Perceived Parental Acceptance and Psychological Adjustment

Abstract

A sample of 168 children ages 7 through 12 years (M = 10.49 years) from Northern Greece (47.9% boys) was drawn to explore whether interpersonal power or prestige moderated relationships between paternal and/or maternal acceptances and children’s psychological adjustment. Child versions of the Parental Acceptance–Rejection Questionnaire (mother and father forms), the Personality Assessment Questionnaire, and the youth version of the Parental Power–Prestige Questionnaire were used. Both boys’ and girls’ psychological adjustment was significantly correlated with perceived paternal acceptance, but only girls’ adjustment was significantly correlated with maternal acceptance. In addition, girls’ perceptions of parental prestige were negatively correlated with paternal acceptance. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that boys’ adjustment was marginally predicted by their perception of paternal (but not maternal) acceptance, whereas girls’ adjustment was uniquely and significantly predicted by their perception of maternal (but not paternal) acceptance. Finally, parental prestige moderated the relationship between perceived maternal acceptance and both boys’ and girls’ psychological adjustment.

Keywords

paternal acceptance maternal acceptance psychological adjustment interpersonal power and prestige Greek children

Introduction from the Editors

In order to avoid unnecessary redundancy across the data-oriented articles in this Special Issue, common issues relevant to all articles are discussed in Rohner’s Introduction (Rohner, 2014). These issues include an introduction to the International Father Acceptance-Rejection Project, of which this article is a part. Common issues also include description of measures used by authors, as well as data analytic procedures employed by all authors. Only information specific to this study is included here.

Method

Participants

Participants in this study included one hundred sixty-eight 7- through 12-year-old children (M = 10.49 years, SD = 1.27), 47.9% boys, from Northern Greece. All participants lived with both parents in residence. Ninety-nine percent of the children were born in Greece. About 8% of the fathers and 6% of the mothers had a primary school education; 16% of the fathers and 10% of the mothers had junior high school education; 37% of the fathers and 35% of the mothers had senior high school education; and 39% of the fathers and 49% of the mothers had a higher education.

Measures

Greek language versions of all measures were presented in the following sequence:

Personal Information Form (PIF)

The PIF was used for the collection of demographic information (Rohner, 2005).

The Parental Power–Prestige Questionnaire (3PQ)

Coefficient alphas in this study were .86 for power, .60 for prestige, and .74 for the total 3PQ (Rohner, 2011). Principal components factor analysis with Varimax rotation revealed the two-factor solution proposed by Rohner (2011): a Power factor and a Prestige factor. The two factors combined explained 43.04% of the variance.

Parental Acceptance–Rejection Questionnaire (child PARQ: Father and mother versions)

Alphas for child PARQ (Rohner, 2005) in this study were .86 for mothers and .87 for fathers.

Personality Assessment Questionnaire (child PAQ)

In this study, Cronbach’s alpha for the total score of child PAQ (Rohner & Khaleque, 2005) was .85.

The Gender Inequality Scale (GIS)

The GIS (Rohner, 2012) was administered to a sample of 90 students at the University of Ioannina (93.3% women), ranging in age from 20 through 27 years (M = 21.92; SD = 1.27). The mean score on the GIS was 9.47 (SD = 2.78) revealing that Greece is generally perceived to be a gender equal society. Coefficient alpha for the scale in this study was .72. A principal component factor analysis with Varimax rotation extracted a single component, which is identifiably a gender inequality factor.

Procedure

The study was conducted in the municipality of Ioannina following the Code of Ethics of the University of Ioannina. Parents and then children were briefed about the research. They were then asked to sign an Informed Consent Form, which included information about the aims, procedures, the data protection issues, the right to withdraw from the research at any time, and contact details of the principal investigator. Data collection lasted approximately 30 min.

Results

As Table 1 indicates, both boys and girls tended to perceive their mothers and fathers to be loving (accepting) parents. But girls perceived significantly more maternal acceptance than did boys. Significant gender differences were also reported for parental prestige (and marginally for parental power). Even though both boys and girls tended to perceive their parents to be approximately equal in interpersonal power and prestige, boys tended to credit their fathers with significantly more prestige and marginally significantly more power than did girls. Finally, both boys and girls also reported fair psychological adjustment.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Gender Differences in Measures of Perceived Maternal and Paternal Acceptances, Children’s Psychological Adjustment, and Power and Prestige.

Measures	M	SD	n	t
Maternal acceptance
Boys	33.20	9.12	80	2.21*
Girls	30.36	6.46	87
Total	31.67	7.85	168
Paternal acceptance
Boys	36.46	9.81	80	1.03
Girls	35.00	8.48	87
Total	35.66	9.13	168
Psychological adjustment
Boys	87.56	11.88	80	1.02
Girls	85.52	14.08	87
Total	86.42	13.07	168
Power
Boys	15.03	4.36	80	1.81^†
Girls	13.90	3.68	87
Total	14.43	4.03	168
Prestige
Boys	16.19	3.39	80	2.46*
Girls	15.13	2.46	87
Total	15.63	2.97	168

†

p < .08. *p < .05.

Because of these gender differences, all further analyses were conducted by sex. Table 2 shows that boys’ psychological adjustment was significantly correlated with perceived paternal (but not maternal) acceptance. But girls’ adjustment was correlated with both maternal and paternal acceptances. In addition, girls’ perceptions of parental prestige were negatively correlated with paternal acceptance. This suggests that the higher the perceived prestige of fathers relative to mothers, the more accepting girls perceived their fathers to be. Finally, paternal and maternal acceptances as well as power and prestige were positively correlated with each other among both boys and girls.

Table 2.

Correlations Between Maternal and Paternal Acceptances, Power, Prestige, and Children’s Psychological Adjustment.

	1	2	3	4	5
1. Perceived maternal acceptance	—	.67**	.08	.14	.13
2. Perceived paternal acceptance	.72**	—	−.01	.17	.26*
3. Power	.08	−.15	—	.62**	.16
4. Prestige	.03	−.27*	.37***	—	.16
5. Psychological adjustment	.34**	.21*	.08	.11	—

Note. Coefficients above the diagonal pertain to boys; coefficients below the diagonal pertain to girls.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

To identify which variables or interactions between variables made unique contributions to the children’s psychological adjustment, two hierarchical regression models were explored, one for boys and one for girls. The same variables were regressed on children’s psychological adjustment in both models. That is, children’s age and parents’ level of education were entered into Step 1. Centered maternal and paternal acceptances along with parental power and parental prestige were entered in Step 2. Finally, four product terms were entered in Step 3: Maternal acceptance × Power, Maternal acceptance × Prestige, Paternal acceptance × Power, and Paternal acceptance × Prestige. Multicollinearity among the predictors was assessed with the variance inflation factor (VIF) statistic. Values in VIF ranged between 1.021 and 4.622. Exceptions to this were the product terms Maternal acceptance × Power and Maternal acceptance × Prestige in the boys’ sample. VIF values for these were 5.065 and 5.662, respectively. All values were within acceptable ranges (Stevens, 2002).

As shown in Table 3, the regression analysis demonstrated a marginally significant link between boys’ psychological adjustment and paternal (but not maternal) acceptance (p = .059). The adjustment of girls, by contrast, was uniquely and significantly predicted by their perceptions of maternal (but not paternal) acceptance. Moreover, both boys’ and girls’ perceptions of parental prestige moderated the association between their perceptions of maternal acceptance and their adjustment. In addition, girls’ perceptions of parental prestige only marginally moderated the relation between their perceptions of paternal acceptance and their overall adjustment (p = .055). Collectively, these variables accounted for 27% of the variance in girls’ psychological adjustment and 29% of the variance in boys’ psychological adjustment.

Table 3.

Hierarchical Regression Analyses Predicting Children’s Psychological Adjustment.

	Model for boys				Model for girls
		β	R ²	ΔR²		β	R ²	ΔR²
Step 1			.085^†	.085^†			.066	.066
Constant	79.985				74.333
Age		.171				.167
Fathers’ education		−.200				−.170
Mothers’ education		−.019				−.019
Step 2			.165^†	.08			.188*	.122*
Constant	77.994				76.686
Maternal acceptance		−.087				.367*
Paternal acceptance		.286^†				−.025
Power		.176				.019
Prestige		−.008				.084
Step 3			.289*	.124*			.269*	.081
Constant	75.315				78.565
Maternaccept × Power		.249				−.173
Maternaccept × Prestige		−.673**				.339*
Paternaccept × Power		−.280				.127
Paternaccept × Prestige		.336				−.416^†

Note. Maternaccept = Maternal acceptance; Paternaccept = Paternal acceptance.

†

p < .08. *p < .05. **p < .01.

In an effort to deepen our understanding of the nature and significance of these interactions, we conducted simple slopes analyses (Aiken & West, 1991). To do this, we divided the moderator variables (i.e., girls’ and boys’ perceptions of parental prestige) into three levels each: the mean (M_{girls’ prestige} = 15.13, M_{boys’ prestige} = 16.19), 1SD below the mean, and 1SD above the mean. In the interaction depicted in Figure 1, fathers and mothers were perceived to be approximately equal in prestige in the mean and −1SD conditions. But fathers were perceived to have more prestige than mothers under the +1SD condition. Under the −1SD condition where boys perceived their fathers and mothers as having more-or-less equal prestige, the relation between perceived maternal acceptance and boys’ psychological adjustment was significant (β = .38, p < .01). The relationship was only marginally significant, however, under the mean condition (β = .16, p = .08), and it was not significant under +1SD (β = −.06, p = .51) condition, where boys’ perceptions of paternal prestige progressively increased. These results seem to suggest that the degree to which perceived maternal acceptance predicted boys’ psychological adjustment intensified significantly the more the prestige of parents was perceived to be approximately equal.

Figure 1.

Maternal acceptance predicting boys’ psychological adjustment at three levels of perceived parental prestige.

In the interaction depicted in Figure 2, mothers and fathers were perceived to be approximately equal in prestige in the mean and −1SD conditions. But fathers were perceived to have slightly more prestige than mothers in the +1SD condition. The relation between perceived maternal acceptance and girls’ psychological adjustment was significant under the mean prestige condition (β = .40, p < .01) and especially under the +1SD condition (β = .63, p < .001). The relationship was not statistically significant under the −1SD condition (β = .16, p = .46). These results seem to suggest that the degree to which perceived maternal acceptance predicted girls’ psychological adjustment intensified significantly the more prestige fathers were perceived to have relative to mothers. In effect, these results expose a form of buffered moderation where perceived maternal prestige diminished the association between perceived maternal acceptance and girls’ adjustment.

Figure 2.

Maternal acceptance predicting girls’ psychological adjustment at three levels of perceived parental prestige.

Discussion

The present study shows that children in Ioannina generally feel accepted by their parents. This evidence corroborates results from prior research in Greece (Mylonas, Gari, Giotsa, Pavlopoulos, & Panagiotopoulou, 2006). Furthermore, results here indicate that both boys and girls are fairly well adjusted psychologically. Moreover, children tend to perceive their fathers and mothers to be fairly equal in power and prestige.

Boys’ psychological adjustment is significantly correlated with paternal acceptance, whereas girls’ adjustment is significantly correlated with both perceived maternal and paternal acceptances. Moreover, hierarchical multiple regression analysis reveals that paternal acceptance—but not maternal acceptance—makes a (marginally) significant contribution to boys’ adjustment, and only perceived maternal acceptance makes a uniquely significant contribution to girls’ adjustment. This analysis also shows that parental prestige significantly moderates the relationship between children’s (both boys’ and girls’) perceptions of maternal acceptance and children’s adjustment. These results reveal that the degree to which perceived maternal acceptance predicts boys’ adjustment is strongest when parents are perceived as having more-or-less equal prestige. In contrast, the relationship between maternal acceptance and girls’ adjustment intensifies significantly the more prestige fathers are perceived to have relative to mothers’ prestige. These results expose a buffered moderation, where perceived maternal prestige diminishes the relationship between perceived maternal acceptance and girls’ adjustment. Additional research must be conducted among Greek children to determine whether these unexpected results are stable, and if so, why. In the meantime, however, it is clear that parental power and prestige do tend to make unique contributions to pre-adolescents’ adjustment in Greece.

This study is not without other limitations. For example, the sample was drawn from one area of Greece that is not necessarily representative of the whole of Greece, but rather of specific parts of it. While such a limitation points to the need for broader based research in Greece, it does not diminish the soundness and importance of the results reported here. In particular—although requiring further exploration—this study shows the importance of both maternal and paternal affection for the development of boys’ and girls’ psychological adjustment, especially during childhood. The study also paves the way for more in-depth investigations of gender differences identified here, as well as of factors contributing to such differences.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Authors have equal contributions to the paper.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Artemis Giotsa is an assistant professor of social psychology in the Department of Early Childhood Education, University of Ioannina, Greece. Her main research interests are focused on the family in cross-cultural contexts, child acceptance–rejection in early childhood, child acceptance–rejection by parents and grandparents, acceptance–rejection by teachers, and the application of systemic theory in parents’ counseling groups. Since 2005, she has been the scientific coordinator of the program “Parents Schools” in Greece, supported by the Ministry of Education. She has adapted in Greece the program “Adults and Children Together Against Violence” (ACT) created by the American Psychological Association. She has developed as a co-author of the “Family Roles Questionnaire,” a psychometric scale on family roles with cross-cultural validity. She has also published three books and more than 30 articles and book chapters.

Anna K. Touloumakos is currently an associate follow at the Centre for Knowledge, Skills and Organizational Performance [SKOPE], Department of Education, University of Oxford, where she obtained her DPhil. In addition, she is the head of psychology department and the director of research at the Business College of Athens (BCA), Greece. Her research interests include the use of quantitative and qualitative methods in social research, with emplhasis on the conceptualization, and measurement of social and psychological constructs. Her expertise is on soft skills, in particular on communication skills, their conceptualisation, and the bebate about their enhancement through education (as the policies promote) and/or as part of workplace practice.

References

Aiken

L. S.

West

S. G.

(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Mylonas

Gari

Giotsa

Pavlopoulos

Panagiotopoulou

(2006). Greece. In Georgas

Berry

J. W.

van

Vivjer de Kagitçibasi

Poortinga

Y. H.

(Eds.), Families across cultures: A 30 nation psychological study (pp. 344-352). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Rohner

R. P.

(2005). Parental Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire (PARQ): Test manual. In Rohner

R. P.

Khaleque

(Eds.), Handbook for the study of parental acceptance and rejection (4th ed., pp. 43-106). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.

Rohner

R. P.

(2011). Parental Power-Prestige Questionnaire. In Rohner

R.P.

(Ed.), Measures for use in parental acceptance-rejection research (pp. 134-135). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.

Rohner

R. P.

(2012). Gender Inequality Scale. Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.

Rohner

R. P.

(2014). Parental Power and Prestige Moderate the Relationship Between Perceived Parental Acceptance and Offspring’s Psychological Adjustment: Introduction to the International Father Acceptance-Rejection Project. Cross Cultural Research, 48(3) 197-213.

Rohner

R. P.

Khaleque

(2005). Personality Assessment Questionnaire (PAQ): Test manual. In Rohner

R. P.

Khaleque

(Eds.), Handbook for the study of parental acceptance and rejection (4th ed., pp. 187-226). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.

Stevens

J.P.

(2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.