Recent studies of parenting and coparenting

The three studies I discuss today all relate to parenting. First, Shalev, Sharon, Uzefovsky & Atzaba-Poria (2023) published “Parental Guilt and Children’s Internalizing and Externalizing Behavior: The moderating role of parental reflective functioning” in Journal of Family Psychology.  Here is the edited abstract:

The immense responsibility inherent in parenthood makes feeling guilty highly prevalent among parents. Such feelings are natural, yet excessive guilt is related to depression and anxiety and could burden parents. Qualitative research suggested that guilt is predominant in parents whose children suffer from behavioral and emotional difficulties, making it necessary to quantify guilt and examine possible resilience factors that could alleviate the aversive aspects of it. In this study, we examined the association between children’s externalizing and internalizing problems and different aspects of parental guilt, assessing whether parental reflective functioning (PRF) would moderate these associations. One hundred six parents of children aged 1.30–9.30 years were recruited from child daycare centers and community clinics. The Parent Development Interview was administered to measure PRF. Based on this interview, we created a new coding system, to quantify three aspects of parental guilt: intensity, reparation, and internal reaction to guilt. Children’s difficulties as well as parents’ depression and anxiety were assessed using validated self-report measures. We showed that children’s difficulties were related to parental guilt, but only when levels of PRF were not high. Specifically, internalizing problems were related to greater intensity and negative internal reaction to guilt only when PRF was low or moderate, and externalizing problems were related to greater intensity of guilt only when PRF levels were low. These findings suggest that encouraging reflective functioning could reduce the burden of guilt. 

This is a fairly large sample with helpful information and findings. I like the coding system for intensity, reparation, and internal reaction, as well as the positive role of parental reflective functioning. The next two studies look at coparenting. Yang, Kim, Wang, Zhang, Schoppe-Sullivan & Yoon (2023) published “Coparenting, Parental Anxiety/Depression, and Child Behavior Problems: The actor–partner interdependence model with low-income married couples” in Journal of Family Psychology. Here’s the edited abstract:

A considerable amount of research has suggested significant associations among perceived coparenting relationships, parental anxiety/depression, and children’s adjustment. Although family members’ function is influenced by other members in a shared context, much of the prior work relied on one parent’s perspective to examine the relationship between both parents. To address this important limitation, we applied the actor–partner interdependence model and accounted for the interdependence between fathers and mothers in examining the mediating role of parental anxiety/depression in the association between coparenting quality and child behavior problems. The present study included 1,827 low-income couples from the Supporting Healthy Marriage project (mothers: 51.25% of White, 14.34% African American, 35.31% Hispanic; fathers: 48.11% White, 18.54% African/Black American, 35.34% Hispanic). The results showed that both fathers’ and mothers’ perceptions of coparenting quality had significant effects on fathers’ anxiety/depression. In contrast, mothers’ anxiety/depression was affected only by mothers’ perceptions of coparenting quality and not by fathers’ perceptions. Overall, the effects of parents’ perception of coparenting on children’s internalizing and externalizing behavior problems were largely mediated by parental anxiety/depression. The findings highlight both interdependent and independent roles of fathers and mothers in the pathways from coparenting quality to children’s behavior problems. 

This is a very large sample. There is a bit of “if mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy,” but the collection of data from both parents is important. Finally,  Ronaghan, Gaulke & Theule (2023) published “The Association between Marital Satisfaction and Coparenting Quality: A meta-analysis” in Journal of Family Psychology. Here’s the edited abstract:

Coparenting refers to the way parents or caregivers relate to each other as parents. Marital satisfaction (MS) is the subjective evaluation of the overall quality of one’s relationship, including the extent to which needs, expectations, and desires are met. The coparenting relationship is distinct from, yet intimately connected to, the marital relationship. The objective of this study was to summarize and analyze current evidence regarding the association between MS and coparenting quality (CQ). Meta-analyses of 108 published and unpublished articles were conducted to evaluate the association between MS and CQ. In the meta-analysis of samples including both mothers and fathers, a medium association was found between MS and CQ, r = .41; 95% CI [.37, .44]; Q(88) = 1253.42. Separate meta-analyses of samples including only mothers and only fathers and an analog analysis of variance examining the moderating effect of parent gender found larger effects for mothers (r = .48) than fathers (r = .42). Maternal age, paternal education level, relationship length, and number of children were also significant moderators, with larger effects being found with families with more advanced maternal age, lower paternal education, longer relationships, and more children. The country, person reporting on CQ, and measure of CQ were also found to be statistically significant moderators. This research has implications that may inform the work of parent and family support services and contribute to positive family functioning. 

It makes sense that marital satisfaction and coparenting quality are related. While the results, as summarized, are vague, they suggest good data to collect when positive family functioning is a goal.