4.2 Article

A Multi-Domain Self-Report Measure of Coparenting

期刊

PARENTING-SCIENCE AND PRACTICE
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 1-21

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15295192.2012.638870

关键词

-

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [K23 HD042575, K23 HD042575-05] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [R21 MH064125, R21 MH064125-01A2] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. This study reports the psychometric properties of a multidomain measure of the coparenting relationship in dual-parent families. Method. A total of 152 couples participating in a transition to parenthood study completed the Coparenting Relationship Scale and additional measures during home visits at child age 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years. Results. Psychometric and construct validity assessments indicated the measure performed satisfactorily. The 35-item measure demonstrated good reliability and strong stability. Subscales measuring theoretically and empirically important aspects of coparenting (coparenting agreement, coparenting closeness, exposure of child to conflict, coparenting support, coparenting undermining, endorsement of partner's parenting, and division of labor) demonstrated good reliability as well. A 14-item brief overall measure showed very strong associations with the overall measure. Relations of the full scale with a measure of social desirability were weak, and the full scale was positively associated with positive dimensions of the dyadic couple relationship (love, sex/romance, couple efficacy) and inversely associated with negative dimensions (conflict, ineffective arguing)-as expected. Conclusions. This initial examination of the Coparenting Relationship Scale suggests that it possesses good psychometric properties (reliability, stability, construct validity, and inter-rater agreement), can be flexibly administered in short and long forms, and is positioned to promote further conceptual and methodological progress in the study of coparenting.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据