Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Conflict between mothers and their children is normal but for some it can escalate to become hostile during adolescence and disrupt healthy social development. This study aimed to understand the prevalence of hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence (16–17 years), and identify associations with mother, child, and family factors during childhood (4–5 years). Participants were 3,021 mothers and their children (49% female) involved in the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that interparental conflict, maternal hostility, consistency, as well as child reactivity, behavioural difficulties, and neurodevelopmental condition at age 4–5 years were positively associated with hostile child-parent conflict at age 16–17 years. These early childhood conditions may act as important initial inputs into the development of coercive child-parent cycles and conflict into late adolescence.

Keywords

Child-parent conflict parenting child-to-parent violence interparental conflict child development adolescence

Introduction

Conflict between parents and their children is normal and an expected part of family life (Branje, 2020; Montemayor, 1983). In most families, this involves low intensity confrontation, argument, or negotiation (Hill, 2013). Conflict is particularly likely as the young person develops autonomy into adolescence where the boundaries and expectations within the relationship are continually re-negotiated (Hadiwijaya et al., 2017). In well-regulated and well-adjusted family environments, conflict creates opportunity for adaptive changes to relationship dynamics (Adams & Laursen, 2007; Branje, 2018; Granic et al., 2003). However, in some cases, these interactions become hostile (e.g., involving substantial anger) and even violent (e.g., verbal or physical abuse; Granic & Patterson, 2006; Patterson et al., 1984) and can transform conflict into an overtly negative experience which generates substantial shame and guilt for those involved (Bobic, 2002; Williams et al., 2017). Child-parent conflict creates strain on the developmentally important child-parent relationship (Agnew & Huguley, 1989; Granic & Patterson, 2006; Johnson & Giordano, 2013; Paulson et al., 1990), which is key to a young person’s future functioning (Ranson & Urichuk, 2008).

Hostile child-parent conflict can be common in families. Up to 1 in 5 Australian families may experience such conflict (Fitz-Gibbon et al., 2022), which primarily implicates mothers (likely because, despite shifts towards more gender-balanced caregiving roles, women remain the primary caregivers in most Australian families; Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2024). Despite being prevalent and consequential, hostile conflict between parents and adolescents (compared to operationalisation as general disagreement or degree of negative affect) has only been measured in approximately 3.7% of child-parent conflict studies to date (Marshall et al., 2023). Understanding and interrupting the processes that lead to hostile child-parent conflict is important for protecting healthy development during a critical developmental period.

Developmental-ecological models (i.e., theories which represent the interaction between individuals and their environmental contexts) would suggest that child-parent conflict emerges via dynamic and reciprocal interactions between the individual(s) and their various ecological systems (e.g., micro-, meso-, and macro-systems; Bronfenbrenner, 2000). Within the microsystem, the family system is highly influential, where both intrapersonal factors at the individual child and parent level (such as mental health), as well as interpersonal factors (such as parenting behaviours), can all contribute to conflict. For example, a family members mood can spread through the system and impact on others mood (Chi et al., 2019), creating tension and conflict between family members. According to family systems theory, the family unit can also be a complex system with multiple sub-systems (Bowen, 1993), where the interactions within one sub-systems (e.g., between parents) can impact or ‘spill over’ into other sub-systems (e.g., the child-parent dyad; Martin et al., 2017; Stroud et al., 2011). For example, conflict between parents can generate conflict between parents and their children (Sherrill et al., 2017). The family system operates within a ‘chronosystem’ (i.e., the influence of time; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2007), whereby earlier interactions between family members shape the nature of later interactions. Overall, in line with developmental ecological and family systems theory, individual and interpersonal factors within the family in childhood could increase or decrease the risk for hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence.

A number of individual child factors may make hostile conflict with parents more likely during adolescence. For example, young people with less ability to regulate emotions (Cano-Lozano et al., 2020), or who have conduct problems (Calvete et al., 2011), substance use problems (Ruiz-Fernández et al., 2021), or mental health problems like depression (Calvete et al., 2011) are more likely to be hostile toward their parents. Some nascent studies indicate that neurodevelopmental conditions may also be implicated in child-parent conflict. Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) may be common amongst young people who use aggression against parents (Harries et al., 2024; Holt, 2023). Indeed, externalising behaviours such as aggression are a prominent reason why caregivers of young people with ASD seek professional help (Locke et al., 2020). The presence of comorbid ADHD can intensify symptoms of ASD, particularly oppositional behaviours such as tantrums (Goldin et al., 2013; van der Meer et al., 2012), potentially leading to hostile conflict with parents. Additionally, sensory differences (such as avoiding or seeking) are also associated with challenging caregiving interactions that can be stressful and sometimes hostile (Griffin et al., 2022).

Maternal factors also contribute to the risk of hostile child-parent conflict. Mothers who experience stress, depression, and anxiety, as well as helplessness in their parenting role, are more likely to experience aggression from their children in adolescence (Harries et al., 2024; Jiménez-Granado et al., 2023). Many of these individual factors influence conflict by reducing the quality of dyadic interactions. For example, parental stress and helplessness can have a negative effect on parenting behaviours, which may increase the risk of hostile child-parent conflict. Anxious parents may lack self-efficacy (Jiménez-Granado et al., 2023), while highly stressed mothers may use more punitive discipline techniques (Martorell & Bugental, 2006), such as corporal punishments (Harries et al., 2022), as well as use positive discipline techniques less, such as the use of reasoning (Rudnova & Kornienko, 2024). Such parental hostility is a robust predictor of child hostility in childhood and adolescence, particularly where the young person is temperamentally reactive or anxious (Leve et al., 2005). Indeed, individual child factors also feed into these interactions to form coercive processes that entrench and escalate hostile conflict over time (Granic & Patterson, 2006). Mothers with children who display more frequent challenging behaviour may feel helpless in their parenting role and become inconsistent in response to hostility or challenging behaviour from the young person (Granic & Patterson, 2006); sometimes power-assertive, but also withdrawing and permissive (Harries et al., 2024). This process then creates risk for later conflict as the strategy becomes viable for the young person throughout childhood (Patterson et al., 1984).

The influence of individual factors and family processes on child-parent conflict is well-supported across research and theory to date. However, the field lacks longitudinal consideration of the early conditions which lead to child-parent conflict in adolescence. Most studies are cross-sectional, or longitudinal but limited to either adolescence (e.g., Calvete et al., 2020; Shek, 2002) or childhood (e.g., Stover et al., 2016). However, exploring child-parent interactions and dynamics within an extended chronosystem (i.e., longitudinally over childhood and adolescence) has important implications for understanding hostile child-parent conflict. For example, the norms, boundaries, and interactions within the child-parent dyad evolve over time, flexing within the developmental stage of the young person and the natural adaptations to parenting across development (Oosterhouse et al., 2020). The transition from childhood to adolescence is a time of substantial re-organisation within the child-parent dyad (Paikoff & Brooks-Gunn, 1991), where the risk profile for conflict may also shift. Despite substantial re-organisation, the nature of conflict may still be informed by enduring problems within the dyad evident from childhood. For example, Kjeldsen et al. (2014) found that a pattern of persistent externalising behaviour from toddlerhood (age 18 months) into adolescence (age 14 years) could be predicted by different ecological factors (such as maternal depression, family stress, and child emotionality) when the child was 18 months old.

Longitudinal investigation that spans childhood and adolescence may provide novel insights into the most influential targets for early intervention and prevention of hostile child-parent conflict. However, studies on hostile child-parent conflict are scarce, particularly with longitudinal designs. The objective of the current study was to explore the long-term predictors of child-parent conflict. The first aim was to explore the prevalence of child-parent conflict in late adolescence (16–17yrs) in Australian mothers and their children. The second aim was to identify child, mother, and family factors in childhood (4–5 years) associated with child-parent conflict in late adolescence (16–17 years). We predicted that child-parent conflict in adolescence would be:

(1) Positively associated with maternal psychological distress, hostility, stress and negatively associated with maternal self-efficacy, warmth, disciplinary consistency, and use of reasoning in childhood

(2) Positively associated with child reactivity, neurodevelopmental condition, and emotional-behavioural difficulties in childhood

(3) Positively associated with interparental conflict and negatively associated with coparenting support childhood

Method

Study design and sample

This study focuses on secondary data analysis drawn from the Growing Up In Australia: the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC), a nationally representative study of children’s health, wellbeing and development initiated by the Australian Government Department of Social Services. Ethics approval for LSAC was granted by the Australian Institute of Family Studies Ethics Committee (Soloff et al., 2005). The study tracks two cohorts of children recruited (1) in the first year of life (baby [B] cohort) and (2) at age 4–5 years (kindergarten [K] cohort). Data collection began in 2004 with nine biennial follow-ups currently available. The sampling frame is detailed extensively elsewhere (Soloff et al., 2005). Briefly, approximately 10% of all Australian postcodes were selected (stratified by state of residence and urban versus rural status). Next, children proportional to population size were randomly selected from each postcode using the Medicare database (Australia’s universal health insurance scheme), which includes over 90% of all Australian infants. Data is collected through face-to-face and telephone interviews, self-completed questionnaires, and direct assessments. Study respondents include children, parents, carers and teachers. The current study used data reported by the study child’s mother. LSAC collects limited demographic data on other family members including siblings and grandparents, however there is only on ‘study child’ that is the sampling unit of interest. That is, only one child per family is the focus. Data collection began in 2004 and is collected every two years, with nine waves of data currently available.

The present study used data from the K-cohort when the children were 4–5 years (wave 1, 2002) and 16–17 (wave 7, 2016) as reported by the study child’s mother. Wave 7 was selected because this was the earliest timepoint where child-parent conflict was measured. At wave 1, the cohort consisted of 4,983 children (50% response rate). Single parents, families living in rental properties, and children from non-English speaking backgrounds were slightly underrepresented compared to the Australian population. Retention from wave 1 was excellent across each wave, including 62% at wave 7. Retention was lower for families of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-English speaking backgrounds, parents with low education, and those living in rental properties (Sipthorp & Misson, 2007). Of the 4,983 children from the K-cohort at wave 1, data was available on the outcome of interest for 3,032 children/mothers. Cases were removed if the ‘mother’ was not the biological, adoptive or step-parent of the study child (n = 11). The final sample consisted of 3,021 mothers and their children.

Measures

Hostile child-parent conflict was measured by the Argumentative Relationship Scale (ARS; LSAC) at wave 7 (16–17 years). LSAC derived this scale based on the Quality of Coparental Interactions Scale (Ahrons, 1981). Mothers were asked two items: (a) “Is there anger or hostility between you and Study Child?” and (b) “Do you have arguments with Study Child that end up with pushing, hitting, kicking or shoving?”. Mothers responded on a 5-point scale (1 = Never to 5 = Always). Items were summed to provide a total score, where higher scores indicate a greater level of conflict in the relationship. To estimate the proportion of mothers reporting high anger/hostility and arguments with violence, we also analysed the endorsement of ‘often-always’ on each item. As an indicator of child violence towards parents, mothers were also asked if they have: (a) ever been, and (b) currently afraid of their child (dichotomise: Yes/No).

Measures used to assess demographic, parent, child and family factors are summarised in Table 1. All potential factors were assessed at wave 1 (4–5 years).

Table 1.

Measures of interest.

Construct	Measure (source)	Additional information
Parent Factors
Psychological distress	Kessler-6 (Kessler et al., 2002)	Mothers rated six items which reported on feelings of nervousness, hopelessness, restlessness, sadness and worthlessness. Rated from 0 = None of the time to 4 = All of the time. Higher scores indicate greater psychological distress. Cronbach’s α = .813
Parental self-efficacy	Early childhood longitudinal study	Mothers rated a single item, ‘Overall, as a parent, do you feel that you are…’ rated from 1 = Not very good at being a parent to 5 = A very good parent. Higher scores indicate mothers rating themselves as better parents
Parenting behaviours
Maternal hostility	Canadian national longitudinal survey of children and youth (Statistics Canada, 2000)	Mothers rated four items about how often they experience anger and irritability during interactions with the study child (e.g., ‘how often are you angry when you punish this child?’). Rated on a 5-point scale (1 = Never/almost never to 5 = All the time). Mean is derived, where higher scores indicate greater anger and irritability during interactions with their child. Cronbach’s α = .642
Maternal warmth	Child rearing questionnaire (Paterson & Sanson, 1999)	Mothers rated six items about how often they express warmth and affection toward the study child (e.g., ‘how often do you express affection by hugging, kissing, or holding this child?’). Rated on a 5-point scale (1 = Never/almost never to 5 = Always/almost always). Mean is derived, where high scores indicate greater maternal warmth. Cronbach’s α = .827
Maternal disciplinary consistency	Canadian national longitudinal survey of children and youth (Statistics Canada, 2000)	Mothers rated five items about how often they set and enforce clear expectations and limits for the study child’s behaviour (e.g., ‘how often does your child get away with things that you feel should have been punished?’). Rated on a 5-point scale (1 = Never to 5 = all the time). Several items were reverse scored, mean is derived, where higher scores indicate greater consistency. Cronbach’s α = .686
Maternal inductive reasoning	Child rearing questionnaire (Paterson & Sanson, 1999)	Mothers rated two items which asked about how often they reasoned with the study child about their behaviour (e.g., ‘how often did you give this child reasons why rules should be obeyed’). Rated on 5-point scale (1 = Never/almost never to 5 = Always/almost always). Mean is derived, where higher scores indicate higher levels of inductive reasoning. Pearsons r = .477, p < .001
Parent stress	Difficulty of life at present from the Australian temperament Project	Mothers completed one item, ‘how difficult do you feel your life is at present?’. Rated on 5-point scale from 1 = No problems or stress to 5 = Very many problems and stress. Higher scores indicate more difficulties
Child Factors
Child temperament - reactivity	Short temperament scale for children (STSC) – reactivity scale	Primary caregiver report on four items related to the child’s reactivity to situations (e.g., “if this child is upset, it is hard to comfort him/her.” rated on a 6-point scale (1 = Almost never to 6 = Almost always). Mean of scores is calculated, where higher scores indicate higher reactivity. Cronbach’s α = .628
Child neurodivergence		Primary caregivers reported on two items: “Does the study child have any of these conditions: ADHD and/or autism’’ across each wave.^a if the primary caregiver reported yes to either condition at any wave, the child was coded as neurodivergent (1 = yes)
Child emotional-behavioural difficulties	Total difficulties scale from the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (Goodman, 2001)	20-Items rated by mothers regarding the child’s behaviour (e.g., ‘restless, overactive, cannot sit still for long’ and ‘many worries or often seems worried’). Items rated on a 3-point scale (0 = Not true to 2 = Certainly true) and summed. Higher scores indicative of more emotional and behavioural difficulties. Cronbach’s α = .713
Family Factors
Coparenting support	Coparenting support subscale from the quality of coparental interactions scale (Ahrons, 1981)	Mean of three items (e.g., “do you feel your partner understands and is supportive of your needs as a parent?”) rated on a 5-point scale (from 1 = Never to 5 = Always), where higher score indicates greater support. Cronbach’s α = .699
Interparental conflict	Interparental conflict subscale from the quality of coparental interactions scale (Ahrons, 1981)	Five items rated by mothers about how often a range of verbal (e.g., disagreements, arguments) and physical (e.g., pushing, hitting, shoving) conflict behaviours occurred with their partner. Rated on a 5-point scale (1 = Never to 5 = Always). Items are summed, where higher scores indicate higher frequency of interparental conflict. Cronbach’s α = .781

^aAs neurodivergence is a stable developmental condition, if parents endorsed ‘Yes’ to either of these items at any wave the study child with characterised as neurodivergent at 4–5 years of age.

Demographics

A range of child, maternal and family characteristics were collected at each wave, including child and maternal: age (years), country of birth (dichotomous: Australia, other), main language spoken at home (dichotomous: English, other), Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander status (dichotomous: yes, no); study child’s parents are partners (dichotomous: yes, no); maternal education (dichotomous: did not complete-/completed secondary school) and employment (dichotomous: not in-/in paid employment); number of children in the house (continuous); and family experience of financial pressure (dichotomous: yes/no). Socio-economic status was based on Socio-Economic Index for Areas – Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage (SEIFA; ABS, 2013). The SEIFA is based on population census data including income, educational attainment and employment. The SEIFA is based on a mean of 1000 (SD = 100) where lower scores are indicative of a local area being relatively disadvantaged (used as a continuous measure).

Data analysis strategy

Data were analysed in SPSS version 29 (IBM Corp, 2021). First, descriptive statistics for sample demographics and child-parent conflict were obtained. Next, to identify early childhood (wave 1; 4–5yrs) factors associated with later child-parent conflict (wave 7; 16–17yrs), bivariate and multivariate linear regression analyses were conducted. Variables selected for inclusion in the multivariate model had significant bivariate associations with child-parent conflict at p < .05 (all correlations are reported in the supplemental material). Demographic characteristics from wave 1 were also explored as above and included in the final multivariate model as covariates if they had significant bivariate associations with child-parent conflict at p < .05 (see supplemental table 1).

Missing data for child-parent conflict at 16–17 years was 41.7%. Little’s MCAR test was on the margins of significance, χ² (2) = 5.99, p = .05. Given that the chi-square tests are over-powered in larger samples, we interpreted this result as not significant, and that the data were likely MCAR. Missing data for all descriptive and regression analyses were handled using multiple imputation. Fifty complete datasets were imputed using a multivariate normal model using all variables used in the analysis. Pooled estimates for all proportions and model parameter estimates were obtained using Rubin’s rule (Rubin, 1987). Multiple imputation in SPSS provides regression estimated for pooled data for unstandardised B, t and p-values. For the remaining estimates (R2, F-statistic), the range across the imputed datasets are reported.

Results

Sample characteristics

Demographic characteristics of the final sample of mothers and their children are presented in Table 2. At wave 1 (4–5 years) the majority of children were born within Australia, spoke English as their main language, and their primary caregiver was female. Mothers, on average, were 35 years of age, born within Australia, spoke English as their main language, had completed secondary school and were in paid employment. The majority of families were comprised of two parents in the home, had an average of 2–3 children, and almost a third reported experiencing financial pressure.

Table 2.

Demographic characteristics, complete data.

	Wave 1 Child 4–5 years N = 3021 n (%)	Wave 7 Child 16–17 years N = 2905 n (%)
Child characteristics
Sex, male	1530 (50.6)	1475 (48.8)
Age (M, SD)	4.16 (.37)	16.45 (.50)
Median (range)	4.00 (4–5)	16 (15–18)
Born in Australia	2893 (95.8)	2793 (92.5)
Aboriginal and/or torres Strait islander	61 (2.0)	58 (2.0)
English As main language	2731 (90.4)	2635 (87.2)
Child’s primary caregiver sex, female	2957 (97.9)	2785 (92.2)
Neurodivergent	233 (7.7)
Autistic^a	113 (3.7)
Attention deficit^a	159 (5.3)
Maternal and family characteristics
Age (M, SD)	35.30 (4.89)	47.38 (5.74)
Median (range_	35.00 (20–52)	47.00 (24–73)
Born in Australia	2325 (77.0)	2250 (74.5)
Aboriginal and/or torres Strait islander	61 (2.0)	41 (1.3)
English As main language	2641 (87.4)	2540 (84.1)
Completed secondary school	2016 (66.7)	2349 (77.8)
In paid employment	1884 (62.4)	2458 (81.4)
Maternal income (per year)
$25,999 or less	1756 (58.1)	997 (33.0)
$26,000 - $51,999	695 (23.0)	741 (24.5)
$52,000 - $103,999	217 (7.2)	791 (26.2)
$104,000 or more	23 (0.8)	210 (7.0)
Missing	330 (10.9)	282 (9.3)
Family experiencing financially pressure	961 (31.9)	586 (19.4)
SEIFA disadvantage	1016.10 (57.78)	1016.10 (65.95)
Single parent	267 (8.8)	484 (16.0)
Number of children in household (M, SD)	2.45 (.94)	1.36 (1.13)

^aChildren could experience coexisting autism and ADHD; n’s differ due to missing data.

Descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics for child-parent conflict and potential predictive factors are presented in Table 3. On average, mothers reported relatively low levels of child-parent conflict when their children were 16–17 years. The proportion of mothers reporting “sometimes” experiencing anger or hostility with their child was 7.8%, while the proportion of mothers reporting “often-always” experiencing anger or hostility with their child was 1.7%. Arguments with violence were rare; 3.7% of mothers reported to ‘ever’ being afraid of their child. Of the mothers who reported to ever being afraid of their child, almost 18% reported that they were currently afraid of their child at 16 years.

Table 3.

Descriptive statistics for all study variables – complete cases (n = 2905).

Study variable	M, SD	Theoretical range
Child-parent conflict @16yrs	2.70 (.89)	0–10
Anger or hostility (n, %)
Never-rarely	2603 (90.5%)
Sometimes	225 (7.8%)
Often-always	48 (1.7%)
Arguments with violence (n, %)
Never-rarely	2837 (98.7%)
Sometimes	34 (1.2%)
Often-always	5 (0.1%)
Ever afraid of child (n, %)	107 (3.7%)	-
Currently afraid of child (n, %)^a	19 (17.9%)
Predictors @4yrs (n = 3021)
Maternal psychological distress	4.10 (3.74)	0–24
Maternal self-efficacy	3.92 (.87)	0–5
Maternal hostility	2.17 (.59)	1–5
Maternal warmth	4.43 (.45)	1–5
Maternal disciplinary consistency	4.14 (.63)	1–5
Maternal reasoning	4.26 (.59)	1–5
Maternal stress	2.49 (.79)	1–5
Child reactivity	3.01 (.65)	1–6
Neurodivergent child	-	-
Child emotional-behavioural difficulties	9.74 (4.58)	0–40
Coparenting support	4.44 (.58)	1–5
Interparental conflict	1.92 (.51)	1–5

All predictors assessed at wave 1 (4-5 years).

^aItem only asked if responded yes to ever afraid of child.

Predictors of child-parent conflict

Bivariate and multivariate analyses assessing the relationship between potential parent, child and family predictor variables and child-parent conflict at 16 years (Table 4) are presented below. Bivariate analysis revealed that mothers who reported more child-parent conflict with their child were more likely to report: greater psychological distress; lower parenting self-efficacy; higher hostile parenting behaviours; lower maternal warmth, consistency and reasoning; and increased life stress. Child factors that predicted increased child-parent conflict included: more reactive child temperament; neurodivergence; and increased child behaviour difficulties. While family factors included, as reported by mothers: less coparenting support and greater interparental conflict between parents. Demographic covariates at child age 4–5 years that predicated increased child-parent conflict included having less children in the house and lower maternal education.

Table 4.

Multiple Linear Regression analysis examining early childhood (4–5yrs) factors associated with child-parent conflict (16–17yrs), pooled across 50 imputed datasets (N = 1893).

	Bivariate analysis			Multivariate analysis
	B ^a	t	p	B ^a	t	p
Maternal factors
Maternal psychological distress	.031	6.25	<.001	−.00	−.64	.521
Maternal self-efficacy	−.12	−6.42	<.001	−.03	−1.32	.185
Maternal hostility	.36	13.11	<.001	.25	6.95	<.001
Maternal warmth	−.25	−6.70	<.001	−.09	−1.83	.067
Maternal disciplinary consistency	−.08	−3.17	.002	.06	2.12	.034
Maternal reasoning	−.08	−2.89	.004	−.01	−.34	.737
Maternal stress	.14	6.12	<.001	.03	1.09	.276
Child factors
Child reactivity	.23	8.93	<.001	.08	2.84	.005
Neurodivergent child^b	.40	6.57	<.001	.27	4.02	<.001
Child emotional-behavioural difficulties	.03	9.61	<.001	.01	2.77	.006
Family factors
Coparenting support	−.09	−2.96	.003	.06	1.86	.063
Interparental conflict	.27	7.78	<.001	.19	4.84	<.001
Demographic Covariates @4yrs
No. children	−.05	−2.65	.008	−.04	−2.13	.033
Maternal education	−.08	−2.18	.029	−.05	−1.28	.200

^aPool unstandardised beta estimated. All predictors assessed at wave 1.

^bDichotomous variable (0 = No, 1 = Yes).

In the adjusted multivariate model, only a subset of variables remained independently associated with child-parent conflict at 16–17 years. In this model, maternal hostility (β = .25, p < .001), maternal disciplinary consistency (β = .06, p = .034) and interparental conflict (β = .19, p < .001) when children were 4–5 years, emerged as robust predictors of child-parent conflict at 16–17 years, even after accounting for the broad ecological context. Child level factors also remained salient, including child neurodivergent status (β = .27, p < .001), child reactivity (β = .08, p = .005), and child emotional-behavioural difficulties (β = .01, p = .006). Number of children in the household remained a significant demographic covariate (β = −.04, p = .033), whereby having less children was associated with greater child-parent conflict.

Discussion

The aims of the current study were to (a) determine the prevalence of hostile child-parent conflict in late adolescence in an Australian population-based sample, and (b) identify mother, child, and family factors in early childhood associated with child-parent conflict in late adolescence. We found that around 8% of mothers reported child-parent conflict in adolescence which involved anger or hostility (more than ‘rarely’), and approximately 1.3% reported that their conflicts involved physical aggression. This prevalence is lower than what was reported by Fitz-Gibbon et al. (2022) for Australian’s aged 16–20 years, however their estimate included conflict tactics such as verbal aggressions which are more common than physical aggression, as well as potential conflict with other family members. In the current study, just under 4% of mothers reported ever being afraid of their child, and of those, approximately 18% reported currently being afraid of their child at 16–17 years. The low prevalence of fear in the sample may suggest that most mothers in our study retain authority in the child-parent dyad, where much substantial child-parent hostility (including physical aggression) occurs in the context of a loss of control and subsequent fear (Harries et al., 2024).

Maternal factors

We found that a range of maternal factors during childhood were associated with hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence. Mothers who reported greater parenting hostility, stress, and distress, as well as lower parental self-efficacy, warmth, and disciplinary reasoning with their young person in early childhood were more likely to experience hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence. Our multivariate model indicated that, of these factors, maternal hostility may be the most important factor (based on the strength of the association). This aligns with evidence that maternal hostility is associated with a range of negative social development outcomes which can increase the likelihood of aggressive behaviours (Khaleque, 2017). This could also be because hostility can have the most direct effect on situations of child-parent conflict, that may then escalate over time and into adolescence. Hostility can instigate conflict (where it is perceived by the child as a threat or irritation) but can also intensify conflict, for example, where the young person is initially non-compliant to a request. In these ways, hostility may feed directly into interactions involving conflict. Factors such as stress or low self-esteem may make the use of hostile or ineffective discipline more likely (Leerkes & Crockenberg, 2002; Martorell & Bugental, 2006), but themselves do not directly cause the dyad to enter a hostile interaction. Similarly, a lack of warmth and less frequent use of positive discipline strategies (like reasoning) may occur within a broader pattern of negative parenting where hostility is central (Wang et al., 2015). Our findings are consistent with studies which demonstrate the negative impact of hostility on the child-parent relationship and child development (Kawabata et al., 2011; McLeod et al., 2007; van Dijk et al., 2020). To this, we add that early hostility could have a lasting impact on child-parent interactions into adolescence, where it is a risk for greater hostile child-parent conflict.

We also found that mothers who were more consistent with discipline in early childhood experienced more child-parent conflict in adolescence. Disciplinary consistency is generally considered positive, in that it can contribute to a broader pattern of responsive parenting (Campi et al., 2024). However, it may be that the consistent application of discipline in the context of high maternal hostility is negative for development. While we did not explicitly test for an interaction, consistent discipline where there is also high maternal hostility may expose the child to greater hostile interactions than where there are inconsistent boundaries enforced. Alternatively, it may be that parents at the high end of consistency lack the flexibility to adjust boundaries as the young persons’ need for autonomy develops, leading to strain and conflict. However, this finding does go against literature which suggests that inconsistent application of boundaries can ‘train’ hostility in the young person (Barry et al., 2009; Patterson, 1986). This may also be due to the nature of our sample, which is representative of the general population, rather than an ‘at-risk’ population of families experiencing substantial hostile conflict (i.e., families characterised by harshness and unpredictability; Conger et al., 2010; Marsh et al., 2020). In at risk families, the young person can gain significant power over the parent over time, who may have less capacity to be consistently responsive, due to fewer support resources (Gülseven et al., 2018). Alternatively, it could be that our initial timepoint (at 4–5 years) represents the early stages of coercive training of the child, where mothers are still able to retain greater control and have not yet withdrawn. At this age, parents have substantial resource in their physical size and cognitive ability relative to the child (Maccoby, 1999; Sherman, 1983), a balance which shifts as the young person becomes older (Selwyn & Meakings, 2016; Straus et al., 2017).

Family factors

Processes within the executive subsystem during childhood impacted the likelihood of hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence in our model. Our results suggest that, in families where there was more interparental conflict during childhood, there is more hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence. Parental helplessness and stress often occur in the context of inter-parental conflict (Huth-Bocks et al., 2016; Krishnakumar & Buehler, 2000), which was consistent with our model. Interparental conflict can spillover into the parent-child dyad (Erel & Burman, 1995; Sherrill et al., 2017), effect caregiver representations and subsequent harsh treatment of the young person (e.g., via ‘spousification’; Harries et al., 2024; Kerig, 2005). Children can also become directly involved in interparental conflicts, broadening these to triadic or child-parent conflicts (Fosco et al., 2014), as well as model and reproduce hostile behaviours (Abbassi & Aslinia, 2010). Further, our model indicated that positive co-parenting support in childhood may reduce the risk of child-parent conflict in adolescence, likely through a ‘buffering’ effect (McRae et al., 2021). However, this was not significant in our multivariate model, perhaps because parents who are often in conflict are likely not highly supportive of one another¹ (Katz & Gottman, 1996), and, like maternal hostility, conflict between parents has the potential to more directly impact on child-parent conflict. Nonetheless, co-parenting support may still play a role in the development of child-parent conflict. There is evidence that co-parenting may interact with other risk factors for child-parent conflict. For example, co-parenting may mediate the effect of partner conflict on child outcomes (Camisasca et al., 2019; Katz & Low, 2004). Future studies should explore if this is also relevant to hostile child-parent conflict.

Child factors

We also found that many child factors were related to hostile child-parent conflict. Specifically, emotional-behavioural difficulties and child reactivity in childhood were both positively associated with hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence. More frequent challenging behaviours from the child may create more opportunity for conflict around discipline and boundary crossing, as well as create stress for mothers (Solem et al., 2011), who may then respond negatively (e.g., with hostility). A child who is more temperamentally reactive may be more likely to push back against disciplinary attempts, particularly if these are negative (Van Zeijl et al., 2007), creating further disciplinary interactions. Over time, this pattern could entrench and become habitual into adolescence. This is especially likely given that emotional and behavioural problems tend to persist from childhood to adolescence, as well as augment into mood disorders (Roza et al., 2003), which themselves are associated with child-parent conflict (Harries et al., 2024). Considering this from a family systems perspective alongside the family factors we observed, it may be that the child’s challenging behaviours and temperament also feed back into the broader family system, exacerbating stress and conflict between parents, or contributing to general household chaos (Marsh et al., 2020), which then impacts on child-parent interactions. However, according to our multivariate models, it could be that the influence of child behavioural factors on child-parent conflict processes may not be as strong as that of the maternal factors (i.e., hostility). This suggests that, when looking to prevent or intervene early with child-parent conflict in adolescence, it may be more important to focus on parenting behaviours during early childhood, rather than the behaviours of the young person. Doing so may create a safer developmental environment and inadvertently reduce child behavioural difficulties and reactivity (which may actually be functional adaptations in a hostile environment), thus reducing both inputs into the development of coercive cycles.

We found that neurodivergence was the strongest childhood correlate of child-parent conflict in adolescence. Family systems where there is substantial interparental conflict and parental hostility can be unpredictable and sometimes chaotic, conversely, neurodivergent young people can have a strong preference for predictability and routine (Goris et al., 2020). Therefore, a ‘controlling’ response to this family environment could be particularly acute in this population (Teague et al., 2017), and may manifest as oppositionality or hostility within conflict. However, this pathway is currently speculative and requires targeted investigation. Parenting a young person with a neurodevelopmental disorder can also present ongoing challenges and stress (Seymour et al., 2013, 2024), which can impact parents capacity for positive parenting (Ooi et al., 2016), as well as the parents’ relationship quality (Chan & Leung, 2020). For example, traits of ASD and ADHD in the young person may increase the risk of parental helplessness (Bozkurt et al., 2019), which is a risk for hostile child-parent conflict (Harries et al., 2024). In the child-parent conflict space, there is emerging consideration of neurodivergence (Holt, 2023) and our results emphasise this as a research imperative. Further studies specific to this population are required to avoid a one-size-fits-all conceptualisation of child-parent conflict, which may obstruct effective and responsive intervention for families of young people with neurodevelopmental conditions.

Strengths, limitations, and future directions

The current study has strength in its longitudinal design and large nationally representative sample of the Australian population. However, there are noteworthy limitations to our findings. First, while the sample was nationally representative, our analyses were not weighted which restricts the generalizability of the findings to the broader population. This was due to the exploratory nature of the study. As noted within the study design, there is an under-representation of diverse family structures, including single-parent and separated families, LGBTQIA + families and families from Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander and non-English speaking backgrounds. We could also not explore different gender identities. Given the importance of cultural, social, and family dynamics in shaping child-parent conflict, this lack of diversity limits the generalizability of the current findings. The LSAC is a comprehensive study covering many domains of child health and development and their social context, and as such, measures are necessarily brief. Given this, we cannot determine directionality from our measure of hostile child-parent conflict; we do not know whether the child or the parent are the primary drivers of hostile conflict. However, we note that behaviours and outcomes for members of a family unit are highly interdependent (Galovan et al., 2017), and much hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence is mutually hostile and bidirectional (Gallego et al., 2019; Van Doorn et al., 2008). As such, the issue of directionality becomes difficult to model, as well as of less clinical importance. Finally, the internal consistency of some measures (maternal hostility, child reactivity) were acceptable, but less than ideal. These findings should be interpreted with this in mind, though we note that the findings related to these measures were consistent with expectations derived from past research.

Regarding the influence of parent behaviours on child-parent conflict, this study was limited to maternal factors. It was important to focus on maternal factors given that mothers are the most likely to report experiencing child-parent conflict. However, decades of research indicates that mothers and fathers parent differently (Yaffe, 2023), each unique role shaping child behaviour, emotional development, and family dynamics. These differences are also relevant when exploring conflict, as fathers are likely to perceive, engage in, and cope with conflict differently compared to mothers (Gao et al., 2019). Given this, it is important that the experiences of mothers and fathers are investigated separately to further enhance our understanding of how parenting contributes to child-parent conflict. The results from our study are limited to maternal experiences, and future studies should replicate this in a sample of fathers to enhance the applicability of findings to the wider family unit. Additionally, research should also consider exploring the combined impact of co-parenting dynamics on child-parent conflict.

The current study had strength in consideration of variables across the family system. In this way, we have demonstrated the necessity of using a family systems lens to understand the early ecological context that child-parent conflict may develop within. Despite this, child-parent interactions operate within a chronosystem, where they develop and change over time, particularly when both the young person and the parent encounter new developmental stages or milestones (e.g., the transition to adolescence, or the birth of another child). While we have demonstrated the general point that early child-parent interactions and conditions influence the likelihood of conflict over time, our study was limited to investigating factors at a single point in childhood. It is likely that influential factors interact and perhaps change over time. For example, mothers who use hostile disciplinary strategies may start to withdraw from disciplinary interactions as the young person learns to use more coercive strategies in return, and they grow larger and stronger (Harries et al., 2024). Future studies could look at how these factors interact over the full period of childhood, to influence hostile child-parent conflict in adolescence.

Conclusions

Overall, using a longitudinal design over 12 years of child development, this study indicates that the risk of hostile child-parent conflict in late adolescence is increased by factors related to both the mother and the child, as well as factors within the executive subsystem during early childhood. In particular, maternal hostility in early life interactions could have a long-term effect on the parent-child dyad and the nature of interactions in adolescence, particularly where the young person has a neurodevelopmental disorder. These factors may be important set-points or initial inputs into the development of coercive and hostile cycles that escalate and entrench into adolescence. It is important to support mothers to have positive and warm interactions during the early childhood years, perhaps via reducing stress and improving their self-efficacy beliefs about parenting. Such support may be most critical in families where the young person has a neurodevelopmental condition. In addition, supporting parents to improve communication and reduce conflict within their relationship during the early parenting years might help prevent the development of hostile conflict within the child parent relationship in adolescence. Working with parents in these environments could help to prevent the development of hostile interactions with their children into adolescence where harm to the parent-child relationship can negatively impact on the child’s development and functioning in future close relationships.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Longitudinal associations between mother, child, and family factors in childhood and hostile child-parent conflict in late adolescence

Supplemental Material for Longitudinal associations between mother, child, and family factors in childhood and hostile child-parent conflict in late adolescence by Travis Harries, Monique Seymour, Alison Fogarty, Rebecca Giallo, and Ashlee Curtis in Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

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

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

Ethics approval for LSAC was granted by the Australian Institute of Family Studies Ethics Committee. Approval references can be found here: https://aifs.gov.au/growing-australia/study/ethics. Participants provided informed consent to participate and publish in a manner consistent with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/national-statement-ethical-conduct-human-research-2023#download). Ethics approval for the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC) was granted by the Australian Institute of Family Studies Ethics Committee (ID: 09–05; Soloff et al., 2005).

ORCID iD

Travis Harries

Data Availability Statement

The data used in the research can be obtained at . Data is available via the LSAC.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Note

References

Abbassi

Aslinia

S. D.

(2010). Family violence, trauma and social learning theory. Journal of Professional Counseling, Practice, Theory, and Research, 38(1), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15566382.2010.12033863

Adams

R. E.

Laursen

(2007). The correlates of conflict: Disagreement is not necessarily detrimental. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 21(3), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.3.445

Agnew

Huguley

(1989). Adolescent violence toward parents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 51(3), 699–711. https://doi.org/10.2307/352169

Ahrons

C. R.

(1981). The continuing coparental relationship between divorced spouses. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 51(3), 415–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1981.tb01390.x

Australian Bureau of Statistics . (2013). Socio-economic indexes for areas (SEIFA) 2011. Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Barry

T. D.

Dunlap

S. T.

Lochman

J. E.

Wells

K. C.

(2009). Inconsistent discipline as a mediator between maternal distress and aggression in boys. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 31(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317100802701186

Bobic

(2002). Adolescent violence towards parents: Myths and realities. Rosemount Youth & Family Services.

Bowen

(1993). Family therapy in clinical practice. Jason Aronson.

Bozkurt

Uysal

Düzkaya

D. S.

(2019). Examination of care burden and stress coping styles of parents of children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 47, 142–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2019.05.005

10.

Branje

(2018). Development of parent-adolescent relationships: Conflict interactions as a mechanism of change. Child Development Perspectives, 12(3), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12278

11.

Branje

(2020). Parent conflict resolution. In The encyclopedia of child and adolescent development (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171492.wecad412

12.

Bronfenbrenner

(2000). Ecological systems theory. American Psychological Association.

13.

Bronfenbrenner

Morris

P. A.

(2007). The bioecological model of human development. In Handbook of child psychology (1). Wiley.

14.

Calvete

Orue

Fernández-González

Chang

Little

(2020). Longitudinal trajectories of child-to-parent violence through adolescence. Journal of Family Violence, 35(2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-019-00106-7

15.

Calvete

Orue

Sampedro

(2011). Child to parent violence in adolescence: Environmental and individual characteristics. Infancia Y Aprendizaje, 34(3), 349–363. https://doi.org/10.1174/021037011797238577

16.

Camisasca

Miragoli

Di Blasio

Feinberg

(2019). Co-parenting mediates the influence of marital satisfaction on child adjustment: The conditional indirect effect by parental empathy. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(2), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1271-5

17.

Campi

Nye

Baranek

G. T.

(2024). Defining parent responsiveness: A systematic review-based theoretical model. Infant and Child Development, 34(1), e2565. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2565

18.

Cano-Lozano

Rodríguez-Díaz

León

S. P.

Contreras

(2020). Analyzing the relationship between child-to-parent violence and perceived parental warmth. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 590097. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590097

19.

Chan

K. K. S.

Leung

D. C. K.

(2020). The impact of child autistic symptoms on parental marital relationship: Parenting and coparenting processes as mediating mechanisms. Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 13(9), 1516–1526. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2297

20.

Chi

King

R. B.

Zhou

Cao

Lin

(2019). Well-being contagion in the family: Transmission of happiness and distress between parents and children. Child Indicators Research, 12(6), 2189–2202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09636-4

21.

Conger

R. D.

Conger

K. J.

Martin

M. J.

(2010). Socioeconomic status, family processes,and individual development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 685–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00725.x

22.

Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet . (2024). National strategy to achieve gender equality: Discussion paper.

23.

Erel

Burman

(1995). Interrelatedness of marital relations and parent-child relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 108–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.108

24.

Fitz-Gibbon

Meyer

Boxall

Maher

Roberts

(2022). Adolescent family violence in Australia: A national study of prevalence, history of childhood victimisation and impacts, 1922645400. https://apo.org.au/node/319424

25.

Fosco

G. M.

Lippold

Feinberg

(2014). Interparental boundary problems, parent-adolescent hostility, and adolescent-parent hostility: A family process model for adolescent aggression problems. Couple & family psychology, 3(3), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000025

26.

Gallego

Novo

Fariña

Arce

(2019). Child-to-parent violence and parent-to-child violence: A meta-analytic review. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 11(2), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2019a4

27.

Galovan

A. M.

Holmes

E. K.

Proulx

C. M.

(2017). Theoretical and methodological issues in relationship research: Considering the common fate model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34(1), 44–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407515621179

28.

Gao

Davies

P. T.

Cummings

E. M.

(2019). Marital conflict behaviors and parenting: Dyadic links over time. Family Relations, 68(1), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12322

29.

Goldin

R. L.

Matson

J. L.

Tureck

Cervantes

P. E.

Jang

(2013). A comparison of tantrum behavior profiles in children with ASD, ADHD and comorbid ASD and ADHD. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(9), 2669–2675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2013.04.022

30.

Goodman

(2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337–1345. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015

31.

Goris

Brass

Cambier

Delplanque

Wiersema

J. R.

Braem

(2020). The relation between preference for predictability and autistic traits. Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 13(7), 1144–1154. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2244

32.

Granic

Dishion

T. J.

Hollenstein

(2003). The family ecology of adolescence: A dynamic systems perspective on normative development. In Blackwell handbook of adolescence (pp. 60–91). Blackwell Publishing.

33.

Granic

Patterson

G. R.

(2006). Toward a comprehensive model of antisocial development: A dynamic systems approach. Psychological Review, 113(1), 101–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.113.1.101

34.

Griffin

Z. A.

Boulton

K. A.

Thapa

DeMayo

M. M.

Ambarchi

Thomas

Pokorski

Hickie

I. B.

Guastella

A. J.

(2022). Atypical sensory processing features in children with autism, and their relationships with maladaptive behaviors and caregiver strain. Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 15(6), 1120–1129. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2700

35.

Gülseven

Kumru

Carlo

Palermo

Selçuk

Sayıl

(2018). The mediational roles of harsh and responsive parenting in the longitudinal relations between socioeconomic status and Turkish children’s emotional development. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 42(6), 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025418783279

36.

Hadiwijaya

Klimstra

T. A.

Vermunt

J. K.

Branje

S. J. T.

Meeus

W. H. J.

(2017). On the development of harmony, turbulence, and independence in parent–adolescent relationships: A five-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(8), 1772–1788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0627-7

37.

Harries

Curtis

Skvarc

Benstead

Walker

Mayshak

(2024). Not all child‐to‐parent violence is the same: A person-based analysis using the function of aggression. Family Relations.

38.

Harries

Curtis

Valpied

Baldwin

Hyder

Miller

(2022). Child-to-parent violence: Examining cumulative associations with corporal punishment and physical abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 38(7), 1317–1324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-022-00437-y

39.

Hill

J. P.

(2013). Adapting to menarche: Familial control and conflict. In Development during the transition to adolescence (pp. 43–77). Psychology Press.

40.

Holt

(2023). I don't know what is autism, what is normal teenage behaviour, and what is naughtiness. Conceptualising child and adolescent to parent violence in the context of neurodevelopmental difference. Children & Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12809

41.

Huth-Bocks

A. C.

Guyon‐Harris

Calvert

Scott

Ahlfs-Dunn

(2016). The caregiving helplessness questionnaire: Evidence for validity and utility with mothers of infants. Infant Mental Health Journal, 37(3), 208–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.21559

42.

IBM Corp . (2021). IBM SPSS AMOS statistics for Windows. version 29.0.

43.

Jiménez-Granado

Fernández-González

del Hoyo-Bilbao

Calvete

(2023). Psychological symptoms in parents who experience child-to-parent violence: The role of self-efficacy beliefs. Healthcare, 11(21), 2894.

44.

Johnson

W. L.

Giordano

P. C.

(2013). The influence of parents on trajectories of antisocial behavior, depressed mood, and child-to-parent abuse across adolescence and young adulthood (Publication Number 3671393) Bowling Green State University.

45.

Katz

L. F.

Gottman

J. M.

(1996). Spillover effects of marital conflict: In search of parenting and coparenting mechanisms. New Directions for Child Development, 74, 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219967406

46.

Katz

L. F.

Low

S. M.

(2004). Marital violence, co-parenting, and family-level processes in relation to children’s adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 18(2), 372–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.18.2.372

47.

Kawabata

Alink

L. R. A.

Tseng

W.-L.

van Ijzendoorn

M. H.

Crick

N. R.

(2011). Maternal and paternal parenting styles associated with relational aggression in children and adolescents: A conceptual analysis and meta-analytic review. Developmental Review, 31(4), 240–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2011.08.001

48.

Kerig

P. K.

(2005). Revisiting the construct of boundary dissolution: A multidimensional perspective. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 5(2-3), 5–42. https://doi.org/10.1300/J135v05n02_02

49.

Kessler

R. C.

Andrews

Colpe

L. J.

Hiripi

Mroczek

D. K.

Normand

S. L.

Walters

E. E.

Zaslavsky

A. M.

(2002). Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychological Medicine, 32(6), 959–976. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291702006074

50.

Khaleque

(2017). Perceived parental hostility and aggression, and children’s psychological maladjustment, and negative personality dispositions: A meta-analysis. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(4), 977–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016-0637-9

51.

Kjeldsen

Janson

Stoolmiller

Torgersen

Mathiesen

K. S.

(2014). Externalising behaviour from infancy to mid-adolescence: Latent profiles and early predictors. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 35(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2013.11.003

52.

Krishnakumar

Buehler

(2000). Interparental conflict and parenting behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Family Relations, 49(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2000.00025.x

53.

Leerkes

E. M.

Crockenberg

S. C.

(2002). The development of maternal self-efficacy and its impact on maternal behavior. Infancy: The Official Journal of the International Society on Infant Studies, 3(2), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327078IN0302_7

54.

Leve

L. D.

Kim

H. K.

Pears

K. C.

(2005). Childhood temperament and family environment as predictors of internalizing and externalizing trajectories from ages 5 to 17. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33(5), 505–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-005-6734-7

55.

Locke

Ibanez

L. V.

Posner

Frederick

Carpentier

Stone

W. L.

(2020). Parent perceptions about communicating with providers regarding early autism concerns. Pediatrics, 145(Supp1), S72–S80. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-1895j

56.

Maccoby

E. E.

(1999). The uniqueness of the parent-child relationship. In Collins

A. W.

Laursen

(Eds.), Relationships as developmental contexts (30, pp. 157–175). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601902

57.

Marsh

Dobson

Maddison

(2020). The relationship between household chaos and child, parent, and family outcomes: A systematic scoping review. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 513. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08587-8

58.

Marshall

S. K.

Tilton-Weaver

Shankar

Johnston

(2023). Parent‐adolescent conflict processes and their measurement: A systematic review. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 15(1), 118–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12479

59.

Martin

M. J.

Sturge-Apple

M. L.

Davies

P. T.

Romero

C. V.

Buckholz

(2017). A process model of the implications of spillover from coparenting conflicts into the parent–child attachment relationship in adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 29(2), 417–431. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579417000086

60.

Martorell

G. A.

Bugental

D. B.

(2006). Maternal variations in stress reactivity: Implications for harsh parenting practices with very young children. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 20(4), 641–647. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.20.4.641

61.

McLeod

B. D.

Weisz

J. R.

Wood

J. J.

(2007). Examining the association between parenting and childhood depression: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(8), 986–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.03.001

62.

McRae

C. S.

Overall

N. C.

Henderson

A. M.

Low

R. S.

Chang

V. T.

(2021). Parents’ distress and poor parenting during a covid-19 lockdown: The buffering effects of partner support and cooperative coparenting. Developmental Psychology, 57(10), 1623–1632. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001207

63.

Montemayor

(1983). Parents and adolescents in conflict: All families some of the time and some families most of the time. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 3(1-2), 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/027243168331007

64.

Ooi

K. L.

Ong

Y. S.

Jacob

S. A.

Khan

T. M.

(2016). A meta-synthesis on parenting a child with autism. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 12, 745–762. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S100634

65.

Oosterhouse

Riggs

S. A.

Kaminski

Blumenthal

(2020). The executive subsystem in middle childhood: Adult mental health, marital satisfaction, and secure-base parenting. Family Relations, 69(1), 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12408

66.

Paikoff

R. L.

Brooks-Gunn

(1991). Do parent-child relationships change during puberty? Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 47–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.47

67.

Paterson

Gill

Sanson

Ann

(1999). The Association of Behavioural Adjustment to Temperament, Parenting and Family Characteristics among 5-Year-Old Children. Social Development, 8(3), 293–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00097

68.

Patterson

G. R.

(1986). Performance models for antisocial boys. American Psychologist, 41(4), 432–434. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.41.4.432

69.

Patterson

G. R.

Dishion

T. J.

Bank

(1984). Family interaction: A process model of deviancy training. Aggressive Behavior, 10(3), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2337

70.

Paulson

M. J.

Coombs

R. H.

Landsverk

(1990). Youth who physically assault their parents. Journal of Family Violence, 5(2), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00978515

71.

Ranson

K. E.

Urichuk

L. J.

(2008). The effect of parent–child attachment relationships on child biopsychosocial outcomes: A review. Early Child Development and Care, 178(2), 129–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430600685282

72.

Roza

S. J.

Hofstra

M. B.

van der Ende

Verhulst

F. C.

(2003). Stable prediction of mood and anxiety disorders based on behavioral and emotional problems in childhood: A 14-year follow-up during childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(12), 2116–2121. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.160.12.2116

73.

Rubin

(1987). Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

74.

Rudnova

N. A.

Kornienko

D. S.

(2024). Mothers’ Stress as a Predictor of Preschoolers’ stress in the context of parental practices. Children, 11(11), 1274. https://doi.org/10.3390/children11111274

75.

Ruiz-Fernández

Junco-Guerrero

Cantón-Cortés

(2021). Exploring the mediating effect of psychological engagement on the relationship between child-to-parent violence and violent video games. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 28–45.

76.

Selwyn

Meakings

(2016). Adolescent-to-parent violence in adoptive families. British Journal of Social Work, 46(5), 1224–1240. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcv072

77.

Seymour

Pecora

McMahon

Wood

C. E.

Feinberg

Hock

Giallo

(2024). Trajectories of psychological distress for australian fathers parenting a child on the autism spectrum: Evidence from early childhood to adolescence. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice, 29(1), 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241272005

78.

Seymour

Wood

Giallo

Jellett

(2013). Fatigue, stress and coping in mothers of children with an autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(7), 1547–1554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1701-y

79.

Shek

D. T. L.

(2002). Parenting characteristics and parent-adolescent conflict: A longitudinal study in the Chinese culture. Journal of Family Issues, 23(2), 189–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x02023002002

80.

Sherman

(1983). The power dimension in the family: A synthesis of Adlerian perspectives. American Journal of Family Therapy, 11(3), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926188308250134

81.

Sherrill

R. B.

Lochman

J. E.

DeCoster

Stromeyer

S. L.

(2017). Spillover between interparental conflict and parent–child conflict within and across days. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 31(7), 900–909. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000332

82.

Sipthorp

Misson

(2007). Wave 2 weighting and non-response. Australian Institute of Family Studies.

83.

Solem

M.-B.

Christophersen

K.-A.

Martinussen

(2011). Predicting parenting stress: Children's behavioural problems and parents' coping. Infant and Child Development, 20(2), 162–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.681

84.

Soloff

Lawrence

Johnstone

(2005). The longitudinal study of Australian children: Sample design: Lsac technical paper number 1. Australian Institute of Family Studies.

85.

Statistics Canada . (2000). Canadian national longitudinal survey of children and youth. https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/survey/overview/cls

86.

Stover

C. S.

Zhou

Kiselica

Leve

L. D.

Neiderhiser

J. M.

Shaw

D. S.

Natsuaki

M. N.

Scaramella

L. V.

Reiss

(2016). Marital hostility, hostile parenting, and child aggression: Associations from toddlerhood to school age. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55(3), 235–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2015.12.008

87.

Straus

Gelles

R. J.

Stienmetz

S. K.

(2017). Behind closed doors. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351298681

88.

Stroud

C. B.

Durbin

C. E.

Wilson

Mendelsohn

K. A.

(2011). Spillover to triadic and dyadic systems in families with young children. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 25(6), 919–930. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025443

89.

Teague

S. J.

Gray

K. M.

Tonge

B. J.

Newman

L. K.

(2017). Attachment in children with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 35, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2016.12.002

90.

van der Meer

J. M. J.

Oerlemans

A. M.

van Steijn

D. J.

Lappenschaar

M. G. A.

de Sonneville

L. M. J.

Buitelaar

J. K.

Rommelse

N. N. J.

(2012). Are autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder different manifestations of one overarching disorder? Cognitive and symptom evidence from a clinical and population-based sample. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 51(11), 1160–1172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2012.08.024

91.

van Dijk

van der Valk

I. E.

Deković

Branje

(2020). A meta-analysis on interparental conflict, parenting, and child adjustment in divorced families: Examining mediation using meta-analytic structural equation models. Clinical Psychology Review, 79, Article 101861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101861

92.

Van Doorn

M. D.

Branje

S. J.

Meeus

W. H.

(2008). Conflict resolution in parent-adolescent relationships and adolescent delinquency. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 28(4), 503–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431608317608

93.

Van Zeijl

Mesman

Stolk

M. N.

Alink

L. R.

Van Ijzendoorn

M. H.

Bakermans-Kranenburg

M. J.

Juffer

Koot

H. M.

(2007). Differential susceptibility to discipline: The moderating effect of child temperament on the association between maternal discipline and early childhood externalizing problems. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 21(4), 626–636. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.626

94.

Wang

Y.-C. L.

Chan

H.-Y.

Lin

C.-W.

J.-R.

(2015). Association of parental warmth and harsh discipline with developmental trajectories of depressive symptoms among adolescents in Chinese society. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 29(6), 895–906. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039505

95.

Williams

Tuffin

Niland

(2017). ‘It’s like he just goes off, boom!': Mothers and grandmothers make sense of child-to-parent violence. Child & Family Social Work, 22(2), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12273

96.

Yaffe

(2023). Systematic review of the differences between mothers and fathers in parenting styles and practices. Current Psychology, 42(19), 16011–16024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01014-6

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.17 MB

Longitudinal associations between mother,child,and family factors in childhood and hostile child-parent conflict in late adolescence

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Method

Study design and sample

Measures

Demographics

Data analysis strategy

Results

Sample characteristics

Descriptive statistics

Predictors of child-parent conflict

Discussion

Maternal factors

Family factors

Child factors

Strengths, limitations, and future directions

Conclusions

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Longitudinal associations between mother, child, and family factors in childhood and hostile child-parent conflict in late adolescence

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

Ethical approval

ORCID iD

Data Availability Statement

Supplemental Material

Note

References

Supplementary Material