Parent–child relationships, friendship networks, and developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth in Hong Kong

Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Children and Youth Services Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth

Parent–child relationships, friendship networks, and developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth in Hong Kong Steven Sek-yum Ngai a,⁎, Chau-kiu Cheung b, Siu-ming To a, Ying Liu a, Han-yu Song a a b

Department of Social Work, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Department of Applied Social Studies, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 9 July 2012 Received in revised form 15 September 2012 Accepted 20 September 2012 Available online 8 November 2012 Keywords: Low-income families Youth Parent–child relationship Friendship networks Psychosocial development

a b s t r a c t This research investigates factors conducive to the thriving of economically disadvantaged young people in Hong Kong. In particular, we examine ways in which the parent–child relationship and friendship networks, as the principal sources of support during the transition from childhood to adulthood, influence the developmental outcomes of this group of young people with regard to their mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience and academic achievement. Based on a survey of 479 young people recruited from community-based youth-service centers located in different districts of Hong Kong, the results of the present research support the hypotheses that parent–child relationships and friendship networks have significant positive effects on youth development among low-income young people. Our results also show that, when compared with friendship networks, the parent–child relationship is a stronger predictor of youth development, that is, a stronger parent–child relationship tends to correspond to a better developmental outcome. Moreover, our research provides empirical evidence regarding the influence that parents can have on shaping the quality of young people's friendship networks. The implications of our findings, both for future research and for service delivery to promote the well-being of economically disadvantaged young people, are discussed. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Adolescence is an important transitional period during which rapid physiological changes and new demands for psychosocial adjustment take place (Deng & Roosa, 2007). It is also a key stage in life that may involve numerous developmental crises and problems including unemployment, depression, delinquency and drug use (Conger & Donnellan, 2007). Although most adolescents can navigate this transitional period with much success, a significant number of adolescents, especially those living in low-income families still encounter great uncertainty and distress in their development. During the current era of economic downturn and financial insecurity, this issue of youth development under economic hardship is becoming more imperative and has already aroused much concern among researchers and policymakers around the world (Johansson & Höjer, 2012). Economic disadvantage can force people to live under the great pressure of social exclusion (MacDonald & Marsh, 2002). For children growing up in low-income families, their developmental environment is usually even more challenging, with inaccessible healthcare and welfare support, inadequate education opportunities and resources, unavailable mentors and models within their social networks, and

⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Social Work, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong. Tel.: +852 39437512. E-mail address: [email protected] (S.S. Ngai). 0190-7409/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.09.025

frequent exposure to antisocial peer groups and temptations from illegitimate opportunities (Jessor, 1993). Nevertheless, despite financial pressure, many low-income families appear to have surprising resilience and strength in tackling disadvantaged life conditions to meet the basic needs of their children, ensuring their children obtain sufficient education, encouraging their children to participate in healthy activities, and protecting them from engaging in violence and crime (Bowen & Chapman, 1996; Crosnoe, Mistry, & Elder, 2002; Lam, Lam, Shek, & Tang, 2004; Orthner, Jones-Sanpei, & Williamson, 2004; Wong, 2006). According to previous research, an important factor that distinguishes adolescents who navigate youth transition with success from those who do not is the quality of the relationship that the adolescents have with their parents and peers (Laible, Carlo, & Raffaelli, 2000). Good parenting qualities are strongly related to the psychological well-being, adjustment to school, and pro-social behavior of young people growing up in these families (Jessor, 1993; Orthner et al., 2004). In addition, the quality of relationships with peers and the social support from friendship networks could help young people to thrive in spite of the economic hardship in their families (Walther, Stauber, & Pohl, 2005; Wong, 2006). With the support and resources generated from these important social networks, the resilience of young people from low-income families can be enhanced, assisting them to accomplish major life tasks of adolescence more successfully (Crosnoe et al., 2002). However, regarding the relative strength of the effect of the parent– child relationship and that of friendship networks on the developmental

92

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

outcomes of economically disadvantaged young people, there are still no consistent answers in the existing youth literature. On the one hand, some researchers state that for young people, support from parents is often regarded as either remaining constant or decreasing, while peers are often perceived as the most important source of support (Holland, Reynolds, & Weller, 2007; Ryabov, 2009). Some researchers further contend that friendship networks represent a significant social capital, assisting young people to establish support networks and providing them with important information and assistance in adapting to the school-to-work transition (Holland et al., 2007). On the other hand, other studies of the relative strength of the effects of parental support and peer support report that only the former contributes to positive youth development (Lewinsohn et al., 1994; Windle, 1992). Hence, the controversy currently remains unsolved. More importantly, most of the studies are done on the general youth population and little research has taken the special condition of economically disadvantaged youth into consideration (Cauce, Stewart, Rodriguez, Cochran, & Ginzler, 2003; Jessor, 1993). The purpose of this article is to present research findings based on a survey of economically disadvantaged young people in Hong Kong, showing the differential contributions of the parent–child relationship, friendship networks, and demographic variables on the developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth. Disadvantaged young people exist everywhere and their problems are not confined to any particular culture. In Hong Kong, both economic disadvantage and youth development have been the subject of public concern and academic research in recent decades. According to a study conducted by the Hong Kong Council of Social Service (2009), the number of young people aged between 15 and 24 living in low-income families has increased to 20% as compared to 10% a decade ago. Moreover, as a result of the economic downturn since 2008, the unemployment rate for young people aged between 15 and 24 has been hovering at around 15–20%, whereas the general population's unemployment rate during the same period was only around 4% (Census and Statistics Department, 2012). In addition, the number of both senior secondary and post-secondary students receiving financial assistance (i.e., fee remission assistance and means-tested grant and loan assistance) has been rising dramatically in recent years (Student Financial Assistance Agency, 2012). Given this social trend of rising youth poverty, investigating youth development and its social and demographic correlates would provide us with insights into helping young people cope with economic disadvantage and achieve better psychosocial development. 2. Theoretical framework and hypotheses This study seeks to examine the relationship among three sets of variables, the parent–child relationship, friendship networks, and the developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth. Our basic premise is that both parent–child relationships and friendship networks have significant positive effects on the developmental outcomes of this youth population. However, when compared with friendship networks, we propose that parent–child relationships may play a more important role among the low-income young people. Besides, this study tries to examine whether the parent–child relationship is positively associated with friendship networks among economically disadvantaged youth (Fig. 1). 2.1. Conceptualizing positive development among economically disadvantaged young people In this study, we conceptualize youth development as a dynamic process that is reflected in measurable outcomes and indicates competent functioning despite the experience of adversity (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000). There are a number of indicators reflecting the ability of impoverished young people to accomplish the developmental tasks of adolescence, such as having success in school, maintaining good mental

Developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth

Parent-child relationships

Friendship networks Fig. 1. The relationship between parent–child relationships, friendship networks, and the developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth.

health, and engaging in pro-social activities (Lerner, Brentano, Dowling, & Anderson, 2002). Academic achievement is an important indicator in studying youth development (Conger, Conger, & Elder, 1997), as young people with a high level of academic success at school tend to further their education in university and contribute to society after their graduation (Ainsworth, 2002). Investigating development among economically disadvantaged youth can also be guided by consideration of those domains in which they are at greatest risk of poor outcomes (Lane, Gresham, & O'Shaughnessy, 2002). Such an approach suggests that assessing emotional and behavioral adjustment is a good way to determine successful development (Schaufeli, 1997). Young people experiencing poverty may be considered as positively adjusted if they do not display emotional or behavioral problems (Creed, 1999). Accordingly, mental health and behavioral adjustment are indispensable indicators in youth development assessment. Moreover, we include positive identity, which refers to being a person with self-confidence and knowing one's strengths and weaknesses, as an indicator of youth development (Shek, Siu, & Lee, 2007). Finally, we include the quality of resilience, in order to examine young people's capacity for adapting to change and stressful events in a healthy way, which in the context of youth development in low-income families can be a valuable developmental outcome despite the adverse challenges and negative life experiences associated with poverty (Orthner et al., 2004).

2.2. The parent–child relationship and developmental outcomes Previous studies indicate that social capital plays an important role in the lives of economically disadvantaged young people as they make their transition to adulthood (Coleman, 1988). By social capital, we refer to resources inhered in the relationships among actors that can be used to facilitate a range of social outcomes (Dufur, Parcel, & McKune, 2008). Social capital is indicated by the presence of objective ties between actors, as well as by subjective relationships contingent upon trust, reciprocity, or other positive emotions (Paxton, 1999). In this study, we focused on the family and peers as the key contexts from which impoverished young people may draw social capital. According to Coleman (1988), family social capital refers to the relationship between parents and their children, including the time, effort, resources, and energy parents invest in their children. As originally proposed by Coleman and Hoffer (1987), measuring the strength of parent–child relationships reflects the quality of intra-familial support in a given family. Across the extant literature, a key component of the parent–child relationship consists of parental supervision of their children's activities. Past research indicates that higher levels of parental supervision, measured by a parent's knowledge of their children's friends and whereabouts, are consistently associated with positive outcomes in young people's educational attainment and psychosocial adjustment (Crosnoe et al., 2002; Teachman, Paasch, & Carver, 1996). Another important component of the parent–child relationship is the quality of parent–child communication. As originally proposed by Coleman and Hoffer (1987), measuring the quality of communication between parents and children gives an indication of the strength of

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

93

social capital in a given family. Common indicators used to measure parent–child communication include the number of times per week the child shares their problems with parents and the number of shared activities parents and children participate in together per week. Previous studies have found that more frequent social interaction between parents and children reduces young people's likelihood of dropping out of school (Teachman et al., 1996), while other studies have found that higher levels of parent–child communication are related to a lower likelihood of young people faring negatively in future outcomes (Fletcher, Steinberg, & Williams-Wheeler, 2004). The third important component of parent–child relationship is parental care (Coleman, 1988). Common indicators for this component include parents' academic aspirations for their children and parents' empathy for their children's needs. Previous research indicates that parents' high expectations of their children's school performance are associated with positive outcomes in their children's educational attainment and behavioral adjustment (Buckner, Mezzacappa, & Beardslee, 2003; Crosnoe et al., 2002). Furthermore, higher levels of parental empathy for their children's needs are found to have a positive influence on children's mental health (Lam et al., 2004). Hence, we suggest that:

developmental outcome (Lewinsohn et al., 1994; Windle, 1992). With continuing warmth and acceptance from their parents, young people can be encouraged to make good use of their increased autonomy during adolescence to achieve the most optimal adjustments in their developmental trajectories (Lerner & Galambos, 1998). Nevertheless, regarding young people growing up in low-income families, findings from previous research tend to support the argument that, when compared with friendship networks, the parent–child relationship is a better predictor of youth development. For instance, Jessor (1993) found that the quality of parent–child relationships has a greater effect on young people's mental health and behavioral adjustment than friendship networks do. In the aspect of academic performance, previous research has shown that good parent–child communication has a positive influence while acceptance from peers has a negative impact (Bowen, Rose, Powers, & Glennie, 2008). Moreover, the availability of parental care and guidance can enhance young people's adaption to persistent poverty and neighborhood danger and thus is a better predictor of youth outcomes than other out-of-home factors including friendship networks (Bowen & Chapman, 1996). Accordingly, the following hypothesis emerges:

H1. The parent–child relationship has a positive effect on the developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth.

H3. Parent–child relationships contribute more to the developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth than friendship networks do.

2.3. Friendship networks and developmental outcomes With the onset of adolescence, peers play an increasingly important role in out-of-home socialization and have a great potential to influence youth development (Harris, 1995). Based on this understanding, some researchers highlight the importance of friendship networks and use them to examine the social capital available to young people (Holland et al., 2007; Ryabov, 2009). According to these researchers, many young people can draw upon their friendship networks, that is, the structure of peer relationships young people can rely on in coping with everyday life, as positive resources that enable them to accomplish the developmental tasks of adolescence (Walther et al., 2005). Networks of friends help young people become familiar with the school or the workplace, learn the unwritten rules and practices there, and become confident and settled (Ryabov, 2009). Furthermore, friendship networks provide young people with a comfort zone in new surroundings and enable them to get access to new resources and friends outside their peer group during their transition to higher education and regular employment (Holland et al., 2007). Past research has demonstrated that friendship networks, especially association with pro-social peers, can promote young people's mental health and behavioral adjustment (Fredricks & Eccles, 2005). Good relationships with friends also enable young people to perceive life more positively (Lam et al., 2004), be more self-confident (Walther et al., 2005), and reduce the risk of social exclusion despite economic hardship in low-income families (Wong, 2006). Drawing on the reviewed literature, we predict that: H2. Friendship networks have a positive effect on the developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth. 2.4. Differential effects of parent–child relationships and friendship networks on developmental outcomes As noted in Section 1, a theme running through the extant youth literature is the debate on the relative importance of parent–child relationships and friendship networks to young people during adolescence (Jessor, 1993). Some researchers argue that peer influence will eventually replace parental influence because intimacy with friends systematically increases while intimacy with parents remains stable or decreases during the transition from childhood to adulthood (Furman & Buhrmester, 1992). Other researchers contend that the parent–child relationship still remains the most important determinant of a young person's

2.5. The relationship between parent–child relationships and friendship networks Despite available evidence on the importance of friendship networks in adolescence and their role in enhancing young people's selfconfidence and social competence, previous research indicates that some types of peer contact may have negative effects on youth development (Ryabov, 2009). Regarding behavioral adjustment, adolescents whose peers engage in high-risk behavior have a greater likelihood of developing similar behavior (Rai et al., 2003). As for youth transition, connections to deviant peer groups may impede social mobility and thus function as negative social capital impeding advancement to higher education or regular employment (Holland, 2009). On top of these findings on negative peer influence on psychosocial adjustment, previous research has also shown that parental supervision can reduce negative peer influence on youth development (Stanton et al., 2002). In particular, parental supervision has a significant effect on reducing adolescents' deviant beliefs and delinquent behavior (Deng & Roosa, 2007). Moreover, parents often show concern about children's friendship networks and may manage these networks by appropriate alerting and intervening if necessary (Fletcher, Bridges, & Hunter, 2007). Due to the significant time that parents spend with their children, which is in general more than the time adolescents spend in all other types of out-of-school activities, parents can actively steer children toward certain friends and away from others and thus perform a protective function against negative peer influence (Coley, Morris, & Hernandez, 2004). Furthermore, prior studies suggest that lower levels of family support, particularly in the case of a weak parent–child relationship, place adolescents at risk from the negative influence of peers (Holland, 2009; Rai et al., 2003). Hence, if friendship networks with deviant peers have a deleterious influence on young people's psychosocial development, it can be expected that these effects will show up under the condition of a poor parent–child relationship (Barrera & Garrison-Jones, 1992). Indeed, parental influences, including parental supervision, parent–child communication and parental care, have been found to reduce peer-induced deviant behavior among adolescents (Wood, Read, Mitchell, & Brand, 2004). Drawing from the findings of previous research, we develop the following hypothesis: H4. Good parent–child relationships have a positive influence on the quality of friendship networks among economically disadvantaged youth.

94

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

3. Methods 3.1. Sampling and data collection procedure This study involved a survey design for which data were collected through a structured questionnaire. The participants were economically disadvantaged youth (aged 12–25) chosen randomly from community-based youth centers in Hong Kong by a stratified cluster sampling method, with the location of the youth center as the stratifying factor (Chambliss & Schutt, 2003; Rubin & Babbie, 2005). In this study, economically disadvantaged youth refer to young people who grew up in a deprived home environment with a monthly family income at or below 75% of the median monthly domestic household income (MMDHI) (Social Welfare Department, 2010a [Table 1]). In Hong Kong, the government uses this criterion to assess which families are eligible to receive fee waivers for social services (Social Welfare Department, 2010b). Accordingly, we invited each participating community-based youth center to provide a list of young people who fulfilled the aforementioned criterion, then randomly chose research participants from the lists provided by the centers. Parental consent was obtained after we explained the purpose of the study and the procedure to be followed; there was no obligation to participate in the study, and an assurance of confidentiality was given in a covering letter before recruitment. The questionnaire was administered in a single group session in which the participants were asked to complete the questionnaire anonymously before returning it to our project assistants, who had been trained in the applicable administrative procedure. Out of 500 young people invited to participate in the study, a total of 479 questionnaires were returned. The response rate of 95.8% was considered satisfactory. All the returned questionnaires were complete and could be used for data analysis. The research design as well as the methods used in this study had been assessed and approved by an ethical review committee of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. 3.2. Measures

scales). Mental health was assessed by the average score of six items that yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .755 on depressive mood, sense of meaning, feeling happy, and self-worth in the month preceding the survey. Positive identity was measured by the average score of seven items that yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .787 on healthy identity formation and achievement such as satisfaction with one's body and appearance, being a person with self-confidence, and knowing one's strengths and weaknesses in the month preceding the survey. Behavioral adjustment was assessed by the average score of eight items that yielded a reliability coefficient alpha of .716 on volunteering, charity work, vandalism, using foul language, and helping older and disabled people in the month preceding the survey. Resilience was measured by the average score for six items that yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .717 on capacity to adapt to change and stressful events in a healthy way in the month preceding the survey. Academic achievement was measured by an item on young people's selfassessment of their academic performance. 3.2.2. Parent–child relationships Three dimensions were identified to measure the parent–child relationship, including parental supervision, parental care, and parent– child communication. Each dimension was measured by the composite score of a group of five-point rating items ranging from 0 to 100. Parental supervision was assessed by the average score of four items on parental monitoring of participants' activities, whereabouts, and friends in the six months before the survey. The composite score of the four items yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .687. Parental care was measured by the average score of four items on parental concern toward participants' feelings and the guidance that participants had received from their parents in the six months before the survey. The composite score of the four items yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .649. Parent–child communication was assessed by the average score of two items on the quality of parent–child communication such as how often participants talked with their parents when they had a problem that bothered them in the six months before the survey. The composite score of the two items yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .908.

Our questionnaire consisted of a number of demographic items and a battery of scales concerning youth development, parent–child relationships and friendship networks. All the measures used in our study were adapted from Chinese versions of a variety of pre-existing scales employed in the literature (Cheung & Bagley, 1998; Ngai & Cheung, 2009; Shek et al., 2007). To assess the reliability of the measures, we computed Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient for each measure. Items were dropped from their respective scales if their elimination resulted in a higher level of reliability for that scale. The final scale items used and the scale reliabilities are presented in Table 2.

3.2.3. Friendship networks The measure of friendship networks involved two dimensions: the size of friendship networks and the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities spent with friends. The size of friendship networks was measured by the number of bosom friends that the respondents had in the two months before the survey. The number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends was measured by the total score for four items that yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .698 based on how many days participants had participated in activities

3.2.1. Youth development The measure of youth development comprised five dimensions: mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience, and academic achievement. Each dimension was measured by the composite score of a group of five-point rating items ranging from 0 to 100. Scores on negative items were re-coded and then added to those on positive items (the same procedure was also applied to the predictor

Table 2 Internal consistency reliability coefficients.

Table 1 Median monthly domestic household income (MMDHI) by household size 2009. Household size

MMDHI

75% of MMDHI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 and over

HK$6500 (US$833) HK$13,500 (US$1731) HK$18,000 (US$2308) HK$22,300 (US$2859) HK$29,000 (US$3718) HK$32,000 (US$4103) HK$37,000 (US$4744)

HK$4875 (US$625) HK$10,125 (US$1298) HK$13,500 (US$1731) HK$16,725 (US$2144) HK$21,750 (US$2788) HK$24,000 (US$3077) HK$27,750 (US$3558)

Variable

Number of items

Alpha

Youth development Mental health Positive identity Behavior adjustment Resilience Academic achievement

6 7 8 6 1

.755 .787 .716 .717 NA

Parent–child relationships Parental supervision Parental care Parent–child communication

4 4 2

.687 .649 .908

Friendship networks Size of friendship networks 1 Number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities 4 with friends

NA .698

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

such as volunteer service, extra-curricular activities, rendering assistance to and accepting assistance from bosom friends in the two months before the survey. 3.2.4. Demographics The last section of the questionnaire included questions designed to elicit background data on the participants, including age, gender, household size, people whom participants are living with, duration of residence in Hong Kong, parental marital status, paternal and maternal employment status, paternal and maternal educational attainment, reception of public assistance, reception of student financial assistance, and monthly family income. These background characteristics served as control variables in the regression analysis of developmental outcomes. 4. Results Table 3 shows the sample characteristics of the 479 young people who participated in the study. All of the participants lived in a low-income home environment with a monthly family income at or below 75% of the MMDHI (Social Welfare Department, 2010a). Among them, approximately 41% were receiving public assistance and around 46% were receiving student financial assistance from the Hong Kong government. There were an equal proportion of male and female participants in the sample, and the mean age of the participants was 17.7 years. The participants had been living in Hong Kong for 14.4 years on average. About 63% of them were born in Hong Kong whereas 36.8% were born in mainland China or other regions. The average household size of the sampled young people was around four persons, with 63.4% of the participants living in families with married parents, 25.8% coming from families with divorced parents, and 10.8% from families with one or both parents deceased. In addition, about 85% of the participants were living with their mothers, 64.6% were living with their fathers, and 70.3% were living with their siblings. The educational attainment of the participants ranged from primary to university education, among which 75.9% of them had senior secondary (grades 10–12) or above educational attainment. Regarding parental educational attainment, the majority of the participants' fathers (92.5%) and mothers (93.5%) had secondary or below qualifications. As for parental employment status, 80.7% of the participants' fathers were employees whereas 51.4% of their mothers were employees. Nevertheless, there was a significant difference in the percentage of participants' fathers (3.0%) and mothers (44.5%) who were homemakers. Table 4 provides the means and standard deviations of all the variables used in the study. Mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience, and academic achievement were the key outcome variables, while parental supervision, parent–child communication, parental care, the size of friendship networks, and the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends were the key predictors used in the analysis. All these variables had means around the midpoint of their scoring ranges and had considerable degrees of variation. Essentially, the distribution of each of the outcome variables resembled a normal curve, making them suitable variables for regression analysis. To test the hypotheses, regression analysis was more appropriate when used to examine the predictors simultaneously and control for significant background characteristics through stepwise selection. The background characteristics included in the stepwise selection procedure were gender, age, educational attainment, duration of residence in Hong Kong, parental marital status, paternal and maternal educational attainment, paternal and maternal occupational status, monthly family income, reception of public assistance, reception of student financial assistance, household size, and people whom participants are living with. The analysis generated two models for each of the five outcome variables – mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience, and academic achievement – by examining the effects of

95

Table 3 Demographic characteristics of youth participants (N = 479). Characteristic Gender Female Male Birth place Hong Kong Mainland China Other regions People the participant is living with Father Mother Siblings Grandparents Others Educational attainment Primary (grade 6) or below Junior secondary (grades 7–9) Senior secondary (grades 10–12) Higher diploma or associate degree Bachelor's degree or above Other post-secondary training curriculums Parental marital status Married Divorced One parent/both parents deceased Paternal educational attainment Primary Secondary Tertiary Maternal educational attainment Primary Secondary Tertiary Paternal employment status Employee Self-employed Unemployed Homemaker Maternal employment status Employee Self-employed Unemployed Homemaker Monthly family income HK$4875 (US$625) or below HK$4876–10,125 (US$626–1298) HK$10,126–13,500 (US$1299–1731) HK$13,501–16,725 (US$1732–2144) HK$16,726–21,750 (US$2145–2788) HK$21,751–24,000 (US$2789–3077) HK$24,001–27,750 (US$3078–3558) HK$27,751 (US$3559) or above Reception of public assistance Yes No Reception of student financial assistance Yes No

% 50.0 50.0 63.2 35.6 1.2 64.6 85.4 70.3 7.7 8.4 .2 23.9 60.0 5.5 5.5 4.9 63.4 25.8 10.8 39.5 53.0 7.5 44.0 49.5 6.5 80.7 8.4 7.8 3.0 51.4 1.4 2.8 44.5 19.2 45.2 16.5 9.6 5.1 2.9 .9 .7 41.4 58.6 45.8 54.2

Characteristic

Mean

Age (years) Duration of residence in Hong Kong (years) Household size (number of persons/household)

17.7 14.4 4.1

parental supervision, parent–child communication, parental care, the size of friendship networks, and the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends (1) without controlling for background characteristics; and (2) controlling for background characteristics. These two models gave a clear picture of the apparent and independent effects of the five predictors on mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience, and academic achievement. Table 5 reports results that partially support H1: economically disadvantaged youth who scored higher on parent–child communication

96

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

have a significant positive influence on youth development in the aspects of mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment and academic achievement. In addition, parental supervision and parental care might only have a significant positive influence on behavioral adjustment and resilience respectively, but not on the other developmental outcomes. Only one of the background characteristics – people whom participants are living with (i.e., living with one's mother) – had significant effects on developmental outcomes. Accordingly, participants who were living with their mothers tended to report higher levels of mental health (β=.120, pb .01), positive identity (β= .128, p b .01), and academic achievement (β =.108, p b .05) than those who were living with other people. Our results also partially support H2 (Table 6): economically disadvantaged youth who scored higher on the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends tended to report higher levels of mental health (β = .118 to .116, p b .05), positive identity (β = .149 to .145, p b .001 to .01), behavior adjustment (β = .150 to .147, p b .001 to .01), and resilience (β = .180 to .179, p b .001), although they did not report higher levels of academic achievement. On the other hand, the size of friendship networks had a significant positive effect on mental health (β = .109 to .110, p b .05) only, but not on the other developmental outcomes. Two of the background characteristics – people with whom participants are living (i.e., living with one's mother) and maternal educational attainment – had a significant positive influence on youth development. Among the economically disadvantaged youth participants in our study, those who were living with their mothers had higher levels of mental health (β= .159, p b .01), positive identity (β = .180, p b .001) and academic achievement (β = .138, p b .01) when compared with those who were living with other people. Additionally, those participants whose mothers had higher educational attainment scored

Table 4 Descriptive statistics for the variables. Variable

Scoring

Mean

Standard deviation

MH PI BA RE AA PS PCC PC SFN NMHPS

0–100 0–100 0–100 0–100 0–100 0–100 0–100 0–100 Total frequency Total frequency

56.1 53.3 52.9 62.8 40.6 51.6 39.0 55.9 4.9 5.1

14.3 15.1 15.4 15.5 23.8 22.7 28.7 20.1 6.0 10.9

Note. MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioral adjustment, RE = resilience, AA = academic achievement, PS = parental supervision, PCC = parent–child communication, PC = parental care, SFN = size of friendship networks, NMHPS = number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends.

tended to report higher levels of mental health (β = .244 to .252, p b .001), positive identity (β = .236 to .240, p b .001), behavioral adjustment (β = .120 to .117, p b .05) and academic achievement (β= .188 to .190, p b .001), although they did not report higher levels of resilience. On the other hand, the effects of parental supervision on four of the five outcome variables (mental health, positive identity, resilience, and academic achievement) were not significant, the sole exception being behavioral adjustment (β= .219 to .213, p b .001). Similarly, the effects of parental care on four of the five outcome variables (mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, and academic achievement) were not significant, the sole exception being resilience (β= .160 to .151, p b .01 to .05). Hence, parent–child communication might

Table 5 Standardized regression coefficients of parent–child relationship variables for predicting mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience and academic achievement. Variable

PS PCC PC LWM R2 Adjusted R2

MH

PI

BA

RE

AA

M1

M2

M1

M2

M1

M2

M1

M2

M1

M2

.011 .244⁎⁎⁎ .126⁎

.005 .252⁎⁎⁎ .110 .120⁎⁎

.113⁎ .236⁎⁎⁎ .087

.103 .240⁎⁎⁎ .067 .128⁎⁎

.219⁎⁎⁎ .120⁎ .101

.030 .091 .160⁎⁎

.080 .190⁎⁎⁎ −.014 .108⁎

.139 .130

.138 .132

.153 .144

.140 .134

.024 .092 .151⁎ .056 .063 .053

.091 .188⁎⁎⁎ .005

.115 .109

.213⁎⁎⁎ .117⁎ .093 .022 .158 .149

.060 .054

.062 .057

.078 .068

Note. MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioral adjustment, RE = resilience, AA = academic achievement, PS = parental supervision, PCC = parent–child communication, PC = parental care, LWM = living with one's mother. M1 = not controlling for background characteristics, M2 = controlling for background characteristics. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b .001.

Table 6 Standardized regression coefficients of friendship network variables for predicting mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience and academic achievement. Variable

SFN NMHPS LWM MEA R2 Adjusted R2

MH

PI

BA

RE

AA

M1

M2

M1

M2

M1

M2

M1

M2

M1

M2

.109⁎ .118⁎

.110⁎ .116⁎ .159⁎⁎

.101⁎ .149⁎⁎⁎

.102 .145⁎⁎ .180⁎⁎⁎ .123⁎

.023 .150⁎⁎⁎

.056 .180⁎⁎⁎

.014 .084 .138⁎⁎ .247⁎⁎⁎

.083 .070

.028 .019

.057 .179⁎⁎⁎ .100 .023 .047 .034

.017 .093

.035 .027

.023 .147⁎⁎ .096 .087 .044 .031

.019 .011

.099 .086

.027 .019

.064 .056 .043

.037 .029

Note. MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioral adjustment, RE = resilience, AA = academic achievement, SFN = size of friendship networks, NMHPS = number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends, LWM = living with one's mother, MEA = maternal educational attainment. M1 = not controlling for background characteristics, M2 = controlling for background characteristics. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b .001.

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

97

Table 7 Standardized regression coefficients of parent–child relationship and friendship networks variables for predicting mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience and academic achievement. Variable

MH M1

PS PCC PC SFN NMHPS LWM R2 Adjusted R2

.006 .225⁎⁎⁎ .135⁎ .082 .035 .128 .117

PI M2 −.006 .228⁎⁎⁎ .116⁎ .084 .036 .116⁎ .141 .128

M1

BA M2

.106 .214⁎⁎⁎ .096 .072 .103⁎

.095 .218⁎⁎⁎ .076 .074 .105⁎ .131⁎

.155 .144

.171 .158

RE

M1

M2

.213⁎⁎⁎ .109⁎ .106 −.002 .105⁎

.210⁎⁎⁎ .110⁎ .100 −.002 .106⁎ .034 .155 .142

.154 .143

AA

M1

M2

M1

M2

.019 .068 .169⁎⁎ .046 .157⁎⁎

.014 .070 .159⁎⁎ .046 .158⁎⁎

.086 .182⁎⁎ .008 −.009 .089

.087 .075

.061 .090 .076

.077 .186⁎⁎⁎ −.012 −.008 .089 .113⁎

.075 .063

.087 .073

Note. MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioral adjustment, RE = resilience, AA = academic achievement, PS = parental supervision, PCC = parent–child communication, PC = parental care, SFN = size of friendship networks, NMHPS = number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends, LWM = living with one's mother. M1 = not controlling for background characteristics, M2 = controlling for background characteristics. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b .001.

higher on positive identity (β= .123, p b .05) and academic achievement (β = .247, p b .001). Table 7 shows the results of regression analysis when both parent– child relationship and friendship network variables were used to predict developmental outcomes. Our findings support H3 that the parental–child relationship had a stronger effect on the developmental outcomes of economically disadvantaged youth than friendship networks did. In particular, parental supervision had a significant positive effect on behavioral adjustment (β = .213 to .210, p b .001). Participants who scored higher on parental care also reported higher levels of mental health (β = .135 to .116, p b .05) and resilience (β = .169 to .159, p b .01). Parent–child communication still had a strong positive influence on mental health (β = .225 to .228, p b .001), positive identity (β = .214 to .218, p b .001), behavioral adjustment (β = .109 to .110, p b .05), and academic achievement (β= .182 to .186, p b .01 to .001). On the other hand, participants who scored higher on the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends tended to have higher levels of positive identity (β = .103 to .105, p b .05), behavioral adjustment (β = .105 to .106, p b .05), and resilience (β = .157 to .158, p b .01). However, the size of friendship networks did not have any significant relationship with the five variables measuring youth development. Besides, only the background characteristic of living with one's mother had a significant positive effect on developmental outcomes, that is, participants who were living with their mothers reported higher levels of mental health (β = .116, p b .05), positive identity (β = .131, p b .05), and academic achievements (β= .113, p b .05). On the whole, the findings suggest that the variables measuring parent– children relationship had a stronger predictive power than the variables measuring friendship networks: parent–child communication represented the strongest predictor of mental health, positive identity and academic achievement. Parental supervision was the strongest predictor of behavioral adjustment. Moreover, parental care had the strongest influence on resilience. Hence, our results indicate that among economically disadvantaged young people, parents still play a more important role than peers do in youth development during adolescence. Lastly, our results partially support H4 (Table 8): among economically disadvantaged youth who participated in our study, there were significant positive relationships between parental supervision (β=.216 to .213, pb .001), parent–child communication (β=.244 to .238, pb .001) and parental care (β=.165 to .162, pb .01), and the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends. The findings suggest that the better the participants' parent–child relationships, the greater will be the quality of their friendship networks in terms of rendering and accepting assistance as well as engaging in pro-social activities with their friends. On the other hand, among the three variables measuring parent–child relationships, only parent–child communication has a

significant positive relationship with the size of friendship networks. Regarding the background control characteristics, only the variable of living with one's mother had a significant positive effect on the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends (β=.134, pb .05). 5. Discussion This study set out to examine the relationships between five aspects of psychosocial development – mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience, and academic achievement – and the parent–child relationship (i.e., parental supervision, parental care and parent–child communication) and friendship networks (i.e., the size of friendship networks and the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends) among economically disadvantaged youth. This question was the primary focus of this study. The premise of our study was that both parent–child relationships and friendship networks have a positive effect on youth development. In addition, this study sought to assess the differential effects of these two sets of predictor variables on shaping developmental outcomes and to examine whether or not there exists a positive association between parent– child relationships and friendship networks. The study used a survey design that measured the parent–child relationship, friendship networks, and developmental outcomes from the perspectives of young people living in low-income families in Hong Kong. The results generally support the hypotheses that among economically disadvantaged youth, parent–child relationships and friendship networks have significant positive relationships with development Table 8 Standardized regression coefficients of parent–child relationship variables for predicting the size of friendship networks and number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends. Variable

SFN M1

PS PCC PC LWM R2 Adjusted R2

.026 .119⁎ −.018 .015 .009

NMHPS M2

M1

M2

.041 .091 −.045 .85 .106 .098

.216⁎⁎⁎ .244⁎⁎⁎ .165⁎⁎

.213⁎⁎⁎ .238⁎⁎⁎ .162⁎⁎ .134⁎

.187 .184

.192 .189

Note. SFN = size of friendship networks, NMHPS = number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends, PS = parental supervision, PCC = parent–child communication, PC = parental care, LWM = living with one's mother. M1 = not controlling for background characteristics, M2 = controlling for background characteristics. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b .001.

98

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

outcomes, although the individual effects differ across various indicators of development. These results reinforce previous findings that parent–child relationships and friendship networks can be key determinants of positive development among impoverished young people (Cauce et al., 2003; Coleman, 1988; Fletcher et al., 2004; Holland et al., 2007; Walther et al., 2005; Wong, 2006). The results of this study thus indicate that when young people living in low-income families obtain adequate support from their parents and peers, they can desist from failure and social exclusion. Moreover, our study extends the literature on economically disadvantaged youth (Bynner & Parsons, 2002) by highlighting the need to identify factors that help this group of young people thrive in different aspects of psychosocial development. 5.1. Parent–child relationships and developmental outcomes Regarding the effect of the parent–child relationship on youth development, our results on the whole are in line with the literature on family social capital and demonstrate the important role played by parents during adolescence (Coleman, 1988; Crosnoe et al., 2002). In particular, economically disadvantaged youth tended to show better developmental outcomes if they experienced higher levels of parental supervision, parent–child communication and parental care. These findings are consistent with those from previous studies, showing that high-quality parenting can facilitate young people's psychosocial adjustment to economic hardship during their transition to adulthood (Conger & Conger, 2002; Orthner et al., 2004). As for the relative effects of the variables measuring the parent–child relationship, our results reveal that parent–child communication contributes more to youth development than parental supervision and parental care. These findings echo the observations in previous research on authoritative parenting, showing that parents who behave with high nurturance and have more democratic parent–child communication are more likely to raise children who show higher levels of mental health, identity achievement, behavioral adjustment, resilience, and academic performance (Ngai & Cheung, 2009). Hence, high-quality parent–child communication filled with trust and respect can enhance the autonomy of young people while providing adequate support for them to accomplish the developmental tasks of adolescence (Lai & McBride-Chang, 2001). Furthermore, in our study parental supervision was found to be the strongest predictor of behavioral adjustment. This result reinforces previous findings that parental supervision reduces young people's deviant beliefs and involvement in delinquency (Deng & Roosa, 2007). Concerning young people living in poverty, Buckner et al. (2003) found that higher levels of parental supervision are associated with adolescents' desistance from delinquency and substance abuse as well as engagement in volunteering and charity work, which, in our conceptualization of youth development, can be regarded as achieving good outcomes in behavior adjustment. Together with our finding that parental care was the strongest predictor of resilience (i.e., capacity to adapt to change and stressful events in a healthy way), it is worth noting that parental supervision and parental care may be regarded as essential elements of an effective parent–child relationship for enhancing young people's behavioral adjustment and resilient adaptation when growing up in low-income families. Nevertheless, our results also show that, when compared with parent–child communication, parental supervision and parental care had a relatively weak predictive power over psychosocial development because each of them did not have a significant effect on four out of five developmental outcomes. This observation on the differential effects of our parent–child relationship predictors suggests that among economically disadvantaged youth in Hong Kong, developing a high-quality family communication environment featuring more frequent parent–child social interaction may be a more effective approach to nurturing positive youth development than that offered by parental monitoring and guidance of their children's activities

and feelings. An important point to emphasize is that because Hong Kong is a Westernized metropolis, young people living there may have a greater orientation toward Western values and thus may strive to become more autonomous from their parents than they might in a non-Westernized environment (Shek, 2007). This conjecture suggests that our results may not be applicable to young people living in other Chinese communities such as those in mainland China. However, our findings are consistent with the remark of Lin and Fu (1990) that in comparison with their Western counterparts, Chinese parents may be more restrictive due to cultural endorsement of parental authority. Nevertheless, the patterns of within-culture relations between parental supervision, parent–child communication, parental care and developmental outcomes discerned in this study are similar to those observed in Western societies (Coleman & Hoffer, 1987; Teachman et al., 1996). Taken together, the results of our own study and those conducted in western contexts suggest a rapid change in the focus of Chinese socialization patterns involving a greater emphasis on quality family communication and greater child autonomy, which are the features of the youth experience commonly found in the west. 5.2. Friendship networks and developmental outcomes As for the effects of friendship networks on the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged youth, our findings generally support the hypotheses that both the size of friendship networks and the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends have significant positive effects on developmental outcomes, although the individual effects differ across indicators of youth development. These results are in line with those from previous studies, wherein friendship networks were found to be a source of social capital, providing impoverished young people with a comfort zone in new surroundings and enabling them to make out-of-home connections with new friends and supportive institutions to thrive in the midst of economic hardship (Holland et al., 2007; Ryabov, 2009; Wong, 2006). Regarding the relative effects of the variables measuring friendship networks, our results show that the strongest contribution to youth development comes from the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends, which indicates the importance of high-quality friendship networks to the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged youth. This result echoes the findings in previous studies, showing that associating with supportive and pro-social friends can enhance the developmental outcomes of young people living in poor families (Walther et al., 2005). Moreover, positive feedback and acceptance from high-quality friendship networks can instill a sense of worth and social connectedness in economically disadvantaged youth, which help them cope with demands from the school or the workplace, learn the unwritten rules and practices there, and become confident and settled (Ryabov, 2009). However, our results also indicate that the effects of friendship networks are dynamic. A review of youth literature shows that poverty culture and powerless lifestyles among anti-social peers can generate motivational deficits, fear of failure, and an unwillingness to take action (Leung & Shek, 2011). This may explain why the size of friendship networks, when compared with the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends, only had a significant effect on mental health but not on other developmental outcomes in our study. Hence, this study broadens the literature by simultaneously examining the relative effects of the quantity (i.e., the size of friendship networks) and the quality (i.e., the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends) dimensions of friendship networks on developmental outcomes. Although prior research has found a weak positive effect of friendship networks on youth development (Berndt, 1999), what they could not demonstrate is the extent to which the observed outcomes may actually reflect the benefits of friendship networks' quantity or quality dimensions. As such, our results show that the quality dimension of friendship

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

99

networks (i.e., the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends) is more important than the quantity dimension of friendship networks (i.e., the size of friendship networks) in facilitating the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged youth, suggesting that helping this group of young people to develop reciprocal and cohesive relationships with pro-social friends can be an effective strategy to enhance their positive development (Ryabov, 2009).

2007). Together with our findings on the significant positive effects of parent–child relationship variables on the developmental outcomes of disadvantaged youth, this indicates that parents thus play an indispensable role in helping this group of young people to thrive during their transition to adulthood.

5.3. The relative importance of parental and peer influences on youth development

Furthermore, our findings on the significant positive effects of the demographic variables of living with one's mother and maternal educational attainment on the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged youth are worth noting. In particular, economically disadvantaged youth who were living with their mothers tended to have higher levels of mental health, positive identity and academic achievement as well as a better quality of friendship networks characterized by mutual help and pro-social activities. In addition, higher maternal educational attainment also had significant positive effects on positive identity and academic achievement. These results echo the findings in previous research, wherein Hong Kong adolescents tended to report higher levels of social interaction with their mothers than fathers (Lam et al., 2004) and a better quality of mother–child relationships as compared with father–child relationships (Shek, 2007). Coupled with our finding on the significant difference in the percentage of participants' fathers (3.0%) and mothers (44.5%) who were homemakers, it seems clear that there exists a great difference in parenting involvement and parenting quality between fathers and mothers with adolescent children in low-income families in Hong Kong. Because of the recent economic downturn and persisting high living expenses in the city, fathers of low-income households might need to work longer hours to support their families and hence have little time interacting with their children (Hong Kong Council of Social Service, 2009). On the other hand, as a significant proportion of mothers in our sample were homemakers, they might have more time to get involved with their children and thus were able to exert a greater influence on their developmental outcomes and quality of friendship networks. Furthermore, our finding on the significant positive effects of higher maternal educational attainment on positive identity and academic achievement is consistent with prior research on family human capital and youth development, wherein children living with parents having higher educational levels were found to have better development outcomes (Coleman, 1988; Entwisle & Alexander, 1995). Given the significant parenting role played by mothers in the Hong Kong context (Shek, 2007), it is likely that mothers with higher levels of educational attainment in our sample may set a role model for their children to work hard and excel in academic studies, which eventually enhances their children's academic achievement and positive identity. Learning from mothers who place greater importance on academic studies and have higher levels of educational attainment is possible because of parental socialization (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995). Taken together, our findings on the significant effects of living with one's mother and maternal educational attainment pinpoint the importance of mothers in low-income families as a key developmental resource helping impoverished young people to overcome challenges and risks in their life trajectories (Lam et al., 2004).

The results of this study indicate that in comparison with friendship networks, the parent–child relationship is a more significant predictor of developmental outcomes among economically disadvantaged youth. Although friendship networks have special importance for psychosocial development, it is also clear from our findings that the parent–child relationship, particularly parent–child communication, exerts a greater beneficial influence on developmental outcomes. The results thus lend support to the argument that among young people living in low-income families, the parent–child relationship is a better predictor of youth development than friendship networks (Bowen et al., 2008; Jessor, 1993). Indeed, compared with the relatively stable and consistent relationship between parents and adolescents, friendship networks may vary as the composition of peer networks shift, or peers may be more likely to oscillate between acceptance and rejection (Holland et al., 2007; Ryabov, 2009). Moreover, as the parent–child relationship contains more mature interaction and can provide more sharing of life experience for engendering emotional and instrumental support, parents may be regarded as a more reliable source of positive social capital than peers may (Cauce et al., 2003). Accordingly, for young people experiencing poverty, parents play a prominent role and serve as a protective factor in the psychosocial development of these young people (Fletcher et al., 2004; Lam et al., 2004). 5.4. Parent–child relationships and friendship networks Our findings on the significant positive effects of parent–child relationship variables (i.e., parental supervision, parent–child communication and parental care) on the quality of friendship networks (i.e., the number of days of mutual help and pro-social activities with friends) among economically disadvantaged youth are consistent with those from previous studies (Coley et al., 2004; Fletcher et al., 2007; Holland, 2009; Rai et al., 2003). As Rai et al. (2003) note, adolescence is a unique developmental stage wherein young people give much importance to their friends who then gain power over them. This kind of power often takes the form of peer pressure under which young people whose friends engage in deviant behavior are at a greater risk of exhibiting similar behavior (Holland, 2009). On the other hand, a high-quality parent–child relationship is associated with lower risks of involvement in delinquency when parents actively steer children toward certain friends and away from others and hence perform a protective function against negative peer influence (Coley et al., 2004). As our findings indicate, higher levels of parental supervision, parent–child communication and parental care help guide economically disadvantaged young people along a trajectory that leads to higher quality friendship networks and more positive developmental outcomes. On the other hand, except for higher levels of parent–child communication, parental supervision and parental care were found to have no significant effect on the size of friendship networks in our study. This result reinforces our finding on the relative importance of the quantity and quality dimensions of friendship networks to youth development, suggesting that parents of economically disadvantaged youth may realize that it will be more beneficial to their children if they invest time and effort to influence the quality of their children's activities with friends rather than the number of their children's bosom friends (Coley et al., 2004; Fletcher et al.,

5.5. Demographic variables and developmental outcomes

5.6. Practical implications Overall, our study highlights the importance of the family to the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged youth. This suggests that human service professionals should think about how they can empower low-income parents on the task of raising children and help these parents be more sensitive to children's needs (Lai & McBride-Chang, 2001). Apart from lectures and printed materials on child and adolescent development, our results point to the need for the parents to review their parenting practices and understand how their actions can influence their children. The use of

100

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101

interactive and reflective methods including group discussions, individual guidance, and the use of diaries or logbooks may constitute a more effective approach to parent education (Cheung, Lam, & Ngai, 2008). On the other hand, while our findings show the significant effects of the parent–child relationship on developmental outcomes, past research has also indicated that living in low-income families can be a risk factor for the healthy development of young people (Bynner & Parsons, 2002). Specifically, parental struggling with economic hardship can minimize children's willingness to turn to their parents for help (Orthner et al., 2004). In addition, the stress that poverty places on both parents and children can generate intergenerational poverty, which has a negative influence on children's perception of their parents' ability to support them (Sandbæk, 2009). Furthermore, the lack of time and financial resources needed to access family services to resolve parent–child relationship challenges and engage in leisure activities that promote parent–child relationship quality is also worth noting (Cauce et al., 2003). These issues should be addressed so as to alleviate intergenerational poverty and promote positive youth development. As such, family-friendly policies that pay attention to enabling family social capital to function more effectively in disadvantaged families should be explored and developed. In this connection, raising the minimum wage level and setting a maximum working hour limit, which would help increase the income of disadvantaged households and create space for more frequent parent–child interaction, may be a priority (Hong Kong Council of Social Service, 2009; Lam et al., 2004). 5.7. Research implications This study is subject to several limitations. First, our results were derived from a territory-wide sample of impoverished youth people in Hong Kong whose developmental processes and outcomes may differ from those of disadvantaged youth elsewhere. Hence, to increase the generalizability of the results to other regions, it would be helpful if comparative studies engaged similar groups of young people living in different settings and contexts. Second, this study focused on testing hypotheses about the effects of parent–child relationships, friendship networks and developmental outcomes. This design leaves room for the investigation of alternative models using variables such as neighborhood quality (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995) and school environment (Dufur et al., 2008). Other means of extending this study include longitudinal analysis of the developmental stages of young people and the use of in-depth interviews and focus groups to collect qualitative data. Third, this study used mental health, positive identity, behavioral adjustment, resilience, and academic achievement as the measures of psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged youth. This list does not represent an exhaustive catalogue of the various measures of emotional and social development among this youth population. Adding life satisfaction (Shek et al., 2007), social competence (Ngai, Cheung, Ngai, & To, 2009), and financial adequacy (Lerner et al., 2002) as outcome measures could enhance the validity of the findings of this study and provide interesting insights into the effects of the parent– child relationship and friendship networks on youth development. Acknowledgments This project was supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (project number: 449409). References Ainsworth, J. W. (2002). Why does it take a village? The mediation of neighborhood effects on educational achievement. Social Forces, 81(1), 117–142. Barrera, M., & Garrison-Jones, C. (1992). Family and peer social support as specific correlates of adolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 20(1), 1–16.

Berndt, T. J. (1999). Friends' influence on students' adjustment to school. Educational Psychologist, 34(1), 15–28. Bowen, G. L., & Chapman, M. V. (1996). Poverty, neighborhood danger, social support, and the individual adaptation among at-risk youth in urban areas. Journal of Family Issues, 17(5), 641–666. Bowen, G. L., Rose, R. A., Powers, J. D., & Glennie, E. J. (2008). The joint effects of neighborhoods, schools, peers, and families on changes in the school success of middle school students. Family Relations, 57(4), 504–516. Buckner, J. C., Mezzacappa, E., & Beardslee, W. R. (2003). Characteristics of resilient youths living in poverty: The role of self-regulatory processes. Development and Psychopathology, 15(1), 139–162. Bynner, J., & Parsons, S. (2002). Social exclusion and the transition from school to work: The case of young people not in education, employment, or training (NEET). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 289–309. Cauce, A. M., Stewart, A., Rodriguez, M. D., Cochran, B., & Ginzler, J. (2003). Overcoming the odds? Adolescent development in the context of urban poverty. In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 343–363). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Census and Statistics Department (2012). Unemployment rate by sex and age group. http:// www.censtatd.gov.hk/hong_kong_statistics/statistical_tables/index.jsp?tableID=011 Chambliss, D. F., & Schutt, R. K. (2003). Making sense of the social world: Methods of investigation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Cheung, C. K., & Bagley, C. (1998). Validating an American scale in Hong Kong: The Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Journal of Psychology, 132(2), 169–186. Cheung, C. K., Lam, C. M., & Ngai, S. S. Y. (2008). Help from the parent–teacher association to parenting efficacy: Beyond social status and informal social capital. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37, 1134–1152. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of Sociology, 94, S94–S120 (supplement). Coleman, J. S., & Hoffer, T. B. (1987). Public and private schools: The impact of communities. New York: Basic Books. Coley, R. L., Morris, J. E., & Hernandez, D. (2004). Out-of-school care and problem behavior trajectories among low-income adolescents: Individual, family, and neighborhood characteristics as added risks. Child Development, 75(3), 948–965. Conger, R. D., & Conger, K. J. (2002). Resilience in Midwestern families: Selected findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(2), 361–373. Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., & Elder, G. H. (1997). Family economic hardship and adolescent adjustment: Mediating and moderating processes. In G. J. Duncan, & J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.), Consequences of growing up poor (pp. 289–310). New York: Russell Sage. Conger, R. D., & Donnellan, M. B. (2007). An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 175–199. Creed, P. A. (1999). Predisposing factors and consequences of occupational status for long-term unemployed youth: A longitudinal examination. Journal of Adolescence, 22(1), 81–93. Crosnoe, R., Mistry, R. S., & Elder, G. H. (2002). Economic disadvantage, family dynamics, and adolescent enrollment in higher education. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(3), 690–702. Deng, S., & Roosa, M. W. (2007). Family influences on adolescent delinquent behaviors: Applying the social development model to a Chinese sample. American Journal of Community Psychology, 40(3–4), 333–344. Dufur, M. J., Parcel, T. L., & McKune, B. A. (2008). Capital and context: Using social capital at home and at school to predict child social adjustment. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 49(2), 146–161. Entwisle, D. R., & Alexander, K. L. (1995). A parent's economic shadow: Family structure versus family resources as influences on early school achievement. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 399–409. Fletcher, A. C., Bridges, T. H., & Hunter, A. G. (2007). Managing children's friendships through interparental relationships: Roles of ethnicity and friendship context. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(5), 1135–1149. Fletcher, A. C., Steinberg, L., & Williams-Wheeler, M. (2004). Parental influences on adolescent problem behavior: Revisiting Stattin and Kerr. Child Development, 75(3), 781–796. Fredricks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2005). Developmental benefits of extracurricular involvement: Do peer characteristics mediate the link between activities and youth outcomes? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(6), 507–520. Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1992). Age and sex differences in perceptions of networks of personal relationships. Child Development, 63(1), 103–115. Furstenberg, F. F., & Hughes, M. E. (1995). Social capital and successful development among at-risk youth. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 580–592. Harris, J. R. (1995). Where is the child's environment? A group socialization theory of development. Psychological Review, 102(3), 458–489. Holland, J. (2009). Young people and social capital: Uses and abuses? Young, 17(4), 331–350. Holland, J., Reynolds, T., & Weller, S. (2007). Transitions, networks and communities: The significance of social capital in the lives of children and young people. Journal of Youth Studies, 10(1), 97–116. Hong Kong Council of Social Service (2009). Percentage of youth aged 15–19 in low income households. http://www.socialindicators.org.hk/chi/indicators/youth/30.13 Jessor, R. (1993). Successful adolescent development among youth in high-risk settings. American Psychologist, 48(2), 117–126. Johansson, H., & Höjer, I. (2012). Education for disadvantaged groups ― Structural and individual challenges. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1135–1142. Lai, K. W., & McBride-Chang, C. (2001). Suicidal ideation, parenting style, and family climate among Hong Kong adolescents. International Journal of Psychology, 36(2), 81–87.

S.S. Ngai et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 91–101 Laible, D. J., Carlo, G., & Raffaelli, M. (2000). The differential relations of parent and peer attachment to adolescent adjustment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29(1), 45–59. Lam, C. M., Lam, M. C., Shek, D., & Tang, V. (2004). Coping with economic disadvantage: A qualitative study of Chinese adolescents from low-income families. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 16(4), 343–357. Lane, K. L., Gresham, F. M., & O'Shaughnessy, T. (2002). Interventions for children with or at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Lerner, R. M., Brentano, C., Dowling, E. M., & Anderson, P. M. (2002). Positive youth development: Thriving as a basis of personhood and civil society. In R. M. Lerner, C.S. Taylor, & A. von Eye (Eds.), New directions for youth development: Theory, practice and research: Pathways to positive development among diverse youth (pp. 11–34). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lerner, R. M., & Galambos, N. L. (1998). Adolescent development: Challenges and opportunities for research, programs, and policies. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 413–446. Leung, J. T. Y., & Shek, D. T. L. (2011). Poverty and adolescent developmental outcomes: A critical review. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 23(2), 109–114. Lewinsohn, P. M., Roberts, R. E., Seeley, J. R., Rohde, P., Gotlib, I. H., & Hops, H. (1994). Adolescent psychopathology: Psychosocial risk factors for depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103(2), 302–315. Lin, C. C., & Fu, V. R. (1990). A comparison of child-rearing practices among Chinese, immigrant Chinese, and Caucasian-American parents. Child Development, 61, 429–433. Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562. MacDonald, R., & Marsh, J. (2002). Crossing the Rubicon: Youth transitions, poverty, drugs and social exclusion. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 13(1), 27–38. Ngai, S. S. Y., & Cheung, C. K. (2009). The effects of parental care and parental control on the internal assets of adolescent children in Hong Kong. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 15, 235–255. Ngai, S. S. Y., Cheung, C. K., Ngai, N. P., & To, S. M. (2009). Public assistance reception, social service use, and developmental outcomes among economically disadvantaged young people. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 15, 103–120. Orthner, D. K., Jones-Sanpei, H., & Williamson, S. (2004). The resilience and strengths of low-income families. Family Relations, 53(2), 159–167. Paxton, P. (1999). Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment. The American Journal of Sociology, 105, 88–127. Rai, A. A., Stanton, B., Wu, Y., Li, X., Galbraith, J., Cottrell, L., et al. (2003). Relative influences of perceived parental monitoring and perceived peer involvement on

101

adolescent risk behaviors: An analysis of six cross-sectional data sets. Journal of Adolescent Health, 33(2), 108–118. Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. (2005). Research methods for social work. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Brooks/Cole. Ryabov, I. (2009). The role of peer social capital in educational assimilation of immigrant youths. Sociological Inquiry, 79(4), 453–480. Sandbæk, M. (2009). Family income and children's perception of parental support and monitoring. Social Policy and Society, 8(4), 515–526. Schaufeli, W. B. (1997). Youth unemployment and mental health: Some Dutch findings. Journal of Adolescence, 20(3), 281–292. Shek, D. T. L. (2007). A longitudinal study of perceived differences in parental control and parent–child relational qualities in Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22(2), 156–188. Shek, D. T. L., Siu, A. M. H., & Lee, T. Y. (2007). The Chinese Positive Youth Development Scale: A validation study. Research on Social Work Practice, 17, 380–391. Social Welfare Department (2010a). General household survey: Median monthly domestic household income by household size (2009 Q4). http://www.swd.gov.hk/ doc/yc/MMDHI-2009_Q4_.pdf Social Welfare Department (2010b). Fee waiving subsidy scheme under after school care program (ASCP). http://www.swd.gov.hk/en/index/site_pubsvc/page_young/sub_ascp/ Stanton, B., Li, X. M., Pack, R., Cottrell, L., Harris, C., & Burns, J. M. (2002). Longitudinal influence of perceptions of peer and parental factors on African American adolescent risk involvement. Journal of Urban Health, 79(4), 536–548. Student Financial Assistance Agency (2012). Statistics. http://www.sfaa.gov.hk/eng/ statistics/index.htm Teachman, J. D., Paasch, K., & Carver, K. (1996). Social capital and dropping out of school early. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 773–783. Walther, A., Stauber, B., & Pohl, A. (2005). Informal networks in youth transitions in West Germany: Biographical resource or reproduction of social inequality? Journal of Youth Studies, 8(2), 221–240. Windle, M. (1992). A longitudinal study of stress buffering for adolescent problem behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 28(3), 522–530. Wong, H. (2006). Human capital, social capital and social exclusion: Impacts on the opportunity of households with youth to leave poverty. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 18(3), 521–534. Wood, M. D., Read, J. P., Mitchell, R. E., & Brand, N. H. (2004). Do parents still matter? Parent and peer influences on alcohol involvement among recent high school graduates. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 18(1), 9–30.