4.5 Article

Chinese fathers' emotion socialization profiles and adolescents' emotion regulation

Journal

PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
Volume 137, Issue -, Pages 33-38

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2018.08.006

Keywords

Paternal emotion socialization; Emotion regulation; Person-centered approach; Adolescence

Funding

  1. MOE Project of Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences in Universities, People's Republic of China [14JJD190003]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study examined the various configurations of Chinese fathers' emotion socialization behaviors and how these configurations relate to adolescents' emotion regulation (ER). A total of 731 Chinese secondary school students completed measures of paternal reactions to their negative emotions, their use of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression strategies, and overall ER ability. Four profiles of paternal emotion socialization were identified: the supportive (high supportive, low punitive, and moderate minimization responses to adolescents' negative emotions), the balanced (moderate warmth/responsiveness and nonsupportive reactions, and below-average levels of expressive encouragement), the disengaged (low across the four paternal emotion socialization practices), and the harsh (low supportive and high nonsupportive responses) profiles. Chinese adolescents with supportive and balanced fathers reported greater use of cognitive reappraisal than did those with disengaged and harsh fathers. Overall ER ability was the highest among adolescents with supportive fathers and the lowest among those with harsh fathers. Expressive suppression did not differ across four profiles. These findings highlight the importance of adopting person-centered approaches in understanding parental emotion socialization strategies and their associations with adolescents' emotion regulation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available