UC Berkeley

Beyond the normative escalation of adjustment challenges in adolescence, immigrant parents and youth also face acculturative challenges that can negatively impact parenting and mental health. Many existing interventions to address the challenges of adolescence capitalize on knowledge of parent-child dynamics primarily studied within non-immigrant, white families. The cultural relevance of these interventions is hampered by our limited understanding of the long-term relations between parenting and youth mental health in immigrant families, and how these factors unfold across time. Furthermore, more research is needed to understand how parents’ and youth’s perceptions of mental health symptoms align and differ among immigrant families.The current study aimed to address this gap by examining longitudinal relations between childhood parenting styles (1st – 3rd grade) and adolescent (9th -12th grade) internalizing and externalizing issues in a group of Chinese American immigrant families. The study utilized the first and third waves (approximately 10 years apart) of a longitudinal study of Chinese American immigrant parents and children in the Bay Area of California (Wave 1: N = 258, M age = 7.4 , SD = .7; Wave 3: N = 162, M age = 16.7 , SD = .7). In Aim 1, I explored whether differences emerged between parent and youth report of parenting styles and adjustment at both waves. In Aim 2, I examined whether childhood parenting styles predicted adolescent adjustment. Parent and youth report of authoritative and authoritarian parenting were measured at both waves using the Parenting Styles and Dimensions Questionnaire (PSDQ). Parent report of youth adjustment was measured at both waves using the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). Youth report of adjustment was measured at Wave 1 using the Behavior Problem Index (BPI), and at Wave 3 using the Youth Self Report (YSR). Regarding Aim 1, results indicated that parent report of authoritarian parenting was higher than youth report at both waves. Differences between reporters on authoritarian parenting were non-significant. Comparing parent and youth report across subscales of authoritative and authoritarian parenting revealed significant correlations only for Wave 3 authoritative parenting (warmth r = .29, reasoning/induction r = .24, democratic participation r = .25). While parent and youth report of internalizing and externalizing T-scores were positively correlated at Wave 3, youth-reported maladjustment was significantly higher across both adjustment dimensions. Regarding Aim 2, separate path models were used to test longitudinal relations between parenting styles and adjustment across every combination of reporters given non-significant factor loadings in measurement models. Controlling for Wave 1 adjustment, youth-reported authoritative parenting had a negative path to Wave 3 parent-reported externalizing issues reported in raw scores. However, this path became non-significant after adjusting for concurrent relations between Wave 3 parenting and adjustment. Additionally, in this more stringent model authoritarian parenting emerged as a significant predictor of externalizing problems. Controlling for Wave 1 adjustment, youth-reported authoritative parenting had a negative path to externalizing problems, and authoritarian parenting had a positive path to externalizing problems. After making similar stringent adjustments for concurrent relations, the positive path from authoritarian parenting to externalizing problems remained significant. In summary childhood authoritarian parenting emerged as a predictor of adolescent externalizing issues. This study adds to our understanding that Chinese American immigrant parents and children likely view parenting behaviors and mental health from different perspectives. It also can contribute to culturally informed interventions that may be able to better address communication within the family.