles­ cent years appears to be moderated by char­ acteristics of the relationship (Buist, Dekovic, MeeuS, & vanAken, 2002). Mother-adolescent attachment security remaim steady and even increases slightly during mid-adolescenee for nondistressed youth. but it declines dramati­ . .cally for distressed youth (Allen, McElhaney, • Knperminc, & Jodi, 2004). With age, insecurely attached youth increasingly turn to .peers to fulfill attachment needs (Markiewicz, Doyle, & Haggart. 2006). which is ubiquitous in dose rela"liiomships, is especially prominent in families. ·~.·....."",,,o of adolescents indicate that disagreeare most common with mothers, followed siblings, friends, and romantic partners, then ; angry disputes arise more frequently family members than with close peers A,,-,"'UJ.""JIl, 1995). When college students were to recount three memories that defined person they came to be. almost all of the 'ID!elllOfles involving parents concerned conflict the adolescent years (McLean & Thorne, 2003). Thus, significant meaning is attached to some parent-child disagreements. There is considerable continuity in parentchild discord. Negativity begets more negativ:ity. From one year to the next across the course adolescence. children's negative feelings for parents predicted a subsequent increase in par';ent's negative feelings for children, and vice versa (Kim, Conger, Lorenz, & Elder. 2001). Family contentiousness during the adolescent years is best forecast by family disharmony during the preadolescent years (Stattin & KIackenberg, 1992). and parent-child conflict during the adolescent years predicts negative interactions between parents and children during young adulthood (Belsky. Jaffee. Hsieh, & Silva, 2001). Negativity takes many different forms. but it is most commonly in terms of interpersonal conflict. Disagreemenl~ are composed of discrete component" with a sequential structure (Laursen & Collins. J994). Like play" or novels, conflicts follow scripts consisting of a protagonist and an antagonist (the participants), a theme (the topic). a complication (the initiation). rising action and crisis (the resolution), and a denouement (the outcome ancl aftermath). Conflicts that adolescents identify as important differ from other conflicts primarily in terms of the intense negative feelings generated during and lingering after the interaction (Laursen & Koplas. 1995). A few words about assessment are in order. Disagreement is common, but serious conflict is not. This poses a problem for measurement. Some scholars address this problem by asking parents and children to deseribe global perceptions of conflict in their relationship. Unfortunately, global rating scales of event frequency are heavily intluenced by individual atrributes, such as personality. and by overall perceptions of relationship quality (Schwarz, 1991). Other scholars ask participants to report on events using a recall period that spans an extended period of time. such as the past 2 weeks or month, This. too. introduces perceptual confounds. When compared to ratings of conflict immediately after the interaction. adolescent reports of the same interaetion 6 weeks later shifted to be more consistent with their attachment-related representations (Feeney & Cassidy, 2003). When compared to peak ratings of emotion made at the close of the day, individuals who de~cribed themselves as neurotic recalled more negative emotions one month later, whereas individuals who described themselves as extraverted recalled more positive emotions one month later (Barrett, 1997). Still other scholars ask participants to report on recent events. such as those during the current or previous day. This minimizes perceptual confounds. but raises the risk that some youth will describe unrepresentative days: large samples ameliorate this liability to some extent. although it is still the case that the highly contentious are 22 Parent-Child Relationships During Adolescence 11l0\t accuraLel~ de~crihed. A running a"crage of report~ lrom,e"cral c()ll~ecutive day~ may afford the lea,! biased mea,.,ure of conflict. B) definilloll. the qability and reliability of repom of conflict from a single day will be lower than those that encol11pa~s longcr time periods. which. in turn. will be lower than those from glohal rating scale~: these ditferences have less to do with the asse;'Sl11ent 01 conflict than with tht: fact that the variable~ confnunded WIth connict (e.g" personality. relationship repre..,entatinns) are highly stable (Burk et aL in press). One final concern: Participants infer meaning from the time frame for the recollection of conflict: IOllg periods imply rare. affectively laden events. whereas short periods suggest that the investigator is intere..,ted in frequent. mundane experiences IWinkielman. Knauper. & Schwarz. 1l)(jXl. The,e issllc~. combined with the absence of a common measurement metric. mean that considerable variability should be expected in accounts of parent-adolescent connic!. Most disagreements between parents and adolescents concern mundane topics. famoLl~ly tagged by John Hill (IYX!-I) as "garbage and galoshes" disputes. Findings from a small meta-analysis indicate that parent-adolescent disagreements are usually resolved through submission or disengagement: compromise is relatively rare (Laursen. 1993 J. Adolescents report that conflicts with parents have few negative repercus.'iiol1s for the relationship. despite the fact that coercive tactics prevail. The prototypical conflict between parents and adolescents invol ve:- a mundane topic. with a power-assertive resolution and a winner/loser outcome that elicits neutral or angry affect (Adams & Laursen. 2001 J. This form of disagreement is to he expected in obligatory affiliations where power is shared unequally and wherc interactions tend to take place on a closed field (Holllans. ]9(11). During the adolescent year,. children n:main dependent on parent~ and have little choice but to engage them in mallers of mutual concern. Tile contilluity of the relationship does not depend on gettlllg along. so participants are free to adopt c(Jercl ve "trategies in conflicts without fear that the relationship will dissolve as a cOll'equence. Conflict with parents was once thought to increase in early adole,.,cence and decline begm£ling in middle adole.,cellce. but meta-analytic methods demonstrated that this presumed inverted U-shaped curve wa~ an artifact of the failure to distinguish the frequency of conflict from its affective quality, Evidence from multiple studies actually reveah linear declines in the frequency of connict with parent.'> from early adolescence to mid-adolescence and again from ll1id-ad(Jle~cence tc' late adole,scence. Significantly. however. the anger associated with these conflicts increases from early adolescence to mid-adolescence. with little change thereafter (,Laursen. Coy. & Collins. 1991:1). Thus, cont1ict rates fall as negati ve affect rises. leaving families with the perception of worsening discord. A recefit challenge to this explanation argues that curvilinear trends in parent-chi Id conflict take place at the level of the family. not the dyad (Shanahan. McHale. Osgood. & Crouter. 20(7). According to this view. conflict between parents and all children m the household follows an inverted V-shaped function. beginning when the elde~t child I:; an early adolescent. This spillover hypothesis open~ a new avenue of research on a topic that many (hought had heen settled. _'10 reliable age differences have emerged in either the topic~ or the outcomes of parent-­ adolescent conflict. but there is some indication that conflict resolutions are somewhat altered across the adole~cent years. The frequency With which adole,.,ccnts submit to parents declines. accompanied by an increase in di!>cngagement and. during late adolescence. compromise (Smetana. Dadelis. & Chuang. 2003: Smetana & Gaines. 1999). Perhaps more important are cl1anges in views concernthe legitimacy of parental authority and decision making (Smetana. 20(0). Acros;.. the adolescent years. but particularly during emly adolescence. parents and children renegotiate domains of authority. Adolescent~ view an increasing number of issues to be personal matters outside of parental authority, whereas parents continue to see the same topics as prudential or social-conventIOnal matters that lall within their jurisdiction. Steinberg (200 I) suggests that one reason adults see adolescence as .a particularly contentious age period is that in the process of claiming authority over domains previously regulated by parents. youth may appear overly eager to reject the ways of their elders. In contrast to the relatively detailed information available about parent-child conflict during adolescence, we know remarkably little about changes in parent-.-child conflict from childhood to adolescence and from adolescence to adulthood. Evidence is limited to a single cross-sectional survey indicating that children perceive cont1icts with mothers and fathers to be more prevalent during adolescence than during childhood or young adulthood (Furman & Buhrmester, 1989). In the absence of an empirical literature, Laursen and Collins (2004) offered two speCUlative propositions regarding long-term developmental trends in parent-child conflict: (1) The level of negative affect in parent-.-child conflict probably is higher during adolescence than during any other age period, except perhaps toddlerhood; and (2) the prevalence of coercion and winnerlloser outcomes in parent-.-child conflict gradually declines across successive age periods from toddlerhood to adulthood. To this we would add that parents and children view these developmental trends somewhat differently. Parents may regard the changes as signs of rejection and deteriorating relationships, whereas adolescents may regard them as evidence of an (overdue) acknowledgment of enhanced maturity. Those who perceive loss (i.e., parents) in response to change experience greater stress than those who perceive gain (i.e., adolescent children). Viewing relationships through the prism of personal gain and loss helps to explain why parents and adole~cents describe their interactions Interpersonal Processes and Relationship Perceptions 23 in different term" (Noller. 1994J. Adolescents appear to have more accurate (or more honest) appraisals of unpleasant aspects of the relationship than do parents. Reports of family conflict from independent observers frequently match those of adolescent children. but neither observer nor adolescent reports accord with parent reports of the same events (Gonzales et al., 1996). Although fathers are stereotyped as the family member most likely to be out of touch. accumulating evidence implies that it is mother.., who most often underestimate the incidence of parent-adolescent conflict and overestimate its severity. Not coincidentally. mothers also report the most negative repercussions from conflicts with adolescent children (Silverberg & Steinberg, 1990). Several explanations have been offered for mothers' relatively extreme responses. Chief among them is that connict represents a personal failure for mothers because it is an indictment of their ability to serve as family conciliators and peacemakers (Vuchinich, 1987). Moreover, conflict is the primary vehicle through which adolescents renegotiate their role in the family, which inevitably diminishes maternal (but not necessarily paternal) authority (Steinberg, 1981). The fact that parent and child reports of conflict appear to converge during late adolescence suggests that disagreements. though often unpleasant, play an important role in aligning expectations and facilitating communication among family members (Collins, 1995). Parents appear to become either more skilled or less invested in changes in relationships with later born children as compared with firstborn children. It is also possible that later born children learn how to better navigate relationships with parents by watching their older counterparts. In any event, second-born children report less contlict during early and mid-adolescence than firstborn children did during these age period~ (Whiteman, McHale, & Crouter. 2003). Compared to second-born children, mothers and fathers discipline firstborn children relatively more often during early 2.:1 Parent-Child kelati!lnship~ During Adolescence ad()je~cence. particularly if they display high lcveb of emotionality (Tucker. McHale. & Crouter. ~O(3). Thl~ type of differential treatmel1l i, not neces;,arily detrimentaL Ado\e.'cent perceptions of differential treatment are L(;,;,Ocialed with parent report;, of greater relationship hostility only when the child perceives the treatment to be unfair (KowaL Krull. & Kramer. 2()04). The extent tu which gender moderates the relation between parent-child conflict behavior and developmental changes in adolescenh Hlries according to whether the focus i;, the frequency of conflict. the affective response to it, or the resolution. Rates of connict and levels of negative affect are higher in l1lother-daughter relationships than in other parenH.:hild reiation"hips (Laursen & Collins. 1(94). In the meta-analysis by Laursen and colleagues ( 19YX). contl ict rates declined 1110re in mother-chi Id relationship~ than in fatherchild relationships. but gender did nO! moderate challge~ in atfective intensity. Conflict resol utions vary as a function of both parent and adolescent gender: Compromise is more common with mothers than with fathers, and disengagement is more typical of conflict with SOilS than of contlict with daughters (Smetana Cl al.. 2003: Smetana. Yau, & Hanson, 1991: Vuchinich. J987). In contrast. studies of negative affect and contlict resolutior. yield no reliable evidence that gender moderates patterns of developmental change. Too little attention has been given to understanding the role gender plays in differences between dyadic and triadic parent-child conflict. Adolescents clearly interact differenlly \vith one parelll than they do with two parents (Vuchinich, Emery. & Cassidy. IYXX). and some evidence suggests that con11ict discussions arc more comaructive when they involve one parent than when they involvc both (Gjerde. 1986). Fathers and sons are particularly likely to alter contlil'l behm'lorS in the presence of an(lther parenl (Smetana. Abernethy. & Harris. 20(0). Variations in conflict allributed to puberty depend on whether the indicator is pubertal statu, or pubertal timing. Pubertal ~l:llL1~ refers to absolute level of sexual !Daturit). Metaanalytic compari~ol1s yield a small positive linear :.!"ocialiol1 between pubenal ,tatus and conflict affect. indicating that greater phy"ical maturity is associated ",ilh greater Ilcgative affect (Laursen et al.. 1998). No similar association emerged for pubertal statLl~ and the freLJuency of parent-child conflict. Observational studie~ 01 problem-solving interaetioll.' among fathers, mothers. and children suggest that family dynamics "hift a" a function of pubertal maturation (Hill. I<)z.;X: Stemberg. j yz.; I). Fathers intelTupt adoje"eents during di,cu;,sions more in the middle phase~ of pubertal maturation than ill earlier or later phases. successtuily signaling their dominant role in family decisioll mabng. Adolescent" and mothers mutually interrupted each otiler 1110st often dUl"lng mid-adolescence, as the fonner challenges the authority of the latter. In later pubertal phases. mothers interrupt less and appear to be less influential over the outcomes of group decisions than sons: mothers and daughters interrupt each other less and exert similar Ie\,e1s of influence over family decisions. Pubertal timing is an indicator of adolescents' level of maturity relative to peer~. Generally. early maturing ;,ons and daughter:.. experience more frequent and more intense parent--child conflict than do adolescents who mature on time (Laursen & Collin,>. 19(4). Indeed. pubertal (.iming accounts for much of the variance in parent-adolescent conniet that might otherwi~;e be attributed to pubertal status. Several explanations for the association between pubertal timing and parent-<:hiJd connict have been ojT"red. most of \vhich <;ug.gest that parents do not agree with adolescents that physical precocity i;., a "ufficient basis for autonomy granting (Laursen & Collins. 20041. Evolutionary accounts take a more distal view. arguing that heightened parent-adolescent conflict accompanies early puberty and the onset of sexual activity. which helps to ensure reproductive success under conditions of en"iwnmenwl risk (Belsky. Steinberg. & Draper. The Role of Parent-Child Relationships ill Adolescent Adjustment 25 1991). Findings that heightened connicl precedes rather than follow~ the early onset of puberty (Belsky et aL 2007: Graber. BrooksGunn, & Warren, 1995: Moffitt, Caspi, Belsky, & Silva, 1992) undersl:ore the notion that individual difference.'. in parent-adolescent conflict are rooted in long-standing differences in family relationships. Although families vary considerably, the extreme forms of connict implied by the popular impres~ion of storm and stress are neither typical nor inevitable. Bandura (1964) forcefully argued that difficult relations during the teenage years are generally circumscribed to those families that also had difficult relation~ during childhood. Subsequent reviews of the literature consistently conclude that turmoil characterizes a small minority of households with adolescent children-probably somewhere between 5G k and J5% of North American families. A::. we will discuss later, individual adjustment is closely bound to interpersonal conflict (Smetana et aL 2006). Relationship difficulties usually have more to do with distressed family systems or individual mental health problems than with the challenges posed by adolescent development (Offer & Offer, 1975; Rutter et aI., 1976). This serves as a fitting backdrop to findings from cluster analyses indicating that bickering is fairly common in some families, but only a small fraction have frequent and angry quarrels (Branje, van Doorn, van der Valk, & Meeus, in press; Smetana, 1996). Conflict management processes also vary across dyads ~uch that the significance of a disagreement depends on the perceived quality of the relationship. Feelings of positive eonnectedness promote the consideration of alternatives in a nonthreatening context; in less supportive relationships, disagreement may be interpreted as a hostile attack that requires an antagonistic response (Hauser et al" 1991 J. It is not surprising, therefore, that securely attached adolescents report fewer conflicts overall and are more likely to resolve conflict with parents through the use of compromise and are les~ likely to rely on disengagement than dismi!>sing adolescent~ (Ducharme, Doyle, & Markiewicz, 2002). One of the most important tasks confronting parent;, and children during adolescence is to renegotiate their roles and relationship: the overall tenor of the affiliation has an important bearing on the attitude::. that each brings to the discus::.ion. To conclude, many families experience a modest upswing in conllicl at the out"et of adolescence, but disagreements typically are not a threat to relationships. Indeed, conflict during this period actually may strengthen relationships by providing a vehicle for communication about interpersonal issues that require attention. More than any other form of social interaction, disagreements offer parents and adolescents an opportunity to reconsider and revise expectations and renegotiate roles and responsibilities to be consistent with the autonomy typically accorded to youth in their culture. Most families successfully meet this challenge because they are able to draw on healthy patterns of interaction and communication established during earlier age periods. But for a small minority of families. the onset of adolescence holds the potential for a worsening of relationships. Families with histories of ineffective relationships are at risk for dysfunctional discord as they encounter pressures to realign relationships in response to the developmental demands of adolescence. THE ROLE OF PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIPS IN ADOLESCEl'IT ADJUSTMENT Links between parent·-adolescent relationships and the development of individual adolescents have been the focus of most of the research on families as contexts of adolescent development. Because the evidence on this point has been reviewed recently and extensively (Collins & Steinberg, 2006; Steinberg & Silk, 2002), this section is selective. It focuses primarily on how the recurring action patterns and emotional qualities of parent-adolescent interactions are related to key aspects of 26 "arent-Child Reilltion~hills During Adolt'sceIlCl' p~~ ci1u,,>()clUl competence In auulescence, The section is ui\ided [ntl) two PaJ'h, The rlrst i" all mervlew of finuing, ulrectly lInking parel1t~ child inlerm:tiol1s t{l ddoiescent de\ chplllent. The "econd outlines illustrative evidence that parel1t~chiid relationships abo play an imporlanl im!irect role in adolescent sociali/,at!on by moderating and mediating the impaL'l of IIlfluences in and beyond the family, Adolescent Outcomes Associated with Parent-Adolescent Relationships Parental style. the dimension that IS most cio;..ely relateu to the eillotiunal tellor Of l{uality uj the parelll~ehiid relationship. IS regarded a., having motivatIonal eHects on the child's rCl'l~ptiveness to specific pntctices (Darling & Steinherg. 1993 J. It follows that the quality of parent·-·chilu exchanges and shm-ed decision making, over and abme the specific content 01 parental teaching. ~hould contribute to the development of autonmllOU~. respon~ible adole~eent behavior by lacilitating role-taking skilb. ego development. and identity exploration (GrOle\'ant & Cooper, IlJXh: H:lUser et al.. 19S1 I ). The evidence IS consistent with this hypothesis: Mature le\'eJs of these competencies are as;,oeiated with parent-adolescent relationships in which both individuation and connectedness are encouraged (Allen. Hauser. BelL & O·Connor. 19<;)4: Lamborn. Mounts. Steinberg. & Dornbusch. ISlY I J. Parelllal style;.. have been iinked tu a wide range of adjustment outcome", In general. children of authoritatIve parent, are l11o"t apt to excel in school and display the highest levels pnb!K'ial behavior. whereas children of neglectful or uninvolved parents tend to evince the most antisocial and health-risk behavior" and the least psycho;,oeial maturity (Steinberg. 2()()1). Authoriwtivt' parcnt-child relationships are marked b) pal\:1I1,' expectation, of mature behavior in combination with interpersonal warmth. accepting uttitude;,. bidirectional cOlllllllmication. and an empila;,i:-. Oil training social respullsibility and concern for the impact of one', aetiull on others. :"Jegleetful parenting. Hl comnlst. COIlSISt>. of relativel> le\\ expectalions. it)\\ ill\o)vell1c!lI with the child. and a rejecting. unre'pon,ive. parentcentered atlltuue. Reccnt c\iuence ;,uggest.. that the au\antages of ulllhoriwtivc parenting and the disach anlages of neglectful parenting. found in communit) ;,amples acn).... culture". ma) e\'en extend to familic' of youth who commit \criuu... criminal ofrenses (Steinberg. Blatt-Eisengarl. 0:. Cauf/malL 20(6). Practices that arc typical of authoritativc families are linked to tlldin~s of positive adjustmem, In studie;, of moral development and SOCial responsibility. j1r(lsllcial behavior is correlated wilh clearly c(lll1ll1unicated parental c);.pecJatiolls for appropriatc hehavior. and with warmth and moderate power accompanied by rea~()ning and explanation (Ei~enberg. Fahe~. & Spinracl. 200() I. Ad()le~cents' perceptions of parental acceptance and ill\olvcl1lenl are correlated positively with self-confidence, identity exploration. and empathic hehavior (.lackson. Dunham. & Kidwel I. I99(): Kt!mptner. 1<)8l-)). Ohservational studies of parent~adole,cent interaction have shown that adolescents from families marked by high encouragement for expressing and developing one's own point of vie\\ manifested higher levels of identity exploration (Grotevant & Cooper. 1<)851. The~e L:onclusion" are bolstered by longitudinal studies showing that high levels or bidirectional communication and mutual respect in parenl-child relationships correlate positively with ...ubsequelll adolesl'ent psychosocial maturity, Allen and colleagues (] 9(4) report that parent,,' (especially fathers') behaviors that made it more difficult for hunit) memhers to dl;,cLls,', their prelcrcnces \\ ere highly correlated with sllh~,equcnt decreases in adole;..celll,· ego deve lopment and ;,elf-esteem. III a similar study. Walker and Taylor ( 1(91) fuund that ad\ ances in adole,",ccI1h' moralreasoning Ic\cls were best predicted hy earliel parent~child interactions eharacteri/ed by supportive. but co)Cnitively challenging. discussions oj' moral issue" Although joint decisioll making i;, generally as,oClated with the most The Role of Parent-Child Relationships in Adolescent Adjustment 27 adolescent outcomes, longitudinal findings suggest that additional benefits may ..,aacrue to those who are gradually accorded autonomy over personal issues (Smetana, ,Campione-Barr. & Daddis, 2004). . A large body of evidence linh certain parenting practices to maladaptive adolescent outcomes. Correlational findings imply that antisocial behavior and ~ubstance use ,are most strongly predicted by an absence of behavioral control; self-esteem and internalizing problems have the strongest links to warmth and autonomy granting; and school grades are uniquely associated with warmth. autonomy granting, and behavioral control (Barber, Stoltz, & Olsen, 2005; Gray & Steinberg, 1999). Studies of this type have been justly criticized for their reliance on concurrent data, but recent longitudinal evidence indicates that parenting practices predict subsequent changes in adolescent outcomes. Among youth affiliating with deviant peers at age 11, externalizing behaviors increased across the next 4 years for those whose parents reported low levels of behavioral control, but there was no change in externalizing problems for those whose parents reported high levels of behavioral control (Galambos, Barker, & Almeida, 2003). Parental warmth also forecasts decreases in adolescent externalizing behaviors; psychological control anticipates increases in adolescent internalizing (Doyle & Markiewicz. 2005). Some studies have raised the prospect that the influence of different parenting practices varies as a function of the child's characteristics. For instance, harsh parenting best predicts externalizing problems for undercontrolled youth but internalizing problems for overcontrolled youth (van Leeuwen. Mervielde, Braet. & Bosmans, 2004). Findings of this sort strongly imply that greater attention must be given to the match between parenting practices and child characteristics, because some child characteristic5> may amplify the risks associated with deleterious parenting. Negativeandpositivefeaturesofparent-child relationship are only modestly intercorrelated. and each i~ known to make II unique contribu tion to adolescent outcomes. With regard to negative features. many studies have indicated that high levels of conflict are associated with psychosocial problems during adolescence and beyond, Reciprocated hostility between parents and early adolescents predict~ subsequent conduct problems and depressive symptoms during mid-adolescence and high levels of expressed negative affect toward romantic partner~ at age 18 (Ge. Best, Conger, & Simons, 1996; Kim. Conger. Lorenz, & Elder. 200 I). High leveb of parent-child conflict during adolescence have also been linked to emotional maladjustment and poor-quality relationships with romantic and marital partners at age 25 (Overbeek. Startin. Vern1ulst. Ha. & Engels. 2007), Conflict is not uniformly deleterious. however. Its impact appears to vary as II function of the perceived quality of the relationship. Evidence suggests that contlict is inversely related to well-being if the relationship is perceived to be poor. but moderate amounts of contliet may be beneficial for those whose relationships are good (Adams & Laursen, 2(07). Regardless of the quality of the relationship. the worst outcomes are generally reserved for those with the most conflicts. But when adolescents reporting no conflicts with mothers and fathers are compared to those reporting an average number of conflicts, the latter had higher school grades if they were in better but not poorer quality relationships and reported more withdrawal if they were in poorer but not better quality relationships. The negative tenor of conflicts in relationships perceived to be unsupportive undoubtedly plays a central role in these deleterious outcomes. Findings that poorly managed parent-child conflict is associated with adolescent depression. delinquency. and self-esteem (Caughlin & Malis, 2004: Tucker. McHale. & Crouter. 2003; van Doorn, Branje. & Meeus. in press) suggest that dysfunctional familie~ not only have frequent disagreements but that these disagreement~ are typically angry and are resolved in a coerci ve. unconstructive manner, 2S Pan'lll-Child Relationship., During ;\dolcsc~nc~ Perception, matter. \ie\1 ,wdie, indicate that adule,cent \ ie\\' oj relatiunship 4l1alit) predict the traject()r~ or suh,e4uent individual adjlhtmenl. StudiL' of attachment securit) Indicate that adole,cent repre,entations of parenh..:hild reIaliOlhhips predict change" in IIlternalizing and externalizing symptoms (Allen. Porter. McFarland. McElhaney. & Marsh. 20(7). Ado/e,cent attachment security also predich increase\ in social skills and COI1structive interactions with romantic partners (Allen. Marsh. McFarland. McElhaney. & Land. 2002: Roisillan. Madsen. Hcnnighallsen. Sroufe. &. Collins. 2(01). Ditficultie;.. increase over time for adolescent:-. who initially perceive low support from parents. whereas adjustment pmhlell1s remain flat or even decl inc for those who initially perceive high support from parents (l3rcndgen. Wanner. Morin. & Vitam. 2005: Dekovic. Buist. &. Reitz. 20(4). This is not just a matter of the trouhled gelling worse and the well-adjusted getting hetter: the same findings cmerge lor youth with comparahlc levels of hehavior prohlems at the outset of adolescence (Mooney. LauL'ien. & Adams. 2007 J. Adoie:,cent report;.. are most likely to he indicative of p()~iti\'e adjustment when they converge with parent reports. Regardless ofwho sees the relatlOllship in hetter terms. large discrepancies signal poor adolescent functioning. Specific~tlly. divergent reports of relationship quality and parcnting practices are associated with concurrent academic and hehavioral problems (Feinherg. Howe. Rei;,s. & Hetherington. 20()0: 1\10llllt". 20(7) and prospective declines in adole"cenl sell-esteem (Ohannessian. Lerner. Lerner. & VOIl Eye. 2()OOl. Perceptions also maHer in h.TIllS or whether adolescents see themselves as recciving the same treatment as a sibling. After accounting for ahsolute levels of each. dillerclltial warmth and control uniquely predict adolcscent outcomes (Tallll'OlItiMakkink. Duhas. Gen·is. & \an Aken. 2()04). Not,urprisinl'ly. efiec\, arc stronger for the "ihling who perceive" him;.;c1f or herself to h<.' the recipient of poorer treatment (Feinhcrg & Hethcrington. 20UI: Sheehan & Noller. 20021. The incn.:a,ing usc ()1 IOllgitudlllul de,ign' bodes well ror conclusion, cOlleerning parent influence..,. Howe\er. the largely correlational nature of finding, from longitudinal data leaves open thc question or proce,s: "Vhat i;.; the origin of a"ociatiol1s hetween \ a!'iations in rami!y relatiollships and adolescent adjustment'l Several possihilitie, hu\e been proposed (Collin, et al.. 200()). One is that parents' childrearing behavior." provide mode"- of different pallern" of social responsihility and concern for others. A second possihility is that different parenting styles engender differentially cfTective skills for autonomous. responsihle hehavior. In this respect. parent-child relationship" provide continuities hetween childhood and the new demands of adolescence that facilitate the integration oj past and future roles. Third. sensiti ve. responsive parental treatment of children and ado1escC'IlfS promotes positive emotional bonds that make the values and behaviors of parents more salient and allractive to adolescent,;. These three possibilities are not mutually exclusive. Indeed. multiple plausible mechanisms imply a more complex causal process than does a view that emphasizes the simple transmission of parents' values to the next generation (Kuczynski. 2003: Grusec. Goodnow. & Kuczynski. 2000). Adolescent adjustment clearly is facilitated by certain parental behaviors. but the operati ve processes ulmost certainly include dynamic properties of relationships hetween parent and child that foster the adolescents' desire or willingness to he influenced. The dehate on parer.tal monitoring and child disclosure is inqructive in this regard. Parental monitoring has long heen a,,;..umed to he heneficial for adolescent development. Many scholar;. have reported that monitoring predicts concurrent and prospective adolescent outcomes. Although llloilitoring is conceptualized as an active process whereby parents solicit information ahout children and keep track of their acti\'ities and whereahouts. the conflatiol1 of measures of parental control and knowledge with measures or child disc\o\tJl'e The Role of !)arent-Child Relationships in Adolescent Adjustment 29 calls into question the mechanisms of parent influence, raising the prospect that a family climate that encourages disclosure may be more important than parent monitoring efforts. Initial reports by Stattin and Kerr (2000; Kerr & Stattin, 2000) and a recent longitudinal replication (Kerr, Stattin, and Burk, in press) indicating that parental knowledge from child disclosure predicted concurrent adolescent adjustment more strongly than did knowledge gained by tracking and surveillance launched a flurry of empirical work. The finding that parental monitoring is of secondary importance in the prediction of adolescent outcomes has not been consistently replicated (Fletcher, Steinberg, & Williams-Wheeler, 2004; Waizenhofer, Buchanan, & Jackson-Newsom, 2004), which has stimulated an ongoing search for potential moderating variables. One important distinction to emerge is that between voluntary disclosure and active attempts to keep secrets from parents (Frijns, Finkenaur, Vermulst, & Engels, 2005). Adolescents from authoritative homes and those who report high levels of trust and acceptance in relationships with parents are more apt to disclose information and refrain from lying and keeping secrets than adolescents who report low levels of trust and acceptance (Darling. Cumsille, Caldwell. & Dowdy, 2006; Smetana, Metzger, Gettman, & Campione-Barr, 2006). These findings raise the possibility that some parents find monitoring more effective and rewarding than others. We know that parents tend to decrease their monitoring of deviant youth, even though this results in a subsequent escalation of antisocial behavior (Dishion, Nelson. & Bullock. 2004; Jang & Smith, 1997; Laird, Pettit, Bates, & Dodge, 2003). Perhaps the parents of deviant children (for whom trust and acceptance are in short supply) respond to secretive and nonresponsive youth by reducing efforts to solicit information, which widens the gulf between them and diminishes the parent's potential for positive influence (Kerr, Stattin, & Pakalnaskiene, in press). Thus. family climate dictates the degree to which parental knowledge is effective in shaping adolescent outcomes by creating conditions that foster or inhibit honest disclosure and effective supervision. Parent-Child Relationships as Moderators and Mediators of Influence Contemporary approaches to research on parenting have moved beyond the exclusive reliance on the global analyses ofparental influence that dominated the field in the last century (Collins et al.. 2000). Among the insights emerging from these more complex models of parenting is the recognition that in addition to their direct impact on adolescent development relationships with parents also may be significant as intervening mechanisms. In this section. we consider instances in which parentadolescent relationships serve as moderators of relations between other sources of influence and adolescent outcomes and as mediators that help to account for or explain why a predictor is related to the outcome of interest. The complex interplay between genetic and environmental influences on adolescent development is illustrated by recent findings indicating that parenting moderates the heritability of adolescent adjustment difficulties. The first example concerns the role of parental monitoring on adolescent cigarette smoking (Dick, Viken, PurcelL Kaprio, Pulkkinen, & Rose, 2007). A genetically informed twin design revealed that parental monitoring had a very modest direct influence on smoking (accounting for less than 2% of the variance), but the effects for monitoring as a moderator of genetic influence were dramatic: Genetic factors accounted for more than 60% of the variance at the low end of the parental monitoring continuum and less than 15% of the variance at the high end. A related study indicated that parental warmth similarly moderates genetic influence on adolescent antisocial behavior but not depression (Feinberg, Button, Neiderhiser, Reiss. & Hetherington. 2007). At low levels of warmth, genetics accounts for 90% of the variance in antisocial behavior. but 30 Parent-Child Relationship~ Durin!! Adole;,cenct' at high lc\eb of warmth. the contrihution of genetjc~ approache~ zero. The~e finding!', render di~cus~i()n, about the relative importance of ge!Je.., and parenting practice~. ob"oiete: child outcomes clearly depend on both. A!-. one ,el of relationships in a larger networi-. of clo\e relationships. parent influences moderate and are moderated by peer relationships ami relationship" with other family memhep,. Most adoie'>cent" are embedded in network" of relationships that are ..,imilar in their perceived quality. Longitudinal ~vidence indicate.s that the majority of adolescents describe all 0, their parent and friend relationshIps as either high quality or low qualilY: fewer than one in four adolescents report diverging support from peers and parents (Laursen. Furman. & Mooney. 2(06). Good relationships with friends can ameliorate some of the detrimental impact associated with poor relationships with parents (Gauze, Bukowski. Aquan-Assee. & Sippola. 19Y6), but there are limib [0 thi~ buffering. Ad()le~cents reporting a positive relationship with a parent or a friend I but not both) had somewhat berter outcomes than ado]e:-.cents with no positive relationships. but adolescenb with uniformly positive relationship.;. almost always had the best school grades. the highest self-worth. and the fewest behavior problems (Laursen & Mooney. 2(08) Parenting quality moderates extrafamilial stressors. Mid-adolescents experiencing high levels of school hassles demol1'.trated more competent functioning and less evidence of psychopathology if they rated their familial relationships as high quality rather than lower lluality IGarher & Little. 19(9), Moreover. the link between after-school self-care and involvement III problem behaviors was found to be bufferec.! by parental acceptance and firm control. which are the dual hallmarks of re"ltionship' in authoritative families I Galambos & Maggs. 199 J). The potential complexity of moderation j" evident in research showing thm the perceived quality of relationships with parcnts facil itated adolescents' modeling of parellt< ~ubstance u~e. Adolescent, who had a relatively good relatiol1~hip~ with p~irent, tended to folloVo their parent,' example more thun if the relationship VoW., relalI\ el~ poor (Andrews. Hops. &: Duncan. 19Y7). implying that positive relationship, with antisocial parents may be a source 01 risi-.. These instancb broaden simplistic cau"eand-effect models of the impact of parent-­ adolescent relationships. Rather th:l11 Ji)cllsing only on the assumption that parenting styles and praetices ("wise the outcome'. to which correlational findings have linked them. compelling evidence shows that parent-adolescent relationships contribute to adolescent development by modifying the impact of other sources oj influence cent adjustment outcomes. We know tbat children are active participants in the socmlization process and that parents react to their children"s behavior. Thus. parenting practices may buffer against or exacerbate child tendencies, as in findings where inept parenting mediate~ links between oppositional behavior in early auolescem:e and the subsequent trajectory of adolescent delinquent peer affiliation (Simons. Chao. Conger. & Elder. 200 I ). It is fitting. therefore. that scholars devote more effort to understanding and elaborating the variou~ bidirectional models 01" parent-child relationship influence. THE INTERPLAY OF CONTEXT AND RELATIONSHIP PROCESSI'~S AND Ot:TCOMES Although the significance of parent-adolescent relationship~ and influenees is surprisingly cOllsistent across social. economic. and cultural contexts (Barber. Stoll. & Oben. 200:i: Steinberg. 200 I). force~ outside of the parcntadolcseell! dyad ne\erthcless help to shape the nature and impact of interactiOlh and their impact on adolescent hehavior and adjustment. The Interplay of Context and Relationship Processes and Outcomes 31 between adolescent adjustment and .rliffering contexts are well documented . ;j(l!.g., Fuligni, Hughes, & Way, thi~ volume), ,Recently, researcher~ have begun to examine the processes that account for these associations. In general. their findings have shown that, although differing contexts each exert certain direct influences both on parenting and on adolescent behavior and adjustment. it is often the case that parent-adolescent interactions ,serve as conduits by which contexts impinge on adolescent development or as buffers of the potential impact of contexts. This section briefly outlines illustrative instances of parent-adolescent interactions as moderators and mediators of contextual influences. The first concerns changes in the family system associated with marital difficulties. The second focuses on links between adolescent-parent relationships and parents' work experiences and socioeconomic circumstances. The third considers the opportunities and constraints in parent-adolescent relationships associated with ethnic and cultural variations. Characteristics of Family Systems Adolescent development occurs within family systems, and apparently direct effects of features of, and especially changes in, the systems are well documented. Most prominently, differences between parent-adolescent relationships in generally harmonious families versus those marked by high levels of eonnict and disruption in one or more of the relationships in the systems are frequently associated with sharply contrasting behavior and adjustment of adolescents (Hetherington & ClingempeeL 1992). Impact (~l Parental Conflict Children and adolescents who witness frequent, angry. unresolved conflicts between mothers and fathers become distressed and manifest depressive symptoms and behavior problems (Cummings & Davies, 1994). In addition, marital connict is associated with increased conflict between parents and adolescents (Almeida, Wethington, & Chandler. 1999). This heightened conflict i~ associated with more negative adolescent behavior and poorer adjustment. even in case.'> where the parent-adolescent relationship is generally positive (Erel & Burman, 1995). The accumulated evidence implies that marital conflict and other stressors may undermine parents' ability to maintain an authoritative parenting style. In many families linh between marital conflict and adolescent internalizing and externalizing problems are mediated by high parent-adolescent conflict and associated harsh discipline (Buehler & Gerard, 2002; Low & Stocker. 2005). Moreover. according to longitudinal evidence, the nonconstructive resolution strategies that typify contlictful marital relationships are effectively transmitted to parent-adolescent relationships (van Doorn, Branje. & Meeus, 2007). Relations between children and fathers are particularly vulnerable to high levels of marital troubles CKrishnakumar & Buehler. 2000), suggesting that mediated effects may occur more frequently in father-adolescent relationships than in mother-adolescent relationships. Divorce and Remarriage High levels of marital conflict commonly eventuate in divorce, which can exacerbate the stress and emotional disruption that stem from the multiple physical, cognitive, and social changes of adolescence. Moreover, the transitions necessitated by divorce may entail other stressors, such as economic need and changes in domicile, neighborhoods, and schools, as well as continuing emotional distress for parents and reorganization of family roles and relationships (Hetherington. 1999). These multiple stressors contribute to temporary disorganization and disruption of parent-adolescent relationships. Mother-adolescent relationships in divorced families manifest higher levels of both conflict and harmony than do relationships in never-divorced families. Divorced mothers monitor their children's activities less closely and demand greater responsibility for family lasks than do married mothers. Divorced f 32 Parent-Child Relationship" [)uring Adole~l'cnc!' Ill()ther~ al~(, lI~e mort: peremptory and coerci\e [cchnlque~ 10 di ....cipline and ()therwI~e influence adole~cenh' beha\ ior. For their pw1. adolescent, in recently divorced fall1ilie, tend to feel anger and moral indIgnation toward their parenb. Some adolescenh react by pull· ing away rrom the family and behaving with aloofness toward both parenh. a withdrawal that may help them adju:..[ to the divorce. These changes in parent-adolescent relationships and influence,. rather than direct effect:.. oj the di vorce or reman·iage. likely account for the link:-. hetween transitions in family system, and negative behavior and adjustment in the adolescent (for review. see Hetherington &. Stanley- Hagan. 20(2) Whether perturbed parent-adolescent relationships imply higher level" of parentadolescent conflid in divorced than in never-divorced families is unclear. Some researchers found more conflict in divorced fall1ilies in the 2-year period of adjustment. with a gradual return to levels similar to those of never-divorced families (Hetherington &. Kelly. 2(02). Others report that initial increased levels are sustained heyond the first :2 years (Baer. 1999). and still others found fewer arguments in single-parent familie~ than in married households (Smetana. Yau. Restrepo. & Braeges. 1991 J. Two studies suggests that overall rates of parent-adolescent conflict in intact two-parent household~ and divorced single-parent hou"eholds are similar. but that mother-adolescent conflict differs acros... households because mothers in singleparent households are in disputes that otherwise fall to fathers in two-parent hou;,(,:!!lolds (Laur;,en, Ig95, 20(5) Custodial parenting arrangements vary. Disrnprions in rclationship:-, with l1oncus[(ldial father'> appear to be more extensive and long-lasting than in mother-·adolescent relationships. showing links to adiustment and relati\lllships of offspring a del'ade later during young adulthood (Burns & Dunlop. 199i\; Hetherington. 1999 L Regardless. adolescent., who h~l\e regular. supportive contact with their 110l1cu...todwi parent have different experience, t\1"11 tho,e for whom the noncu:-.todial parent i, rarely. if e\er. in contact. Moreover. ha\'ing "upport from an extended family member. such a~ a grandparent. I, linked to ,ingle parcnh' succes~ ill maintaining authoritative parenting pra.:tices: extended lamily support is notably Ie", important for sustained authoritative parenting in intact hml,eholds (Taylor. Casten. &. Flickinger, I99."h The"e ditlerellces in the significance of po,tdivOfce arrangement:.. var) to :-;ome extent with the recency of divorcc and the numbe, or ancillary change;, that accompany divorce (Steinberg & Silk. 2(02). Are the implications oj' apparent disruption;, ill relationships unique to recently divorced parents and adolescents'.) Some evidence suggest;, that parental conflict and lack of har· mony in the family have negative effect, much like those observed in studies of the impact of divorce (Fauber. Forehand. Thomas, & WieNlll. 19(0). Moreover. the nature and extent of disruptions vary among divorced families. with more pronounced Iinb for boys than for especially when the mother i" the custodial parent (Needle. Su, & Doherty. 1(90). Adolescents who have experieneed divorce tend to be somewhat less well adjusted than those who have not. A meta-analysis of parental divorce and child adjustment revealed modest differences between divorced and intact families in terms of secondary school student outcomes in the domains of academic achil:vemenL conduct psychological adjustment. self-eoncept, and parent-adolescent relationships (Amato. 200 I), Thc impact of remarriage on parentadolescent relationship.... likewi~e yaries considerably from fanlll~ to family and adolescent to adolescent (Amato. :2()OO). Adjustment to remarriage appears to be more difficult initially for daughters than for sons (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan. 20(2), Whereas warmth and int imacy characteri/.e l11other~ and daughters 111 divorced. single-parent families relative to intact. two-pHrent families. cio,>eness in The Interplay of Context and Relationship Processes and Outcomes 33 the former group declines somewhat when the parent remarrie~. In contrast, sons s()metime~ benefit from the introduction of a stepfather into the family. Their relations with mothers often improve. and stepfathers also report more positive relationship!> with boys than with girls. Findings from one study imply that some African American adolescents benefit more from remarriage than European American adolescents (McLanahan & Sandefur. 1994). In the final analysis. adolescents' relationships with parents and stepparents depend on several factors. Continuing tensions and conflict between an adolescent's biological mother and father generally make it more difficult for the adolescent to adjust. In general, noncustodial parents who put the welfare and adjustment of their children before their own personal difficulties foster positive parent-adolescent relationships and high levels of authoritative parenting during family transitions. Recent findings show that adolescents who perceive little conflict between their parents and close relationships between themselves and their parents have fewer adjustment problems than do those whose parents are in conflict with one another (Brody & Forehand, 1990). One reason for this is that adolescents often feel caught between warring parents and have attendant fears of breaching their relationship with one parent or another (Buchanan. Maccoby. & Dornbusch, 1991). Economic Status In cases where parents either are unemployed or income is insufficient for the family, adolescents face well-documented developmental challenges. Among the multiple risks associated with economic strain are difficulties in familial relationships, including those between parents and adolescents. As with the effect of family system stressors. the operative factor appears to be deterioration of the parents' ability to maintain nurturant, authoritative parenting (Grant. Compas. Stuhlmacher. Thurm. McMahon. & Halpert. 20(3), Strong evidence indicate~ that the impact of family economic strain 011 adolescents is mediated by a rise in negativity and a deterioration of nurturant and involved parenting. which in turn is associated all increase in adolescent academic and behavior problems (Gutman & Eccles, 1999). Familial conflicts serve a similar mediating role in the link between family economic hardship and adolescent aggression and anxiety-depressioll (Wadsworth & Compas, 20(2). Both chronic poverty (McLoyd, 1998) and sudden economic loss (Conger et aI., 1992, 1993) are associated with greater parentadolescent conflict, more negative behaviors. harsh, punitive parenting, and adverse adolescent outcomes in domains ranging from prosocial behavior to academic achievement. Recent findings specify one process by which parent-adolescent relationships may exacerbate or buffer the impact of economic strain on adolescent behavior and adjustment. Early adolescents who experience chronic stress from family turmoil, poverty, and crowded, substandard living conditions generally manifest higher allostatic load (a physiological marker of cumulative wear and tear on the body) than adolescents with lower cumulative risk. This effect is most pronounced for adolescents whose mothers are low in responsiveness. implying that having a responsive mother is a resource for adolescents in stressful circumstances, whereas low maternal responsiveness is an additional risk factor (Evans, Kim, Ting, Tesher. & Shannis, 2007). It should be noted that stressors and developmental challenges emanate not only from economic loss and disadvantage. As a group. children and adolescents from affluent families manifest problems such as depression. anxiety, and substance abuse to a greater extent than those from less affluent families (Luthar & Latendresse, 2(05). This link between aft1uence and developmental risk is mediated by achievement pressures and isolation from parents. In many aft1uent families. material wealth appears to be accompanied by reduced contact between parents and their offspring. possibly .q Parenl-Child Relationship" During Adolestentl:' r('..;ultin!:, 111 p0(lrei' qualit~ parent-adole'-.l'el1l relationships (Luthar 6: B.:cker. 20(2). Parental Work Role!> Parent-ad()lescent relationship.s oft':l1 reflect the naturc of rarelll~' work roles and the stre...ses a"soclalL'd with them. Kolm (1079) argued that parents who"e work require" COIIformit\ rather than imlividuai initiative tend lP \ alue oh.:dienee 0\':1' autonomy in their children'" hehavioL In addition. parents' work sclledules--whether they are required to travel extensively. and even thc distance between workpbce and hOl1le--oflen influence what adolescents are expected or allowed to do (Gottfried. Gottfried. & Bathurst. 2(02). Until recently. researchers focused almost exclusiwly on maternal employment. Today. rew ,tudies show differences in closeness or other qualities of relationships for working and nonworking mothers (Galambos & Maggs. I<)() 1: Keith. NeL,on. Schlabach. & Thompson. IY90), Indeed. both sons llnd daughters of working mothers appear to have less stereotyped views of ma<.,culine and feminine gender roles than children .~ ilh nonworking mothers (Hoffman & Youngblade. 1(99). In response, researchers have broadened their inquiries to address the impact that parents' work-related stressors have on their family lives. Findings show that work-related stressors may exacerbate marital and parentadolescent contl icts. In one study. mothers and lathers were more likely to experience tense interactions with their adolescents when they aiso had experienced work overloads or home demands (A imeida et aL. 19Y9J. Tcnsion spillover was more likely for mothers with adolescents than for mothers with younger children. Other findings have re\ealed that the link bctw cen parents' work pressures and adolescent well-heing are mediated by parents' sense of role nverload (Crollter ct al.. 1(99). Having d()cumented these probkms. we still lack I't"search that deSCribes the proces~es by which parent~ and adolescent" adjust to the COJl1pelJng demallds of rarent,' work and fami Iy role.'>. Ethnic and Cultural Variations Link i~ known ahout vanation" in closcne,s among adole,ccnts and parents who ditTer in socioecollomic statu., or ethnic bal'kgwund, One j"lIe in c(lmparing diverse group... i" the best method for equating the degree of closeness as.,ociated with different l10rms and cultured forms of relating. The suggestion that closeness he operationali/ed as interdependence may provide II partial solution tt> this quandary by allowing I'm members of cultunt! groups to specify and report on the freLJliency. duratiun. diversity. and salience of aetivities that denote closeness in their respective contexts (Reis et aL 20(0). Variations among families also retlect differences in ethnic and cultural heriwges. Different cultures foster sometImes contrasting views of parent-adolescent relatioJlships (Feldman & Rosenthal. I<)\j I). For Korean adolescents, strict parental control signifies parenwl warmth and low neglect. whereas middle-class adolescents in North America typically regard the same behavior from parents as repressive !Rohner & Pettengill, 1985). Adolescents from European backgrounds report similar or greater closeness, compared to their peers from families with Mexican or Chinese backgrounds. yet those from the Jatter two groups experience a stronger emphasis on family obligation and assistance than do adolescents from European backgrounds (Hardviay & FUligni. 2(00). Cultural comrari:,olls generally show sizable overlaps in descriptions of relationships across differing cultural groups and elillal or even greater diver.,ity within than helween these groups (Harkness & Super. 2(02). Cultural gaps in the nature and .,ignificanee of parent-adolescent interactiolls are especially apparent in immigrant families. Parentadolescent relation:-.hips vary aeros, immigrant families and between immigrant families and those of the host culture. reflecting parents' varied nJitural and normative patterns. For '~aID1~le,Asian American families in California more formal communication with than did either Hispanic American ElllfOlpe2m American adolescents (Cooper, Asian American youth also expressed./,.""~,.,.. J. levels of familistic values, emphasizing importance of respect for and duty toward and family. Some cultures foster relamore attention to duty and filial piety thers (Hofstede, 1980J. and these differmay affect the degree to which adoJes,. ifnts evaluate their relationship~ with parents siblings in terms of the quality of interaction. Research findings suggest that patterns ~parent-adolescent conflict differ between and nonimmigrant families in the States (Fuligni, 1998), but not between dll:ter,ent nonimmigrant subgroups (Smetana & 1999). Similarly, Greek Australian .aO.(')Ie:scems reported more tolerance and accepof conflict than did Greek adolescents eUts viewed conflict with their children much the parents living in Greece did (Rosenthal, l)emetriou, & Efklides, 1989). Despite cultural and ethnic differences in the perceived qualities of relationships, '~eral studies have documented consistent yorrelations between the characteristics of parental behavior toward adolescents and adolescents' behavior and development. In one lllultiethnic sample, adolescents' perceptions that their parents were authoritative, rather than anthoritarian or neglectful, were correlated with personal maturity. school achievement, and low levels of behavioral and psychological problems (for an overview, see Steinberg, 2001). This correlation held for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and European Americans alike. Similarly. perceptions of parental rejection have been found to be correlated with poor individual outcomes in a number of different cultures (Rohner & Pettingill. 1985; Rohner & Rohner, 1981). In other words. although typical patterns of parental control may vary across cultures. family environments that empha~ize mutuality, Conclusion 35 respect for the child's opinions, and training for maturity seem to be most effective in helping adolescents develop attitudes and behaviors appropriate to their society. Arecent study of the impact of racial identity and parent·-adolescenl relationships on adolescent functioning illustrates the complexity of these links. A sample of African American high school seniors revealed that correlations between racial identity and maternal support, on one hand, and depressive symptoms and anxiety, on the other. were mediated by perceived stress (Caldwell, Zimmerman, Bernat, Seiler:" & Notaro. 20(2). It is clear that direct and indirect influences of relationships with parents extend to families in all cultures. However, the enterprise of amassing information on variations in the nature of these links is still in its infancy. Knowledge of indirect links is especially meager. The next phase of research incorporating ethnic and cultural diversity must attend to the more complex models ofparenting that encompass multiple possible pathways of int1uence. CONCLUSION Contemporary research with parents and adolescents challenges traditional theoretical and methodological approaches to adolescent development Conceptually, the growing body of findings on adolescents' close relationships implies that adolescent development can be understood more fully in the context of relationships with significant others and that relationships with parents remain centrdl to these contexts. Methodologically, the findings imply the need for broadening the construct of adolescent outcomes to incorporate interpersonal competencies and developmental changes 1n them and also to adopt more complex models of the processes through which parent-adolescent relationships have an impact The key task is to understand not only the developing individual, but also the interplay between individual growth and change in the nature and developmental significance of relationships with others. 36 Pan~nl-Child Relationships Durin!! Adolescence REFERENCES t,\d~l.Ill"', R 12(0);, P(!I'el1i-t"ilih! rc!ulio/l,lhijl.\ ({eW.I.I {-arf\ w/o/c', . ('!it ( (/1(111 l,'C\ l/Jul W/III.IIIllClli Jocto! a: tl!..,:-,ctl;1l101L Dc;-unnn.:nl 111 P..,!chnh)~:. HI lLd RaWlL FL AJ~llH:-. k .. &: Llur:'('JI. H i2{Xll i. ThL' or~"lllilJIIUn a:ld d:!l~Jlll it,.;" of ;;uulL':,u:!1t cootllL'1 wilh parl'llh <.JnJ friend" ,1our!Ja! o! Mllrridl;c om! /'clli/ily, (L", lJl ·-110 '-\Li;,u)),,_ R.. .\ 1,<.JlIL"l'Il, H. {2007 J. The ":OITL'late" vJ conflict: Di"i.lgrLTJlh~n' i", noi liC..'I.: .....,ilni: ddrimemaL Jour/wi t~II,;it11Ih' /).Hrli(l/PL'\, '2 J. --J.-45~--J.)r:. Ain..,v,urtll, M. D. S ([(})<)1.)L Al!l-l.:llt illt.:rat:tion" <..I.., prL'diL'lOr'" o! adok""t.:l'nl q;u tin l'lnpll1L'1I1 "df-l·...ll·CI1L {"ltilt! /)cnz /r)l'l!u'!II. Ii.) 179--1'14 A!lr:n. 1 j-'" &: L<.UIJ. D. ! 19(9) Auachnlen! m <.u:.lOk,...CCIlL'L', In J. Ca_"':--'Id~ b: P It Sha\LT Ii-.tk). l1uIJdhfJof.. {II {iffW'!IIIIt'1!! Tlwlln. r('w_'wd:. find clinical {{1'I,jiclf1ioJl.' (pr. ~ 19 Barher. B K. S'"I/. H. L. 6: Olsen. J. A ,COO)1. Parcn: "'pr"fL r,\~chnln~icd' control. alld hl'i1;n mral Lonlfol A"'~l::-'\1I1g n:le\ .mel' aCfP:-." lllTh..'. nllwrc anu Illetilod Mill!tJr;!tIJ'/J'-. of llie .)U( ('ll.lm Rt'.\('{(!dl iii C/Hld /)C\·e{(J!H1Jfl1l. 70,..j :-.~.:riu; Il(l, 21--;2 I Barrell. L S. (1997 L The n,'blwibiIip" am()n~ IllOl1lCn!Jr: cmo· (lull:.!1 ue"Lfil~!ltJn~. ,Inc! n..'lfu"'PL'CtI\'C r..Hlng:-. ::3. I 17.1- I IX7 l1aurnrind. D. I jl)l)lj t::.1kcti'l' Jli.ln:nling during lhi...' e;;rl: aU(liC'''LL'fH lrt!)1\llioH in f-', .A_ C\l\\:!Jl &: J~vt Hcth.:r~llt'HJJ! I Etb..!. Jonu/; 11'011.\/"(111,\ (PP 111 .. 1631. HiU,uah.:. "iJ' LmTL'IH:C f-.rlhaultl. ikhk). J." Jufkc. S.. H-,;l~b. l\.. 6.. Slha. II. A, (:::001!. Child rcann~ ,\o;a .\i!!ll)wia on Child hyc/;n!o,l;\ ' .. oJ. 30. A'chif!ol/.\/IIf'.~ a\ t!t'\"('I(),!)~ !JJctHtll ("omen" (PI' X5-I(7). Mall\villt. \/J: Lawn.:nL't' Erlnaurn, Bh)~, p. j 1974}, The m!n/on'lIt pa\,w).:t'_ Nc\\ Yurk' IIHt'rnatJonal Ulli\'.:r~itk:-. Pre-s:-., B\,lger. K, E.. PaUen",H'.. C, J,_ Thomp....on. \\" \it'.. & KU[1L'r:--midl. J B. (14()5). PSYL'ho~(ldal atljul.,tlllclll among chiftlrell ,:xne"lerl""'" anti illlcnmHenl hllnilj l"LOllUJHIi...· haH.hh![) U<"('I{//>,III""1. ',f,. 1107-1129. Bowcrman. C, ., &: Kinch. J. '\Ai 11(59). ChaHgc~ in ramil,:.. and peer orientation or chilurcil hCiV¥CClJ thl.: 4th and lOth gr;,tde:-., Sucial fin'u'.\, 37, ~On<:' J 1. Bowlhy. J. (19691. A1Wl'!JIHClJ1 WIl! Ion. \'01. L Al1(fdoJli'ft/. Ncv; 'rorl-:: BU:-'Ic Boob. Br''''Je. S~ J. T.. Ian Aken. M. A. G.. & vall Lic,hout~ C. F M~ i 20021. Rclulional in familie:; with adole....cellb, joul'If(l/ or "'.lIlIiiy Psycholugy. 351-.\62. BranJe. S. J. T.. Ian Doom. M., lall der Val~. L &. Mee"s. W. 'In pre....;;). Pure-nt-u{loie",cL'nt conilict..., conl1ic! re~ohl!ion. :md adolescent adJu....lInenL Journal (1} Al'lllied 1J('w:/opmnllul P.'Jydw/ogr, Brall.le~ S~ J. T.. Ian Lie,boul. C. F. M.. &. van Aken. M. A. G. (2005 i Rdatton:-. hctween and pen.:t:ivcd _...up· nice pcoplt' .arc no! alvray.." o{ Uei1(ll'iomi /Jer('/opmenf. Brcl1ugcn, M" \Vanner. 13" Morin. A. J, S." 8: Vltam. F. (2005J. Relation:-; with parelll:-. and with pecr:-,. tL'mperamenL and tr11Cau~;h! bL'twecn parent~: AdnJc:-.cL'I1!'· c\p...:riellCl..: ill Ji, ol'ccd homes_ Child Dn'e!o/mu'f1l, (;2, If)Ot\-I030. Buchlc], C (\: GcrartL 1 M. (::'0021. Mari{,d (\mnkl. inctTcLlIYL ami chll;Jrcll'~ :lnd adt}k~lTnl:-" Illalau,!U\tlllCnl 11/ :'tJurtiogl' ami Fumi1\-, ()-+. 7~-9~. HuhrnlC'~tcr, D .. & Furman, \V. Ilt):-;7" The dn.:11.1rtncll! 01 ,:(lll) pu'liollShip and intimal'), CI,iid On'l'/ojlllICnf, 11 {) 1, i 11,l References 37 Dekovic. M.. Meeu,. W.. & van Ake". M. A G. (2(Xl21 '..'ri_,IOl!m'~'"" panem~ III adolehcent attachment 10 mother. sibling, ,Juurnal (~I }<:wth and AdOfesu:nct, 31, ,1.. van Doorn. M.. BranJe. S. J T. & Laur,en. vicisSHudeh of contlict mea~uremenl: Stabiiu: in the frequency Gf di~ag:reement\ European & Dunlop. R. (1998). Parental divorce. parent~;hild rela· and early adull relationship' A longitudinal Australian PersoTlf./1 ReintiollShips. 5. 393-407. H., Zimmerman. M. A.. Bernat. D. H. Seiler;. R. M . & C. (2002). Racial identity. maternal ,upport. and distress among African American adolc:.cents. 73, 1322..1336. itUe, T. D,. & Seli!,. J. P. (Ed,.) (21x]H I. Mudelin~ rdcpemJenf dato ill t1evelopmenlEJl reSl'lIrc/t, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. & Collin.. W. A. (2007.J. Adolescent attadl' sentations and development in a risk sample. In & O. Maysele:-:s (Ed~.). Allochmcl1/ in udall',H'ene£' .;1lns and nell' DilKIe,). Ne..r lJireCliO:l,\ for Child amI Developmenl (No. 117. pp 'I1-J061. San Franci,co' P., & Malis. R. $, (2IXl4), Demand/withdraw commu· between parenl\ and adolescents: Connection:-. with and substance use. )ourrwf of Social and Persuna! " 2{, 125..148 (1995), Relationships and development: Family individual change In S. Shulman (Ed.). C/m" and sociOe1nulional develo/)ll1enl (pp. 12g~154t Ablex. (2002). Historical perspective, 011 contemporary social development. In P. Smith & c. Hart (Ed,.). Handbook of' Social Developmenl (pp. 3-231. Blackwell. A., & Laursen, B. (2000). Adolescent relationship" The In C. Hendrick & S S. Helldnck (Eds,), elme re/a· ,A sourcebool. (pp. 59--69). Thou;and Oaks. CA: Sage. , Laursen, B, Mortensen, N.. Luehker. C.. & Ferreira. Conflict processe"i, and lransitions in parent and relationships: Implications for autonomy and regulation. lofAdolescenre, 12. 17~.. 19~. W. A., Maccoby, E., Steinberg. L.. Hetherington. E. M., & . M. (2000). Contempomry research on parenting: The nature and nurture. American Pxycl/ologisl. 55, 218-232. A, & Madsen. S. D. (2003). Developmental changes interactions. In L. Kuczynski (Ed,. t, HOlldhook of' parent--child relullOlis (pp. 49-66). Beverly Hills. ,A., & Repinski, D. J. (200I t. Parents and adolescents as lransf'Drn,.", of relationships: Dyadic adaptations to develop· I'nental change, In J. R, M. Gerris rEd.). D\'IIwnics o[parenting: """"l11!e:nlationaJ perspectives on n.ature aHd suurces of parentmg 429-443). Leuven, Netherlands: Garant A., & Steinberg. L. (2006). Adolescent development in int<)rp<,rsclnal context. III W. Damon & R. Lerner (Series Ed,,) Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.). 111e handbook (I{child ps\cholol!.v, 3: Social. emotional and personality dei'e/opmenl (6th cd.: 1003-1(67). Hohoken. NJ: John Wiley & Sons. W, & Goldstein. M. J. (199~). Multiple perspective, on family relationships: A latent variables model. Child Deve/opmelll,64, 1377..1388. ~Cook, W, L., & Kenny. D. A. (2(x]5). The Actor..Pariner T~terdepelldence Model: A model or hidirectlOnal ctTects 1I\ uevelopmental sludies" Internalimwl J{Junlal or I3dwI'iom/ Development, 2~, toI..·I04 Cooper. C R. (14Y4l- CuilUra! pcr:,pective> on continull: and change in aJolt.':-;cem< relalJonships In R. Montemayor. G. R Adam~. ~ T p" Gullmta {Ed!',.). f'US{Hlut feialionshitlJ durinj! "dolescellce (pp. 7g·.. IIKll Thousand Oak,. CA: Sage. Cro~noe, R A.. &: Elder. L HH Jr, (2002 j Ufe cOUr~c traolsirion:-. the !!eneralional stake. and grandparent·-grandchi!d relation· shir.~. Journal 0/ /ylarriage and fht: Famil.\. 64. lO~('\-·IO~6 Cmuter. A. C. Bumpus. M. F.. '.1aguire. M. C.. &: ;'IcHale. S M. (19Y{),I. Linking pan..mb' work pre,,\un: and adolest:em..,weH-belU,g. Im.ighb- into dynamIC!'- in dual~earncr familie~ Dnelopmem'" PS\('hoiogr. 35. 1453 .. 146J. Cumaang~. E. M .. &: Davie..,. p, (IY44) Children and mantal nm .IIiCl: Tilt' impaci (~rfamil.i di,\'pwe and re.wlurimi f\.'cy.· York: Guilford Press Darling. J',;" Cumsillc. P.. Caldwell. L. &: Dowdy. B (2t~)6, Predictors of adol6cenb' disclosure to parent' and percelved parental knowledge: Betwe~n- and wlIhin-pcr..,on dlffercn(:cs juurnal (~fT(}/1tl1 and Adolescence, 35, 667-67l<. Darling. N.. & Steinberg. ! J'i9~). Parenting styJe ttl'. t:omext: An jnlegrallVe model. Ps\'chologica/ Bui/elm, 113,487-496. l.)ekovii. M.. BuiS!, K. L., &: Reilz, E. CO(l4, Slaoilll), and changes ill prohlem behavior during adole~cence: Lwcnt growth analy" sb. journal {~rh)!/lh and Adole.\ct'llcc, 33, 1-12. Devereux, E. (1970, The role or peer group experience in moral development. In 1 Hill (Ed.l, Ti,e Mmne.IO/O Chlhl P,yclw;ogl·. vol. 4 (pp ~4-140, MinneapolIS' of Mmnc:.ola Pres~, D,eh, D. M" Viken, R" Purcell, S" Kapno. 1.. Pulkkmen. L.. & Ro,e. R. J. (2007). Parental mOflltoring moderates the impor~ lance of genetic and environmental mfluence,.., on adoie~cent smoking. Journal PSldwlog\: /16, 213..2 Jg. Dishion, T J. Nelson. E., & Bullock. B. M. :20(4). Premature ado)c'\cent autonomy: Parent disengagement and dt:\'lanl peer process in the amplificalJOn of prohlem oehavioL Joumal (~f Adolescence, 27. 5J5..530. Doyle. A. B" & Markiewicz. D. (2005). Parenting. marital conflict and adjuMmem from early~ to mjd~adole"iccnce: Mediated hy adoic}.cent attachment style? Journal o.fYotlth and Adolescence. 34,97.. 110. Duhas. J" &. Gerris. J R. M. (2002). Longitudinal changes 111 the rime parents spend in activitie.... with their adoles!":ent children a!:o a function of child age. pubertal statu;.,. and gender. Journal at FlIlIlilv Psvchololi). 16.415-427, Ducharme, 1.. Doyle. A. B.. & Markiewicz. D. 120(2), Attachment security with mother and father: Ass:ocialion~ with adole!-.cents repon, of interpersonal behavior with parents and peers. Journal (4Social Wid Personal Rcfmionsilipx. 19, 203-231. Eccles. 1. S. (1992). School and family el!ecb Oil the ontogeny ot children's interests. self-perceptions. and acdvJty choice\", In J. E, Jacob~ (Ed.). Nehraska Symposium Oil Moth'mim!. vol. 40: DeFc/opmenJal per.'pectil'es un moth'a/ion (pp, 145~20g), Lincoln; Unive"ity of Nebraska Pre,,,. Ei,enherg. N., Fabes. R. A.. & Spmrad, T. 1... (20061. Pro,ocial development. In \V, Damon & R. Lerner (Sene, Ed.1 arid N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.). The homlhook ojchiidp,q chology, "01. 3: Social, emOTional (ffu/ personalif", dl'1'f:/UpntcJIl 16th ed. pp. 646-718). Hohoken. NJ; John Wiley & Son,. Ere!. 0 .. & Bunnan. B. (1995). lnterrelaledness of marital rela· tion~ and parent---child relations: A meta-analytic revie'W. PsydlOlngiml8ullelin. 1111. 101\--132 !of/hon. c. H (lY6g) Idelllilr. Yaurh "/ld ensi,\. New Yod: W W. Norton. Evan,. G. W" Kim. P.. Ting. A. H.. Te,her. H. B.. & Shanuls. D. 1200h Cumulative risk. malemal responsiveneS\, and allo,tatic load among young adolescent!". Devdupmerual P.,ychuJogy. 43. 341·351. Fauher. R.. Forcha.ld. R.. Thomas, A M" & Wlerson. M. (I 'I~OI. A mediational model of the impact of marhal ~onnlci on adole~cent adjustment in intact and divorced falHljH:!S: The role of disrupted parentmg. Child Deve!0lmlcnl. 6/. 1112..1123 Fecne:. B, C" & CahSidy. J. (2003). Row"'truc!ivc memory n~:ated 10 adolcsccnI-parem conflict imcnh:tion!-. The innc~ encc of attachment· related reprc\emation,... on immediate perCeption... and change~ In perceptions uver time. Jourrwl oj Pcr.w.mahty alld Sodal Psycilo/ugy, 85. 445~955. JX Parcllt-Child Rdatiollsbil)~ During Adolcscence f'L'IJ1I'lT;. \1 . ~\.. l-kulvrih12l()E \1. (20tH L [)inC;'l'H:h.t1 :'ldll'1llill!C ,t'- d \' I!!!!J: IJllllI; .IuUl'iIll! (1,1 hUllii" l'I..!'i;(J!(;g\ /5 i-ctlib'-·I~. \1- L. BU!l~!n "L iv-I i\L t\.l'ilkri1!:-":I, J M.. R\:h", D, &:. I k\h...'nn~lt)n. 1" Ivl : 2007 L I\.in:nllfl~' allJ dU! )k'_'l"Cnl ~1ll1!"'!J"-ia! hchin it>: dlhJ uL'11rc-.",!on Ui\lI,l!il!lc;,.'1l 1 Iflll'fiH.:lIOl, h,,'lobelt-o \1. f-.. H(J\\\.'. Cl. \1\,. Ht.:j ...... P .. &: l-h:t!l1'::lnglllJ1. r.. \-1 i_~I)f)!I._ k.::btHlll,inp hl'l\\l'l~Jl PCIJ,,::•.'pu,\I dirr,-TenL\.'" n! p:lrl'lll In!:, dod ddllh."\':l'lli ,mti·....lll·lal lwil;\\ io! .{nd '.\ !llPtum'_ .loHI'IW/ ;If hlllli;' /J;u'iwl()!,'\. 1-1 h.:ltllll'-lll. S. S.. &; I Gal"lI1b,,,. 1\. L Barker. F.. 1. &: AlmcllJa. D. M. 12()0.1) Paren" do matter: Tn~icc!Oi ie, of change in c\(nnalJ1mg anu illtt?rn:.di/jng prohkm" m t'arly adole:-.cenl'c. ('jlllt! /)!'rcioplncn[, 7-1, 57K~)Y-l (i<.llamho~. '\J I., & l\1agg.... ,I. L : 194 I L OU!-or~schooj can: ur adok~LL'IHS i.HH.l "elf-rcporku hL'h~l\'il)r. Ol'l'cl(JjJIIU'fliOI 27, 64-4--hS). (;arhcr, J . & Lillie. S_: 1l)t)CJ!. Pn.'Jictor"-, 01 amung oir"print~ (1/ ciepn..",cd lllo11lL'r~. JOHni{{/ III nJ{ !,n:nCt·, ('!tiM /)Cl'('/Oi'IliClif, 51. 4!:') (jrotnalll. H, I)" &. (oopl,;'r. C. 1<. \ ll}~6) (min idllat~o[l in LUll il~ 1\:iaU!)ll\hip": A PLr:"jK·;,:li\L' 011 illlll\iulial tllfll'l'l'IlU..':" in thv U..:\ l"IUrlllL"n~ oi ident!!:, and rok~l amltv,,.-o-pan:nl famllie\ Child 1h'1'c/o/"lJIt'tH, 7tJ i-l-h-l---1-I76. lII,di" w/lflif'fljl 10 WX, Cl il//{-', n:ligl'(I};, dJld APrielon Hanlw,ty, C.. &. Fuligni. A. {::0(6). Dinh:n:.,i('ln~ or ramil) L'onnn:iedI1C'" .H1lOng adole_\cl'nt\ with \lc;\II,,'an. Chine,,..,!.:. and EUr(lpcan hackgrOlllld.... {)('vc/ol'f//clllllf Ps,rclwlo!{r. ./2, 1246--(2)h. lhlrhnc$:". ,S" & c. 1200:21. Cuhure and parenting. In M. Born"tein Hm!(/h(Jo~' o/IJnn'mil1f:{_ \oL 2: BiuJogy ;md ecolo!!) of p.ueming Ipp 25,t- 2tHlL rvlahv,:ah. '\JJ. Lav.;n'lH.:e Erihallll1 Harri\..J. R. { !ijl.)X I. Tlw Hurflfl'f' If.\,\ifl!JI'{IOIL Ne\\ 'Wrt',:, rrL't' Pn;~:-., 'Vi. W,. &:. Laur"en, 13. i 19'1j L Rdulii.ltlship~ de\dnpmen~ (onh:x[". In R. Cohn; &. A \V Siegei (Ed."_). COilfcS! and d,'I't,'lrJpJ1Jo!J IPP, 2:'\,;<279;. Hillsdak. NJ: Lawrcllce Erlb,lUm. HaUhL'l'. S. T..I'O\h'f\,. S.. & Nomll. CI_ f 1l)9f J. Adolc,\cul/~ 1I/1t! J/wil /ulIlilin: PalIn (;1 t'J.:f! dCI'('/uI'JIf('ff!. NeVI YOfh. rrl.:t' Prr~". Hethl:'finglon. E. M (1999). So...:la! L<-tpilai and the lh.::\t:!oprnem o! },outh from J1olluiYorced. uivorcL'd. and rl'lllilrneU I;'HnillC~, In VI/. A, Coli III:.. &. B Laur~en (Ed',L 'Ihe AfiIlIlC,W/U Sym{I(J,.,iu OJ! Chiltl VI\'C/IO/Ugy, vol. 30: I,'ith lllarit'JllTam,lIi01:: '~}:-h:;tl:_ flL'r"I'L':"!I\~' ,~I(J1:(j."rdrh (~I Ihi' SOClt'ty ,lor Itn( (IIi ,Ii in r/;ild /)(Tcl"j1I!1('1{f, _"17 ('2 J. "cnailio rktherill~IO\;, t·, M .. & Kl'II~. J. !2002!. Jy'r hf'l1C! (1,1' n-or,I(': /)i"tll'u' I'COJ(J,\f'df'lt'ti. '\Jc\>, Yor\...: W W, Kurt;')n. r. M. M. (.::'{)02! Palt.'nIJHl;! If! ,11ld remarried In f..'1 Rorn"'!J.:1II Il:d,1 !/omlh(Jot of /lurellfill,t:. \ 01. i I'P .'15 J ,',,1,,11\\ al:. f'..1 Hill. J P. (J9X};i i\diljl!itl!! 10 Illcll,Jrchc; LlIl:illm) l'OllllO! :ll1d L'llnrli..:!. In M R. (Iollnal ~ \\:_ i\. ('plIlIl:- {Ed:-.,!, ,1flJllI(,,\O{O SrJlfIJo,\f(/ 011 ('fuM P,\I('/{(llll:':" \Ill :2! fh'lc!"/WIOI! dll! ill,!.!. !III.' f/d/t\lIi!IU If' Ilduln('('I/{ ( (I'p. 4.1. Ililhdak. ~J 1":I\\'1'clk':.' 1·,rib,lum References 39 HI J P.. & Lynch. M E (19~3 L The tntensiticallun of gender H 'reiaLed role expectations dunng enrly udolc:'\cencc, 1n j. BroobGUM & A. C. Pelcr:-.en (Eds.). Gu-h at PUbf!'~IY,' Hio!ugical ana psychologli;al pl'np of ho"ilily in familie,. In N. A. Card. T D. Lillie. & 1. P Selig lEd,.), ModciinR dvadic and jnler' dependt'nt data in aen-iopmental research, Ivtahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlhaum. Keilh, J. G., Nelson. C S .. Schlabach. J. H.. & Thompson. C J. (1990). The relationship belween parental employment and three measures of early adolescent re~ponslbility: Famil)'4 related. personaL and social. Journal ofEar(r Adolescence, 10, 399-415. Kelley,H. R.Ber.scheid,E .Clu·;slensen,A..HarveyJ. H.,Huslon,TL.. Levinger. G.. ct ul. (1983), Clo~e relationships, Ne\\ York: Freeman. Kenny, D. A.. Kush)'. D. A.. & Cook. W. L (2()(J6). Dyadic dala analysis. New York: Guilford Pre::;,s. Kerr. M., & Slallin. H. (2000) What parents kno\\, ho", they know it, and severaJ form:.. of adole:o.cenl adjustment: Further I'IUpport for a reinterpretation of monitoring, Dt:!'f'iupnwntal Ps.rcllOlogr. 36. .166-380. Kerr, M.. Slauin.. H.. &: Burk. W. J (in press!. A reinterpretation of parental monitoring in longitudinal per~pl:ctive. Journal of Research un AfJoil'scencc. Ken, M.. Stall;n. H., &: PilKulnisklene. V {2mJ6L Whal do par· ent;.;. do when fai.:ed with adolescent prohlem hehavior'! In J. Coleman. !\Ol. Kerr. & H. Swum (Ed,.). P(/renli/!!! of adule.'· ceHl.\. Hoboken. NJ: John \Vijey & Son'. Kim, K L Conger. R. D.. Locenz. ". 0 .. /;;. Eldcr. G. H.. lL (2mll. Parcn!-·utiole\Ce!11 reclprocit~ in negatlve affect and ib rdation to adull social ot.'vclopmenL lki'c/opmcJlwl Psyclwlug:r, 37. Kohn. M, L {197i.h The efieu~ of \ocia: cla:,~ on paremal \'ul~ ue, and practice, In D Ret'" & H. A. Hoffman (Ed,.!. flu· Amrrtc(1n fWJli(r: Dyinp or dn'f'lul'inJ!. (PP_ 45··{)t'S~. f\.e" 'fort.. PleHu!11 Pre:--... Kowal. A. K. Krull. tial treatment 01 h linked wilh purent-i.:hild rClatlOlJ~ ship yuahly. Journal V~n1j{}1(J,t{\. 18. 65){~665. Kmlmakumar. A.. /;;. Buchler. C. 1~()()OI. Intcrparenwi coll1liel and hehavior:--: A meta-analyti",' rC"H:W. Fomilr R('llIt/oJIj, KW':lyn:-.ki. L (Ed.). (2003). /lwu/boo/.. (~r((Yllwnit:.\ iJl/WI't'lIh'hiJd reialirm,\ Thou~and~ Ouk:~. CA: Sage. Kuczynski. L. &. Parkin. M. (lOOt)). Agenc; and bidire<.:lionalHY 111 :--ocialization. Intera<':lion~. lran~ac!Jolll\. and relmlonal diah.:ctl~S. Illl E. Gru~e(' &. P Ha-'ling., {Ed:.";. HtllldbouJ,. (~f .W((u/· i;:.mimf (pp. 259~2HJ). !\cw York: GuiJforcj Pres.... Laird. R. D.. Peun, G. S.. Bale,. J. L &. Dodge. K. A. I2(X)3J. Parent;." monHoriniH'clevunt knowledge and adoh:-:--CCHIS' delin­ 4uent behavior: Evidence of correlated cbange:-. in recipro<.:al influem::e,. Child /)('1It/o/)ftlf'1l1. 752-768 Lamborn. S. D.. Mounts 1'. S, Stelnbcq;. L. &. Dornbusch, S. M (1991). Pauerns of compeLCHce and udjustment among adoll'sM t:enC... from authoriwlIve_ authOritarian. indulgent and nL'gkcl~ ful families. Child lJn-clol,metll, oJ. 1049--·1065. Lur:--on, R. W., & Almeida. D. M. 04'YlJl, Emotiona! lrUIbmlssion in the daily lives of fumjJies; A nev. paradigm for studying famIl) proce.s:-.. Journal (~rM(J!TUJkt' lind the family. 6/, 5~20, Larson, R. w.. & Richards. M. H. 11'194 L Di\·('J)!elll ··ealities: Til<' emotioJlal!il'c.\ (~rmOlherl. j'i.lllwrs. and ado/Dcem.\. New York: Basic Book..... Lor",n. R. W.. Richard,. M. R. MonetlL G., Holll1bcck. G.. &. Duckett. E. ()4'96). Change:-- in udole~cenb' dail~ illterac[ion~ with their fUlIlIlies from age, 10 (0 18· and trano.;.formali0)). D(,I,t'loj1IHelltal P.'iyt/w/ogy, 32. Lk1ur~en, B. (1993). Contlict managemtnt among do~c pe(;r~. in B. Laur~en (Ed,). CIO:H) friendships ill adolescence Ne}1 Dirt'ctioJl,\ for Chlid f )r'I'e/opmem i 110. 60: pr, 39~-54). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Laur~en, B. (1995,1. Conflict and sodal inleraction in adolescent relationships. JOLlmai (~rR~search on Ado/escf'nce. 5, 55~7(L Lau"e". B. (200S). Conflict between mothe" and adolescents in single-mother. blended. and two-biological-parenl familie,. Parenting: ScieNce and Praclic('. 5, 347-370. Laursen. B., &: Bukowski. W. M. (1997;. A de\elopmental gUide to the organisation of close rdaljonship~. Imernmiono/ Journal vf Be/laPioral Deve/opmel1l. 21,747--770. Laursen. B .. & Collins. W. A. (1994) Interpersonal conflicl during adolescence. Psyclwlogwa/ BIII/elii/. i 15. 197~2()9. Lau,,,,,n, B.. & Collin" W. A. (2004). Parent-child communica· tion during adoJc;..cerlcc. In A. Vangelisti (Ed,), Handbook (4 {amify communicatiON lrp, 333-348i. Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Er1baul11. Laursen. B.. Coy. K. c. &. Collin,. W. A (1998). Reconsidering change!-. in parent-child conflicl acroh~ udole:-;ccm:c: A mctaanalysi;... Chiid [In'e!op1llent. 6l), ~ 17···g~i2. Laursen. B.. Funnan. W.. & \1ooncy. K. S. (C(Kl6i. Predicling intcrper~{)nal competence and ~df-worlh from adoie:--cclH rt'lullonship!-. and relationship networks: Variahk-ccnlcrcd and person-centered pL'r:.;pective;" IWt:rril/~p(llmer QUllIwrl) , 52, 572-6(Kl. Laur,en. B.. & Koplas, A. L 11995 L Wha!"s impo'tam about important connkts',l Adolesl:L'nts' pcn..:cptions of daily dl\agreements. Merrill-Palma QlIllrlerlr .Ji. 536551. LauLsen. B.. & Moooq'. K, S. {.=!OOH'l. Adole:-.cenl adjustlllt'll! as a function of the number oj perceived high qualll} relationship!-. with parents and friend:--, Amcr':\.'wl j(lur/wl (~I Or(lwpsyclJia!rr, 71( 47~53. Lau"eH. B.. Popp. D.. Burk. W. L Kerr. M., &: Slaltfll. H. 1200HL Incorporatjng mterdependcnrc mtl) de\eiopmcntal rest:ateh: Example:-. from the :-.tud) of h()1l1ophil~ ulld horongt:neit} In r 'J. , 40 Parent-Child l I Eu:-.. i, f({ltfl{UIlIt Id'drlO!J,,,!Ji!).1 ill odn[C 1' li'll:/. /)clc/(lflJI'Cliflli l'i'''-IjlCdll'('' '\(')1 fhi'cr/tu}j\ ;UI- ('fu{tf 1)( \ ,,/, '/IIIWI/i : I:ll. 7\": I'P :~. 2!J J. ~,1I1 1-r;JI1L'i.'-ul: .hl;-':-l'~ - Bit"'-" L(l~'l-.,l'r. j.t. iJnllj,.\\;tlL'!. f'vL YIIL 'I. ·\lidCI"\I!L S,l. S\":hlll~dL L C (\ ( 1';.1\\ lor~~. !\. 1201l(h. SI'II1I1II.' 01 L,I!~il~ ilJL.:ruuioll 11'011. age" {I It, 1;-'" j"Hi1/!:! ,,/ ;i.lmnUI/;i! Cilild V, \('iJ%,'..;.\, ~,\ :'5~,~3ht) ad,iu....lmL'n~: i\~ ...()Uall\J!I'. mood. marIliil !Ill,,;ill!:' PilfL'Jll :"'!liIJ ,IOU adJlb1!1!l'lll. I"lfuud 0/ rUlliify 1',1 "'iJlI/O,,{\ 1(/ YQ",40,\ LHhaJ. .\, \. ~\: Ikd.\..'1. B i ~OO~ I. PriyllVt;l'tl flU! :-.!ud.' !,It <{frllle!>1 : oUlh, Chiit! /)('1 C!O!ll!li'lIL 7.( Clla!!Clll!t.''. h' \\l'U-hl'lll,:': ('urn'nf lhrt·'Cli{lll~ II! l'srl'ilological ,>','h'!!CC. ;-+.~!j : .~'\\OI1. H, L::O(J/)) 'fll\\ard a ll1uJ\.'! u! Lllllil';'-L'1l\ [mllllll':lltul ;JnL! ~'Ilild "bj\)in~lCal mnl.lI.·l\l·I:,.... ()11 de\d,)plllL'll1, J)n'c/oll!llt'nJid h','\!('>\. ':0. ::;;0 '7() t\'lUl'l',dl), L L Illh~;, 'I Ill' rllk of piln:IlL~ ill 11"11.' '-'iil,:iali/alioll nl ,-,hiidrt.'IL ,'\1\ Ili ....lonc;d o\l!!'\'in~, /)Cl'dtlllJl1('!;/(i/ 1),\,I.·r/!()/o,l'L .:/'"I(J(l(l iV\(":'Cl't1h:. I:, ~ &: i\--1arlllL J. 1\. f !9{'JJ. Sm:blizallon iii till' l'llfHl'xl \11 lllL' Parl'IlI' child inl:':lactioll, III P 11, \1U\:-'L'll jSL'riL':' Ed,; anti L 1'~kthL'"rillgton I Vi): Ed, L HmJdh(J(}~ oj ('{li!d 1)\,)" t Ilo/ag" \ u! 4' :';Oi'io!i,~{/li(Jii, MOl! \ rp 10 I J. Ncv, Yor!,; l\'tlrkk\\J"":1. D., Lavd~)rJ, tL Dnyk' A. H.. &. Haggan. ~,;20(6). fk\.:hlprnc-nta; dlrfcr;:11L'L'~ In adt)li..':'~l·nl,.. · ..lilt.! young aJuh\" ~!..,;: 01 nlulh;:r~, Lllh.:!'" hl',": !ril'nJ". and I'OtllJ.lllil' partner" tu fulfill aUdcIJlHcn: flt'L'd" Jm!!lIf;/ fllT(Jlflh and Adnie\(l'ncc 35 14(j McUut', )\L El"-im. [. v\·,-tld~IL IL &: la~ono. \\:. G 120())) P~ru.:ptil)lb of Ihe nai lJl\\':-.li~alj():l. l'v1cLanuhatl. S. S., X: SamkfuL G. (19L)-l-j, (jrml'illg II;' wit/' d sill· !Fiwr lion;" 111itii hcfp.l, Camoridge MA, Han'art! Prl'''~ Ml..'LL'tlr, 1\. C &. Thorne. (~O{)JL Lal\.' aiJoh.;:-'Cl't1l"': "dr-dcrill~ illr IIh..'I1IUriL''. ahou! n:lation:-.hip:-., /)Cl'(·/r'I)lJ1n;!ul V~y('lwl(Jgy. 3\;, 6.~5 tll)L)t-J,), SoL'iocl"}n(H11ic di,ad\'untage anti .::hild MnllilLl /.. i...':\Pl'1'il.'lll'l' and (lH"ot'l or Ilh":lIarche: A tc:-.l (If ;;J "'(lclobiologic~1l lllndd. Child ihTciujflllt'lI/. '+7~ 5~ Monlll'\', K, S.. L1Ul'<.,cn. Ii.. (\: A(bnb. R. E. 12mi7j. S()o..:ial ,"llp~ pon ~ll1d pO"nl\L dL'\L'luplIll.:n!: un Ihe hrighi "ide 01 adph:...~cn! ci(l"L' rchllinn'lhip:.. In K. Sllb,-'fei:--.cn & R. M I.LTllLT IEt!.".L .\I'IJ((lIldtn li ' po.'IJil'C ;'olllh dn'c/opult'lif (PP l::'; .:'(),~j TllOu....,lI'd ()ak", CA, S'lgr port and fhl"ilh L' nn 11l1' hri~hl or "dO!c....\'l'III dO'L' K, Silhl'I"l'I'Il'n 8: I~ !\l !.l'~lll'l IJ·.d',L "/.J,UI'II(lcitt'.; It.' 111';ilin ,(lifil: df'l'c/rlJlIllCnf l]1p. I;':()~ ~()31 L(l~ .'\p~L'k'.: Sa~!(', \10UHh. t\. S. i :007), A,lnk"lTllh - dlld their lllrtllicr'.· jl\"'r~cplion:.. 01 p;trl'lllallll.I11:1}!,,·I1l'..'lll nf Pl'CI' rC;aIH)I\~!lip.... J(lumaJ d! Nn( ({I'dl ,'riolo, nlf"(. I, !i,t) 17;-;. ~,-,cdll'_ I{. H.. Su. S.. ,\:. /)(\i11'r!:, v-.', J : !()I.){jI. Di\o!'L'L', dl]11 adok,.....-l·nl "tll'q~\ilCt' ll~l': /\ pnhfll'c!i\,' IOllllillldln<'li ....ttll.l). ,tqu!'!JUr lit ifn! r/(It.:I' [Old rltt liulIJlr. 5::" ['57 --I ()-lJ .\plkL I'. j I ()l)hlI. Rddl!PIl....hlj''. \\ Itll P:IJ'L'"IlI-., I:! fI/lcJil/, 12(), ;';44 -,;q ~ Kolmer, R" P.. &: PCHco,f!ilL S, M. i 1,:):-5,"]' PL"f'c..:jvt.:ci parental fe~u:lH~. ffl/rnul1iOl1ui j(){uuui 0/ nt'/wl'ioml !Jen-,1(l,tHllt'l/i, I::: ~07 -,2! 9 Ruller. M .. Graham. P. Chad\'. il'f..... O. f'_ D.. 6: Yuic. \-V, (tlJ7()) Adok....cL'n! lurmoll' F,le( Of rlL'tiOlt'.1 jOllrtw/ of' Child /YSydlO/Og\- owl PSyciliult'\', ; /. 3:'\-56. Rtltkr. M., Pickk,," A .. \<1urray. R.. 6: Ean:..... L (20011. T~s{in~~ hypot!1l''-E':-' on SlK'L'iJ'k l'm ilOnml'tltal l'alha! dl't.:eh l)11 bL'h,l\iu:. JI.\-y('h%gi( uilillf!l'lin, ~l) l·~ ~:2-i, ~('l'c/(lrmuu, U':,65 79, Sari .... W. E, (i.; Sal()JT 01 dlf· -~krential parentll1g: Links with atlaChmenl style and adole~cenl adjustment. Personal Relali{mship~ 9, 173-190 Silk J, S,. Morn>, A. S.. Kanaya, L & Stemberg, L 12(YJ3) 'Psychological control ,and aUlonorn~ granting: Opposite end~ of 8 continuum or dhtwc( construch'} journal oj Re.\earch on Adolesrence. J3, 113.. 12~. Silverberg. S. B.. & S.emberg, L IIY90), Psychological well..being of parenlS with early adolescent children. lJeveluJimcllwl Ps),choiogl, 26, 658,666 Simmons, L. G .. & Conge!. R, D, (200/). Linkint mother-father differences in parenting to a typology of lami!y parentIng. ~tyle"i and adolescent outcome~. Journal (~r Fami!y lHUeJ, 28, 212~24 i. Simmon~, R. G" &. Blyth, D. A. (19B7), Moving into adolesceNce: The imparl oj pubertal changr and school conIexL New York: de Gruyter. Simons. R. L Chllo, W.. Conger. R. D.. & Elder. G H. (200 I) Quality of parenting a, mediator of the effect of childhood def.ance on adolescent Irlendship chOIces and delinquency: A growth curve analysl!\. journal u(JWarria,UJ and Family. 63, 63~79. Smetana. J G (1988). Adolescents' and parellls' conceptions of parental authority, Chil,l DeI'eloplJ1cnl, 59, 321-335. Smetana, J. G, (I 9Y6) Adole,"cnt-parent conflict ImpiicatJ(lns for adaptive and maladaptive development. III D. Cicchetti & S. L, Toth fEd~.), l?oche.Her Symposium (JII De\'e/opmemal Psychopaflw/ogy, vol. 7, Adole5cence.- Opportunities and chal· lenges (pp, 1..-46), Rochester, NY: University of Rochester. Smetana. J. G, (200()), Middle-class African American adobcems' and parents' conceptions of parental authomy and parenting practices: A longitudinal investigation. Child Developmem, n, I672-!686, Smetana, J, G., Abemethy, A.. & Harris, A, (2000). Adolescent·..parent interactions in mjddle cia:-.s African American famiJit:-s: Longitudlna! change and contextual variation:.. Journal (~r Family Psvchology, 14,458..-474, Smetana.J, G.. Campione-Barr, l\, & Daddis. C (2004), Longitudinal development of family declsion making: Detining healthy behavioral auronomy for middle-clas~ African American ado~ lesceOls. Child IJevelopmelll, 75, 1418-1434, Smetana, J, G" Campione-Barr, N,_ & Metzger, A, (2006), Adolescent development in interpersonal and societal contexts, Annual Rel'ie,,' (y'Psvchoiogr, 57, 255..284. Smetana, J. G" & Daddis, C (2002). Dumain-specific antecedents of parental psychological control and monitoring: The role of parenting beliefs and practices, Child Development, 73, 563-SS0. Smetana, J, G, Daddis. C, & Chuang, S. S, (2tXJ3), "Clean your roomr' A longiludjnal investigation of adolescent-parent COll~ fliet and conflict rel)oJution in middle-c1as~ African American families, Journal o/Adoiescenl Reseurch, 18, 631-650. Smetana, J, G .. & Gaines. C (1999). AdoJescent..parent conft,ct in middJe-cla~-~ African American families. Child Development, 70, 1447-1463, Smelana. J. G,. Metzger. A .. Gettman. D,C" & Campione-Ban', N. (2006). Dlsciosurc and in adobcent-parem relationship!:;. Cllild Dei'ciojmu'l1l, Smetana. J. G" Yau, L & Hansoll, S. 119'11). Contliet re,olUlion in families with adolescent;:.., Joumel ofRe,H!(Jrch 0/1 Adolescence. ], IS9-206, Smetana, J. (j,. Yau, L Remepo, A,. & Braeges. J, L (19'11) Ado!elI' your child's ado/esceno:, fri}5!{ers your own crisl,:" New York: Simon & Schuster, Susman, E, L & Rogol. A, (2004). Puberty and psychological development. In R. M. Lerner & L Steinberg (Eds.). Handbook 0/ adolescefll p.nchologr (pp, 15-44). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Tam,oulJ-Makkink, L D.. Dubas, J. S,. Gems, J. R M, & van Aken, M, A. G. (2004). The relation bet\;'een the absolute level of parenting and differential parenlal treatment with adolescent siblings' adjustment JOllf1W/ (~I Child Ps.\'chology and Ps:\,chialry, 45, 1397-1406. Taylor, R, D.. Casten, R.. & Flickinger. S. M, (1993i. Influence of kinship social ,ul)pOrl on the parenling expenenee, and psychosocial adjuslmcOI of African-American adolescents. lJel'flopmelltal Psychology, 29, 3S2..J~8, Thoma" A.. Chess. S,. & Birch. H. G, (1'l7?}' Temperament alld del'eiopmelJl, New York; BrunnerlMazel. Tucker. C J,. McHale, S, M .. & Crouter. A, C (2003). Dimensions of mothers and father's difterentlal treatment of siblings: Links with adolescent~' sex-typed per.<;,onal qualitie~, 1f.J11lily Rdalion;, 52, 82-89, Tmkheimer. E.. & Waldron, ,'vi, (2ooOl, Nonshared environ· ment: A theoretical. methodologIcaL and quantllntive revie-w P,\yc/wlogicall:illllelm, 126, ]M.. I08. van Doorn, M. D .. Brante, S. J. T.. & Me"u,. W. H. J (Ill press). Conflict resolution in parent-adoJe.'>Ccnl relationships and adole~cent delinquency, Journal of Early Adole,\'c(!IU'f, van Doorn M, D.. Brunje. S. J, T.. & Meeus. W H. J, (20()7). Longitudinal trullsmission of COUnicl rei'<.OlUlion :-;lyle~ from lnarilal relatiunsh;p:-: to adolescent-parent relationships. J(JlItHai of Fumily Psrcholog\,. van Leeuwen, K, G .. Mervieldc. L Brae!. C. & BO,nIans. G (2004), Child personality and parental behavior as moderalor; of problem behavior: Variable· and pcrsofl"'centered approache:-.. Dc,'e!opmentai P.'.'r/lOlogv, 4U, J02~-1 046. Vuchinich. S. {f9H7 L Slaninl; and stopping spontancou_, farnil~ conf1icL~_ Journal (~tMar"it1g(' onel rhe FaI1rU~ . ./,0, 59! ·-60 I, 42 Parent-Child Rclati(Jnship~ During Adolescence (IHnl part!\.. .... 111 u: .' 1<.1:mJ) L'on!lil't oul",p!l1",',". ('iliid !ki d"IJIlIUJ:, 5(;, J ~lJ3-_j V'~ld'\\OruL \1. L t:... ('l'm;x;" B, L ;2(J(i:21 Cupin,~ \'dth l.:tlllJl: ctl!lfli(f add cl'nnoll1i ... ,qr\iilL Thc aJul":'-,I..'(;'rH [1L'r"p..:L!!\;:. ,ill/IU,U! i!I HI'.\£ Illi It tli, Ado/cli'elle c i::. '::7-4 \\;,l/_'llh(liL'r. K ,'\ BuchanarL C. M. L\: .h.tck...un-Nc\\",oJ11, J ! 20iJ-l J, ~1ulht:r" ami lathL'T~' 1-..110\\ kd~L' II!" .tdok·"CL'fH<,,· Jail) ~1l'li\-i\Il"'" It-. ....ulIln''', and Ii' 1m!.;., v. itt"! adok'lTIl! ;'iJ;u",uHcm J(Jl!!wd o( / omf/) I~_\ \ t'i/r,fO(L J8, .160, W~llh'l, I, ~'J:i: loc.! ! j 4l) i I I-amll}, lH\LT<1CUOlh dlld tilt' ~h.., ,:jllP1JlL'IH n! '!lora; n;'L"l)!lill~.' Clu'U IJr') dO!}!}lc!!! Ii ;."l.1 \\-hlk'nlJ.r;, ~ 1),. c..: Buch<-lIWl1. C \1 <~.(J(r:::J i\1(1\lk'f' ,:;'lt!lJ Pre,,:.­ HANDBOOK OF ADOLESCENT PSYCHOLOGY THIRD EDITION Volume 2: Contextual Influences on Adolescent Development Edited By RICHARD M. LERNER LAURENCE STEINBERG ffiWILEY John Wiley & Sons, Inc.