A longitudinal examination of the family stress model of economic hardship in seven countriesShow others and affiliations
2022 (English)In: Children and youth services review, ISSN 0190-7409, E-ISSN 1873-7765, Vol. 143, article id 106661Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]
The Family Stress Model of Economic Hardship (FSM) posits that economic situations create differences in psychosocial outcomes for parents and developmental outcomes for their adolescent children. However, prior studies guided by the FSM have been mostly in high-income countries and have included only mother report or have not disaggregated mother and father report. Our focal research questions were whether the indirect effect of economic hardship on adolescent mental health was mediated by economic pressure, parental depression, dysfunctional dyadic coping, and parenting, and whether these relations differed by culture and mother versus father report. We conducted multiple group serial mediation path models using longitudinal data from adolescents ages 12–15 in 2008–2012 from 1,082 families in 10 cultural groups in seven countries (Colombia, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, the Philippines, Thailand, and the United States). Taken together, the indirect effect findings suggest partial support for the FSM in most cultural groups across study countries. We found associations among economic hardship, parental depression, parenting, and adolescent internalizing and externalizing. Findings support polices and interventions aimed at disrupting each path in the model to mitigate the effects of economic hardship on parental depression, harsh parenting, and adolescents’ externalizing and internalizing problems. © 2022 Elsevier Ltd
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2022. Vol. 143, article id 106661
Keywords [en]
Economic hardship, Parent-child relationships, Family processes, Cross-cultural
National Category
Psychology (excluding Applied Psychology)
Research subject
Child and Youth studies
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-19293DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2022.106661ISI: 000933948300005Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85138324360OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hv-19293DiVA, id: diva2:1720796
Note
This research has been funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development grant RO1-HD054805 and Fogarty International Center grant RO3-TW008141. This research also was supported by National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Grant P30 DA023026, the Intramural Research Program of the NIH/NICHD, USA, and an International Research Fellowship at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), London, UK, funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 695300-HKADeC-ERC-2015-AdG). Susannah Zietz was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development grant F32HD100159.
2022-12-202022-12-202024-04-10Bibliographically approved