Child conflict in adoptive families and non-adoptive families: The role of family communication

1. Child conflict in adoptive families and non-adoptive families: The role of family communication Martha A. Rueter Department of Family Social Science Margaret A. Keyes Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research Ascan F. Koerner Department of Communication Studies University of Minnesota

2. Sibling Interaction Behavior Study (SIBS) Research Team Matt McGue, PI Bill Iacano Irene Elkins Meg Keyes Martha Rueter SIBS is funded by grants for the US government: NIMH, NIDA, NIAAA

3. Sibling Interaction Behavior Study (SIBS) Participants N = 616 families, each with two participating children. Child M age = 14.9 years. Families with 2 adopted children: N =285 Families with 1 adopted child, 1 biological child: N =124 Families with 2 biological children: N = 208 M age of adoption = 4.7 months. All adoptees placed within 2 years of age. 27.3% domestically adopted, 72.3% internationally adopted.

4. Self-reported parent-child conflict Dark Bars: Adoptive Light Bars: Biological p < .05 p < .05 p < .05 p < .05 Mean conflict level Rueter et al, 2009

5. Within family comparisons: Self-reported parent-child conflict Dark Bars: Adopted child Light Bars: Biological child p < .05 p < .05 p < .05 Mean conflict level Rueter et al, 2009

6. Observed parent-child conflictual behavior Dark Bars: Adoptive Light Bars: Biological Mean conflict level p < .05 p < .05 Rueter et al, 2009

7. Family Communication Patterns Theory (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2004) Optimal family functioning requires that members achieve a shared social reality Shared social reality exists when family members (A) Agree. (B) Accurately perceive their agreement.

8. Family Communication Patterns Theory (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2004) Shared Social Reality Achieved through reliance on a combination of 2 orientations. Conversation Orientation: Emphasizes conversation to achieve shared social reality. Conformity Orientation: Emphasizes conformity to achieve shared social reality.

9. Family Communication Patterns (FCP) High Protective Consensual Conformity Orientation Laissez-Faire Pluralistic Low High Conversation Orientation

10. Conformity Orientation Conversation Orientation Child conflict levels by Family Communication Pattern Protective Consensual Moderate conflict Lowest conflict Laissez-Faire Highest conflict Pluralistic Moderate conflict

11. Study Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: Child conflict varies by FCP. Family Communication Pattern Child Conflict

12. Study Hypotheses Hypothesis 2: Child conflict varies by adoption status. Family Communication Pattern Child Conflict Adopted vs. Non-adopted

13. Study Hypotheses Hypothesis 3: Adoption status and FCP interact . . . Family Communication Pattern Child Conflict Adopted vs. Non-adopted

14. Conformity Orientation Conversation Orientation Hypothesized interaction between Family Communication Pattern and adoption status Protective Consensual Adopted higher than non-adopted Adopted similar to non-adopted Laissez-Faire Adopted higher than non-adopted Pluralistic Adopted higher than non-adopted

15. Study Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: Child conflict varies by FCP. Hypothesis 2: Child conflict varies by adoption status. Hypothesis 3: Adoption status and FCP interact such that . . . H3a: Among adoptive families, conflict varies by FCP. H2b: Among non-adoptive families, conflict does not vary by FCP.

16. E M F E Y M E Y M F Y F E M F Y Measuring Family Communication Patterns Observed Communication ObservedListening ObservedWarmth Observed Control Family Communication Patterns (4 Latent Classes) Rueter et al, 2008

17. Dark Bars: Adoptive Light Bars: Biological Rueter et al, 2009

18. Measuring Child Conflict Sum of 4 observed ratings: Child hostility to (1) mother and to (2) father. Extent to which child’s behavior was characterized as angry, hostile, contemptuous. Child coercion to (3) mother and to (4) father. Extent to which child’s behavior was characterized as demanding, threatening.

19. Conformity Orientation Conversation Orientation Hypothesis Testing Hypothesis 1: Child conflict varies by FCP. Protective Consensual Moderate conflict Lowest conflict Laissez-Faire Highest conflict Pluralistic Moderate conflict

20. Hypothesis 1: Child conflict levels vary by FCP Observed Child Conflict by Family Communication Pattern Mean conflict level

21. Hypothesis 2: Child conflict levels vary by adoption status Observed child conflict by adoption status Dark Bars: Adoptive Light Bars: Biological Mean conflict level

22. Hypothesis 3: Adoption status and FCP interact Observed child conflict by adoption status and FCP Dark Bars: Adoptive Light Bars: Biological Mean conflict level

23. Conclusions and Future Directions Family Communication Pattern Family Communication Pattern Child Conflict Family Shared Social Reality Child Conflict Adopted vs. Non-adopted Adopted vs. Non-adopted

24. Conclusions and Future Directions Family Communication Pattern Family Communication Pattern Child Conflict Family Shared Social Reality Child Conflict Adopted vs. Non-adopted Adopted vs. Non-adopted

25. Observed warm, supportive behavior Dark Bars: Adoptive Light Bars: Biological Mother-adolescent Father-adolescent Mean warmth level Rueter et al, 2009

26. Observed parental control Dark Bars: Adoptive Light Bars: Biological Mean control level p < .05 Rueter et al, 2009