Analytic Plan
Quantitative analyses were performed using SPSS 15.0 for Windows. We used frequencies and cross-tabulations to summarize the number of topics discussed, parents’ perceived levels of comfort and knowledge in sexual communication, and the difficulties parents reported in sexual communication. Statistical significance, at an alpha level of .05, was assessed by Chi-square test (for expected frequencies of fewer than five, we used Fisher’s exact test or, if computational limits were reached, the Monte Carlo approximation).
We also employed hierarchical regression analyses to examine the relationships between parent and adolescent primary demographic variables, socio-demographic variables, parent perceived comfort and knowledge regarding sexual communication, and parent reported sexual communication difficulties, with the dependent variable number of topics discussed. Because of insufficient sample sizes in the race categories other than White, only the Hispanic versus non-Hispanic ethnicity variable was included in the regression analyses, whereas the non-Hispanic race categories reported in Table
1 were not used. Listwise deletion for missing values was employed for all variables (missing between 0 and 1.1%) except the open-ended item on sexual communication difficulties (missing of 7.2%), for which missing was included as one of two dummy variables (presence of difficulties and missing, vs. the reference category absence of difficulties) to allow for testing the effect of not answering this question. In addition, adolescent gender and parent gender individually and in combination were included to allow for testing of the hypothesized parent–adolescent gender interaction. An alpha level of .05 was used to evaluate statistical significance. Indices of multicollinearity (eigenvalues, condition indices, and variance proportions) were examined, and no problems were identified.
Descriptive Data
Fifteen percent of parents did not discuss with their adolescent any of the six sex education topics we asked about, and 26% of parents discussed all six topics. The mean number of topics discussed was 3.5 out of 6 topics. The greatest proportion of parents (73.8%) said they discussed human reproduction; 70.6% discussed HIV/AIDS and other STIs, 64.5% avoiding sexual intercourse, 57.4% becoming sexually active, 52.2% using protection, and 33.4% where to get condoms.
Table
2 presents the percentage of parents who discussed each of the six topics with their adolescents, and mean numbers of topics discussed, by parent gender and by adolescent age level and gender. Significant differences were found among both mothers and fathers in the percentage who discussed the six topics with daughters versus sons at different age levels (
p < .05). The mean number of topics discussed by both mothers and fathers increased as adolescent age level increased. Mothers discussed a greater number of topics with preadolescent and early adolescent daughters than did fathers. The mean number of topics discussed with middle adolescent sons was greater for fathers than for mothers. Further, mothers discussed a greater number of topics with late adolescents than did fathers.
Table 2
Percentage of fathers and mothers who have discussed selected sex education topics with their adolescent by adolescent age level and gender
Fathers |
Preadolescent |
Sons (n = 37) | 54.1 | 21.6 | 27.0 | 37.8 | 16.7 | 11.1 | 1.71 |
Daughters (n = 29) | 62.1 | 16.7 | 31.0 | 34.5 | 13.8 | 0.0 | 1.59 |
Early adolescent |
Sons (n = 19) | 78.9 | 57.9 | 57.9 | 78.9 | 47.4 | 30.0 | 3.46 |
Daughters (n = 27) | 66.7 | 48.1 | 64.3 | 71.4 | 32.1 | 23.1 | 3.06 |
Middle adolescent |
Sons (n = 44) | 88.6 | 75.0 | 81.8 | 86.0 | 75.0 | 59.1 | 4.64 |
Daughters (n = 29) | 75.9 | 70.0 | 80.0 | 73.3 | 60.0 | 35.7 | 3.95 |
Late adolescent |
Sons (n = 21) | 78.9 | 81.0 | 80.0 | 81.0 | 81.0 | 45.0 | 4.40 |
Daughters (n = 13) | 84.6 | 76.9 | 76.9 | 92.3 | 53.8 | 38.5 | 4.22 |
p
| .024 | .000 | .000 | .000 | .000 | .000 | |
Mothers |
Preadolescent |
Sons (n = 92) | 52.2 | 25.3 | 30.4 | 38.0 | 16.5 | 7.7 | 1.71 |
Daughters (n = 93) | 53.8 | 26.9 | 33.3 | 44.1 | 19.1 | 8.5 | 1.85 |
Early adolescent |
Sons (n = 108) | 73.8 | 53.7 | 63.2 | 65.7 | 52.8 | 31.8 | 3.40 |
Daughters (n = 101) | 84.2 | 67.3 | 72.3 | 78.2 | 53.5 | 25.7 | 3.81 |
Middle adolescent |
Sons (n = 84) | 83.3 | 75.0 | 82.1 | 90.5 | 73.8 | 48.8 | 4.53 |
Daughters (n = 99) | 88.9 | 76.8 | 85.9 | 90.9 | 74.7 | 46.5 | 4.63 |
Late adolescent |
Sons (n = 62) | 75.8 | 75.8 | 79.0 | 90.3 | 83.9 | 67.7 | 4.70 |
Daughters (n = 48) | 87.8 | 89.8 | 100.0 | 93.8 | 85.7 | 63.8 | 5.20 |
p
| .000 | .000 | .000 | .000 | .000 | .000 | |
Some gender-related communication patterns on specific topics were observed. A greater proportion of fathers discussed avoiding sex with preadolescent and early adolescent daughters than with preadolescent and early adolescent sons. For late adolescence, a greater proportion of fathers discussed HIV/AIDS and other STIs with daughters than with sons, but a greater proportion discussed using protection with sons than with daughters. Among mothers, a greater proportion discussed condoms with sons than with daughters in early, middle, and late adolescence. In addition, 100% of mothers discussed avoiding sex with late adolescent daughters, as compared with 79% who discussed the topic with late adolescent sons.
In response to the questions about how comfortable they feel in talking with their adolescent about sex and relationships, 52.4% of parents said they feel very comfortable, 25.8% said they feel somewhat comfortable, 15.3% said they feel somewhat uncomfortable, and 5.8% said they feel very uncomfortable (missing = 0.7%, N = 907). In response to the questions about how knowledgeable they feel in talking with their adolescent about sex and relationships, 59.5% of parents said they feel very knowledgeable, 32.3% said they feel somewhat knowledgeable, 4.9% said they feel somewhat unknowledgeable, and 3.3% said they feel very unknowledgeable (missing = 0.8%, N = 907). In response to the open-ended question about the most difficult part in talking with their adolescent about sex and relationships, 70.1% of parents reported experiencing difficulties (absence of difficulties = 22.8%, missing = 7.2%, N = 907). Through open coding of these responses, we identified nine categories of sexual communication difficulties.
The first category comprised difficulties related to embarrassment or discomfort, whether parents’ self-reported embarrassment or discomfort or perceived adolescent’s embarrassment or discomfort (e.g., “I think that it is just a comfort level that you feel, because it is a topic we are not in the habit of discussing” and “They [children] are embarrassed over girls menstruating.”) The second category comprised difficulties related to knowledge and self-efficacy (e.g., “It is difficult for me to talk with her; I fear that I may explain something poorly to her or give her incorrect information.”).
We labeled the third category cultural and social influences or issues, which included cultural influences or issues (e.g., “I think that sexual relations are a very delicate subject due to our culture”), societal and social environment influences or issues (e.g., “The hard part is that what TV and culture are showing them is not real life; it’s me against the media”), religious influences or issues (e.g., “Not scaring her and explaining how God sees it and how the world sees it and the difference in that”), and gender influences or issues (e.g., “That is a certain taboo…as a father with my daughters I feel a bit uncomfortable, something that I leave in the hands of my wife and she talks with them.”) The fourth category involved family and intergenerational influences or issues (e.g., “It’s difficult for me because they never told me anything about this subject and what I learned, I learned at school because in my house one did not use to talk about this subject.”).
The fifth category involved general communication issues with one’s adolescent, including initiating talks about sex and relationships and the adolescent not listening (e.g., “I think just to bringing it up in a comfortable time” and “Knowing whether he’s listen. He’s 13 going on ugly. I guess he gets a lot of peer pressure from his friends…I guess he’s listening…sometimes.”) The sixth category comprised difficulties related to parental influence or control issues (e.g., “Knowing that the kids are going to do it regardless of what you say and wanting them to be safe and make wise choices.”) Difficulties related to accepting one’s adolescent’s sexuality (e.g., “Imagining that someday she’s going to have it [sex]”) comprised the seventh category.
The eighth category involved issues related to age or development, including developmental–cognitive issues, being afraid of promoting sex and taking away innocence, and being unsure of the amount of information to provide (e.g., “Judging how much to tell them for their age, age appropriateness of the subject, how to judge what is and isn’t [appropriate]” and “I look for opportunities to talk to him, but I don’t want to put ideas in his head or bring things up that he is not thinking about naturally.”) Finally, the ninth category encompassed difficulties in talking about specific topics (e.g., “About using protection when I want him to be abstinent” and “Probably the whole relationship part, having respect for the other person.”).
Table
3 presents the sexual communication difficulty categories, in order of total frequency, by adolescent age level and gender, for both mothers and fathers. Categories that totaled to less than 5% within each parent-gender subgroup, and across adolescent age levels and genders, were combined into an Other category. Significant differences were observed by adolescent age level and gender in the percentage of parents who reported experiencing the noted difficulties (
p < .001). Age or developmental issues were the most common among both mothers and fathers of younger adolescents. Embarrassment or discomfort was greater with older adolescents for both mothers and fathers. General communication issues, such as initiating discussions and getting past the adolescent’s “know-it-all” attitude, were more common among fathers than mothers of late adolescents.
Table 3
Sexual communication difficulty categories by adolescent age level and gender for fathers and mothers
Fathers (p < .001) |
Age or developmental issues | 51.6 | 34.5 | 17.6 | 4.2 | 8.1 | 15.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 19.1 |
General communication issues | 16.1 | 0.0 | 5.9 | 4.2 | 13.5 | 15.4 | 40.0 | 40.0 | 14.4 |
Issues with specific topic | 3.2 | 6.9 | 17.6 | 25.0 | 27.0 | 7.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 12.4 |
Embarrassment or discomfort | 3.2 | 10.3 | 0.0 | 8.3 | 10.8 | 23.1 | 15.0 | 10.0 | 10.3 |
Gender influences or issues | 0.0 | 17.2 | 5.9 | 12.5 | 0.0 | 15.4 | 0.0 | 10.0 | 7.2 |
Other | 3.2 | 13.7 | 0.0 | 25.1 | 18.9 | 3.8 | 25.0 | 10.0 | 12.8 |
Mothers (p < .001) |
Age or developmental issues | 41.7 | 43.4 | 13.8 | 19.8 | 6.0 | 7.1 | 0.0 | 2.6 | 18.1 |
Issues with specific topic | 19.4 | 10.5 | 14.9 | 8.1 | 13.4 | 16.5 | 8.6 | 7.7 | 12.8 |
Embarrassment or discomfort | 4.2 | 5.3 | 13.8 | 11.6 | 16.4 | 11.8 | 17.2 | 15.4 | 11.6 |
General communication issues | 1.4 | 3.9 | 8.0 | 5.8 | 10.4 | 18.8 | 17.2 | 12.8 | 9.5 |
Family and intergenerational issues | 5.6 | 6.6 | 6.9 | 9.3 | 11.9 | 9.4 | 10.3 | 5.1 | 8.2 |
Other | 16.8 | 15.6 | 11.3 | 11.7 | 23.9 | 15.4 | 27.6 | 12.8 | 16.5 |
Regression Analyses
As indicated in the Analytic Plan section, parent and adolescent primary demographic variables, socio-demographic variables, parent perceived comfort and knowledge regarding sexual communication, and parent reported sexual communication difficulties were entered into a series of hierarchical regressions as predictors of number of topics discussed.
Model 1 included the four primary demographic variables—adolescent age, adolescent gender, parent age, and parent gender, as well as the parent–adolescent gender interaction,
F(5, 869) = 78.166,
p = .000. Adolescent age and the parent–adolescent gender interaction were significant. Across all adolescent age levels, number of topics discussed was consistently higher when the gender of the parent and the gender of the adolescent matched. Probing of the significant parent–adolescent gender interaction following the procedure outlined by Hayes and Matthes (
2009) indicated a conditional effect of parent gender on number of topics discussed for female adolescent gender, such that mothers communicated with daughters about sex education topics to a significantly greater extent than fathers did (
B = 0.6746, SE
B = 0.210,
t(5, 872) = 3.214,
p = .001), but not for male adolescent gender (
B = 0.098, SE
B = 0.193,
t(5, 872) = 0.507,
p = .613).
Model 2 added the three socio-demographic variables (parent Hispanic ethnicity, parent education, and parent religious attendance in a typical month) to Model 1,
F
inc(3, 866) = 1.261,
p = .287. None of the three variables added significantly to the prediction provided by age and gender. Finally, Model 3 added the three psychological variables—parent perceived comfort, parent perceived knowledge, and parent-reported sexual communication difficulties (coded as two dummy variables, presence of difficulties and missing, vs. the reference category absence of difficulties)—to Model 2,
F
inc(4, 862) = 54.169,
p = .000. All of these variables were significant after adjusting for the primary and the socio-demographic variables. The regression analyses results are presented in Table
4.
Table 4
Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting number of topics discussed (N = 875)
Model 1 |
Adolescent age |
0.392
|
0.022
|
.550***
|
Adolescent gender (female) |
−0.330
|
0.249
|
−.076
|
Parent age |
−0.004
|
0.078
|
−.001
|
Parent gender (female) |
0.086
|
0.197
|
.017
|
Parent–adolescent gender interaction |
0.599
|
0.286
|
.134*
|
Model 2 |
Adolescent age | 0.393 | 0.022 | .552*** |
Adolescent gender (female) | −0.341 | 0.249 | −.079 |
Parent age | −0.045 | 0.082 | −.018 |
Parent gender (female) | 0.116 | 0.198 | .023 |
Parent–adolescent gender interaction | 0.596 | 0.286 | .133* |
Parent Hispanic ethnicity |
0.010
|
0.159
|
.002
|
Parent education |
0.090
|
0.061
|
.054
|
Parent religious attendance |
0.017
|
0.044
|
.011
|
Model 3 |
Adolescent age | 0.371 | 0.019 | .521*** |
Adolescent gender (female) | −0.185 | 0.223 | −.043 |
Parent age | −0.058 | 0.074 | −.023 |
Parent gender (female) | 0.182 | 0.178 | .036 |
Parent–adolescent gender interaction | 0.280 | 0.257 | .063 |
Parent Hispanic ethnicity | 0.191 | 0.147 | .044 |
Parent education | 0.003 | 0.055 | .002 |
Parent religious attendance | −0.004 | 0.040 | −.002 |
Parent perceived comfort |
0.679
|
0.070
|
.287***
|
Parent perceived knowledge |
0.342
|
0.089
|
.115***
|
Communication difficulties |
Absence (reference) | | | |
Presence | −0.339
|
0.139
| −.071*
|
Missing | −1.059
|
0.242
| −.124***
|