Skip to main content
NCBI home page
International Journal of Developmental Disabilities logoLink to International Journal of Developmental Disabilities
. 2022 Apr 12;70(1):100–109. doi: 10.1080/20473869.2022.2062841

Associations between social isolation and parenting stress during the first wave of COVID-19 in Italian children with special educational needs

Laura Zampini 1,✉, Paola Zanchi 1, Paolo Riva 1, Valentina Tobia 2
PMCID: PMC10916901  PMID: 38456135

Abstract

The parents of 413 children with typical development (TD) or special educational needs (SEN) filled in an online survey to investigate the associations between the restrictions introduced to face COVID-19 and parenting stress and parental disciplinary practices. The parents of children with SEN showed a significantly higher stress level than TD children's parents. However, they showed a lower inclination to overreact. In both groups, the parents who feel less supported, feel their needs threatened, and report having a child with more difficulties were more likely to exhibit parenting stress. Data on the associations between COVID-19 restrictions and the stress perceived by parents could help to focus the attention of the public health system on their parents' needs, leading to practices aimed to prevent parenting stress and burnout.

Keywords: COVID-19, parenting stress, parental disciplinary practice, special educational needs, social isolation

Introduction

Parenting stress is a specific type of stress that emerges when parents have the perception that parenting is too demanding for their resources (Deater-Deckard 2014). Anxiety, frustration, and guilt could frequently be associated with parenting stress (Abidin 1995, Östberg and Hagekull 2000). Two main components contribute to parenting stress: the child's characteristics and parent functioning (Abidin 1995). Previous studies showed that parenting stress levels significantly affect the parents' sensitivity to their children's needs (Deater-Deckard 2005). Therefore, early identification of potentially stressful elements is essential to intervene and improve families' well-being and children's development (Osborne et al. 2008).

Although parenting stress can also occur in parents of typically developing (TD) children (Anthony et al. 2005, Crnic et al. 2005), several studies suggested that the parents of children with special educational needs (SEN) may experience higher levels of parenting stress (Baker et al. 2002, Dempsey et al. 2009, Fidler et al. 2000, Gerstein et al. 2009, Sarimski 2007). This could be explained considering the presence of various possible issues (e.g. in cognitive, behavioural, or relational development) as potentially stressful factors for parents of children with SEN (Fidler et al. 2000, Sarimski 1997). Various types of SEN could affect parenting stress differently. For instance, the parents of children with autism spectrum disorder usually exhibit higher levels of stress than those of TD children or children with other neurodevelopmental disorders (Davis and Carter 2008, Estes et al. 2009, Rezendes and Scarpa 2011, Valicenti-McDermott et al. 2015, Valicenti-McDermott et al. 2014).

The levels of parenting stress have been associated with the disciplinary practices used by parents to guide or control children's behaviour. For example, it has been found that parents who report higher stress levels more often exhibit attitudes in favour of physical punishment (Clément and Chamberland 2009), authoritarian parenting style (Carapito et al. 2020), and also show more overreactive reactions, such as harsh verbal commands and physical punishment (Guajardo et al. 2009). Also, higher levels of parental laxness, which involves submitting to child demands, have been associated with parenting stress (Carapito et al. 2018 , Guajardo et al. 2009).

Parenting stress could be mitigated by social support, which is part of a supportive social network (e.g. Östberg and Hagekull 2000). The perceived social support depends on both the source of support (e.g. grandparents, other relatives, friends, neighbours) and the type of support offered (Lieberman 1982). Previous studies showed that parents who report higher social support levels also report more positive feelings about parenting (Crnic and Greenberg 1987) and experience a lower level of parenting stress (Östberg and Hagekull 2000). Moreover, in a study on mothers of TD children and children born deaf, Quittner et al. (1990) found that social support mediated the relationship between potential stressors and actual stress. Parenting stress was associated with lower perceptions of emotional support, which predicted higher anxiety and depression symptoms. However, there is still conflicting evidence on the role of social support on parenting stress. For instance, Raikes and Thompson (2005) did not find an association between social support and lower parenting stress levels among families living in poverty.

It should be noted that previous studies showed that the level of perceived social support was generally lower in the parents of children with SEN, especially those with intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder (Heiman and Berger 2008). This result could be due to a greater need for support from these parents or a gradual deterioration of their social network resulting from the difficulties in raising a child with special needs (Sivberg 2002).

Social isolation linked with the outbreak of the first wave of COVID-19

In March 2020, the explosion of the coronavirus-related emergency (COVID-19) in Italy and the government's measures to contain the spread of the virus left the families in a situation of isolation and lack of social support. From the 9th of March to the 3rd of May, a strict lockdown period was declared: school, universities and other educational activities, retail businesses, and restaurant activities were suspended, and people's gathering was prohibited in public or private spaces. From the 22nd of March, travelling outside the municipality where people were located, by public or private means, was banned, except for proven work needs, absolute urgency, or health reasons. In many cases, the closure of schools and educative services and the ban on travelling across the country, including visiting relatives and friends, placed the burden of childcare exclusively on their parents. This situation has no precedent in recent history.

During the last two years, different studies investigated the associations between the COVID-19 related restrictions and parenting stress and disciplinary practices (e.g. Daks et al. 2020, Gassman-Pines et al. 2020). A recent review on the psychosocial consequences of pandemics, including COVID-19, showed that parents experienced more significant psychosocial problems than adults without children (Lateef et al. 2021). The COVID-19 pandemic triggered specific stressors among parents, such as health-related concerns, which disrupted parents' perceived sleep quality and daily energy levels. In turn, these perceptions influenced parents' psychological flexibility, which is essential to face new and problematic daily situations (Daks et al. 2020, Peltz et al. 2020).

According to Brown et al. (2020), greater COVID-19 related stressors predicted higher perceived parental distress. Conversely, parental support and perceived control during the pandemic were related to lower parental distress levels. Moreover, Griffith (2020) underlined how this unprecedented period (considering at least the recent history) presented many risk factors generally associated with parental burnout (i.e. the feeling of a mismatch between the demands of parenting and the resources available to face them). Even parents' COVID-19 related fears affected parenting, especially parental disciplinary practices. In particular, COVID-19 related fears were significantly associated with controlling parenting behaviours (Wissemann et al. 2021).

An increase in parents' personal and child-rearing-related stress during the COVID-19 pandemic was evidenced in different countries. For instance, Gassman-Pines et al. (2020) collected daily survey data from hourly service workers with children aged 2-7 years, living in a large US city, before and after the crisis started (between the 20th of February and the 27th of April 2020). The parents involved in the study reported deterioration in their own psychological well-being since the start of the crisis. Also Patrick et al. (2020) found alarming data about US families' well-being during the COVID-19 crisis, with 27% of parents reporting deterioration of their mental health and 14% reporting deterioration in their children. Using a retrospective method, Hiraoka and Tomoda (2020) found an increase in the perceived child-rearing-related stress comparing the situation before and after school closure during the pandemic in Japan.

Concerning Italy, Marchetti et al. (2020) collected data on a sample of 1.226 parents showing that more than 80% of the participants reported high stress levels, with 17% reporting parenting-related exhaustion. This percentage was alarmingly higher than that found in previous studies before the pandemic (e.g. 1.3-8.8% in Roskam et al. 2017). In addition, parenting-related exhaustion seemed to be predicted by several factors: being a mother, the feeling of social isolation, and the presence of a child with SEN. However, data on the Italian population are not consistent. Di Giorgio et al. (2021) found that the COVID-19 lockdown affected sleep quality and psychological well-being in mothers of preschoolers and their children. Moscardino et al. (2021) found a positive relationship between parents' difficulty in managing their children's distance education and their stress levels. In contrast, Spinelli et al. (2021) found that the mean level of parenting stress registered during the lockdown was not different from what was reported in previous studies conducted in the non-COVID-19 period.

Focussing on parents of children with SEN, Colizzi et al. (2020) highlighted how the pandemic was particularly challenging for families of children with autism spectrum disorder. Nearly all the parents in their sample (93.9%) evaluated the lockdown period as challenging or very challenging. In addition, a high percentage of children (about 40%) was reported to show more intense and more frequent behaviour problems. Paulauskaite et al. (2021) found that parents of children with developmental delays were particularly concerned by the lack of specific information for their children, the lack of care services, and a worsening in parents' and children's well-being. Similar results were found by Guller et al. (2021), who showed higher levels of anxiety and depression symptoms in parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders. These results were further supported by Chan and Fung (2022), who also found higher levels of parenting stress, anxiety and depressive symptoms in parents of children with SEN than in those of TD children during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, they found that parenting stress appeared to mediate between having a child with SEN and mental health symptoms.

Human beings have a basic need for belonging and social connections (Baumeister and Leary 1995). Accordingly, the social isolation imposed to contain the spread of COVID-19 has negatively impacted the mental health of various sectors of the population. This seems particularly true for more severe lockdowns, in which people have been prevented from leaving their homes except for a limited number of reasons (e.g. health emergencies, food supplies). A study (Pancani et al. 2020) evaluated the impacts of the first lockdown (especially strict) in the Italian context, finding that the longer the isolation and the less adequate the physical space people were when isolated, the worse their mental health (e.g. they reported higher levels of alienation and depression). This study considered the prolonged threat to four basic psychological needs: belonging, self-esteem, control, and significance of existence. These needs are known to be readily threatened by short (Williams et al. 2000) and long term (Riva et al. 2017) forms of social exclusion and isolation (Williams 2009). Although various studies have converged in showing the negative repercussions of social isolation imposed by national governments to contain COVID-19 (e.g. Ellis et al. 2020, Clemente-Suárez et al. 2020, Marinucci et al. 2022, Zhu et al. 2021), to our knowledge, the research in the context of parenting is still limited, especially when considering a wide range of psychosocial variables, including perceptions of loneliness and the threat to basic psychological needs. As found by Lee et al. (2021), parents' perceived isolation resulted in some changes in disciplinary practices (i.e. more harsh discipline and spanking) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other effects of social isolation on parenting stress and disciplinary practices should be investigated.

The present study

This study aimed to analyse the associations between social isolation due to the restrictions imposed for the COVID-19 emergency and parenting, considering the differences between parents of TD children and children with SEN on perceived social support, threats to basic psychological needs, perception of loneliness, COVID-19 related fears, and space adequacy. The focus was on the parents of TD children and children with SEN because we expected that the impact of COVID-19 related restrictions could be significantly higher in the latter group since these children usually need more attention and care than TD children. Moreover, although some studies have already considered the impact of isolation linked to the lockdown from COVID-19 (e.g. Marchetti et al. 2020), in the present study, besides assessing the parenting stress level, we considered parental disciplinary practices and a wide range of psychosocial variables that could influence parents' stress and behaviour. In particular, we considered the impact of the perceived social support, the threat to basic psychological needs, the perceptions of loneliness, the COVID-19 related fears, and the adequacy of the physical space of the house where the confinement took place.

The specific aims were the following:

  1. Comparing parenting stress levels and disciplinary practices during the lockdown period in parents of both TD children and children with SEN.

  2. Analysing the between-group differences in child characteristics, perceived social support, threat to basic psychological needs, perceived loneliness, COVID-19 related fears, and space adequacy. Then, we examined the associations of those variables with parenting stress and parental disciplinary practices in the two groups of participants.

We hypothesised that the parents of children with SEN experienced higher stress levels and more dysfunctional disciplinary practices. In addition, we hypothesised that different patterns of relationships among the variables investigated could emerge due to the potentially different stressors in the two groups of participants.

Methods

Participants

Participants were 413 parents of children ranging in age from 3 to 15 years. Mothers were 374 (91%), and fathers were 39 (9%). Approximately 82% of the participants were parents of TD children (TD group), whereas 18% were parents of children with SEN (SEN group). Their mean age, number of children, and age of the target child (i.e. the child on which they focussed in filling in the questionnaire described in the procedure section) are reported in Table 1. The two groups showed a small but significant difference for all these variables: age (F(1,411) = 8.80; p = .003; η2 = .02), number of children (F(1,411) = 6.77; p = .01; η2 = .02), and age of target child (F(1,411) = 37.90; p < .001; η2 = .08). Parents in the SEN group were significantly older, with more children and an older target child than parents in the TD group.

Table 1.

Participants' characteristics.

    Age
 Number of children
 Age of target child
  N M SD Range M SD Range M SD Range
Total sample 413 41.46 6.13 22-60 1.84 0.74 1-5 8.00 3.35 3-15
TD group 339 41.04 6.06 22-58 1.80 0.72 1-5 7.54 3.25 3-14
SEN group 74 43.35 6.12 29-60 2.04 0.80 1-4 10.08 3.02 3-15
Open in a new tab

Parents were mainly Italian (97% in both TD and SEN groups). Considering their marital status, approximately 74% of the parents was married (72% in the TD group, and 82% in SEN group), 19% was cohabitant (21% in the TD group, and 14% in SEN group), 4% were divorced or separated (4% in the TD group, and 4% in SEN group), and 2% was single (2% in the TD group, and 0 in SEN group). Concerning their education level, 39% of the participants had a bachelor's or master's degree (39% in the TD group, and 37% in SEN group), 37% a high school diploma (35% in the TD group, and 43% in SEN group), 20% a postgraduate education (22% in the TD group, and 11% in SEN group), and the remaining 4% a junior or secondary school certificate (3% in the TD group, and 10% in SEN group).

Concerning the children in the SEN group, the diagnoses were distributed as follow: 30% specific learning disorders (SLD), 18% intellectual disability (ID), 16% attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), 15% autism spectrum disorder (ASD), 14% developmental language disorder (DLD), 8% not specified.

Procedure

An online survey was implemented on the Quatrics platform (www.qualtrics.com). Each participant completed a written informed consent form, a brief demographic questionnaire, a questionnaire assessing their parenting stress level, and one evaluating their parental disciplinary practices. We measured other relevant constructs: perceived social support, the threat to basic psychological needs, perceived loneliness, and COVID-19 related fears. Furthermore, considering that people were confined to houses that could also be very different in terms of available space, we measured space's perceived adequacy.

The survey was distributed via social networks, sharing a post in Facebook groups for parents. Parents with children ranging in age from three to 15 years were invited to fill in a survey to investigate how the restrictions introduced to face COVID-19 have affected their parenting. Responses were recorded during the lockdown period, from the 9th of April to the 3rd of May 2020. The study was approved by the local ethical committee of the [Department of Psychology of the University of Milano-Bicocca]. The survey took about 30 min to be filled in. For data analyses, we considered only participants who completed it (i.e. 76% of the parents who opened the survey link).

Materials

  1. Parenting Stress Index – Short Form. The Parenting Stress Index – Short Form (PSI – Abidin 1995; Italian version by Guarino et al. 2008), a Likert-type parental self-assessment questionnaire, was used to assess stress levels of the parent-child system. The questionnaire consists of 36 items divided into three main subscales: 1- Parental Distress; 2- Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction; 3- Difficult Child. For the present study, we considered the Parental Distress scale (PSI-PD), which measures the stress deriving from parents' perception of their child-rearing competence and stress deriving from restrictions on their social life due to their children. Cronbach's alpha for the PSI-PD was .86. Each item was rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Raw scores are converted in percentiles. High scores indicate a higher level of stress.

  2. Parenting Scale. The Parenting Scale (PS – Arnold et al. 1993; Italian version by Bonifacci et al. 2016), a 30-item self-report scale, was used to measure parental disciplinary practices. Parents are asked to rate their probabilities of using some discipline strategies to child misbehaviours. Ratings are made on a 7-point scale ranging from one effective and one ineffective strategy. Two factors (i.e., Laxness and Overreactivity) can be extracted using the scale with preschool-age children and school-age children (Lorber et al. 2014). Laxness refers to parents' tendency to not impose severe discipline, and Overreactivity refers to parents' tendency to be quick to anger when children make mistakes. Both Laxness and Overreactivity were reported to have good internal consistency and test-retest reliability (Salari et al. 2012). Analysis of the questionnaire's psychometric properties identified Laxness and Overreactivity as two distinct factors with a low (r = .24; Lorber et al. 2014) correlation. Cronbach's alpha was .68 for Laxness and .58 for Overreactivity.

  3. Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ – Goodman 1997; Italian version by Tobia et al. 2013) was used to assess the participant's children's negative and positive behavioural attributes. The SDQ consists of 25 items divided into five scales: 1- Emotional Symptoms; 2- Conduct Problems; 3- Hyperactivity-Inattention; 4- Peer Relationship problems; 5- Prosocial Behaviour. Parents are asked to rate, on a 3-point Likert-type scale, if a statement (e.g., "She/he is a loner. She/he tends to play alone") is: 0 (not true), 1 (somewhat true), or 2 (certainly true). To measure children's difficulties, we used the SDQ-Total difficulties score, which includes the four problematic behaviour subscales (Emotional Symptoms, Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity-Inattention, and Peer Relationship problems). Cronbach's alpha for the SDQ-Total difficulties score was .84.

  4. Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS – Zimet et al. 1988; Italian version by Busoni and Di Fabio 2008), a 12-item self-report questionnaire, was used to assess parents perceived social support from family, friends, and a significant other. The questionnaire includes four items for each source of support (e.g., "My family really tries to help me") on a 7-point rating scale ranging from 1 (very strongly disagree) to 7 (very strongly agree). Cronbach's alpha for the full scale was .93. Higher scores indicate higher levels of perceived support.

  5. The Need-Threat Scale. The Need-Threat Scale (NTS – Williams 2009; translated and previously used in the Italian context by Riva et al. 2017) was used to assess the threat to four basic psychological needs: 1- belonging; 2- self-esteem; 3- control; and 4- meaningful existence. The questionnaire consists of 20 items (rated on a 5-point scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = very much). As in Riva et al. (2017), we computed an average score from the four basic needs so that higher scores indicate that these basic needs are threatened (e.g., low sense of self-esteem and control). Cronbach's alpha for the full scale was .87.

  6. Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness. The Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness (SSML – Hughes et al. 2004; translated and previously used in the Italian context by Riva et al. 2014), a 3-item scale, was used to assess the parents' perception of loneliness in the last week. The responses of the SSML are coded on a 3-point scale ranging from 1 (hardly ever) to 3 (often) (e.g., "During the last week, how often do you feel that you lack companionship?"). Cronbach's alpha was .83. Higher scores indicate a greater level of loneliness.

  7. COVID-19 related fears. The scale was specifically developed for the present study. On a scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely), five items were used to assess COVID-19 related fears. We asked parents how much they were scared of 1- contracting COVID-19; 2- transmitting COVID-19; 3- remaining without essential items; 4- losing their work; 5- experiencing economic problems. The COVID-19 related fears score was computed as the sum of the five items. Cronbach's alpha for the full scale was .75. Higher scores indicate a higher level of fear.

  8. Space Adequacy. Three items were used to assess the space adequacy of the place where the participants lived during the lockdown period (see Pancani et al. 2020). Participants were asked to rate, on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely), how adequate were the 1- size, 2- brightness, and 3- privacy of their living space. The space adequacy score was computed as the mean of the three items. Cronbach's alpha for the full scale was .75. Higher scores indicate a more appropriate space.

Data analyses

Parenting stress levels and parental disciplinary practices during the lockdown period were compared in the participants (TD vs SEN group). Since the two groups significantly differed in parents' age, number of children, and target child age, we used a MANOVA controlling for these three variables. Moreover, we used the same between-group analysis to compare the scores obtained in the potential factors related to parenting stress levels and parental disciplinary practices (i.e. child characteristics, perceived social support, threat to basic psychological needs, loneliness, COVID-19 related fears, and space adequacy).

To investigate the concurrent predictors of parenting stress and parental disciplinary practices in SEN and TD groups, a multigroup path analysis was run with the MPlus software (Muthén and Muthén 1998, 2010), applying the maximum-likelihood estimator. As dependent variables, we included the PSI-PD (parental distress) score as a measure of parenting stress and the PS Overreactivity and PS Laxness scores of the Parenting Scale as measures of the two parental styles. Potential concurrent predictors included in the model were child's behavioural problems as measured by the SDQ total score, social support (MSPSS) that parents experienced during the lockdown, the Need Threat Scale (NTS), the loneliness scale (SSML), COVID-19 related fears, and space adequacy (environmental variable). All the variables included in the model were observed variables. Multiple indices were used to evaluate the model fit: the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), and the Standardised Root-Mean-square Residual (SRMR). RMSEA values no greater than 0.06, CFIs and TLIs of 0.90 or higher and an SRMR ≤ 0.08 suggest an acceptable model fit (Browne and Cudeck 1993, Hu and Bentler 1999, Marsh et al. 1988).

Results

Parenting stress and parental disciplinary practices in parents of TD children and children with SEN

The scores obtained by parents in the PSI-PD and PS Laxness and Overreactivity are reported in Table 2. The MANOVA (controlling for age, number of children, and target-child age) showed that the two groups significantly differed for parenting stress (PSI-PD) and level of Overreactivity. In particular, the parents in the SEN group were more stressed than the parents of TD children. However, the parents of TD children appeared more inclined to overreact than those of children with SEN.

Table 2.

Parenting stress and parental disciplinary practice in parents of TD children and children with SEN (MANOVA controlling for parents' age, number of children, and target-child age).

  TD group
 SEN group
 F (3,406) p part η2
  M SD Range M SD Range
PSI-PD 28.56 7.96 12-57 32.06 9.68 12-51 20.64 < .001 .05
PS Laxness 2.95 0.73 1-5 2.91 0.69 2-5 .15 .70 .00
PS Overreactivity 3.63 0.72 2-6 3.48 0.77 2-6 5.13 .02 .01
Open in a new tab

Between-group differences in the potential predictors of parenting stress and parental disciplinary practices

Children's scores on the SDQ and parents' scores related to perceived social support (MSPSS), the threat to basic psychological needs (NTS), and perceived isolation (SSML) are reported in Table 3, along with the scores about COVID-19 related fears and space adequacy. As expected, results from MANOVA showed that the number of difficulties reported in children (SDQ) was significantly higher in the SEN group. Moreover, parents of children with SEN perceived lower social support levels than those in the TD group. In keeping with this finding, parents of children with SEN perceived higher threat levels to their basic psychological needs (NTS) than those reported by TD children's parents. No other significant differences between SEN and TD parents were found.

Table 3.

Potential concurrent predictors of parenting stress and parental disciplinary practice in parents of TD children and children with SEN (MANOVA controlling for parents' age, number of children, and target-child age).

  TD group
 SEN group
 F (3,406) p part η2
  M SD Range M SD Range
Total difficulties (SDQ) 8.71 4.83 0-26 14.97 6.95 2-31 84.46 < .001 .17
Perceived social support (MSPSS) 5.32 1.26 2-7 4.56 1.65 1-7 21.16 < .001 .05
Need Threat (NTS) 3.36 0.98 1-7 3.58 1.01 1-6 5.07 .03 .01
Perception of loneliness (SSML) 3.11 1.69 1-7 2.97 1.79 1-7 .25 .62 .00
COVID-19 related fears 20.09 6.78 5-35 19.92 6.57 7-35 .00 .95 .00
Space adequacy 5.11 1.33 1-7 5.06 1.35 2-7 1.50 .22 .00
Open in a new tab

Concurrent predictors of parenting stress and parental disciplinary practices in SEN and TD groups

The fit indices suggested that the multigroup path analysis presented with a good fit to the data: RMSEA = .000 (90% confidence interval = .000 − .134); CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.015; SRMR = .008. Figures 1 and 2 show the model fitted to the data obtained from the TD and SEN groups, respectively. The path analysis revealed a partially different pattern of predictors in the two groups. For the SEN group, PSI-PD was significantly and negatively predicted by the perceived social support and significantly and positively predicted by the need thread scale and the child's SDQ difficulties score. The concurrent predictors included in the model explained the 57.1% of the variance for PSI-PD. One significant link was found concerning the parental styles, with space adequacy positively predicting parents' laxness (14.5% of variance explained). No significant correlations were found between PSI-PD and parental style.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Model tested with path analysis on TD children. Arrows represent significant relationships at * p <.05; ** p <.01.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Model tested with path analysis on children with SEN. Arrows represent significant relationships at * p <.05; ** p <.01.

Considering the TD group, PSI-PD was concurrently predicted by the perceived social support (negatively) and the need threat scale, loneliness, and child's SDQ score (positively), revealing a pattern similar to children with SEN. The variance explained for this dependent variable was 37.9%. Unlike the SEN group, our potential concurrent predictors were more strongly associated with TD children's parental styles. Parents' overreactivity was positively predicted by the need threat scale and the child's SDQ score (8.3% of explained variance). On the other hand, parents' laxness was significantly and negatively predicted by the perceived social support and house space adequacy, explaining the 7.4% variance. For the TD sample, both Laxness and Overreactivity were positively and significantly associated with PSI-PD.

Discussion

The present study focused on the associations between the COVID-19 related restrictions and parenting stress levels and disciplinary practices in parents of TD children and children with SEN. We were interested in investigating the lockdown situation in Italy since many parents had the exclusive burden of childcare during this period. The role of children's problems, parents' perceived social support, the threat to basic psychological needs, perceptions of loneliness, and COVID-19 related fears were examined. In addition, the perceived space adequacy was considered since families were required to stay at home for nearly two months except for proven work needs, absolute urgency, or health reasons.

The parents of children with SEN showed a significantly higher stress level than TD children's parents. This result is in line with those previously found by studies on parents of children with SEN in both the pre-COVID-19 period (Baker et al. 2002, Dempsey et al. 2009, Fidler et al. 2000, Gerstein et al. 2009, Sarimski 1997) and during the COVID-19 crisis (Colizzi et al. 2020, Paluauskaite et al. 2021). Parents of children with SEN showed a lower inclination to overreact. One might speculate that the higher experience of these parents in coping with stressful situations allowed them to avoid overreaction when facing an unexpected event such as the pandemic. However, in both groups, a positive relationship was found between parenting stress and overreaction, confirming data in the literature (Guajardo et al. 2009).

As expected, data from the SDQ questionnaire showed that children with SEN showed more developmental problems than TD children. Moreover, in line with previous studies (e.g. Heiman and Berger 2008), the parents of children with SEN perceived a lower level of social support and higher threats to basic psychological needs. In contrast, no significant differences were found in the perception of loneliness or the COVID-19 related fears. Moreover, the perception of the home environment was not significantly different between the two groups.

In both groups, parenting stress was concurrently predicted by the perceived social support level, the threats to basic psychological needs, and the child's reported difficulties. Parents who feel less supported, feel their needs threatened, and report having a child with more difficulties (with or without SEN) were more likely to exhibit parenting stress. This result suggests that parenting stress during the lockdown depended on the same variables independently from the previous situation (i.e. a child with SEN needing specialist support or a TD child without any specific 'extra' support). These variables are contextual-level (i.e. social support) and individual-level (i.e. threats to basic psychological needs and child's reported difficulties). The pattern in the two groups was similar, except for the perceived loneliness in the last week that was associated with parenting stress only in the TD group. As found by Spinelli et al. (2021), physical environmental features (i.e. space adequacy) did not seem to explain parenting stress levels in both groups.

Two different patterns emerged in the TD and SEN groups concerning parental disciplinary practices. Although with a small effect, laxness was negatively predicted by the perceived social support and space adequacy in the TD group (i.e. a low perceived social support and a less adequate space lead parents to be laxer). In contrast, laxness was positively predicted by space adequacy in the SEN group (i.e. an adequate home environment leads parents to be laxer). We could speculate that during the lockdown, the parents of children with SEN who lived in a bigger house could use independent spaces to separate parents' and children's activities. Therefore, intervening and controlling them less than would happen in a smaller home, where eventual disturbing behaviours would lead to a more controlling response by parents.

In TD children, parents' overreactivity was predicted by children's SDQ scores and the need threat scale (i.e. the parents of children with more difficulties who feel their basic psychological needs threatened tend to be more overreactive). These relationships were not found in the SEN group since none of the variables considered appeared to be related to parental overreactivity.

The concurrent predictors included in the model explained about 51% of the variance in parenting stress for the parents of children with SEN and only about 38% for the parents of TD children. These data suggest that other factors not included in the present study could more deeply explain the origin of the perceived parenting stress in this last group. For example, in line with what was recently found by Moscardino et al. (2021), the parenting stress of Italian parents during COVID-19 lockdown was influenced by the possibility to manage with distance education, an aspect not included in our model.

Study limitations

Only 18% of the parents who filled in the survey have children with SEN. Considering that the study's main aim was to assess the associations of COVID-19 related restrictions with the well-being of parents of children with SEN, the small sample size of the SEN group and the comparison with a larger TD group represents a critical limit. Future studies should include larger samples, comparing groups with similar numerosity. Moreover, different types of SEN were reported, from intellectual disability to learning difficulties, suggesting a possible different impact of the COVID-19 breakdown on these families. To enlarge the sample of parents of children with SEN could help understand the impact of COVID-19 on these families and compare different special needs conditions.

We collected data nearly at the end of the first COVID-19 lockdown period when most people's attention was focused on the gradual re-opening that was next to come in Italy. This timing could presumably have positively influenced the general well-being of the participants. Moreover, the rapidly changing data on the COVID-19 situation makes it difficult to compare what was found at a different time point, even if in the same country. Longitudinal data, collected at several critical points of the COVID-19 pandemic experience, could shed more light on the impact of this unprecedented event on our lives and the long-term consequences of the pandemic.

Finally, like many other studies conducted during the COVID-19 breakdown, an important limitation of the present study is the lack of data about the stress levels in our sample of parents before the pandemic. To our knowledge, only one study conducted by Bailey et al. (2021) examined the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on parents of children with intellectual disabilities accounting for the pre-COVID levels of well-being. This study did not find significant differences between the pre-COVID and the during-COVID well-being of the families in the sample, suggesting that the pandemic's hypothesised negative impact may not be so harsh in this population. Nonetheless, as suggested by the authors of the study, it is possible that the COVID-19 restrictions would have taken longer to impact families (the T2 data were collected soon after the beginning of the COVID-19 breakdown in the UK). Moreover, this result could reflect the impact of COVID-19 restrictions in the UK, but not in other countries, considering the different policy approaches that characterised the managing of the pandemic.

Implications for practice

Data on the impact of COVID-19 on the stress perceived by the parents of children with SEN could help to focus the attention of the public health system not only on the children who present special needs but also on their parents, leading to practices aimed to prevent parenting stress and burnout.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the parents who participated in the study gratefully.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding details

The study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

  1. Abidin, R. R. 1995. Parenting Stress Index (PSI) manual. 3rd ed. Charlottesville, VA: Pediatric Psychology Press. [Google Scholar]
  2. Anthony, L. G., Anthony, B. J., Glanville, D. N., Naiman, D. Q., Waanders, C. and Shaffer, S.. 2005. The relationships between parenting stress, parenting behaviour and preschoolers' social competence and behaviour problems in the classroom. Infant and Child Development. An International Journal of Research and Practice, 14, 133–154. [Google Scholar]
  3. Arnold, D. S., O’Leary, S. G., Wolff, L. S. and Acker, M. M . 1993. The parenting scale: A measure of dysfunctional parenting in discipline situations. Psychological Assessment, 5, 137. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bailey, T., Hastings, R. P. and Totsika, V.. 2021. Covid‐19 impact on psychological outcomes of parents, siblings and children with intellectual disability: Longitudinal before and during lockdown design. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research: JIDR, 65, 397–404. doi: 10.1111/jir.12818 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Baker, B. L., Blacher, J., Crnic, K. A. and Edelbrock, C.. 2002. Behavior problems and parenting stress in families of three-year-old children with and without developmental delays. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 107, 433–444. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Baumeister, R. F. and Leary, M. R.. 1995. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bonifacci, P., Storti, M., Tobia, V. and Suardi, A . 2016. Specific learning disorders: A look inside children’s and parents’ psychological well-being and relationships. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49, 532–545. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Browne, M. W. and Cudeck, R. 1993. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage Focus Editions, 154, 136–136. [Google Scholar]
  9. Brown, S. M., Doom, J. R., Lechuga-Peña, S., Watamura, S. E. and Koppels, T.. 2020. Stress and parenting during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Child Abuse & Neglect, 110, 104699. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Busoni, L. and Di Fabio, A.. 2008. Misurare il supporto sociale percepito: Proprietà psicometriche della Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) in un campione di studenti universitari. Risorsa Uomo, 3, 1000–1012. [Google Scholar]
  11. Carapito, E., Ribeiro, M. T., Pereira, A. I. and Roberto, M. S.. 2018. Parenting stress and preschoolers' socio-emotional adjustment: The mediating role of parenting styles in parent-child dyads. Journal of Family Studies, 26, 594–610. [Google Scholar]
  12. Chan, R. C. H. and Fung, S. C.. 2022. Elevated levels of covid-19-related stress and mental health problems among parents of children with developmental disorders during the pandemic. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 52, 1314–1325. doi: 10.1007/s10803-021-05004-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Clément, M. È. and Chamberland, C.. 2009. The role of parental stress, mother's childhood abuse and perceived consequences of violence in predicting attitudes and attribution in favor of corporal punishment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 18, 163–171. [Google Scholar]
  14. Clemente-Suárez, V. J., Dalamitros, A. A., Beltran-Velasco, A. I., Mielgo-Ayuso, J. and Tornero-Aguilera, J. F.. 2020. Social and psychophysiological consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic: An extensive literature review. Frontiers in Psychology, 3077, 1-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Colizzi, M., Sironi, E., Antonini, F., Ciceri, M. L., Bovo, C. and Zoccante, L.. 2020. Psychosocial and behavioral impact of COVID-19 in autism spectrum disorder: An online parent survey. Brain Sciences, 10, 341. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Crnic, K. A., Gaze, C. and Hoffman, C.. 2005. Cumulative parenting stress across the preschool period: Relations to maternal parenting and child behaviour at age 5. Infant and Child Development. An International Journal of Research and Practice, 14, 117–132. [Google Scholar]
  17. Crnic, K. and Greenberg, M.. 1987. Maternal stress, social support, and coping: Influences on the early mother-infant relationship. In: Boukydis C. F. Z., ed. Research on support for parents and infants in the postnatal period. New York: Ablex Publishing, pp.25–40. [Google Scholar]
  18. Daks, J. S., Peltz, J. S. and Rogge, R. D.. 2020. Psychological flexibility and inflexibility as sources of resiliency and risk during a pandemic: Modeling the cascade of COVID-19 stress on family systems with a contextual behavioral science lens. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 18, 16–27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Davis, N. O. and Carter, A. S.. 2008. Parenting stress in mothers and fathers of toddlers with autism spectrum disorders: Associations with child characteristics. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1278–1291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Deater-Deckard, K. 2005. Parenting stress and children's development: Introduction to the special issue. Infant and Child Development, 14, 111–115. [Google Scholar]
  21. Deater-Deckard, K. 2014. Parenting stress. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
  22. Dempsey, L., Keen, D., Pennell, D., O'Reilly, J. and Neilands, J.. 2009. Parent stress, parenting competence and family-centered support to young children with an intellectual or developmental disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30, 558–566, May–Jun. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Di Giorgio, E., Di Riso, D., Mioni, G. and Cellini, N.. 2021. The interplay between mothers' and children behavioral and psychological factors during COVID-19: An Italian study. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 30, 1401-1412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Ellis, W. E., Dumas, T. M. and Forbes, L. M.. 2020. Physically isolated but socially connected: Psychological adjustment and stress among adolescents during the initial COVID-19 crisis. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue Canadienne Des Sciences du Comportement, 52, 177–187. [Google Scholar]
  25. Estes, A., Munson, J., Dawson, G., Koehler, E., Zhou, X. H. and Abbott, R.. 2009. Parenting stress and psychological functioning among mothers of preschool children with autism and developmental delay. Autism : The International Journal of Research and Practice, 13, 375–387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Fidler, D. J., Hodapp, R. M. and Dykens, E. M.. 2000. Stress in families of young children with Down syndrome, Williams syndrome, and Smith-Magenis syndrome. Early Education & Development, 11, 395–406. [Google Scholar]
  27. Gassman-Pines, A., Ananat, E. O. and Fitz-Henley, J.. 2020. COVID-19 and parent-child psychological well-being. Pediatrics, 146, 1–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Gerstein, E. D., Crnic, K. A., Blacher, J. and Baker, B. L.. 2009. Resilience and the course of daily parenting stress in families of young children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research : JIDR, 53, 981–997. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Goodman, R. 1997. The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Griffith, A. K. 2020. Parental burnout and child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Family Violence. 10.1007/s10896-020-00172-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Guajardo, N. R., Snyder, G. and Petersen, R.. 2009. Relationships among parenting practices, parental stress, child behaviour, and children's social‐cognitive development. Infant and Child Development, 18, 37–60. [Google Scholar]
  32. Guarino, A., Di Blasio, P., D’Alessio, M., Camisasca, E. and Serantoni, G. 2008. Parenting Stress Index SF. Organizzazioni Speciali: Firenze. [Google Scholar]
  33. Guller, B., Yaylaci, F. and Eyuboglu, D.. 2021. Those in the shadow of the pandemic: Impacts of the covid-19 outbreak on the mental health of children with neurodevelopmental disorders and their parents. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 1–13. doi: 10.1080/20473869.2021.1930827 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Heiman, T. and Berger, O.. 2008. Parents of children with Asperger syndrome or with learning disabilities: Family environment and social support. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 29, 289–300. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Hiraoka, D. and Tomoda, A.. 2020. The relationship between parenting stress and school closures due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 74, 497–498. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Hughes, M. E., Waite, L. J., Hawkley, L. C. and Cacioppo, J. T.. 2004. A short scale for measuring loneliness in large surveys: Results from two population-based studies. Research on Aging, 26, 655–672. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Hu, L. T. and Bentler, P. M. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lateef, R., Alaggia, R. and Collin-Vézina, D.. 2021. A scoping review on psychosocial consequences of pandemics on parents and children: Planning for today and the future. Children and Youth Services Review, 125, 106002. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Lee, S. J., Ward, K. P., Lee, J. Y. and Rodriguez, C. M.. 2021. Parental social isolation and child maltreatment risk during the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Family Violence, 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s10896-020-00244-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Lieberman, M. A. 1982. The effects of social supports on responses to stress. In: Goldbeiger L. and Breznitz S., eds. Handbook of stress. New York: Free Press, pp.764–781. [Google Scholar]
  41. Lorber, M. F., Xu, S., Slep, A. M. S., Bulling, L. and O’Leary, S. G. 2014. A new look at the psychometrics of the Parenting Scale through the lens of item response theory. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 43, 613–626. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Marchetti, D., Fontanesi, L., Mazza, C., Di Giandomenico, S., Roma, P. and Verrocchio, M. C.. 2020. Parenting-related exhaustion during the Italian COVID-19 lockdown. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 45, 1114–1123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Marinucci, M., Pancani, L., Aureli, N. and Riva, P.. 2022. Online social connections as surrogates of face-to-face interactions: A longitudinal study under Covid-19 isolation. Computers in Human Behavior, 128, 107102. [Google Scholar]
  44. Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R. and McDonald, R. P. 1988. Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391–410. [Google Scholar]
  45. Moscardino, U., Dicataldo, R., Roch, M., Carbone, M. and Mammarella, I. C.. 2021. Parental stress during COVID-19: A brief report on the role of distance education and family resources in an Italian sample. Current Psychology, 40, 5749–5744. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Muthén, L. K. and Muthén, B.O. 1998. Mplus: The comprehensive modeling program for applied researchers: User’s guide. [Google Scholar]
  47. Muthén & Muthén. Muthén, L. K. and Muthén, B. O. 2010. Mplus user’s guide: statistical analysis with latent variables: User’s guide. Muthén & Muthén. [Google Scholar]
  48. Osborne, L. A., McHugh, L., Saunders, J. and Reed, P.. 2008. Parenting stress reduces the effectiveness of early teaching interventions for autistic spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1092–1103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Östberg, M. and Hagekull, B.. 2000. A structural modeling approach to the understanding of parenting stress. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29, 615–625. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Pancani, L., Marinucci, M., Aureli, N. and Riva, P.. 2020. Forced social isolation and mental health: A study on 1006 Italians under COVID-19 quarantine. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1540. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Patrick, S. W., Henkhaus, L. E., Zickafoose, J. S., Lovell, K., Halvorson, A., Loch, S., Letterie, M. and Davis, M. M.. 2020. Well-being of parents and children during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national survey. Pediatrics, 146, e2020016824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Paulauskaite, L., Farris, O., Spencer, H. and Absoud, A.. 2021. My son can't socially distance or wear a mask: How families of preschool children with severe developmental delays and challenging behavior experienced the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Mental Health Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 14, 225-236–. [Google Scholar]
  53. Peltz, J. S., Daks, J. S. and Rogge, R. D.. 2020. Mediators of the association between COVID-19-related stressors and parents' psychological flexibility and inflexibility: The roles of perceived sleep quality and energy. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 17, 168–176. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Quittner, A. L., Glueckauf, R. L. and Jackson, D. N . 1990. Chronic parenting stress: Moderating versus mediating effects of social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1266–1278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Raikes, H. A. and Thompson, R. A.. 2005. Efficacy and social support as predictors of parenting stress among families in poverty. Infant Mental Health Journal, 26, 177–190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Rezendes, D. L. and Scarpa, A.. 2011. Associations between parental anxiety/depression and child behavior problems related to autism spectrum disorders: The roles of parenting stress and parenting self-efficacy. Autism Research and Treatment, 2011, 395190–395110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Riva, P., Montali, L., Wirth, J. H., Curioni, S. and Williams, K. D.. 2017. Chronic social exclusion and evidence for the resignation stage: An empirical investigation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34, 541–564. [Google Scholar]
  58. Riva, P., Williams, K. D. and Gallucci, M.. 2014. The relationship between fear of social and physical threat and its effect on social distress and physical pain perception. Pain, 155, 485–493. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Roskam, I., Raes, M. E. and Mikolajczak, M.. 2017. Exhausted parents: Development and preliminary validation of the parental burnout inventory. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 163. 00163 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Sarimski, K. 1997. Communication, social-emotional development and parenting stress in Cornelia-de-Lange syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 41, 70–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Salari, R., Terreros, C. and Sarkadi, A. 2012. Parenting scale: Which version should we use? Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 34, 268–281. [Google Scholar]
  62. Sivberg, B. 2002. Family system and coping behaviors: A comparison between parents of children with autistic spectrum disorders and parents with non-autistic children. Autism : The International Journal of Research and Practice, 6, 397–409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Spinelli, M., Lionetti, F., Setti, A. and Fasolo, M.. 2021. Parenting stress during the COVID‐19 outbreak: Socioeconomic and environmental risk factors and implications for children emotion regulation. Family Process, 60, 639–653. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Tobia, V., Gabriele, M. A. and Marzocchi, G. M. 2013. The Italian version of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) —Teacher: Psychometric properties. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31, 493–505. [Google Scholar]
  65. Valicenti-McDermott, M., Burrows, B., Bernstein, L., Hottinger, K., Lawson, K., Seijo, R., Schechtman, M., Shulman, L. and Shinnar, S.. 2014. Use of complementary and alternative medicine in children with autism and other developmental disabilities: Associations with ethnicity, child comorbid symptoms, and parental stress. Journal of Child Neurology, 29, 360–367. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Valicenti-McDermott, M., Lawson, K., Hottinger, K., Seijo, R., Schechtman, M., Shulman, L. and Shinnar, S.. 2015. Parental stress in families of children with autism and other developmental disabilities. Journal of Child Neurology, 30, 1728–1735. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Williams, K. D. 2009. Ostracism: A temporal need‐threat model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 275–314. [Google Scholar]
  68. Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. and Choi, W.. 2000. Cyberostracism: Effects of being ignored over the Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 748–762. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Wissemann, K., Mathes, B., Meyer, A. and Schmidt, N. B.. 2021. COVID-related fear maintains controlling parenting behaviors during the pandemic. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 50, 305–319. doi: 10.1080/16506073.2021.1878274 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Zhu, Y., Zhang, L., Zhou, X., Li, C. and Yang, D.. 2021. The impact of social distancing during COVID-19: A conditional process model of negative emotions, alienation, affective disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 281, 131–137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G. and Farley, G. K.. 1988. The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 30–41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Developmental Disabilities are provided here courtesy of The British Society of Developmental Disabilities

RESOURCES