There have been few studies that prospectively examined the association between family functioning and girls’ disruptive behavior. A study by McFadyen-Ketchum et al. (
1996) reported that boys who had mothers who were observed to be highly controlling and low in affection showed an increase in physical and verbal aggressive behavior at school (as measured by Teacher Report Form) from kindergarten to third grade. Interestingly, girls of mothers showing similar behaviors (i.e. highly controlling and low in affection) showed a decrease in aggressiveness over these four years. Two important issues should be noted, however. First, only verbal and physical aggression were measured, while relational aggression, was not. Second, since aggression is known to decrease over middle childhood and this decrease is known to start earlier in girls than boys, the results could also represent the ‘normative’ developmental pattern of girls’ physical aggression. A more recent study of the same sample that used nine waves of data collection (Pettit et al.
2001), showed that parental monitoring was associated with fewer delinquent behavior problems for both boys and girls across time. On the other hand, high levels of psychological control (e.g. love withdrawal, guilt induction) were associated with more delinquent behavior problems for girls. In another study, Kilgore et al. (
2000) investigated the association of parental discipline and monitoring with the early conduct problems of 123 boys and girls in a highly disadvantaged, African American sample. Prospective analyses indicated that, after controlling for earlier conduct problems, coercive parent discipline and poor parental monitoring at age 4½ years were independent predictors of conduct problems at age 6 for both boys and girls.
Instead of focusing on the negative effects of parenting behaviors, some longitudinal studies examined protective processes. Scaramella et al. (
1999), for example, examined parental protective influences on adolescent externalizing problems in a sample of seventh-graders (average 12 years of age, followed up over a five-year-period) drawn from the general population in a rural, mainly white area. The authors reported that adolescents with parents above the median in warmth, child management skills (consistent discipline and monitoring) and low hostility showed fewer externalizing problems and had lower growth trajectories than their counterparts. Chronis et al. (
2007) conducted seven diagnostic assessments over eight years and examined parenting factors in 108 children who first met diagnostic criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) at age 4–7 years old (approximately one-fifth were girls). After controlling for demographic variables, baseline ADHD and conduct problems, observed positive parenting (including praise, positive affect, physical warmth) predicted fewer conduct problems 2–8 years following the initial assessment. Surprisingly, observed negative parenting did not predict the future course of conduct problems. This may have been because mothers were less likely to exhibit negative parenting during the
observed parent-child interaction due to social desirability. The authors suggested that this lack of variability likely minimized their ability to detect effects.
With the exception of the studies by Scaramella et al. (
1999) and, previously mentioned, Hipwell et al. (
2008) the majority of longitudinal studies assessed parenting behavior once and were therefore not able to study the development of parenting behaviors over time. Although the study by Scaramella et al. (
1999) observed parenting twice, the two measurements were only one year apart and summed into a single composite measure. The authors reported moderate correlation coefficients between the two measurements, i.e. seventh and eighth grade parenting, ranging from .40 (maternal hostility) to .45 (paternal warmth) but did not comment on (the direction of) the observed changes, nor were separate analyses conducted for each gender. The study by Hipwell et al. (
2008) took into account changes in parenting over time, but did not report on the nature of those changes. Another exception of studies with multiple measurements of parenting behavior pertains to the research focusing on parental monitoring, which shows both continuity and transformation of parental monitoring. Pettit et al. (
2001) showed that monitoring at ages 13 and 14 appeared to be preceded by a proactive parenting style at age 5, whereas psychological control was preceded by earlier harsh parenting. Mother’s report of psychological control was preceded by earlier maternal judgments of child externalizing behavior problems at age 5. A study by Patrick et al. (
2005), however, suggested that monitoring in later childhood (third and fourth grade) was only indirectly associated with earlier parenting skills at the entry of elementary school by their association with child conduct problems (reciprocal effect). None of these studies, however, examined the development of monitoring in girls or studied gender differences in the development of monitoring.
In summary, few longitudinal studies on girls have measured both child and parental behavior repeatedly. It is therefore difficult to draw conclusions about the dynamic, bidirectional association between girls’ disruptive behavior and family functioning. Data from cross-sectional studies suggests that disruptive behavior in girls, as in boys, is associated with low levels of parental warmth, support, supervision and monitoring and high levels of hostility and conflict. Conclusions from the longitudinal studies, however, are less conclusive. Although studies show an association between girls’ disruptive behavior and parental monitoring, psychological control and coercive parental discipline (Kilgore et al.
2000; Pettit et al.
2001), other studies do not report associations between suboptimal parenting behaviors and the development of disruptive behavior in girls over time (Chronis et al.
2007; McFadyen-Ketchum et al.
1996). Due to the scarcity of longitudinal studies with repeated measurements of parental and girls’ behavior, we do not know how the parental behaviors associated with disruptive behavior, develop over time as they influence and are influenced by the girl’s disruptive behavior. Furthermore, we are not aware of any study that examined the longitudinal development of parent-daughter conflict.
To What Extent Can Risk and Protective Factors Related to Family Functioning Explain the Differential Development of Disruptive Behavior in Girls?
Several scholars have reviewed parental socialization as a potential explanation for a lower overall prevalence of disruptive behavior in girls, compared to boys (Crick and Zahn-Waxler
2003; Keenan and Shaw
1997; Maniadaki et al.
2003; Zahn-Waxler and Polanichka
2004). These reviews show that parents interact differently with girls and boys (Crick and Zahn-Waxler
2003; Keenan and Shaw
1997; Lytton and Romney
1991; Zahn-Waxler and Polanichka
2004). Differences include a parental focus on interpersonal relationships in girls by emphasizing the need for prosocial behaviors such as considering the personal consequences of their actions, and the need to control/mask their feelings of anger and aggression. Girls, in contrast to boys, also tend to be treated by their parents with less aggression and physical punishment, and with more warmth (Lytton and Romney
1991; Zahn-Waxler and Polanichka
2004). Regarding parenting behaviors, studies examining adolescents’ development of substance use and affiliation with deviant peers consistently report that girls, compared to boys, are more closely monitored by parents (e.g. Kim et al.
1999; Svensson
2003; Wall and Barth
2005; Webb et al.
2002). The typical parental socialization of girls may function as a protective factor against the development of disruptive behavior in childhood and therefore may explain why the majority of girls do not show disruptive behavior in childhood or adolescence. Girls’ typical socialization focussing on interpersonal relationships and suppression of anger and curtailing aggression may, for example, explain why girls show less physical aggression than boys, and use relational aggression instead. In addition, higher levels of parental supervision and monitoring tend to be associated with higher rates of secure attachment relationships between parent and child. Securely attached children internalize the values of their parents and in turn are less likely to become affiliated with deviant peers (Giordano et al.
1986). Due to the fact that girls, compared to boys, show lower levels of problem behavior in childhood and the majority of girls do relatively well in elementary school, parents are likely to refrain from changing their parenting behaviors which may explain the relatively stable levels of parenting behavior found in middle childhood (Forehand and Jones
2002). These high levels of stability in turn, may further increase the protective effect of parenting.
Evidence pointing in the same direction comes from studies indicating that normative gender-differentiated parenting styles become disrupted in the face of children with conduct problems. Two studies of high-risk samples of 15- to 18-year-old adolescents, for example, showed a similar distribution of the four parenting styles (authoritative, authoritarian, permissive/indulgent, and neglectful/disengaged parenting) across boys and girls (Pittman and Chase-Lansdale
2001; Steinberg et al.
2006). In addition, no differences in parent reported parenting practices by gender were found in a clinical sample of 4- to 7-year-olds diagnosed with ODD or early onset conduct problems (Webster-Stratton
1996).
As discussed previously, a relatively small subgroup of girls shows high levels of disruptive behavior in childhood (Côté et al.
2001; Hipwell et al.
2002, Lanctôt and LeBlanc
2002; McCabe et al.
2004; Odgers et al.
2008). These girls are often characterized by highly dysfunctional families in terms of suboptimal parenting and levels of conflict. These girls may have developed disruptive behavior in the absence of the protective effect of parenting. It may, however, also be the case that the highly deviant behavior of the girl causes disruptions in the child-rearing environment, which in turn, is likely to further increase or escalate the girl’s disruptive behavior. Studies on the reciprocal association between child disruptive behavior and parental behavior provide support for this hypothesis (Hipwell et al.
2008; Huh et al.
2006). In addition, girls who display aggressive, antisocial tendencies are more likely, due to the existing gender stereotype, to be rejected by their parents, teachers and peers. This, in turn, further increases the risk of developing disruptive behavior and may potentially explain the small subgroup of girls that shows disruptive behavior from early childhood onwards.
A third, relatively large, subgroup of girls exhibits adolescent-onset of disruptive behavior (e.g. Côté et al.
2001; Galambos et al.
2003; Moffitt et al.
2001; Scaramella et al.
1999; Silverthorn et al.
2001), suggesting that the peri- and post-pubertal period is one of particular risk for conduct problems in girls. The transition from childhood into adolescence appears to be a time of transformation in parent-adolescent relationships. Parental monitoring, for instance, decreases whilst parent-daughter conflict increases (e.g. Dworkin and Larson
2001; Forehand and Jones
2002; Holmbeck and Hill
1991; Sagrestano et al.
1999). During this time, conflicts between parents and their children potentially serve an adaptive function by signaling to parents and youth that relationship structures and processes require attention and redefinition (Holmbeck and Hill
1991). The transition from childhood into adolescence is also marked by an increase in time spent with peers outside the home, therefore increasing the influence of peers and potentially reducing the protective effects of positive parenting behaviors. Among boys, it is well established that involvement with deviant peers is associated with conduct disorder and delinquency (e.g. Elliott et al.
1985; Patterson and Dishion
1985). Less is known about girls, although such an association appears to exist for antisocial females (Aseltine
1995). It has also been argued that peer influence might be more important for girls than for boys, because girls’ friendships are characterized by greater intimacy, loyalty and interpersonal engagement (Buhrmester and Furman
1987; Savin-Williams and Berndt
1990; see review by Rose and Rudolph
2006). Girls typically enter mixed-age and mixed-sex peer groups earlier than boys (Vitaro et al.
2001), which may get them in contact with older, deviant males. Antisocial females tend to affiliate with older, antisocial males, which may increase the risks for relationship difficulties, teenage pregnancies and antisocial behaviors (Moffitt
1993).
The different subgroups of girls (no disruptive behavior, childhood-onset disruptive behavior and adolescence-onset disruptive behavior) may be distinguishable early in life, for example by temperamental factors such as negative emotionality or impulsivity. Côté et al. (
2002) showed that girls who were both hyperactive and unhelpful in childhood had a significant risk for CD in adolescence. McCabe et al. (
2004) showed that girls with childhood-onset disruptive behavior were more likely to have a family history of mental illness or a family history of antisocial behavior than girls with adolescent-onset. This finding points towards familial influence, but may also be indicative of biological causes of the development of psychopathology (Moffitt
2005). Girls exhibiting an early onset of disruptive behavior also differed from adolescent-onset girls on below median household income and comorbid ADHD (McCabe et al.
2004). In addition, Odgers et al. (
2008) reported that the life-course persistent path, as opposed to the adolescence-limited subtype, in females was differentially predicted by low intellectual ability, reading difficulties, hyperactivity, maternal poor mental health, experiences of harsh and inconsistent discipline, much family conflict and low family socio-economic status. Previous studies suggest that childhood-onset girls can be differentiated from adolescence-onset girls (see also Moffitt and Caspi
2001).
The role of family functioning in desistance processes in girls has yet to be studied fully. However, Formoso et al. (
2000) suggested that continuous parental involvement and support despite the girl’s behavior problems in adolescence may protect the girl from persistent disruptive and delinquent behavior in late adolescence and adulthood. They showed that girls in conflictual families who reported stronger bonds with their mothers and closer supervision by their parents exhibited lower levels of conduct problems than girls without such strong bonds or close supervision. In addition to this indirect effect, studies also showed a direct protective effect of parenting on the development of disruptive behavior (Chronis et al.
2007; Scaramella et al.
1999). Scaramella and colleagues showed that observed parenting that is high in warmth, low in hostility and highly consistent in management behaviors inhibits growth of externalizing behavior in adolescents through a compensatory main effect (exhibiting lower levels of initial externalizing behavior) and through a buffering effect that reduced increases in these problem behaviors over time.