Validation of the mothers object relations scales in 2–4 year old children and comparison with the child–parent relationship scale

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Sarah Stewart-Brown³  Peter K Kimani³  John M Oates²  Emma EY Fan³  Fiona MacCallum¹  Douglas E Simkiss³ 

[1] Department of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK;Child and Youth Studies Group, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK;Warwick MedicalSchool, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

关键词: Internal consistency;    Validity;    Psychometrics;    Outcome measure;    Relationship;    Child;    Parent;   

Others  :  823856
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-11-49

 received in 2012-08-29, accepted in 2013-03-04,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The quality of the parent–child relationship has an important effect on a wide range of child outcomes. The evaluation of interventions to promote healthy parenting and family relationships is dependent on outcome measures which can quantify the quality of parent–child relationships. Between the Mothers’ Object Relations – Short Form (MORS-SF) scale for babies and the Child–parent Relationship Scale (C-PRS) there is an age gap where no validated scales are available. We report the development and testing of an adaptation of the MORS-SF; the MORS (Child) scale and its use in children from the age of 2 years to 4 years. This scale aims to capture the nature of the parent–child relationship in a form which is short enough to be used in population surveys and intervention evaluations.

Methods

Construct and criterion validity, item salience and internal consistency were assessed in a sample of 166 parents of children aged 2–4 years old and compared with that of the C-PRS. The performance of the MORS (Child) as part of a composite measure with the HOME inventory was compared with that of the C-PRS using data collected in a randomised controlled trial and the national evaluation of Sure Start.

Results

MORS (Child) performed well in children aged 2–4 with high construct and criterion validity, item salience and internal consistency. One item in the C-PRS failed to load on either subscale and parents found this scale slightly more difficult to complete than the MORS (Child). The two measures performed very similarly in a factor analysis with the HOME inventory producing almost identical loadings.

Conclusions

Adapting the MORS-SF for children aged 2–4 years old produces a scale to assess parent–child relationships that is easy to use and outperforms the more commonly used C-PRS in several respects.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Simkiss et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Department for Education and Skills: Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage. https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/eyfs_practiceguid_0026608.pdf webcite
• [2]Carlson E: A prospective longitudinal study of attachment disorganisation/disorientation. Child Dev 1998, 69(4):1107-1128.
• [3]Weich SS, Patterson J, Shaw R, Stewart-Brown S: Family relationships in childhood and later psychopathology: a systematic review of longitudinal studies. Br J Psychiatry 2009, 194:392-398.
• [4]Repetti RL, Taylor SE, Seeman TE: Risky families: family social determinants and the mental and physical health of offspring. Psychol Bull 2002, 128(2):330-366.
• [5]Sroufe LA, Egeland B, Carlson EA: One social world: The integrated development of parent–child and peer relationships. In Relationships as developmental concepts. Edited by Collins . Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1999:241-261.
• [6]Kremers SPJ, Brug J, de Vries H, Engels RCME: Parenting style and adolescent fruit consumption. Appetite 2003, 41:43-50.
• [7]Cohen D, Richardson J, Labree L: Parenting behaviours and the onset of smoking and alcohol use: a longitudinal study. Pediatr 1994, 94(3):368-375.
• [8]Scaramella LV, Conger RD, Simons RL, Whitbeck LB: Predicting risk for pregnancy by late adolescence: a social contextual perspective. Dev Psychol 1998, 34(6):1233-1245.
• [9]Bijur PE, Kurzon M, Hamelsy V, Power C: Parent-adolescent conflict and adolescent injuries. Dev Behav Pediatr 1991, 12:92-97.
• [10]Stewart-Brown S, Fletcher L, Wadsworth MEJ: Parent–child relationships and health problems in adulthood in three UK national birth cohort studies. Eur J Public Health 2005, 15(6):640-646.
• [11]Belsky J, Bell B, Bradley RH, Stallard N, Stewart-Brown S: Socioeconomic Risk, Parenting during the Preschool Years and Child Health Age 6 Years. Eur J Public Health 2007, 17(5):508-513.
• [12]Clover RD, Abell T, Becker LA, Crawford S, Ramsey CN: Family functioning and stress as predictors of influenza B infection. J FamPrac 1989, 28:535-553.
• [13]Flinn MV, England BG: Social economics and childhood glucocorticoid stress response and health. Am J Phys Anthropol 1997, 102:33-53.
• [14]MacCoby EE, Martin JA: Socialization in the context of the family: parent–child interaction. In Mussen Manual of Child Psychology. Edited by Heatherington EM. New York: Wiley; 1983:1-102.
• [15]Early Child Care Research Networks: Child Care and child development: results of the NICHD study of early child care and youth development. New York: Guildford Press; 2005.
• [16]Steinberg L, Lamborn SD, Dornbursch SM, Darling N: Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Dev 1992, 63(5):1266-1281.
• [17]Pianta RC: Child–parent relationship scale. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia; 1992.
• [18]Driscoll K, Pianta RC: Mothers' and fathers' perceptions of conflict and closeness in parent–child relationships during early childhood. J Early Child Infant Psychol 2011, 7:1-24.
• [19]U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families: Head Start Impact Study, Final Report. Washington, DC; 2010.
• [20]National Evaluation of Sure Start – Methodology report, executive summary. http://www.ness.bbk.ac.uk/documents/Methodology.pdf webcite
• [21]Oates JM, Gervai J: Mothers’ Object Relational Scales. Poster presented at the XIth European Conference on Developmental Psychology. Milan, Italy; 2003.
• [22]Davies J, Slade P, Wright I, Stewart P: Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms Following Childbirth and Mothers’ perceptions of their infants. Infant Mental Health J 2008, 29(6):537-554.
• [23]Milford R, Oates J: Universal screening and early intervention for maternal mental health and attachment difficulties. Community Pract 2009, 82:30-33.
• [24]Oates JM, Gervai J, Danis I, Tsaroucha A: Validation studies of the Mothers Object Relational Scales Short Form (MORS-SF). Poster presented at the XIIth European Conference on Developmental Psychology. La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain; 2005.
• [25]Oates J: Risk factors for infant attrition and low engagement in experiment and free play. Infant Behav Dev 1998, 21:555-569.
• [26]Nunnakky JC: Psychometric Theory. 2nd edition. London: McGraw-Hill; 1978.
• [27]Cox A, Walker S: The HOME Inventory – home observation and measurement of the environment. Brighton: Pavilion Publishing; 2002.
• [28]Simkiss DE, Snooks HA, Stallard N, Davies S, Thomas MA, Anthony R, Winstanley S, Wilson L, Stewart-Brown S: Study protocol Measuring the impact and costs of a universal group based parenting programme: protocol and implementation of a trial. BMC Public Health 2010, 10:364. BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Department of Health: The Children and Young People’s Health Outcomes Forum. http://www.dh.gov.uk/health/2012/07/cyp-report webcite
• [30]Grossman KE, Grossman K: Universality of human social attachment as an adaptive process. In Attachment and bonding: a new synthesis. Edited by Carter CS, Ahnert L, Grossmann LE, Hardy SB, Lamb ME, Porges SW, Sachser N. Cambridge Massachusetts: The MIT Press; 2005:199-228.