Assessing Relations between Parental

Acceptance and Children´s Behavioral Problems

from a Multi-Informant Perspective
Carrasco, M. A., Izquierdo-Sotorrío, E., & Holgado-Tello, F.P.
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE EDUCACIÓN A DISTANCIA (UNED)
Introduction and Aims
- According to the Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection Theory (IPARTheory: Rohner, 1986) perceived mothers’ and fathers’ acceptance-rejection has consistently
negative effects on the children’s psychological adjustment.
- A multi-informant approach is mostly accepted as an adequate and useful procedure for children´s assessment (De Los Reyes et al., 2015). From this perspective,
the two aims of this study are: 1) to explore the confluence of parents and children on both parental acceptance and, children´s internalizing and externalizing
behavioral problems; and 2) to explore the incremental validity and predictive value of parental acceptance-rejection on children´s behavioral problems
(externalizing and internalizing) using child, mother and father as sources of information.

Method Results
Participants Table 1. Intercorrelations among children, fathers and Table 2. Intercorrelations among children, fathers and mothers
▪ N= 270 (90 children, 90 fathers, and 90 mothers for perceived parental acceptance . for children´s internalizing and externalizing problems .
mothers).
▪ Gender of children= 38% boys, 52% girls Informants 1 2 3 4 Informants 1 2 3
▪ Ages of children= 9 to 16 years (M=11.91,
1. Child_Father 1 .60** .19 .32** 1. Child 1 .39** .26**
SD=2.03).
▪ All children attended school and lived in two- 2. Child_Mother -- 1 .26* .25** 2. Mother .03 1 .79**
parent households. 3. Father -.13 .38** 1
3. Mother _ -- 1 .34**
▪ Parent´s education level and occupational titles Note. Externalizing problems above diagonal. Internalizing problems
4. Father -- -- -- 1
are according to the Spanish middle class. below diagonal; **p < .01
*p < .05; **p<.01

Instruments Incremental validity by hierarchical regression analysis of parent information (Model 2) on child information (Model 1)
Parents and children completed both: predicting behavioral problems from perceived parental acceptance.
▪ Parental Acceptance Rejection Questionnaire
(PARQ; Rohner & Khaleque, 2005). Child-
version for children; parent-versions for mothers
and fathers.
▪ Achenbach System of Empirically Based
Assessment (ASEBA; Achenbach & Rescorla,
2001). CBCL for parents and YSR for children.

Procedure
▪ As part of a larger research, children filled up
different questionnaires about family relations Predictive value by regression analysis (stepwise method) of perceived parental acceptance on children´s behavioral problems using
and their psychological problems. child, father and mother as informants.
▪ Children were randomly selected from public
schools in different cities of Spain.
▪ Informed consent was reported by parents and
participation was voluntary.
▪ Data were collected by trained psychologists in
the classroom in the school time.

Conclusions
▪ According to previous studies from a multi-
informant perspective (Achenbach et al., 1987; De
Los Reyes et al., 2015), confluence between
children and parents (both mother and father)
were moderated, and these were higher between
fathers and mothers: children and parents tend
to show higher confluence in externalizing
problems than internalizing. All informants
tend to perceive the parental acceptance in a
similar way.
▪ The incremental validity of parental acceptance
information over the children´s information
predicting behavioral problems tends to be non-
significant regardless of the informants. It suggests
children (instead of parents) are the most
important source of information to predict
behavioral problems considering perceived
parental acceptance.
▪ The paternal acceptance (non-maternal) perceived by children was the best predictor of
behavioral problems when these were reported by children (externalizing and internalizing) or by
mothers (externalizing). However, the maternal acceptance (non-paternal) perceived by children was the
best predictor when fathers report about externalizing problems. It is important to highlight that the
internalizing problems were only predicted by the children´s paternal acceptance report.
▪ These results could be considered from a multi-informant perspective in order to collect information
about parental acceptance and behavioral problems. Informants must be elected according to
cost and benefits, level of specificity and the incremental validity (i. e. the degree to which adding
a new measure or informant to the assessment increases consistently the predictive power and decision
making) (Garb, 2003).
References
• Achenbach, T., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, C. T. (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: implications of cross-informant correlations
for situational specificity. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 213-232.
• Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for
Children, Youth, & Families.
• De Los Reyes, A., Augenstein, T., Wang, M., Thomas, S., Drabick, D., Burgers, D., & Rabinowitz, J. (2015). The validity of the multi-informant approach to
assessing child and adolescent mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 858-900.
• Garb, H. N. (2003). Incremental validity and the assessment of psychopathology in adults. Psychological Assessment, 15, 508-520.
• Rohner, R. P. (1986). The warmth dimension: Foundations of parental acceptance-rejection theory. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Rohner, R. P., & Khaleque, A.(Eds.) (2005). Handbook for the Study of Parental Acceptance and Rejection (4th ed., pp. 187-226). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research
Publications.

macarrasco@psi.uned.es *Financially supported by Spanish Government (MINISTERIO DE CIENCIA E INNOVACIÓN) through the
eva.izq@cop.es Research Project PSI2011-28925