Fpsyg 11 01203
Fpsyg 11 01203
Fpsyg 11 01203
communications between parents and children on such issues According to the social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1995),
appear to be associated with the children’s better academic interactions between parents and their children can influence
performance (Shochet et al., 2007; Caro, 2011). Researchers their self-evaluations of how capable they are in doing a given
supporting this association have explained that the quantity task. The cognitive abilities of individuals play a key role in their
of parent–child communication on school-related issues is one developmental outcomes in many aspects, including academic
of the crucial indicators of how much parents are involved performance. A crucial component of social cognitive theory that
in their children’s education. More frequent communications has received much attention is self-concept, which consists of
suggested a higher level of parental involvement and that individuals’ judgments about their abilities and skills (Ahmed and
the children’s academic performance might benefit from these Bruinsma, 2006). Research studies have demonstrated a direct
parental practices. However, other researchers have claimed association between children’s self-concept and their academic
that more frequent conversations with children about their achievements (Wu and Kuo, 2015; Jhang, 2017; Susperreguy
school lives may not be helpful in enhancing their academic et al., 2017). On the other hand, individuals’ self-concept can be
achievement; instead, it may threaten these children’s needs influenced by social agents, such as parents and teachers in the
for autonomy and may negatively influence their learning form of verbal persuasion. For example, parents can tell their
motivation (Keijsers and Poulin, 2013). When children are in children that they are capable of performing a task and will do
their adolescent years, they tend to want independence from their it well. This effective method of verbal persuasion helps children
parents and may not see the benefits or show any interest in realize that they can be successful in doing a task and that this
conversing with their parents about their school-related issues success can translate to their new tasks (Urdan and Schoenfelder,
(Grolnick et al., 2007; Hill and Tyson, 2009). Other studies 2006). More frequent positive communications between parents
have found that the quantity of parent–child communication and children might be helpful in supporting the children’s
does not significantly associate with children’s higher academic positive self-concept, which contributes to their academic
performance among middle and high schoolers (Jeynes, 2007; achievement (Rogers et al., 2009). However, few studies have
Park, 2008). Overall, studies primarily focusing on the quantity investigated this mediation path of parent–child communication
of parent–child communication indicated a mixed result in and the children’s academic performance via their self-concept.
associating it with the children’s academic performance. Even fewer studies have focused on the important quantity
Besides the quantity of parent–child communication, another and quality aspects of parent–child communication. The role
group of researchers has emphasized the significance of the of children’s self-concept and how the different aspects of
quality aspect of these communications. Hollmann et al. (2016) communication influence their academic performance is still
described high-quality parent–child communication as parents not well understood. Therefore, this study considered the
and children conducting a conversation in an environment where children’s self-concept as a mediator for examining what aspects
the parents encourage their children’s opinions and provide of parent–child communication, quantity or quality, matter
structure with decisions that are tolerant of different viewpoints. most to the children’s academic performance. In examining
In such a beneficial communication environment, both parents this association, we considered the potential confounding effect
and children provide opinions and make decisions. The parents of the home environment on parent–child communication
provide a structure with explanations of their actions and and children’s academic performance. Jeynes (2007) examined
encourage their child or children to explain their opinions. In the effect of various forms of parental involvement, including
this way, the parents know the motivation behind and how to parent–child communication, on the academic achievements of
respond to their children’s actions and the children understand the students from grades 6 through 12. The researcher found
what and why something is expected of them. Studies on the that parent–child communication did not have a significant
quality aspect of parent–child communication have consistently effect on the children’s academic achievement when their
suggested that parent–child communication involving parents’ parents’ educational attainment was controlled. Consistent with
understanding and support of their children is associated with Jeynes (2007), Park (2008) and Hay et al. (2016) stressed
the children’s better academic performance (Vukovic et al., 2013; the necessity to control for family background characteristics,
Camacho-Thompson et al., 2016). such as the parents’ educational attainment and family type,
Although previous studies to date have documented the effect because they found that intact families with parents who
of the quantity or quality of parent–child communication on had attained a higher education were more likely to have
these children’s functioning in school, there has not been any effective and healthy communications with their children
single empirical research that has simultaneously investigated and thus their academic achievement appeared to be higher
the relationship of the quantity and quality of parent–child than for children from divorced families or parents with
communication to children’s academic performance among lower educational attainment (Hao and Bonstead-Bruns, 1998;
adolescents. Therefore, it is difficult to determine which aspects of Wang et al., 2009).
communication parents need to pay more attention to—quantity
or quality—to boost their adolescents’ academic performance.
Hence, a few coherent suggestions from researchers have been THE PRESENT STUDY
generated for adolescents’ parents and family practitioners
regarding the relative effects of parent–child quantity and quality The objective of this current study was to investigate the
communications about the children’s academic performance. associations between the different aspects of parent–child
communication in terms of the quantity and the quality of with their children. These items included aspects of how well
those communications and the children’s academic performance. parents get along with their children, make decisions together
We also examined the possible indirect effect of parent–child with them, understand, and trust them. Ratings were measured
communication on their academic performance via their self- according to a four-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 4
concept. Because parent–child communication mostly occurs in (always). Higher scores indicated a higher level for the quality
a home environment, to avoid a possible confounding effect, of parent–child communication. The one-factor confirmatory
we included parents’ educational attainment and family type as factor analysis model was acceptable for these four items (χ2 (2,
controls in our analysis because these factors may influence the N = 1815) = 8.02, p < 0.05, CFI = 0.99, RMSEA = 0.041, 90% CI
way parents communicate with their children. [0.014, 0.072], SRMR = 0.035); standardized factor loadings were
statistically significant, ranging from 0.48 to 0.68. The reliability
of the four-item scale indicated an acceptable internal consistency
METHOD (Cronbach α = 0.60). Accordingly, we used the average score for
the four quantities of parent–child communication items as the
Participants observed variable in the final structural equation model.
This study’s findings are based on data from the Early Childhood
Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten (ECLS-K, full sample). The
Academic Performance
ECLS-K followed 9000 children nationwide from kindergarten
Students’ eighth-grade academic performance in reading, math,
to the eighth grade. Our study focused on these eighth-graders
and science were drawn from the ECLS-K dataset that assessed
in the ECLS-K dataset as our analysis sample because these
children’s academic progress in school in many ways, such
children are transitioning from middle school to high school. To
as teachers’ and parents’ reports on the children’s school
avoid a school-related confounding effect due to school changes,
performance. However, these self-reported measures can be
we selected eighth-graders who did not change schools during
subjective and grades are likely to vary across schools, thus
their first year of middle school. The participants in this study
making it more difficult to determine the extent to which
totaled 1815 eighth-graders who did not change schools during
academic performance varies due to informants’ bias and schools
their middle school years (mean age = 14.31 years, SD = 0.47)
and other factors. Taking this into consideration, we obtained the
and 52.6% were females. Among the participants, 1319 (72.7%)
standardized test scores administrated by the ECLS-K researchers
were White, 101 (5.6%) were African Americans, 231 (12.7%)
that assessed the students’ academic ability in reading, math,
were Hispanics, 77 (4.2%) were Asian American, and 87 (4.7%)
and science. These standard test scores were adjusted using the
were Others. The majority (89.9%) indicated that their native
Item Response Theory (IRT) method to produce a more accurate
language is English, and most were in two-parent households plus
estimate by the ECLS-K researchers (Najarian et al., 2009). The
siblings (69.4%). The parents had some college experience or a
three-item measure of students’ academic performance indicated
Bachelor’s degree (53.5% of the mothers and 40.5% of the fathers).
a high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.86).
Measures
Quantity of Parent–Child Communication Self-Concept
Four items assessing the frequency of parent–child conversations In the ECLS-K dataset, as part of the eighth-grade survey, the
in a month were drawn from the parents’ questionnaire in children provided information on their self-concept. They were
the ECLS-K dataset. This communication content was about a asked about their level of agreement and the statements about
child’s day at school, school friends, grades, and school activities. certain perceptions about them. A total of seven items were
Ratings were measured on a four-point scale ranging from 1 included. Sample items included “I feel good about myself ” and
(not at all) to 4 (every day). A higher score indicated a higher “I am able to do things as well as most of other people.” The
frequency of communication between parents and children. The children’s responses were based on a four-point Likert scale
one-factor confirmatory factor analysis model was acceptable for (1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree). The ECLS-K
these four items (χ2 (2, N = 1815) = 23.18, p < 0.05, CFI = 0.99, datafile included scores for each of these seven items that
RMSEA = 0.076, 90% CI [0.050, 0.105], SRMR = 0.020); standardized to a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.
standardized factor loadings were statistically significant, ranging These seven items indicated high construct reliability (Cronbach
from 0.54 to 0.82. The reliability of the four-item scale indicated α = 0.79). The one-factor confirmatory factor analysis model was
a high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.76). Accordingly, acceptable for these seven items (χ2 (14, N = 1815) = 604.33,
we used the average score for the four quantities of parent– p < 0.05, CFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.051, 90% CI [0.042, 0.073],
child communication items as the observed variable in the final SRMR = 0.068); standardized factor loadings were statistically
structural equation model. significant, ranging from 0.50 to 0.71. The ECLS-K researchers
created the composite average score for this seven-item scale
Quality of Parent–Child Communication and used the composite indices as a measure of the children’s
This communication involved parents’ understanding and self-concept. Accordingly, we used the composite average score
support of their child or children in this study. We selected four for the seven self-concept items as the observed variable in the
items from the parents’ questionnaire in the ECLS-K dataset that final structural equation model. Higher score indicated a greater
reflected the supportive nature of parents in their conversations positive perception among the children about themselves.
TABLE 1 | Parent–child communication variables, self-concept, and academic performance variables: correlations and descriptive statistics (N = 1815).
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6
FIGURE 1 | Standardized coefficients of the effects of parent-child communication on the latter’s academic performance via their self-concept. Solid lines are the
significant paths (∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01) and dashes are the non-significant paths. Model fit: χ2 (12, N = 1815) = 15.24, χ2 /df = 1.270, p = 0.228 > 0.05,
CFI = 0.999, RMSEA = 0.012, 90% CI [0.000, 0.028], SRMR = 0.007. Parents’ educational attainment and family type (1 = married, 0 = other status) were control
variables in the analysis.
Communication Effect of communication dimensions Effect of self-concept on Indirect effect of Bootstrapped 95% CI for
dimensions on self-concept academic performance self-concept indirect effect
CI, confidence interval, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, two tailed.
parent–child communication indicated a significant indirect helpful in enhancing these adolescents’ academic performance.
effect on the children’s academic performance through their self- This may be because children in their adolescent years
concept (β = 0.007, 95% CI [0.002, 0.013]), while the quantity tend to want independence from their parents (Grolnick
of parent–child communication did not reveal such an indirect et al., 2007; Hill and Tyson, 2009) and may not see the
effect through the children’s self-concept (β = −0.002, 95% CI benefits or show any interest in conversing with their
[−0.007, 0.004]; see Table 2). parents; instead, they find such attempts to have frequent
conversations about school life means giving away their
privacy, power, and identity (Solomon et al., 2002). However,
DISCUSSION the alternative aspect of parent–child communication—the
quality of such communications—does contribute to children’s
This study examined how the quantity and quality of parent– academic enhancement. Specifically, if parents would show
child communication were associated with adolescents’ academic their trust and understanding of their child during these
performance through the children’s self-concept. We found that conversations and would like to collaborate with them in
high-quality parent–child communication had a significantly decision making, then these adolescents’ academic performance
positive effect on children’s academic performance. This effect is likely to benefit from such high-quality communications
can be mediated by the children’s self-concept. However, the with their parents.
quantity of parent–child communication did not have an effect We also found that high-quality, parent–child communication
on the children’s self-concept or academic performance. benefit adolescents’ academic performance by influencing their
These findings suggest that the quality of parent–child positive self-concept. This finding supports Bandura’s social
communication may show a closer connection with these cognitive theory and is consistent with a prior study (Rogers
children’s academic performance than the quantity of et al., 2009) showing that positive parent–child interactions
communication. Parents’ having more frequent conversations (i.e., mothers’ academic encouragement) had an indirect effect
with their children about their school lives may not be on children’s academic performance through their self-concept.
In high-quality communications during which parents listen the quality of communication about the children’s academic
to and respect their children’s perspectives, invite them to performance. This study argued that what matters more to
be part of the decision-making process, understand their young adolescents’ academic performance is the quality of their
emotions, and provide them with conducive feedback; these parent–child communication rather than the quantity. These
children are more likely to actively participate in family findings shed light on how parents and educational programs
conversations and express their perspectives when facing critical can advance efforts in helping adolescents to enhance their
school-related choices (e.g., courses, study plans). Through academic performance.
such parent–child communication, parents socialize them into
being autonomous, confident in their decisions, and tolerant
of others’ perspectives. Thus, such collaborative interactions DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
support the children’s needs for autonomy and the establishment
of a positive self-perception, which is especially important The datasets generated for this study are available on request to
when they are in their adolescent years (Hill and Tyson, the corresponding author.
2009). When children are confident about themselves, they
tend to perform better in what they do and they are
more likely to have high academic achievements in school ETHICS STATEMENT
(Guay et al., 2013; Hollmann et al., 2016). The findings
of our research emphasized that high-quality, parent–child Ethical review and approval was not required for the study
communication can promote children’s academic performance on human participants in accordance with the local legislation
through their self-concept. and institutional requirements. Written informed consent from
The current study is subject to several limitations. The the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin was not required
cross-sectional design limited conclusions about causes and to participate in this study in accordance with the national
effects. Some scales, such as the quality of parent–child legislation and the institutional requirements.
communication, displayed somewhat low reliability. Despite
these limitations, the present study examines the quality and
quantity of parent–child communication as it relates to the AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
latter’s academic performance and allows us to identify which
aspects of parent–child communication (quantity vs. quality) The author contributed to this study in aspects of manuscript
are more influential in adolescents’ academic performance. In writing, data analysis, research design, and editing. The author
conclusion, frequent parent–child communication about their confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved
children’s school issues appears to be less influential than it for publication.
REFERENCES aspirations: an exploratory investigation. Int. J. Educ. Res. 77, 50–61. doi:
10.1016/j.ijer.2016.02.004
Acock, A. C. (2005). Working with missing values. J. Marriage Family 67, 1012– Hill, N. E., and Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: a meta-
1028. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00191.x analytic assessment of the strategies that promote achievement. Dev. Psychol. 45,
Ahmed, W., and Bruinsma, M. (2006). A structural model of self-concept, 740–763. doi: 10.1037/a0015362
autonomous motivation and academic performance in cross-cultural Hollmann, J., Gorges, J., and Wild, E. (2016). Motivational antecedents and
perspective. Electr. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 4, 551–576. consequences of the mother-adolescent communication. J. Child Family Stud.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2011). Amos (Version 20.0) [Computer Program]. Chicago: SPSS. 25, 767–780. doi: 10.1007/s10826-015-0258-8
Bandura, A. (1995). Self-Efficacy in Changing Society. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge Hu, L., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance
University Press. structure analysis: convential criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equat.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol. Bull. Model. 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
107, 238–246. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 Jeynes, W. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban
Camacho-Thompson, D. E., Gillen-O’Neel, C., Gonzales, N. A., and Fuligni, secondary school student academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Urban Educ.
A. J. (2016). Financial strain, major family life events, and parental academic 42, 82–110. doi: 10.1177/0042085906293818
involvement during adolescence. J. Youth Adolesc. 45, 1–10. Jhang, F.-H. (2017). Economically disadvantaged adolescents’ self-concept and
Caro, D. H. (2011). Parent-child communication and academic performance. academic achievement as mediators between family cohesion and mental health
J. Educ. Res. 2, 15–37. in Taiwan. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 15, 407–422. doi: 10.1007/s11469-017-
Grolnick, W. S., Price, C. E., Beiswenger, K. L., and Sauck, C. C. (2007). Evaluative 9737-z
pressure in mothers: effects of situation, maternal, and child characteristics on Keijsers, L., and Poulin, F. (2013). Developmental changes in parent–child
autonomy supportive versus controlling behavior. Dev. Psychol. 43, 991–1001. communication throughout adolescence. Dev. Psychol. 49, 2301–2308. doi:
Guay, F., Ratelle, C., Larose, S., Vallerand, R. J., and Vitaro, F. (2013). The number 10.1037/a0032217
of autonomy-child-supportive relationships: are more relationships better for Najarian, M., Pollack, J. M., and Sorongon, A. G. (2009). Early Childhood
motivation, perceived competence, and achievement? Contemp. Educ. Psychol. Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998–99 (ECLS-K), Psychometric
38, 375–382. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.07.005 Report for the Eighth Grade (NCES 2009–002). Washington, DC: National
Hao, L., and Bonstead-Bruns, M. (1998). Parents’ extrafamilial resources and Center for Education Statistics.
children’s school attainment. Sociol. Educ. 71, 175–198. Park, H. (2008). The varied educational effects of parent-child communication:
Hay, I., Wright, S., Watson, J., Allen, J., Beswick, K., and Cranston, N. (2016). a comparative study of fourteen countries. Comp. Educ. Rev. 52, 219–243.
Parent-child connectedness for schooling and students’ performance and doi: 10.1086/528763
Rogers, M. A., Theule, J., Ryan, B. A., and Adams, G. R. (2009). Parental anxiety. Early Educ. Dev. 24, 446–467. doi: 10.1080/10409289.2012.
involvement and children’s school achievement. Can. J. Sch. Psychol. 24, 34–57. 693430
Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., and King, J. (2006). Reporting Wang, J., Simons-Morton, B. G., Farhat, T., Farhart, T., and Luk, J. W. (2009).
structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis: a review. J. Educ. Socio-demographic variability in adolescent substance use: mediation by
Res. 99, 323–337. doi: 10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338 parents and peers. Prevent. Sci. 10, 387–396. doi: 10.1007/s11121-009-0141-1
Shochet, I. M., Smyth, T., and Homel, R. (2007). The impact of parental Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F., and Summers, G. (1977). Assessing
attachment on adolescent perception of the school environment and school reliability and stability in panel models. Soc. Methodol. 8, 84–136.
connectedness. Aust. N. Z. J. Family Ther. 28, 109–118. doi: 10.1375/anft.28. Wu, P.-C., and Kuo, S.-T. (2015). Academic achievement, self-concept and
2.109 depression in Taiwanese children: moderated mediation effect. Sch. Psychol. Int.
Solomon, Y., Warin, Jo, Lewis, C., and Langford, W. (2002). Intimate talk between 36, 36–53. doi: 10.1177/0143034314559869
parents and their teenage children: democratic openness or covert control?
Sociology 36, 965–983. doi: 10.1177/003803850203600409 Conflict of Interest: The author declares that the research was conducted in the
Susperreguy, M. I., Davis-Kean, P. E., Duckworth, K., and Chen, M. (2017). absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
Self-concept predicts academic achievement across levels of the achievement potential conflict of interest.
distribution: domain specificity for math and reading. Child Dev. 89, 2196–
2214. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12924 Copyright © 2020 Zhang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms
Urdan, T., and Schoenfelder, E. (2006). Classroom effects on student motivation: of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or
goal structures, social relationships, and competence beliefs. J. Sch. Psychol. 44, reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the
331–349. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.003 copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal
Vukovic, R. K., Roberts, S. O., and Wright, L. G. (2013). From parental is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or
involvement to children’s mathematical performance: the role of mathematics reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
APPENDIX
List of items used for measuring the quantity and quality of parent–child communication, self-concept, and academic performance (Najarian et al., 2009).
Quantity of Four items from parents’ report assessing the 1. P7OFTTLK: “How often do you talk with your child about his/her 1 = not at all,
parent–child frequency of parent–child conversations in a month day at school?” 4 = every day
communication 2. P7TLKFRD: “How often do you talk with your child about his/her
friends?
3. P7TLKGRD: “How often do you talk with your child about
his/her grades?”
4. P7TLKSCH: “How often do you talk with your child about his/her
school activities?”
Quality of Four items from parents’ report that reflected the 1. P7GETALN: “You get along well with your child.” 1 = never,
parent–child supportive nature of parents in their conversations with 2. P7DECIDE: “You and your child make decisions about his/her life 4 = always
communication their children together.”
3. P7NOUNDR: “You just do not understand him/her.” (recode)
4. P7TRUST: “You feel you can really trust him/her.”
Children’s Seven items from children’s report on their level of 1. C7FLGOOD: “I feel good about myself.” 1 = strongly
self-concept agreement on certain perceptions about themselves 2. C7WORTH: “I feel I am a person of worth, the equal of other disagree,
people.” 4 = strongly
3. C7ABLE: “I am able to do things as well as most other people.” agree
4. C7SATISF: “On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.”
5. C7USELES: “I certainly feel useless at times.” (recode)
6. C7NOPRD: “I feel I do not have much to be proud of.” (recode)
7. C7NOGOOD: “At times I think I am no good at all.” (recode)
Academic Standardized test scores administrated by the ECLS-K 1. C7R4RSCL: reading IRT scale score. –
performance researchers that assessed the students’ academic 2. C7R4MSCL: math IRT scale score.
ability in reading, math, and science, collected during 3. C7R2SSCL: science IRT scale score.
the spring of the student’s eighth-grade year