The Effect of Family Structure and Family Functioning on Adolescents ...

5 downloads 0 Views 2MB Size Report
supportiveness [J. S. Kidwell (1981), "Number of Siblings, Sibling Spacing, and Birth Order: Their Effects on Perceived Parent-Adolescent Relationships,".
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 26, No. 1, 1997

The Effect of Family Structure and Family Functioning on Adolescents' Perceptions of Intimate Time Spent with Parents, Siblings, and Peers Barry J. Falion1 and Terry V. Bowles2 Received February 14, 1995; accepted February 23, 1996.

In previous research, family structure variables have been operationalized as family size, birth order, sibling spacing, and sibling density. These structure variables have been linked to parental strictness, reasonableness, and supportiveness [J. S. Kidwell (1981), "Number of Siblings, Sibling Spacing, and Birth Order: Their Effects on Perceived Parent-Adolescent Relationships," Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 43, pp. 315-333]. Other research has drawn attention to the link between the amount of time adolescents spend with parents and peers and the influence of family relations variables — intensity, duration, and frequency of conflicts. [R. Montemayor (1982), "The Relationship Between Parent-Adolescent Conflict and the Amount of Time Adolescents Spend Alone and with Parents and Peers," Child Development, Vol. 53, pp. 1512-1519]. More recent research has related family structure (family size, sibling spacing, and gender) effects to the amount of time adolescents spend with parents, a measure of relationship quality, and a set of measures of discipline [R. A. Richardson et al. (1986), "Parent-Child Relationships in Early Adolescence: Effects of Family Structure," Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 48, pp. 805-811]. To date, the questions asked by researchers have not simultaneously explored whether it is the family relations or the family structure variables that contribute most powerfully to the amount of time that female and male adolescents spend with family members and peers. In this research adolescents were asked to report the amount of time they spend with their mother, 1Senior

Lecturer, Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Received his Ph.D. in social psycholody from State University of New York at Buffalo. Research interests include interpersonal relations and the work-family interface. 2Doctoral candidate, Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Received Post Graduate Diploma in adolescent and child psychology from the University of Melbourne. Research interests include self-motivated change, time orientation, work-family relations, and adolescent academic achievement.

25 0047-2891/97/0200-0025$12.50/0 O 1997 Plenum Publishing Corporation

26

Fallon and Bowles

father, siblings, and peers, and to respond to a questionnaire that has three factors that define family functioning: Parenting Style (democratic decision making), Intimacy, and Conflict [P. Noller et al. (1992), "Parent and Adolescent Perceptions of Family Functioning: A Comparison of Clinic and Nonclinic Family, Journal of Adolescence, Vol. 15, pp. 101-115]. The analyses revealed that complex and interpretable family structure and family functioning factors differentially influence whether males and females spend time with family members and peers.

INTRODUCTION The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether family structure variables and/or family functioning variables best predict the amount of intimate time adolescents spend with family members and peers. Research using family structure variables is based on an assumption that such variables have an effect on the interactions between family members. A further assumption that is often made is that more interaction between parents and their children is better throughout childhood and adolescence. The fewer the number of children, or the more spaced the children are in age, the greater the potential, and therefore probability of experiencing actual contact between parents and children. Research involving such family structure variables began with investigations into the influence of birth order and moved to the more complex construct of sibling density (Kidwell, 1981). Richardson et al. (1986) has linked family structure variables with the amount of time adolescents spend with family members and the quality of that time. Montemayor (1982) found complex relations between the amount of time adolescents spent with family members and peers and the influence of the family functioning variable of conflict. In neither study were the family structure and functioning variables used concurrently to ascertain which had the greatest influence on time with others.

Family Structure Research findings using family structure variables are compelling because of their simplicity and face validity. Birth order is reported to be related to a variety of other variables. For example, first borns have more expected of them, are confronted by parents more often, are controlled more coercively than later borns, and are more aggressive toward younger siblings (Ernst and Angst, 1983). Pfoutts (1980) reported the effects of birth order and sibling spacing (defined as the average age difference between the target adolescent and his or her siblings) on a number of family relations variables and IQ. Pfoutts (1980) found that in families with two sons,

Family Structure and Family Functioning

27

the closer they were in age the more positive their relationship with their brother and father. Koch (1955) found that children in closely spaced families were influenced more, both positively and negatively, by siblings than by their parents. Koch also reported that as spacing increased parental influence increased and sibling influence decreased. With 1700 males from a national sample, Kidwell (1981) investigated the family structure variables of sibling spacing, birth order, sibling density (defined by Kidwell, 1981, as the reciprocal of the number of years between the target child and each sibling), and sex on perceptions of parental punitiveness, reasonableness, and supportiveness. Kidwell maintained that sibling density was important because it was a combination of sibling spacing and birth order that had previously been shown to influence parent-adolescent relations. She used the reciprocal of the spacings to give decreased weight to siblings who were spaced further apart on the time line. Using a series of regression equations to predict adolescent's perception of parental punitiveness, reasonableness, and supportiveness, Kidwell reported that having large numbers of siblings increased the perceptions of parental punitiveness and decreased the perceptions of parental reasonableness. Males spaced close together (less than 12 months) and distant (more than 4 years apart) reported more positive relations, with the optimal spacing being 4 to 5 years. Middle boms reported being more punitively treated and less reasonably and supportively treated than older and younger borns. Two elements of Kidwell's (1981) research bear further attention. Sibling density was not included in all analyses as it did not account for a significant amount of variance and that sibling spacing and number of siblings were adequate measures. This explanation is counterintuitive in that, while it may be qualitatively different, if spacing and number of siblings explain variance so ought density, as it is the mathematical combination of both. Second, Kidwell's findings were based only on males. Taken together the findings and arguments regarding density would suggest that it is at least important to ascertain whether density is an influence for both males and females and whether Kidwell's (1981) original finding can be replicated.

Time Some research has examined the relationship between family functioning and the time adolescents spend with parents and peers (Montemayor 1982, Richardson et at, 1986). Prior to considering their findings, it is important to substantiate the use of time as an appropriate dependent variable in adolescent research.

28

Fallon and Bowles

In previous research, time has been used in a way that corresponds closely to the Newtonian temporal framework of time as objective, continuous, universal, and reductive (Slife, 1993). Piaget's (1969) research shows that by the age of 11 children are capable of reversibility, and of making and recalling an account of a rational succession of events, based on operational modes of thought, that are no longer intuitive or as egocentric as are the processes used in earlier developmental stages. Harner's (1982) summary of psychological research into perceptions of past and future perspectives of time in adolescents and adults reports similar findings to those of Piaget (1969). She maintains that by the end of the middle years of childhood, approximately 6-11 years of age, children have mastered the basic system of time relations and the linguistic structures that are necessary for meaningful articulation of events from the past, or in the future. Taken together, the conclusions of Piaget (1969) and Harner (1982) suggest that it is appropriate to ask adolescents after the age of approximately 11 to recall their perception of the quality and duration of time in the company of others. Further, these findings would suggest that such hindsight recollections would be expected to be as accurate as other self report measures. Montemayor (1982) used verbal self-reports during telephone interviews on three randomly selected evenings approximately a week apart to investigate the link between the time adolescents spend with parents and peers and parent-adolescent conflict. Montemayor found that adolescents had three times more conflicts with their mother than their father. Female adolescents had more conflicts than males. The majority of the conflicts that females had were with their mothers, were longer and more intense than they had with fathers, as well as longer and more intense than those reported by males (Montemayor, 1982). The respondents were also asked about time duration, operationalized as "Doing something with someone else, and feelings as if you and the other person were together and not just at the same place at the same time." Montemayor (1982) drew three conclusions from the research. First, adolescents spent approximately equivalent amounts of time with parents and peers, but used their time differently with parents and peers. Second, for females there appeared to be competition between parents and peers, while for males there appeared to be competition between being with parents or being alone. Finally, for both males and females, disagreeable relations with mothers corresponded with greater time with mother and not with peers. Richardson et al. (1986) gathered data from young adolescents from intact families with at least two children to explore the link between family structure, family functioning, and time spent with parents. Adolescents who were further in age from their siblings spent more time with their fathers

Family Structure and Family Functioning

29

than those who were closely spaced. Consistent with previous research (Kidwell, 1981), adolescents with a mean sibling spacing of less than five years indicated that fathers were more strict than those with wider spacing. Further, when sibling spacing was wider, adolescents perceived their parents' disciplinary behavior as more fair. Sibling spacing did not influence perceptions of mother strictness, but males rated their mothers as more strict than did females. The respondents were also asked to indicate how much time they spent with parents together and individually. Females spent more time with both parents present and mothers alone than did males, but there was no significant sex difference for time with fathers. This effect was mediated by family size, in that females spent more time with their mothers as the family size increased with little change for males as family size increased.

Age Differences Montemayor (1982) pointed out that parents and peers have different roles or functions for adolescent males and females, but did not investigate whether the function changes as adolescents age. Research has shown that the function of the peer group changes with age and gender. Brown et at. (1986) found that females considered peer affiliation more important than males. The positive reasons for seeking affiliation were enhancement of social support, friendship, and social activities. The negative reasons associated with peer affiliation related to the emphasis placed on conformity and unnecessary commitment to friendships. Given these findings, it is inappropriate to view relationships between adolescents and their parents and adolescents and their peers as an "either-or" choice. In line with the findings of Montemayor (1982), the explanation of Noller and Callan (1991) provides a more accurate description of the parent-adolescent-peer triad. Rather than the parents and peers being in competition it may well be that they complement each other. Such a description of interaction stresses the interrelatedness of the relationship between the adolescent, family, and peers in a mutually rewarding and affirming fashion. This conception of family and peer interaction is supported by Sebald and White (1980) and Wilks (1986), who found that while parents were consulted for issues such as work orientations and future orientations, peers were consulted for more immediate considerations. In short, one set of interactions did not deny the other. It fulfilled a different purpose — a point that has been made previously by Biddle et al. (1980) and Montemayor (1982).

30

Fallon and Bowles

Family Functioning Accepting the notion of functional differences in the interaction between adolescents, parents, and peers does not deny that adolescents may experience inconsistent levels of contact with family members and peers that may be related to the combined influence of family structure and family functioning. This draws into question the Kidwell (1981) proposition that family structure variables directly influence family relations (parenting practices) and in turn adolescent behavior. The amount of time adolescents spend with family members and peers (Montemayor, 1982; Richardson et al,, 1986) would be one such behavior. The model suggests that greater amounts of time correspond to more positive family relations, after the influence of family structure factors, such as the number of siblings or density of siblings is taken into account. It is possible that both family relations (family functioning variables) and family structure variables influence relationship quality simultaneously. In the present research the three-factor (intimacy, parenting style, and conflict) Family Functioning Scale (Noller et al, 1992) will be used to measure family relations.

Quality Time Quantity of time with others may not meet the needs of the adolescents. Quality time with others is not dependent only on quantity. It is dependent on having opportunities to interact with someone with whom there is a trusting or intimate type of relationship. Simply spending time in the company of others may not be satisfying the need for assertive care, or provide the knowledge that care is available, if desired. In his research, Montemayor (1982) used amount of time, qualified as not just being in the same place but "feeling as if you and the other person were together," with parents, peers, and alone as the variable of interest. While intimacy has been considered an important dimension of relationships between adults (Walker and Thompson, 1983), it is not a term that is used very often in referring to adolescent-parent relationships. Of interest in the present study was not simply the amount of time adolescents spend with parents, siblings, and peers, but the amount of time that would be characterized by intimacy and trust — the type of time during which issues of importance to either party to the interaction can be explored and discussed. Intimacy has been variously defined as comprising elements of affection (Berger and Calabrese, 1975), altruism, solidarity (Levinger and Snoek, 1972), a heightened sense of the importance of the relationship (Huston and Burgess, 1979), openness (Altmann and Taylor, 1973), and commitment (Huston and Burgess, 1979).

Family Structure and Family Functioning

31

Of interest here is the amount of time adolescents spend with their family members and their peers when they feel free to talk about things that are especially important to them, and to ask questions about and discuss things they would not want any other person to know, or to know they were speaking about. In this type of interaction there is a directly intimate element. Hall et al. (1995) in their research had children provide four self-report items concerning time with their parents. One of these is similar to that used in the present study — time for having private talks. While our proposed operationalization of time spent with parents, siblings, and peers is similar to Montemayor's (1982) operationalization, with regard to the intimacy dimension, it was found in some pilot work with young adolescents that the proposed definition was more easily understood. Time in the current study was defined in this way because, with the exception of Montemayor (1982), no previous research was found that examined this important dimension of the quality of adolescent's relationships with significant others.

Research Questions We were primarily interested in whether the amount of "intimate" time adolescents spend with their mother, father, siblings, and peers can be best explained as a function of the family's structure, functioning, or whether it is a combination of some elements of family structure and family functioning. Second, as suggested by previous research, we were interested in whether there are differences in the ways males and females are influenced by family structure and family functioning variables. Specifically, it was hypothesized that, in line with Richardson et al. (1986), family size will be positively related to the amount of time adolescents spend with family members, particularly mothers. It was also hypothesized that sibling density will influence the amount of time adolescents spend with family members and peers. That is, low density will be related to more time with family members and less with peers and the reverse for high sibling density. Extending Montemayor's (1982) research by defining time more specifically, we expect some differences between the age groups of adolescents in the amount of "intimate" tune spent with family members and peers.

32

Fallon and Bowles

METHOD Respondents Two hundred and ninety-nine adolescents, 144 females (48.16%) and 155 males (51.84%) who were attending secondary schools in the Melbourne, Australia, metropolitan area participated in the study. The sample was limited to adolescents with one or more siblings and two parents/care givers. The schools were in middle class suburbs. In terms of race, all of the respondents would be described as white. The respondents were from one coeducational and two single-sex (one male, one female) metropolitan high schools in Melbourne. The mean age of the 155 males that participated was 14.26 years (SD = 1.72) and the mean age of the 144 females that took part was 14.11 years (SD = 1.87). There were three age groups, a young group comprising 58 females and 51 males with a mean age of 12.24 years (SD = 0.57), a middle age group of 35 females and 54 males with a mean age of 14.30 years (SD = 0.43), and an older group comprising 44 females and 49 males with a mean age of 16.35 years (SD = 0.56). There were eight respondents whose age was not known.

Measures Time In addition to demographic variables of age and sex, the questionnaire measured the following constructs. The respondents were asked to report in hours/minutes the amount of time spent alone with their mother, their father, their siblings, and their peers. They were informed that "amount of time" was defined as the time spent, in the last week, with that person, "when if you wanted to, you would feel free to talk about things that were especially important to you or them; ask questions about and discuss things you would not want any other person to know, or to know you were speaking about." Family Structure The Family Structure variables of number of siblings, birth order, sibling spacing, and sibling density were constructed from information about the ages of the respondent's sibling(s). Following Kidwell (1981) the number of siblings was calculated as the total number of brothers and sisters,

Family Structure and Family Functioning

33

including those no longer living at home with those reporting 4 or more siblings forming a single group. The mean number of siblings in the sample was 2.23 (SD = 1.38) with a range of from 1 to 9. Birth order was coded into three categories, first, middle, and last born (Kidwell, 1981). Sibling spacing was operationalized in line with Kidwell (1981) as the average age difference between the target adolescent and Ms or her sibling(s) (mean = 3.47, SD = 2.31) ranging from 0 to 14. Sibling density was operationalized as the sum of the reciprocals of spacings between the respondents and each sibling (Kidwell, 1981). The mean sibling density was 0.900 (SD = 0.31) ranging from 0.07 to 2.58. Family Functioning The Family Functioning Scale (Noller et al, 1992) has 30 items — for example, "People in our family help and support each other" -- requiring Likert responses (1: Totally Disagree, 6: Totally Agree). It comprises three scales: Intimacy (12 items), the extent of sharing and closeness., as well as expressiveness and openness in communication; Parenting Style (10 items), the extent to which family members have a say in rules and decisions, and are encouraged to operate independently; and Conflict (8 items), the extent of misunderstanding and interference, and difficulty in solving problems and making plans. The validity and reliability of the instrument has been reported (Noller et al., 1992) with alpha coefficients of .92 for intimacy, .68 parenting style, and .82 for conflict, with test-retest reliabilities reported at .77 for intimacy, .79 conflict, and .81 for parenting style. Procedure Two hundred and forty-six respondents were administered the questionnaire in class groups in their normal class settings. The other 53 respondents who were not able to complete the questionnaire in class groups were administered the questionnaire under the supervision of psychology students in one-to-one interview settings in the adolescent's home. RESULTS Preliminary analyses of the dependent variables indicated that there were no significant differences between respondents from the single sex and coeducational schools. Nor were there any significant differences on

34

Fallon and Bowles

the dependent variables between respondents from the two data gathering methods. The reliabilities for the Family Functioning scales were .92 for Intimacy, .87 for Parenting Style, and .74 for Conflict, which are consistent with the high reliabilities previously reported. Correlational analysis revealed that multicollinearity was not a problem.

Age and Sex Differences The first set of analyses tested for age and sex differences in the amount of time spent with individual family members and with peers. Table I shows the mean amount time adolescents reported. There were no multivariate or univariate main effects for sex. A multivariate analysis of variance with the four tune variables as dependent variables and age and sex as the independent variables showed that there were no multivariate sex by age group interactions. At the univariate level there were interactions for the amount of time adolescents reported spending with their fathers F2,285 = 4.02, p < 0.05). Post hoc comparisons showed that younger aged females and the mid-aged males spent significantly more time with their fathers than did the mid-aged group females (t285 = 2.18, p < 0.05; t285 = 2.18, p < 0.05, respectively). There was also a univariate interaction for the time adolescents spend with their mothers (F2,285 = 3.05, p < 0.05). Younger females indicated spending significantly more time with their mothers than did younger males t285 = 2.08, p < 0.05), mid-aged females t285 = 2.53, p < 0.05), older aged females t285 = 2.14, p < 0.05) and older aged males (t285 = 3.02, p < 0.05). Pillais multivariate test showed an effect for age group for amount of time spent with peers (F8,140 = 2.08, p < 0.05). Univariate analyses indicated that the amount of time adolescents spent with peers increased with age (F2,.285 = 3.78, p < 0.05) with significant differences between the younger and older age groups (t285 = 2.50, p < 0.05). Analysis of the intercorrelations revealed that significant differences were present between males and females for the correlations of the amount of time spent with father and siblings (z = 2.29; p < .05) and time with mother and siblings (z = 3.38; p < .01; see Table II). These show that there is a greater relationship between tune with parents and siblings for males than for females. That is, more time with parents for males corresponds to more time with siblings.

Family Structure and Family Functioning

35

Table I. Means and Standard Deviations of the Number of Minutes Spent by Adolescents with Family Members and Peers in the Previous Week Family members and peers Sex and age of adolescent

Father

Mother

Brothers and sisters

Peers

SD

442.65 645.64

742.96 1185.37

659.86 1043.13

727.26 856.10

Male Mean SD

254.76 492.14

405.18 1109.37

402.04 947.86

669.26 903.56

354.74 583.96

584.91 1157.57

539.23 1003.46

700.18 874.98

167.80 211.75

281.74 279.23

338.86 372.77

665.20 668.67

435.26 854.43

548.98 917.53

657.59 1024.97

844.17 827.98

330.08 688.68

443.88 744.57

532.25 843.17

773.78 770.31

Older age Female Mean SD

229.25 332.34

378.18 405.19

396.14 483.31

1174.93 1051.69

Male Mean SD

314.63 448.68

360.21 462.22

477.49 740.88

887.12 1003.00

Combined Mean SD

274.24 398.11

368.68 433.92

439.00 630.27

1023.29 1030.88

321.47 567.76

472.67 857.58

505.06 847.83

825.95 906.41

Younger age Female Mean

Combined Mean

SD Middle age Female Mean

SD Male Mean

SD Combined Mean SD

For entire sample Mean SD

36

Fallon and Bowles Table II. Intercorrelations of the Amount of Time Spent with Fattier, Mother, Sib!ing(s), and Peers for Males and Females" Females Males Father Mother Sibling(s) Peers

Father

.76* .72* .35*

Mother

Sibiing(s)

Peers

.77*

.56* .46*

.33* .34* .35*

.72b .35b

.46*

Correlation coefficients above the diagonal are for females, those below are for males. * Significance less than .01 (2 tailed). a

Predicting Amount of Time The next set of analyses used multiple regression to predict the amount of time spent with family members and with peers. Initial analyses indicated that birth order did not contribute to the variance, which could be accounted for in any of the analyses and so it was dropped from further analyses. The curvilinear relationship between sibling order (Kidwell, 1981) and other variables were not replicated; instead the relationship was linear, which indicated that it was appropriate for inclusion in the regression equations. Therefore the family structure variables that were included in the prediction of times were sibling spacing, sibling density, and number of siblings. The family functioning variables of Intimacy, Conflict, and Parenting Style represented the family functioning variables. Age in years was included as a possible predictor in the regressions. Separate analyses were conducted for males and females. Table III presents the variables found to be significantly related to the criterion variables of time for males. The regression analyses revealed that 18% of the variance of the amount of time adolescents spend with their fathers is accounted firstly by level of democratic parenting, then density of the siblings, then intimacy of the family, and then the negative influence of conflict. Males' time with mother and siblings was similarly predicted by parenting style and sibling density. Whereas the amount of time with peers was predicted weakly and negatively by family conflict. By contrast, Table IV indicates that family structure variables were the more significant predictors of time spent with family members and peers for females. That is, the best predictors of intimate time with fathers for females was lower sibling density, being younger and having fewer

Family Structure and Family Functioning

37

Table III. Regression Analyses Predicting the Amount of Time Adolescents Spend with Parents, Siblings, and Peers for Males Father

Mother

Sibling(s)

.24a 2.85b

.29 3.55

.32 3.90

Sibling density

.35 4.36

.21 2.50

.21 2.55

Intimacy

.27 3.53

Parenting style

Conflict R2 (adjusted) F Ratio a

-.21 -2.18 .18 9.73

Peers

-.19 -2.34 .07 7.20

.08 8.43

.03 5.49

Standardized regression coefficients (beta weights). values.

bt

siblings, in that order. The equation accounted for 19% of the variance. Accounting for a similar amount of the variance for the amount of time adolescent females spend with mothers is lower sibling density, being younger and less democratic parenting. Sixteen percent of the variance of time with siblings was accounted for by lower sibling density and being a younger adolescent. Lower sibling density and lower levels of family intimacy was related to spending more time with peers. In summary, significant age group and sex effects were found for the amount of time adolescents spend with individual family members and with peers. For males, family functioning variables were more important predictors of time than were the family structure variables while for females, the reverse was found. DISCUSSION The purpose of this research was to investigate the influence of family structure and family functioning variables to ascertain which were influential on male and female adolescents' perception of intimate time spent with individual family members and peers. In line with the hypotheses, the findings showed that the amount of time that adolescents spend with their mother, father, siblings, and peers varies, at least in part, as a function of the adolescent's age and sex. The results also show that males were influenced more

38

Fallon and Bowles Table IV. Regression Analyses Predicting the Amount of Time Adolescents Spend with Parents, Siblings, and Peers for Females Father

Mother

Sibling(s)

Peers

Sibling density

-.39a -5.05b

-.46 5.58

-.40 5.04

-.29 -3.63

Age

-.24 -3.11

-.22 -2.70

-.18 -2.32

Number of siblings

-.17 -2.19 -.20 -2.45

Parenting style

-.18 -2.19

Intimacy R2 (adjusted) F Ratio a

.19 12.06

.19 12.02

.16 13.33

.09 8.00

Standardized regression coefficients (beta weights). values.

bt

by family functioning factors and females more by family structure factors. Across all four relationships there were significant positive correlations for male and female adolescents. The strongest correlations were between time with mothers, fathers, and siblings for males and mothers and fathers for females. Predictions of whether family structure or family functioning variables are related to the amount of intimate time with significant others showed that for males family functioning and sibling density variables were the most influential, whereas for females family structure variables and age were the most influential. Overall substantial support for the hypotheses was found. A range of important issues emerge from these findings. The means and the standard deviations of this intimate time with significant others is consistent with previous time research reported by Montemayor (1982) and indicates that this intimate element of time with others may be correctly interpreted as a subset of total time adolescents spend with family members and peers. Analysis of the mean amount of time spent with individual family members and peers revealed some consistent age group and sex patterns. For females, in all situations, it was the middle-aged group of adolescents who spent the least amount of time with family or friends. For males, the middle-aged group spent the least amount of tune with their mothers whereas for fathers, siblings and peers, it was the youngest age group of males who

Family Structure and Family Functioning

39

spent the least amount of time. These periods where little time is spent with others in this intimate fashion may indicate a developmental phase shift and/or be a period of vulnerability when the adolescent; will engage in behaviors to enhance the possibility of deeper associations with parents or siblings or peers to attract attention from such individuals. The correlations showed that more time spent with parents for males is associated with more time with siblings, whereas these findings were significantly different from the correlation of the time females spend with parents and siblings. The consistency of the correlations indicate that for both males and females time with parents is most highly correlated, then time with parents and siblings, and the least but still moderate correlation occurs between family members and peers. These findings differ from those of Montemayor (1982), who reported that the correlations of time between mothers and peers for females was consistently negative but less consistently so for males. The correlations in the present study show that time with peers is not negatively related to time with either parent. Thus there is little evidence of a parent-peer conflict model operating. This further reinforces the notion that those who spend the least amount of this special time with family members and peers are likely to be vulnerable as all the correlations were positive. Thus, less time with family members is associated with less time with peers. The consistency of these findings and the association between time spent with family members and peers suggests that rather than having a group of adolescents defined by their association with peers or parents, what actually may be occurring is a different polarization during adolescence. This more disturbing situation would have those who spend "quality time" with family members and peers at one end and those who are socially isolated or lonely at the other. Research into loneliness has shown that 22% of adolescents in Australia responded positively to the statement "I am so very lonely" (Atkinson, 1988). This group is likely to be represented in this research as those with very little time with all others. The complexity and importance of the attributions made about the quality of such contact and other influential factors such as personality variables has been noted in previous research (Boldero and Moore, 1990; Inderbitzen-Pisaruk et al, 1992). Future research linking the perceptions of intimate time spent with others and such variables would assist in the understanding of loneliness. The predictors of intimate time with parents and siblings for males were democratic parenting style and high sibling density, while for females, low sibling density and being of younger age were important. Weak predictors of time with peers for females were lower sibling density and less intimacy in the family, whereas for males the only predictor was low conflict in the family. Of interest also is the direction of the predictors of time

40

Fallon and Bowles

with peers. For males ail of the variables that distinguish time with family and peers are positive (with the exception of conflict where the negative beta weight implies a positive outcome, i.e., less conflict) while every factor for females was negative. That is, males are positively influenced mostly by the family's functioning as well as sibling density, whereas family structure factors are negatively influential for females. These findings concur with the assertion that larger families function more like a group and are less democratic, particularly for females (Kidwell, 1981). Importantly, and contrary to previous research (Kidwell., 1981), the other family structure variables did not consistently and significantly contribute to prediction of time with family members and peers. Central to the descriptions of adolescent interaction with family and peers is the accepted notion that adolescents communicate less with parents and more with peers as they age (Fasick, 1984; Vernberg et al., 1993). These findings have been partially supported by this research. The mean time with fathers, mothers, and siblings for the entire sample show that adolescents spend the most intimate time with peers, then siblings, mothers, and fathers. One explanation offered for this transition from dependence on parents to peers is that families simply spend less time together and, by comparison, adolescents spend more time with peers (Miller and Lane, 1991). Another explanation is the onset of the peak period of puberty and a corresponding distancing in family relations. Studies have shown that this period is characterized by more interrupting language in interaction between males and parents (Steinberg and Hill, 1978; Steinberg, 1981, 1988) and greater conflict between adolescents and their mothers (Hill et \aL, 1985). Another explanation is that parents, siblings, and peers differ in their functional roles (Lempers and Clark-Lempers, 1992). Mothers and fathers are sources of affection, instrumental aid, and alliance, whereas peers provide intimacy and companionship as do siblings. Lempers and Clark-Lempers' (1992) research also associated conflict with parent-adolescents relations, and Montemayor (1982) concluded that disagreement between females and their mothers was related to spending greater amounts of time together. In this present study conflict was associated with less time with fathers and peers for males but not for females. Of interest also was the finding that less democratic parenting style was associated with spending greater amounts of time with mothers for females. Investigation of the causes and outcomes of such family functioning is necessary. The changes in the amount of intimate time adolescents spend with family members varied across adolescence, which is in line with findings from research into emotional disclosure by adolescents to parents and peers. The findings show the need for families to adapt to the needs of

Family Structure and Family Functioning

41

adolescents at various adolescent stages ( Brown et  al, 1986; Papini et al., 1990). Adapting to such needs does not necessarily mean parents spending more time with adolescents. It is possible that more time with parents is not necessary or welcome and may not relate to better adolescent adjustment or well-being. In line with the findings of Miller and Lane (1991), it may be that the function of interaction with parents at various stages of adolescence has not only a different effect but also a different quality and therefore a differential salience for the adolescent. Therefore increasing the absolute amount of time with a significant other, such as a parent without some purpose, may have a detrimental influence on the relationship. It is more likely that a flexible approach, responsive to the adolescents' needs in the context of other competing social and developmental goals, is appropriate. Some words of caution are needed regarding the present study even though the selection of respondents and the data gathering techniques used were not unusual in this type of research. While there is no evidence to suggest a biased sample from the one coeducational and two single-sex schools used, respondents were not selected randomly and therefore may or may not be representative of the schools populations or of the population of Australian schools. Sampling of individual adolescents' that would have permitted interviews rather than pencil-paper responses were not permitted by school policies. No specific information concerning the socioeconomic status of the families was available; however, the schools were located in middle class suburbs. The usual caveats that apply to self-report data are also required; for example, while the respondents were instructed that the time which was being asked about was one-on-one time, there was no way to ensure that the adolescents complied with this instruction. A number of possible research questions emerge from the study. Future research into the nature of interactions of those adolescents who are low on quality time with both family members and peers is necessary. Exploration of the predictors of time with different family members may help explain the sex differences. Future research into the values and importance of the qualitative differences in the amount of time spent with family members and peers would be appropriate as it is too simple to assume that more (for example more time with peers with age) implies a better relationship or a more meaningful relationship. Such research would help define why family intimacy influences time with peers negatively. Ascertaining whether the periods of less time with family members and peers, in early adolescence for males and midadolescence for females, are actually times of loneliness and vulnerability is also important.

42

Fallon and Bowles

REFERENCES Altmann, L., and Taylor, D. (1973). Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships. Holt, Rinehart, Winston, New York. Atkinson, R. (1988). Respectful, dutiful teenagers. Psychol. Today 26: 22-23. Berger, C., and Calabrese, R. (1975). Some explorations in initial attraction and beyond: towards a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Commun. Res. 1: 99-112. Biddle, B., Banks, B., and Marlin, M. (1980). Parental and peer influences on adolescence, Social Forces 58: 1057-1079. Boldero, J., and Moore, S. (1990). An evaluation of the de Jong-Gievald's loneliness model with Australian adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 19: 133-147. Brown, B., Eicher, S. A., and Petrie, S. (1986). The importance of peer group ("crowd") affiliation in adolescence. J. Adolesc. 9: 73-96. Ernst, C., and Angst, A. (1983). Birth Order: Its Influence on Personality. Springer-Verlag, New York. Fasick, F. (1984). Parents, peers, youth culture and autonomy in adolescence. Adolescence 19: 143-157. Hall, L. D., Walker, S. J., and Acock, A. C. (1995). Gender and family work in one-parent households. /. Marriage Family 57: 685-692. Harner, L. (1982). Talking about the past and the future. In Friedman, W. J. (ed.), The Development of the Psychology of Time. Academic Press, New York. Hill, J., Holmbeck, G., Marlow, L., Green, T., and Lynch, M. (1985). Pubertal status and parent-child relations in families of seventh grade boys. / Early Adolsec. 5: 31-44. Huston, T., and Burgess, R. (1979). Social exchange in developing relationship: an overview. In Burgess, R. I., and Huston, T. L. (eds.), Social Exchange in Developing Relationships. Academic Press, New York. Inderbitzen-Pisaruk, H., Clark, M., and Solano, C. (1992). Correlates of loneliness in midadolescence. X Youth Adolescence 21: 153-167. Kidwel!, J. S. (1981). Number of siblings, sibling spacing, sex, and birth order: Their effects on perceived parent-adolescent relationships. J. Marriage Family 43: 315-333. Koch, H. (1955). The relation of certain family constellation characteristics and the attitudes of children towards adults. Child Develop. 26: 13-40. Lempers, J., and Clark-Lempers, D. (1992). Young, middle and late adolescents comparisons of the functional importance of five significant relationships. /. Youth Adolesc. 21: 53-96. Levinger, G., and Snoek, J. (1972). Attraction in Relationship: A New Look at Interpersonal Attraction. Genera! Learning, Morristown, NJ. Miller, J., and Lane, M. (1991). Relations between young adults and their parents. J. Adolesc. 14: 179-194. Montemayor, R. (1982). The relationship between parent-adolescent conflict and the amount of time adolescents spend alone and with parents and peers. Child Develop. §3: 1512-1519. Noller, P., and Cailan, V. (1991). The Adolescent in the Family. Routledge, London. Noller, P., Seth-Smith, M., Bouma, R., and Schweitzer, R. (1992). Parent and adolescent perceptions of family functioning: A comparison of clinic and nonclinic families. J. Adolesc. 15: 101-115. Papini, D., Farmer, F., Clark, M., Micka, J., and Barnett, J. (1990). Adolescence 25: 960-975. Pfoutts, J. H. (1980). Birth order, age-spacing, IQ differences, and family relations. /. Marriage Family 42: 517-530. Piaget, J. (1969). The Child's Conception of Time. (A. J. Pomerans, trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1927.) Richardson, R. A., Abramowitz, R. H., Asp, C. E., and Petersen, A. C. (1986). Parent-child relationships in early adolescence: Effects of family structure. J. Marriage Family 48: 805-811. Sebald, H., and White, B. (1980). "Teenagers' divided reference groups: Uneven alignment with parents and peers. Adolescence 15: 979-984.

Family Structure and Family Functioning

43

Slife, B. D. (1993). Time and Psychological Explanation. State University of New York Press, New York. Steinberg, L. (1981). Transformations in family relations at puberty. Develop. Psychol. 17: 833-840. Steinberg, L. (1988). Reciprocal relations between parent-child distance and pubertal maturation. Develop. Psychol. 24: 122-128. Steinberg, L., and Hill, J. (1978). Patterns of family interaction as a function of age, the onset of puberty and formal thinking. Develop. Psychol. 14: 683-684. Vernberg, E., Beery, S., Ewell, K., and Abwender, A. (1993). Parents' use of friendship facilitation strategies and the formulation of friendships in early adolescence: A prospective study. J Family PsychoL 7: 356-369. Walker, A., and Thompson, L. (1983). Intimacy and intergenerational aid and contact among mothers and daughters. /. Marriage Family 45: 841-848. Wilks, J. (1986). The relative importance of parents and friends in adolescent decision making. J. Youth Adolesc. 15: 323-335.