Parent-child communication and educational anxiety: a longitudinal analysis based on the common fate model

Fengqiang Gao; Chunze Xu; Qing Lv; Yufei Zhao; Lei Han

doi:10.1186/s40359-024-02093-x

. 2024 Oct 28;12:594. doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-02093-x

Parent-child communication and educational anxiety: a longitudinal analysis based on the common fate model

Fengqiang Gao ¹, Chunze Xu ¹, Qing Lv ¹, Yufei Zhao ¹, Lei Han ^1,^✉

PMCID: PMC11514826 PMID: 39465452

Abstract

Background

In the face of family stress and emerging family problems, the transactional model of stress and coping provides new perspectives for solving stress problems in the family. This study integrates it with the common fate model to reveal new paths for coping with educational anxiety problems from the level of parent-child dichotomous interaction in the family environment, aiming to provide some theoretical and practical support for alleviating parents’ education anxiety.

Methods

This study used a combination of interviews and questionnaires to stratify students and their parents from a public junior high school in Jinan City to participate in the study. Data were collected in two time periods (T1, T2; one year apart), and the demographic characteristics of parents and children, parent-child communication quality, education anxiety, and parent-child trust relationship of 495 families were finally analysed by SPSS 27.0.

Results

The results found that (1) based on the Common Fate Model, quality of parent-child communication negatively predicted parents’ education anxiety; (2) quality of parent-child communication positively predicted parent-child trust relationship; (3) parent-child trust relationship negatively predicted parents’education anxiety; (4) parent-child trust relationship mediated quality of parent-child communication and education anxiety.

Conclusions

This study sheds light on research related to stress coping and anxiety relief in the family environment, and provides theoretical and practical support for understanding the interaction between parents and children at the family level, and coping with stressful events together. It implies that future researchers should not only focus on one aspect when coping with and dealing with family problems, but should analyse the family as a whole, including the communication status and parent-child relationship between parents and children.

Keywords: Quality of parent-child communication, Parents’ Education Anxiety, Parent-Child relationship, Transactional model of stress and coping, Common fate model

Background

Due to changes in education policy and the impact of COVID-19, schools have banned off-campus tutoring and discontinued offline classes in favour of online classes [1]. Many students are unable to continue off-campus tutoring and have to take online classes at home, which raises many issues for both parents and students [2, 3]. Some of the representative problems are: parents’ inability to help their children at the learning level [4], and students’ own online learning to show problems such as distraction and low interest in learning [5]. These problems caused high educational anxiety among their parents and gradually became a common phenomenon. At the same time, [6] show that as children enter middle school, academic pressure gradually increases, and many students exhibit various problems (e.g., addiction to online games, lack of motivation to study, etc.). Most parents are gradually becoming overwhelmed by the complexity of their children’s prosperity and learning methods, but they do not want their children to fall behind. Over time, in this state of parental education anxiety gradually became a common phenomenon and continues to increase [7].

In short, educational anxiety refers to a variety of negative emotional experiences and physical discomfort, such as heart palpitations, insomnia, and loss of appetite, caused by excessive worry about their children’s academic performance, advancement to higher education, and future employment [8]. Research has found that parents with high levels of educational anxiety are more concerned about their own marital problems, creating a negative family climate [9–11], which in turn affects their children’s physical and mental health [12]. In addition, parents at higher levels of educational anxiety are more inclined to adopt controlling, harsh, and other educational styles that are not conducive to the healthy development of their children [11], which in turn negatively affects the harmony of the family and the stability of the society [13–15]. It is therefore particularly important to explore the factors that influence parental anxiety and to reduce the level of parental anxiety in education.

Research has shown that communication is not only a remedy for interpersonal interactions, but also a bridge for interpersonal trust [16]. At the family level, communication plays an important role in the emotional bonding between parents and children and in parent-child education, serving as a bridge between parents and children [17, 18]. Parent-child communication refers to a process of exchanging information, opinions, feelings or attitudes between parents and children for the purpose of improving emotional connection and solving problems, etc. In parent-child communication, parents and children need to consider various aspects, grasp the way of communication, pay attention to the communication skills, resolve the emotional barriers between parents and children, and negotiate together to solve problems in order to realize a good parent-child relationship such as mutual understanding, mutual support and mutual trust [19]. Good communication between parents and children is not only conducive to the development and growth of children, but also enhances the satisfaction of both spouses with their family life, which is a key factor in maintaining family happiness and stability [18, 20].

However, it has been found that upon entering adolescence, children become more expansive, begin to adopt new forms of self-expression, and are more inclined to self-determination in many contexts [21], and because of this, they become dissatisfied with and antagonistic to their parents’ disciplinary constraints, making the parent-child relationship increasingly strained and communication tricky as well [22]. At the same time, in most Chinese families during this period, parents are in a state of "having an old man at the top and a young man at the bottom", in addition to their work, they also have to spend time and energy to take care of the old man, which reduces the opportunity to communicate with their children, and it is difficult to ensure the quality of communication. Research has shown that children in families with poor communication have a higher tendency for social rejection as well as depression [23], in a follow-up study, it was found that both father-child and mother-child communication negatively moderated the prediction of pre-tested depression on post-tested self-injury [24], and that poor communication does not only have an effect on depression, but may also aggravate the parents’ level of educational anxiety [25]. Therefore, good communication plays a key role in the family system as the main way to alleviate family conflicts, optimize the family atmosphere, and promote parent-child relationships. Therefore, there is an urgent need for research on how to alleviate parents’ education anxiety in the family interactions.

Literature review

Transactional model of stress and coping and common fate

The transactional model of stress and coping (TMSC) proposed by Lazarus and Folkman [26] as a rapid and well-established intervention model for treatment in health pedagogy [27, 28], which integrates multiple concepts and processes from cognitive, behavioural and affective models, has been widely used in a good deal of health education studies with good results [29, 30]. It suggests that anxiety occurs when an individual feels that his or her coping abilities are not able to resolve the stress that he or she is currently facing. When stress continues to increase, individuals may even engage in maladaptive behaviours such as avoidance and denial, resulting in an increase in behaviours that are detrimental to their own health or hurtful behaviours [31]. For parents in the family, educational anxiety has always been an inescapable nuisance, and their anxiety levels have been rising with the pressure of their children’s exams, especially after the education reform, parents’ anxiety about their children’s education has been increasing rather than decreasing [7, 32], and the sustained high level of anxiety has irreversible impacts on the parents’ own mental health.

In order to better cope with the increasing surge of stress and educational anxiety, parents need to actively cope. According to TMSC, coping is a cognitive and behavioural action taken by the individual to reduce his or her own feelings of tension, control internal and external demands, and try to reconcile these demands [33]. By coping with this behaviour, it is possible to solve the problems that arise and also to change the negative effects that they produce and reduce the negative effects [29]. Coping is when an individual changes his or her state to cope with the changes in the environment. When faced with a state of educational anxiety, parents choose to cope in certain ways, for example, by adopting a strict approach to education. However, due to the influence of multiple factors in the complex environment, the individual’s choices and efforts often produce unsatisfactory results [34, 35].

Dorrance-Hall et al. [36] used an investment model to understand family commitment in the context of family member marginalisation by surveying 285 marginalised family members and showed that family member marginalisation was associated with lower family satisfaction and higher levels of substitute kinship,Olabisi et al. [37] examined the level of mental health and psychological disorders among families with different socio-demographic characteristics (e.g., age and family size) and found that most of the family members experienced psychological distress, while those with close relationships among family members and those who used more task coping strategies had lower levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. Previous research has confirmed that joint efforts between family members are beneficial in helping individuals to alleviate stressful stimuli. When stressful stimuli are perceived as disposable, individuals have good beliefs about self-efficacy,and they choose to cope positively and solve problems systematically [38, 39]. This makes joint coping among family members particularly important. However, by collating the literature, the researcher found that most of the previous studies have examined the internal relationships and stress coping among family members in intensive care units, and there has not been any study in real daily family life, where the shared fate model can provide a better understanding of the relationships and interactions among members in the family environment [40]. Therefore, this study will incorporate the family-level shared destiny model to further understand the interactions between members within the family as well as stress coping.

The Common Fate Model is a model that describes the relationship between pairs of variables in which the underlying assumption is that one variable will have similar or different effects on two or more objects in the relationship [41]. The model focuses on exploring interactions at the group level and helps researchers to understand the mechanisms of interactions between internal objects at the macro level by modelling the way different groups act in an interdependent manner [41, 42]. In the family environment, parents and children share a common destiny, and the psychological and behavioural states of the parents influence and affect the psychological and behavioural states of the children at all times, and vice versa. Therefore, the model is well suited for family-level research.

Previous research has found that the model can provide a more intuitive account of the effects of the macrosystem on the micro-individual [43]. Astle et al.’s [44] study explored the associations between frequent parent–child interactions and children’s disclosure and confidentiality, as well as the moderating role played by open-ended exchanges in the Common Fate Model of Structural Equations (CFM),Pivetta et al. [45] used CFM to analyse the relationship between parents and adolescents from a parental perspective, suggesting that mothers may have higher motivation to perceive their parenting as crucial in the context of adolescent problematic play, Jensen & Ganong [46] used CFM to assess the effects of marital quality, marital confidence, and the quality of the stepparent-child relationship on family cohesion, expressiveness, and family harmony, providing a favourable perspective for family research.

In conclusion, based on the TMSC, by analysing the stress and coping patterns of parental educational anxiety and incorporating a family-level analysis method (the Common Fate Model), this study aims to alleviate parental educational anxiety by shaping a benign family atmosphere and environment through the joint efforts and positive coping of parents and children in the family environment.

The mechanisms of parent-child communication quality on parental educational anxiety

According to Barnes and Olson, at the family level, communication can be categorized into positive and negative communication: in positive communication, parents and children can communicate with open hearts and minds, and they are free to share what they know and their emotional experiences, as well as to understand and trust each other [18]. Negative communication, on the other hand, refers to some of the negative outcomes that occur during parent-child communication, such as, intensified conflict, rigidity of relationship, and emotional outbursts [47]. In families with high-quality parent-child communication, positive communication is often used, and parents and children can have positive interactions with each other, which strengthens the emotional connection between family members, creates a favourable family atmosphere, and, in a sense, relieves parents’ educational anxiety [19, 48].

However, it has been shown that communication can educate anxiety, but the mechanism of action is not clear. Therefore, in order to realize the research goal of studying parent-child communication quality and exploring its relationship with educational anxiety, this study starts from the family systems theory, a commonly used theory in family relationship research, and selects mother-child communication quality and father-child communication quality as the answer indexes of parent-child communication quality in order to demonstrate its relationship with educational anxiety more effectively.

The crossover hypothesis in family systems theory posits that every family is composed of multiple interdependent and interacting subsystems (e.g., the couple subsystem) working together [49]. Within a particular subsystem within a family, if one party in that subsystem (e.g., the mother in a mother–child interaction) exhibits behaviours or emotions that lead to affective fluctuations, this will directly or indirectly affect the emotions or behaviours of other participants in other subsystems (e.g., the father in the marital subsystem) [50]. Family members are interrelated and interact with each other to form the family system. If a problem arises in one subsystem, the other subsystems are needed to help maintain the balance and order of the family system [51]. Therefore, in the face of the growing problem of educational anxiety, the assistance of other subsystems becomes particularly necessary.

Research has shown that communication is the process of transmitting and sharing information with each other, which facilitates family members to resolve family conflicts and tensions, and promotes the implementation of family members’ roles and the normal functioning of the family [52], which confirming the views of the family systems theory and indicating that communication is a crucial method for the family system. For example, couple communication is very important for improving marital quality [53]. Specifically, couple communication reduces and eliminates the root causes of conflict or tension in couples. Through communication, it is possible to explain the causes, to feel each other’s feelings, and to understand each other’s perceptions to correct one’s own. Husband-wife communication can also seek reasonable and effective solutions to conflicts or tensions. Thus, the negative function of conflict is minimized,and it helps couples to analyse the root causes of conflict calmly and rationally and negotiate solutions together [54].

Whereas educational anxiety is mainly caused by concerns about the child’s schooling and a lack of understanding of the academic problems that the child has, the intervention of the parent-child subsystem is needed in order to alleviate the tensions of parental educational anxiety and to maintain the stable functioning of the family system. As one of the most important and effective means of maintaining the parent-child parenting subsystem, high-quality parent-child communication helps to promote the improvement of problematic scenarios in the parenting subsystem and is an important means of reducing family tensions [55]. Specifically, parent-child communication allows parents and children to explain to each other the causes of their own problems and helps parents and children to calmly and rationally analyse the root causes of anxiety. At the same time, parents can better understand what their children are really thinking and negotiate solutions together to achieve the effect of easing their own level of educational anxiety, so that the family system can restore balance [56].

Although previous research has found that good parent-child communication negatively predicts educational anxiety faced by parents [25]. However, after most of them have raised the issue of collaborative alleviation of educational anxiety at the family level, they have modeled the problem at the individual level of fathers and mothers respectively in terms of analysing the problem in concrete terms, ignoring the macro-level of the family. Then this study, on the basis of summarizing the previous experience, further discusses and analyses the relationship between the two at the family level.

This study would like to emphasize that in the family dichotomy, the thoughts, behaviours, and feelings between parents and children are connected and not completely separated. Bronfenbrenner [57], in his ecosystem theory, states that the family ecosystem is the system that has the most direct and microscopic impact on the growth of an individual. In a family, the experiences of different members interact with each other, which in turn co-constructs the entire family climate [58, 59]. This interaction not only affects the family climate, but also has an impact on each member’s personal development and trajectory of change [60]. Thus, the family ecosystem is a factor that must be emphasized when studying individuals. However, previous family researchers have preferred to explore issues in terms of the family, or in terms of dichotomies, while analysing them in terms of individuals, which has some limitations in terms of statistical methods [43]. Therefore, this paper draws on previous experience and adopts the Common Fate Model (CFM) (see Fig. 1), which has high explanatory power at the household level, to study the intrinsic interdependence among household subsystems.

Fig. 1 — Conceptual diagram of the basic common fate model

According to Ledermann and Kenny [41], there are two prerequisites for adopting the Common Fate Model: firstly, in the selection of variables, they should be those that have an effect on both parties, secondly, in the selection of indicators, the data used must be a reliable indicator of the variable. Based on the family system theory, parents and children are a community in a family, and both parents and children affect the quality of communication together, and the quality of parent-child communication belongs to the common fate variable. And parents’ perceived educational anxiety will have an impact on each other’s psychology and behaviour, and educational anxiety belongs to the common fate variable. As a result, this paper explores the influence of parent-child communication quality on parents’ educational anxiety from the family systems theory and proposes research hypothesis 1:

H1: Based on the Common Fate Model, quality of parent-child communication negatively predicted parenting anxiety, with higher communication quality leading to lower parents’ education anxiety (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 — Hypothetical model based on the common fate model

The mechanisms of parent-child communication quality on parenting anxiety: the mediating role of the parent-child trust relationship

So is there an internal mechanism of influence between parent-child communication and educational anxiety? Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development suggests that the establishment of a sense of trust is key to influencing a person’s growth [61]. Parent-child trust relationship is a concrete manifestation of interpersonal trust relationship at the family level, which is a specific kind of trust that exists in a specific environment (family) and between close relationships (parent-child) [62]. In everyday life, parents and children gain a basic sense of security, belonging, and dependence in their shared experiences, forming a more intimate and trusting relationship. In this process, parents and children are able to perceive each other’s attitudes and behaviours and will form a stable psychological and emotional identity. Therefore, in a family, the parent-child trust relationship is an indispensable foundation for the survival of the family. As a factor closely related to family functioning, the parent-child trust relationship always influences the process of family interaction, but few studies have examined its specific mechanism of action. Therefore, based on the interaction process between parents and children, this paper converges the perspective on the role of parent-child trust relationship between parent-child communication quality and parenting anxiety.

Parent-child communication is the key to parent-child interaction, and high-quality parent-child communication plays an important role in maintaining the normal functioning of the family and promoting family harmony and stability [63]. Families with high-quality communication tend to have a higher degree of dependence between family members [64], and children’s emotional and psychological qualities will be more stable [65], which facilitates the cultivation of trusting relationships between parents and children and family education functions. Emotional and psychological quality will also be more stable [65], favouring the development of trusting relationships between parents and children and the educational function of the family [66]. So, what is the specific link between the two, parent-child communication quality and parent-child trust relationship? Considering the family level, does good quality of parent-child communication have an impact on the trust relationship between parents and children, this study will further explore the link between the two accordingly by formulating research hypothesis 2:

H2: Based on the Common Fate Model, quality of parent-child communication positively predicts parent-child trust relationships, with higher communication quality leading to stronger parent-child trust relationships.

Meanwhile, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory [67, 68] suggests that individuals have a need for security as well as a need for belonging and love, where the need for security refers to protection from harm, while the need for belonging and love refers to the individual’s longing for intimacy, recognition by the group, and acceptance by the group, etc., and once these needs are not fulfilled, the individual develops anxiety (Maslow et al., [69]. Research has shown that parent-child trust relationships are significantly and negatively related to parents’ perceived educational anxiety, i.e., parents with higher levels of parent-child trust relationships perceive less educational anxiety and parents with lower levels of parent-child trust relationships perceive more educational anxiety [70]. In other words, if parents enhance the parent-child trust relationship, so that their own needs for security, belongingness and love are satisfied, which in turn reduces anxiety due to educating their children. Accordingly, research hypothesis 3 is proposed:

H3: Parent-child trust relationship negatively predicts parents’ education anxiety, with higher levels of parent-child trust relationship being associated with lower levels of parents’ education anxiety.

Therefore, parents with good parent-child communication are more inclined to collaborate with each other, establish a cordial parent-child trust relationship with their children, possess a deeper understanding and a more tolerant mindset in educating their children, and are more likely to support and approve of their children in the family, avoiding excessive educational anxiety and forming a good family atmosphere. Research hypothesis 4 is proposed:

H4: Parent-child trust relationships can mediate the relationship between quality of parent-child communication and parents’ education anxiety (see Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 — Mediation hypothesis model based on the common fate model

Current study

In summary, this study aims to explore the mechanism of parent-child communication in the family environment on the level of parental educational anxiety, with a special emphasis on the role played by parent-child trust relationship, to reveal the mechanism of parent-child interaction in coping with the problem of family stress, and to provide some theoretical support for the alleviation of parental educational anxiety. Therefore, this study intends to plan the problem of parental educational anxiety in the family by using TMSC, and then test the relationship between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety at the family level by using the dichotomous analysis method in CFM. The mediating effect of parent-child trust relationship between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety is explored on the basis of collecting data from both parents and their children, which provides some theoretical support for understanding the mechanism of parental stressful events in the family environment, and helps parents to alleviate their level of educational anxiety in the benign interactions of family relationships. The following four research hypotheses are proposed:

H1: Based on the Common Fate Model, quality of parent-child communication negatively predicted parenting anxiety, with higher communication quality leading to lower parents’ education anxiety.
H2: Based on the Common Fate Model, quality of parent-child communication positively predicts parent-child trust relationships, with higher communication quality leading to stronger parent-child trust relationships.
H3: Parent-child trust relationship negatively predicts parents’ education anxiety, with higher levels of parent-child trust relationship being associated with lower levels of parents’ education anxiety.
H4: Parent-child trust relationships can mediate the relationship between quality of parent-child communication and parents’ education anxiety.

Method

Participants

In this study, 710 students and their parents from the first to third grades of a full-time public junior high school in Jinan City were selected in two time periods (T1 and T2, with an interval of one year) using stratified cluster sampling method. All participants signed an informed consent form and volunteered to participate in this study. They have all been influenced by the broader context of education policy and COVID-19, and are representative of the research on parenting anxiety. With the cooperation of the school, students (Communication Quality Questionnaire) and parents (Education Anxiety Questionnaire and Parent-Child Trust Relationship Questionnaire) each completed an online questionnaire. 575 questionnaires were returned, and after excluding the questionnaires with missing information (e.g., no questionnaire was filled in by either party) and invalid data (e.g., the same option was selected for the whole questionnaire), 495 valid questionnaires remained, with a validity rate of 86.1%. The validity rate was 86.1%. The basic demographic information of the participants is shown in Table 1. The mean age of the fathers was 42.70 ± 4.64 years, the mean age of the mothers was 40.88 ± 3.92 years, and the mean age of the children was 13.67 ± 0.74 years.

Table 1.

Basic demographic information about the participants

Variable	Number	Percentage (%)
Sex of the child
Male	265	53.6
Female	230	46.4
Mother’s education
Undergraduate	110	22.2
College and below	375	75.6
Master’s Degree	11	2.2
Father’s education
Undergraduate	132	26.2
College and below	350	70.6
Master’s Degree	13	2.6
Doctoral students	1	0.2
Number of children at home
1	174	35.1
2	280	56.5
3	42	8.5

Open in a new tab

Follow-up interviews were conducted with each of the 495 families in collaboration with the school and classroom teachers. The interviews were conducted in the participants’ homes. For parent interviews, the researcher obtained written informed consent from the parents in person. For child interviews, the researcher obtained written informed consent from both parents and consent from the child. The interviews specifically included the content of daily interactions between family members, the frequency of communication, and the level of closeness to each family member. All family members were interviewed individually, which allows them to freely share their true opinions, ideas and attitudes without having to consider the feelings of others (especially other members of the family), making the interview data more authentic and reliable [71, 72]. Parent interviews lasted between 60 and 90 min,child interviews lasted between 30 and 45 min. Each interview was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim using pseudonyms. At the end of the interview each participant (both parent and child) was asked to complete assessments of communication quality, trusting relationships, and educational anxiety. Permission for this study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the School of Psychology, Shandong Normal University.

Materials

Parent–Child communication quality questionnaire

The Parent-Child Communication Quality Scale, a parent-child communication subscale developed by Prof. Chi [73], was used to assess this study. The scale includes father-child communication quality and mother-child communication quality, and each subscale contains 12 items, measuring father-child and mother-child communication quality in terms of relationship-oriented and problem-oriented dimensions. A 4-point Likert-type scale was used, ranging from 1 to 4 on a scale from "not at all" to "completely". The questionnaire contained both forward and reverse scoring items, and the reverse scoring resulted in a mean score for the scale items. Higher scores indicate higher quality of communication. In this study, the Cronbach’s α for the parent-child communication quality (father-child and mother-child) questionnaire was 0.954 and 0.957.

Parental educational anxiety questionnaire

The Parental Educational Anxiety Questionnaire developed by Li Lin [74] was used. The questionnaire consisted of 14 items divided into 3 dimensions. Among them, the health anxiety dimension consisted of 4 questions (e.g., "I worry that my child’s health is too poor to keep up with his or her studies."), 4 questions on test anxiety (e.g., "I am worried that my child does not have a good mindset to face the test."), the employment anxiety dimension totalled 6 questions (e.g., "I worry that my child will not have a stable job if he or she fails to get into college."). A 5-point Likert scale was used, ranging from 1 to 5 on a scale from "not at all" to "completely". The mean score of the scale items represents the degree of parental educational anxiety, with higher scores indicating more severe educational anxiety held by parents. In this study, the Cronbach’s α for the educational anxiety (father, mother) questionnaire was 0.942 and 0.944.

Parent-child trust relationship questionnaire

The quality of the trusting relationship between parent and child was measured using The Trusting Relationship Questionnaire (TRQ) developed by Mustillo et al. [75]. It can be measured using both parent and child reports [75]. The original scale consists of 18 items, and with reference to previous research [76], a new item (“Does the child tell you what he/she likes about you?”) was added in this study to more comprehensively measure the quality of the parent-child relationship. With a view to measuring the quality of parent-child trust more comprehensively. Parent-reported parent-child trust was categorized into two parts: parent’s trust in the child (e.g., "Does the parent take the child’s opinion into account") (12-19) and parent’s perceived child’s trust in the parent (e.g., "Does the child tell the parent what’s on his/her mind") (1-11) in two parts. A higher parent-child trust score indicates a stronger parent-child trust relationship. In this study, the Cronbach’s α of the parent-child trust relationship (father-child and mother-child) questionnaire was 0.954 and 0.957.

Procedure

Based on the need for the purpose of the study, the study was divided into two samples and administered to parents and their children separately. The student questionnaire was administered by the graduate student and the classroom teacher of the class in which the questionnaire was administered as the main test, with a detailed explanation of the purpose of the questionnaire. The group administration of the questionnaire was carried out using the same instructions, which required careful answering of the questions and rewarding the participants with a small gift upon completion. Studies have shown that participants do not differ significantly in completing web-based questionnaires versus traditional paper-based questionnaires [77], meeting the requirement of invariance in measurement [78]. Therefore, the parent questionnaire of this study was used to collect data using an online questionnaire in the classroom group in active collaboration with the classroom teacher. After the data were collected, the researcher carefully screened these data and eliminated those who answered randomly as well as a large number of incorrect answers, leaving only valid data for subsequent analysis. A total of 495 student and parent matches were obtained after matching.

Since over-reliance on self-report measures may lead to bias between the experimental results and the actual situation, objective data from multiple informants (parents and children) obtained after interviews were also included in this study to make the data analysis more realistic and reliable.

Data collation and analysis

With reference to Wickham and Macia [79] and Volling et al. [80], this study used SPSS 27.0, Amos 24.0, and Mplus 8.0 for descriptive statistics, correlation and modelling analyses, and for the mediation model based on the common fate model.

Results

Common method biases

Common method bias is a systematic bias artificially caused by factors such as the same data source or environment, and is widely found in studies of questionnaire methods [81]. Since the variables involved in this study were collected through self-report method, common method bias may exist, therefore, this study reduced this bias by improving the questionnaire entries to reduce their ambiguity, balancing the order effect of the entries, using reverse formulation for some entries, and strict confidentiality of the participants’ anonymity and other procedural controls during the administration process. In addition, using the Harman one-way test [82], this study conducted an unrotated exploratory factor analysis of all variables, which showed that both father and mother data had five factor eigenroots greater than 1, and that the first factor pair explained only 30.17% (fathers) and 31.95% (mothers) of the variance, which were both less than the 40% critical criterion, and there was no serious common method bias.

Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis

Pearson’s product-difference correlation was used to analyse the correlation between parent-child communication quality, educational anxiety and parent-child trust, and it was found that (see Table 2): there was a significant correlation between the two variables of communication quality, parental educational anxiety and parent-child trust relationship. Parent-mother communication quality was significantly positively correlated; parent-mother educational anxiety was significantly positively correlated; parent-child trust was significantly positively correlated with mother-child trust; parent-mother communication quality was significantly negatively correlated with educational anxiety; parent-mother communication quality was significantly positively correlated with parent-child trust; and parent-mother educational anxiety was significantly negatively correlated with parent-child trust.

Table 2.

Correlational analysis of parent-child communication quality, parenting anxiety, and parent-child trust relationship

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6
1 Quality of father-child communication T1	-
2 Quality of mother-child communication T1	.540^**	-
3 Fathers’ educational anxiety T2	-.174^**	-.136^**	-
4 mothers’ educational anxiety T2	-.196^**	-.217^**	.421^**	-
5 Father-son relationship of trust T2	.289^**	.244^**	-.176^**	-.156^**	-
6 Mother-son relationship of trust T2	.224^**	.269^**	-.122^**	-.190^**	.358^**	-
M	3.171	3.329	2.921	2.964	3.681	3.853
SD	0.624	0.649	1.068	1.061	0.671	0.645

Open in a new tab

^***p < 0.001; ^**p < 0.01; ^*p < 0.05

The mechanisms of parent-child communication quality on parental educational anxiety: based on the common fate model

In this study, based on analysing data from both parents, the basic common fate model on the effect of parent-child communication quality on parental educational anxiety was formed, and the results are shown in Fig. 4. This study hypothesized that the basic common fate model fit metrics were χ²/df = 1.16, RMSEA = 0.018, SRMR = 0.011, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.99, which is a good model fit [83]. Parent-child communication quality significantly and negatively predicted family-level educational anxiety (β = -0.31, t = -4.78, p < 0.001), proving that research hypothesis 1 was valid.

Fig. 4 — Hypothetical model results based on the common fate model. Note. ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05

The effect of parent-child communication quality on parental educational anxiety: a mediation analysis based on the common fate model

In this study, a common fate mediation model on the effect of parent-child trust between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety was developed based on the analysis of data from parents and children, and the results are shown in Fig. 5. This study hypothesized that the mediation model based on the common fate model fit indices were: χ²/df = 1.31, RMSEA = 0.02. SRMR = 0.01, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.98, a good model fit [83]. Parent-child communication quality significantly and negatively predicted parental educational anxiety (β = − 0.17, t = − 2.08, p < 0.05). Parent-child communication quality significantly and positively predicted parent-child trust relationship (β = 0.487, t = 6.49, p < 0.001), proving that research hypothesis 2 was valid. Parent–child trust relationship significantly negatively predicted parental educational anxiety (β = − 0.266, t = − 2.261, p < 0.05), proving that research hypothesis 3 was valid.

Fig. 5 — Model results for the mediation hypothesis based on the common fate model. Note. ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05

The bias-corrected non-parametric percent Bootstrap (repeated sampling 5,000 times) was used for the mediation effect test and the estimation of confidence intervals, which indicated a significant indirect effect when its 95% confidence interval did not include zero. The analysis results showed that the mediating effect of parent-child trust relationship between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety was -0.47, and its 95% confidence interval was [-0.36, -0.03], which was significant. This shows that parent-child communication quality has an effect on parental educational anxiety through parent-child trust relationship. Therefore, parent-child trust relationship mediates between parent-child communication quality and parents’ educational anxiety, proving that research hypothesis 4 was valid.

Discussion

Taking parents’ educational anxiety as the starting point, this study combines CFM and TMSC to analyse the sources of parental stress and coping styles, highlighting the important role of positive interaction between parents and children in the family environment. By verifying the validity of the pathway "parent-child communication quality-parent-child trust-parental educational anxiety" in the family dichotomy environment, we reveal the relationship mechanism between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety, and expand the understanding of the relationship between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety. It also expands the understanding of the relationship between parent-child communication quality, parent-child trust and parental anxiety, and provides an effective path to reduce parental anxiety. The results of this study indicate that good parent-child communication quality negatively predicts the level of parental educational anxiety and positively predicts parent-child trust relationship; parent-child trust relationship plays a mediating role between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety. The results of this study suggest that parents should pursue high-quality parent-child communication with a proactive attitude, always pay attention to their children in all aspects, and at the same time respect and understand their children’s thoughts and behaviours in their daily interactions, so as to establish a harmonious and even intimate parent-child trust relationship, reduce their own educational anxiety, and promote a virtuous cycle in the family environment.

Quality of parent-child communication affects educational anxiety

In the home environment, parent-child communication quality affects children’s emotions and makes parents anxious about education [18, 84]. The results of this study indicate that parent-child communication quality negatively predicts parents’ level of educational anxiety, which is consistent with the results of existing studies. Researchers have found that positive parent-child communication is negatively associated with educational anxiety, and families that use more harsh communication styles have parents who experience higher levels of anxiety [25]. Good parent-child communication reduces the distance between parents and children and alleviates parents’ educational anxiety. Parents who do not have good parent-child communication relationships will focus more on their own marital problems and neglect communication with their children, creating a negative family atmosphere and showing more severe educational anxiety when facing their children [9, 10]. Therefore, good family communication plays an important role in the growth of children and the psychological health of parents. For families with serious educational anxiety problems, parents should focus on rational communication and positive involvement with their children and individualize education with their children’s personalities and interests, so as to alleviate their parents’ educational anxiety and avoid the deterioration of family relationships due to educational problems [48].

The mediating role of parent-child trust relationships between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety

Parents who have high-quality communication with their children tend to be more able to fully trust their children, resulting in a happy family atmosphere filled with parent-child trust. In such a family environment, children’s subjective well-being is significantly enhanced, while reducing parents’ educational anxiety [85, 86]. The results of the mediation analysis based on the Common Fate Model in this study indicated that the parent-child trust relationship mediated the relationship between parent-child communication quality and parents’ educational anxiety, i.e., the higher the quality of communication and the better the parent-child trust relationship, the lower the parents’ educational anxiety would be. This is consistent with the results of previous research [87]. Positive communication between parents and children can increase the closeness and adjustment between each other, and also promote parent-child trust through communication to harmonize family problems and arguments [88]. A good parent-child trust relationship promotes parents to be more involved in intimate interactions with their children, which helps them to better understand and pay attention to their children’s needs, respond to the signals sent by their children in a timely and effective manner, and focus on the current parent-child interaction process, so that the children will be willing to take the initiative to share their own experiences with their parents and increase the intimacy of parent-child interactions, which leads to the improvement and enhancement of the parent-child trust relationship and thus reduce the level of parental anxiety [89].

In recent years, more and more scholars have taken the parent-child trust relationship as an object of study, and the results suggest that the parent-child trust relationship serves as an important protective factor in the family system, which can buffer the effects of unfavourable family environments [90]. It should not be overlooked that parent-child trust relationships arise naturally during the parenting process, and their mediating effects may not be easily perceived, but they can affect adolescents’ growth at the cognitive level [91], and children with high levels of parent-child trust have better quality friendships, fewer conflicts with their peers, better social adjustment, and lower levels of parental anxiety [92]. This needs to be emphasized. Therefore, the present study exploring the relationship between communication quality and educational anxiety under the joint influence of parents could further highlight the role played by the parent-child trust relationship.

Limitations and future directions

The main use of this paper’s is to combine CFM and TMSC to provide a more accurate analysis of the problems of the family subsystem, to explore the mechanism of its action on educational anxiety in terms of the understanding and perception of the quality of parent-child communication, and to help parents to alleviate the burdens and pressures they face in their family life.

The results of this study have implications for future researchers, specifically in terms of theory: First, the present study combined theories at the family relationship level with models at the stress coping level, highlighting the ways in which parental stress is perceived and coped with in the family environment, which provides an important supportive basis for the creation of good family environments, as well as further expanding the development of CFM and TMSC at the family level; Second, in order to further expand the research related to educational anxiety and alleviate parental stress, future researchers can start from the classical theories at the family level (e.g., attachment theory, cultural theory paradigm) to explore the effects of different types of parents and children on family atmosphere, parental marital quality, psychological state, children’s temperament, and so on, so as to reveal the potential mediators, moderators, and moderating factors and modes of action that have not been investigated by the previous research. The study will reveal potential mediators, moderators and modes of action that have not been studied before. In addition, the impact of differences between parents on the child and family levels should not be ignored. At the individual level, parents are also two separate individuals, and differences in parenting styles, emotional support, and parenting burnout may have different impacts on their children, which are crucial for the child and the family as a whole. Therefore, future research provides researchers with deeper insights by taking a more in-depth perspective to reveal the potential impact of individual parental differences on family-level interactions (e.g., children’s emotional resilience, peer relationships, academic burnout, etc.), the mechanisms of action, and the potential pathways.

In terms of practice: firstly, this study adopts a combination of subjective and objective indicators, integrates multiple data sources (parents and children), and pays attention to the thoughts and attitudes of each family member, so as to provide a more comprehensive and objective analysis of the problem. In the future, researchers should consider both children and parents when studying family issues, which will not only provide a basis for maintaining good family relationships, better accompanying children’s healthy growth, and promoting positive parent-child interactions, but also have a certain guiding significance in reducing parental stress perceptions. Second, with the gradual application and popularisation of smart wearable devices, smart AI devices such as smart audio devices and smart monitoring systems have also appeared in the family, and exploring the application of these intelligent devices at the family level (e.g., home care, telecommuting) and their impact on family members and the family atmosphere will be beneficial to researchers’ understanding of the modern family in the context of intelligent interaction.

In addition, there are some shortcomings in this study; first, parental education anxiety can be divided into more detailed levels, such as test anxiety, employment anxiety, etc., and the effects of these levels of anxiety on families can be further studied in the future; second, the participants in this study were middle school students, and the shortcomings in the sample survey make the results of the study on the different stages of the elementary school and high school students have limitations, thus We plan to use a wider sample and collect data in stages in subsequent studies to explore the mental health development of these students in depth. Third, the tracking study contains only two rounds of data and could be refined in the future to fully validate the findings and better understand the dynamic relationship between communication quality, parent-child trust relationship, and educational anxiety. Finally, it should be emphasised that the participants in this study were mainly Chinese families, typical of a collectivist culture, where parents place great emphasis on socialisation, which is manifested in a greater focus on the development of the child’s character, management and guidance, and therefore are more prone to stress and anxiety; Parents in an individualistic culture believe that children are independent individuals with thoughts and self-awareness, and should be respected. Therefore, parents in this culture emphasise independence and competence, focusing on the development of their children’s personalities and independence without interfering with their children’s personal space and free activities [93, 94]. Thus parents in individualistic cultures may perceive less stress and anxiety. Previous studies have also revealed that parents’ emotional states such as stress and anxiety may be related to the cultural context in which they live, for example, Junla and Yotanyamaneewong [95] explored the relationship between different cultural values (individualism, collectivism) and parenting behaviours, revealing differences in parental perceptions across different cultural contexts. Therefore, future researchers may be able to elucidate parent-child interactions in the family in a more comprehensive and thorough manner by comparing the subtle differences between family atmosphere and environment in different cultural contexts.

Conclusion

This study analysed the influencing factors of parental educational anxiety based on the TMSC and CFM, which measured quality of parent-child communication, parent-child trust relationship, and education anxiety through a combination of questionnaires and interviews. The results showed that quality of parent-child communication negatively predicted parents’ education anxiety and positively predicted parent-child trust relationship; parent-child trust relationship negatively predicted parents’ education anxiety and mediated between quality of parent-child communication and parents’ education anxiety.

Authors’ contributions

C.X. and F.G. wrote the main manuscript text and designed of the work and the acquisition, analysis. Q.L. and Y.Z. prepared figures and the interpretation of data. L.H. revised the work ubstantively. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (62077034), Shandong Taishan Scholars Project Special (tsqn202306153) and Jinan City Municipal School Joint Development Strategy Project (JNSX2023037).

Data availability

Data is provided within the manuscript or supplementary information files. The original data of this study have been uploaded to https://osf.io/ and have generated a Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.17605/OSF.IO/S67MN. We welcome researchers who are interested in this study to join us for a more in-depth analysis of the research results.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the School of Psychology of Shandong Normal University. Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

1.Hume S, Brown SR, Mahtani KR. School closures during COVID-19: an overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023;28(3):164–74. 10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2.Adedoyin OB, Soykan E. Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interact Learn Environ. 2020;31(2):863–75. 10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180. [Google Scholar]
3.Alam BF, Bashir R, Hussain T, Abbas T, Malik SA, Jan SH, Khurshid M. Online vs traditional learning: a comparative analysis of student’s responses during COVID-19. Work. 2023;74(1):21–9. 10.3233/wor-220082. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4.Hamza EGA, Elsantil YG. Impact of parents’ stress on engagement with online learning during COVID-19. Sustainability. 2023;15(14):10900. 10.3390/su151410900. [Google Scholar]
5.Klein P, Ivanjek L, Dahlkemper MN, Jeličić K, Geyer M, Küchemann S, Susac A. Studying physics during the COVID-19 pandemic: Student assessments of learning achievement, perceived effectiveness of online recitations, and online laboratories. Phys Rev Phys Educ Res. 2021;17(1). 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.17.010117.
6.Styck KM, Malecki CK, Ogg JA, Demaray MK. Measuring COVID-19-related stress among 4th through 12th grade students. Sch Psychol Rev. 2021;50(4):530–45. 10.1080/2372966x.2020.1857658. [Google Scholar]
7.Yu S, Zheng J, Xu Z, Zhang T. The transformation of parents’ perception of education involution under the background of “Double Reduction” Policy: the mediating role of education anxiety and perception of education equity. Front Psychol. 2022;13. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.800039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
8.Chen G, Oubibi M, Liang A, Zhou Y. Parents’ educational anxiety under the “Double Reduction” policy based on the family and students’ personal factors. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2022;15:2067–82. 10.2147/prbm.s370339. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9.Davies PT, Cummings EM. Exploring children’s emotional security as a mediator of the link between marital relations and child adjustment. Child Dev. 1998;69(1):124–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10.Denham SA. Maternal emotional responsiveness and toddlers’ social-emotional competence. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1993;34(5):715–28. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1993.tb01066.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11.Guajardo NR, Snyder G, Petersen RM. Relationships among parenting practices, parental stress, child behaviour, and children’s social-cognitive development. Infant Child Dev. 2009;18(1):37–60. 10.1002/icd.578. [Google Scholar]
12.Scullion F, Cossar J, Wesson C, Power M, Wilson DC. Parental over-protection and higher parental anxiety/depression levels are associated with lower quality of life of teenagers with IBD. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2011;17(suppl_1):S37–8. 10.1093/ibd/17.supplement1.s37c. [Google Scholar]
13.Fenigstein A, Scheier MF, Buss AH. Public and private self-consciousness: assessment and theory. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1975;43(4):522–7. 10.1037/h0076760. [Google Scholar]
14.Mattick RP, Clarke JC. Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety11Editor’s note: This article was written before the development of some contemporary measures of social phobia, such as the Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory (Turner et al., 1989). We have invited this article for publication because of the growing interest in the scales described therein. S.T. Behav Res Ther. 1998;36(4):455–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15.Bögels SM, Alberts M, De Jong PJ. Self-consciousness, self-focused attention, blushing propensity and fear of blushing. Pers Individ Dif. 1996;21(4):573–81. 10.1016/0191-8869(96)00100-6. [Google Scholar]
16.Langlinais LA, Howard HA, Houghton JD. Trust me: Interpersonal communication dominance as a tool for influencing interpersonal trust between coworkers. Int J Business Commun. 2022:232948842210809. 10.1177/23294884221080933.
17.Aloia LS. Parent-Child relationship satisfaction: the influence of family communication orientations and relational maintenance behaviours. Fam J. 2019;28(1):83–9. 10.1177/1066480719896561. [Google Scholar]
18.Buehler EM, Crowley JL, Peterson A, Jackl JA. Family communication patterns, mediated communication, and well-being: a communication interdependence perspective on parent–adult child relationships. J Soc Personal Relation. 2022:026540752211456. 10.1177/02654075221145628.
19.Galvin K, Braithwaite DO, Schrodt P, Bylund CL. Family communication: cohesion and change. Fam Relat. 1983;32(2):304. 10.2307/584694. [Google Scholar]
20.Stivers C. Parent-adolescent communication and its relationship to adolescent depression and suicide proneness. PubMed. 1988;23(90):291–5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3407491. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21.De Los Reyes A, Ohannessian CM, Laird RD. Developmental changes in discrepancies between adolescents’ and their mothers’ views of family communication. J Child Fam Stud. 2015;25(3):790–7. 10.1007/s10826-015-0275-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22.Collins WJ, Newman B, McKenry PC. Intrapsychic and interpersonal factors related to adolescent psychological well-being in stepmother and stepfather families. J Fam Psychol. 1995;9(4):433–45. 10.1037/0893-3200.9.4.433. [Google Scholar]
23.Rohner RP, Lansford JE. Deep structure of the human affectional system: introduction to interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory. J Fam Theory Rev. 2017;9(4):426–40. [Google Scholar]
24.Wang YL, Su HJ. A follow-up study on the relationship between depression and self-ilnjury in adolescents: moderating effect of parentadolescent communication. J Psychol Sci. 2022;45(05):1243–50. [Google Scholar]
25.Bronte-Tinkew J, Scott ME, Lilja E. Single custodial fathers’ involvement and parenting: Implications for outcomes in emerging adulthood. J Marriage Fam. 2010;72(5):1107–27. 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00753.x. [Google Scholar]
26.Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer; 1984. [Google Scholar]
27.Huo W, Luo W, Yan J, Wang Y, Deng Y. Medical artificial intelligence information disclosure on healthcare professional involvement in innovation: a transactional theory of stress and coping model. Int J Human Comput Interact. 2023:1–13. 10.1080/10447318.2023.2266797.
28.Kaveh MH, Mehrazin F, Cousins R, Mokarami H. Effectiveness of a transactional model-based education programme for enhancing stress-coping skills in industrial workers: a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1). 10.1038/s41598-023-32230-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
29.Brantley C, Knol LL, Douglas JW, Hernandez-Reif M, Lawrence JC, Wind SA. 222 Stress and coping efforts among caregivers of children with down syndrome: application of the transactional model of stress and coping. J Clin Transl Sci. 2023;7(s1):68. 10.1017/cts.2023.293. [Google Scholar]
30.Li F, Chen T, Lai X. How does a reward for creativity program benefit or frustrate employee creative performance? The perspective of transactional model of stress and coping. Group Org Manag. 2017;43(1):138–75. 10.1177/1059601116688612. [Google Scholar]
31.Weale V, Lambert KA, Graham M, Stuckey R, Oakman J. Do work–family conflict or family–work conflict mediate relationships between work-related hazards and stress and pain? Am J Ind Med. 2023;66(9):780–93. 10.1002/ajim.23514. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32.Zhao S. Research on the strategies to alleviate parents’ educational anxiety under the background of the “Double Reduction” Policy. J Educ Res. 2023;1(3):15–9. 10.54097/jeer.v1i3.3936. [Google Scholar]
33.Folkman S, Lazarus RS. An analysis of coping in a Middle-Aged Community sample. J Health Soc Behav. 1980;21(3):219. 10.2307/2136617. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34.Amin NAL, Tam WW, Shorey S. Enhancing first-time parents’ self-efficacy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of universal parent education interventions’ efficacy. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;82:149–62. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.03.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35.Yin X, Zhang H, Chen M. The influence of parents’ education anxiety on children’s learning anxiety: the mediating role of parenting style and the moderating effect of extracurricular tutoring. Front Psychol. 2024;15. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1380363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
36.Dorrance-Hall E, Campbell N, Carlisle M, Silverstone J, Immel M, Earle K. Why family members St(r)ay: marginalized family members’ commitment to family. J Fam Commun. 2023;23(3–4):274–93. 10.1080/15267431.2023.2215232. [Google Scholar]
37.Olabisi OI, Olorunfemi O, Bolaji A, Azeez FO, Olabisi TE, Azeez O. Depression, anxiety, stress and coping strategies among family members of patients admitted in intensive care unit in Nigeria. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2020;13:100223. 10.1016/j.ijans.2020.100223. [Google Scholar]
38.Kahana E, Lee JE, Kahana J, Goler T, Kahana B, Shick S, Burk E, Barnes K. Childhood autism and proactive family coping: Intergenerational perspectives. J Intergenerational Relationships. 2015;13(2):150–66. 10.1080/15350770.2015.1026759. [Google Scholar]
39.Sarour EO, Keshky MESE. Almost perfect? Perfectionism and work-family conflict in saudi workers: the contributions of coping strategies and positive automatic thoughts. Curr Psychol. 2022;42(35):30715–25. 10.1007/s12144-022-04053-3. [Google Scholar]
40.Wikle JS, Hoagland A. Adolescent interactions with family and emotions during interactions: variation by family structure. J Fam Psychol. 2020;34(5):544–54. 10.1037/fam0000625. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
41.Ledermann T, Kenny DA. The common fate model for dyadic data: variations of a theoretically important but underutilized model. J Fam Psychol. 2012;26(1):140–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
42.Kenny DA. Models of Non-Independence in Dyadic Research. J Soc Pers Relat. 1996;13(2):279–94. 10.1177/0265407596132007.
43.Galovan AM, Holmes EK, Proulx CM. Theoretical and methodological issues in relationship research. J Soc Pers Relat. 2017;34(1):44–68. [Google Scholar]
44.Astle SM, Jankovich MO, Vennum A, Rogers AA. Parent-Child sexual communication frequency and adolescent disclosure to mothers about sexuality: The moderating role of open communication in a Common Fate Structural Equation model. J Sex Res. 2022;60(7):1045–54. 10.1080/00224499.2022.2045888. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
45.Pivetta E, Costa S, Antonietti J, Marino C, Billieux J, Canale N. Adolescent problematic gaming and its association with maternal behaviours: a dyadic study focusing on the relational-emotional correlates. Addict Behav. 2022:107602. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107602. [DOI] [PubMed]
46.Jensen TM, Ganong LH. Associations between dyadic relationship quality and stepfamily functioning: a common fate modeling approach. Fam Process. 2022. 10.1111/famp.12803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
47.Yang R, Zeng T. The review of parent-child communication and adolescent depression. Int Conference Interdisc Human Commun Stud. 2023;6(1):655–60. [Google Scholar]
48.Borre A, Kliewer W. Parental strain, mental health problems, and parenting practices: a longitudinal study. Pers Individ Dif. 2014;68:93–7. 10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49.Cox MJ, Paley B. Families as systems. Annu Rev Psychol. 1997;48(1):243–67. 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
50.White LT. Contagion in family affection: mothers, fathers, and young adult children. J Marriage Fam. 1999;61(2):284. 10.2307/353748. [Google Scholar]
51.Combrinck-Graham L. Developments in family systems theory and research. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1990;29(4):501–12. 10.1097/00004583-199007000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
52.Koerner AF, Fitzpatrick MA. Toward a theory of family communication. Commun Theory. 2002;12(1):70–91. 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00260.x. [Google Scholar]
53.Ledermann T, Bodenmann G, Rudaz M, Bradbury TN. Stress, communication, and marital quality in couples. Fam Relat. 2010;59(2):195–206. 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00595.x. [Google Scholar]
54.Leuchtmann L, Milek A, Bernecker K, Nußbeck FW, Backes S, Martin M, Zemp M, Brandstätter V, Bodenmann G. Temporal dynamics of couples’ communication behaviours in conflict discussions: a longitudinal analysis. J Soc Pers Relat. 2018;36(9):2937–60. 10.1177/0265407518806582. [Google Scholar]
55.Weber M, Salloum A, Alvariza A, Kreicbergs U, Sveen J. Outcomes of the grief and communication family support intervention on parent and child psychological health and communication. Death Stud. 2020;46(7):1750–61. 10.1080/07481187.2020.1851816. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
56.Friedberg RD, Thomas J, Tiller-Ormord J, Korte C, Brown K, Mendez E, Mohavedi Y, Zelcer H. Parents’ and children’s intolerance of uncertainty and their reactions to COVID-19: a story of remarkable similarity. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2023;28(4):1243–56. 10.1177/13591045231156346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
57.Bronfenbrenner U. Interacting Systems in Human Development. Research Paradigms: Present and Future (1988). In. Bronfenbrenner U. Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. In SAGE Publications eBooks; 2005. pp. 67–93. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA68633374.
58.Ostovarfar J, Kaveh MH, Vardanjani HM, Ghahramani L, Karimi M, Asadollahi A, Zare R. Improving family health climate, effect of role modeling and maternal support in female students. BMC Primary Care. 2023;24(1). 10.1186/s12875-023-02015-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
59.Pojanapotha P, Boonnag C, Siritikul S, Chalanunt S, Kuntawong P, Wongpakaran N. Helpful family climate moderates the relationship between perceived family support of ADHD symptoms and depression: a conditional process model. BMC Psychol. 2021;9(1). 10.1186/s40359-021-00615-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
60.Buelga S, Martínez-Ferrer B, Cava MJ. Differences in family climate and family communication among cyberbullies, cybervictims, and cyber bully–victims in adolescents. Comput Human Behav. 2017;76:164–73. 10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.017. [Google Scholar]
61.Perry JW, Erikson EH. Childhood and Society. J Marriage Fam. 1965;27(1):115. 10.2307/349827. [Google Scholar]
62.Hestenes SL. Early and middle adolescents’ trust in parents and friends. Ph.D.dissertation, Purue University, United States. 1996. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2791&context=dissertations.
63.Yotyodying S, Dettmers S, Jonkmann K. Quality features of family–school partnerships in German schools: Measurement and association with parent–child communication about school. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2020;115:105078. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105078. [Google Scholar]
64.Lee TH, Ng TK. Stress communication, communication satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction: an actor-partner interdependence mediation model. J Soc Psychol. 2023:1–14. 10.1080/00224545.2023.2171848. [DOI] [PubMed]
65.Cui M, Janhonen-Abruquah H, Darling CA. Parent-child communication, relationship quality, and female young adult children’s well-being in U.S. and Finland. J Comp Fam Stud. 2022;52(4):648–67. 10.3138/jcfs.52.4.06. [Google Scholar]
66.Efrati Y, Gola M. Adolescents’ compulsive sexual behaviour: the role of parental competence, parents’ psychopathology, and quality of parent–child communication about sex. J Behav Addict. 2019;8(3):420–31. 10.1556/2006.8.2019.33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
67.Maslow AH. Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row; 1954. [Google Scholar]
68.Maslow AH. Motivation and personality. In SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks. 1997. pp. 110–133. 10.4135/9781446221815.n7.
69.Maslow AH, Frager R, Fadiman J. Motivation and personality. Pearson. 1987.
70.Pan X, Fang Y, Wu Y, Chen Z. The effect of parental organismic trust on parental anxiety: the moderating role of perceived adolescents’ coping styles. Curr Psychol. 2023. 10.1007/s12144-023-04879-5.37359607 [Google Scholar]
71.Morris SM. Joint and individual interviewing in the context of cancer. Qual Health Res. 2001;11(4):553–67. 10.1177/104973201129119208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
72.Van Schoors M, De Mol J, Verhofstadt LL, Goubert L, Van Parys H. The family practice of support-giving after a pediatric cancer diagnosis: a multi-family member interview analysis. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2020;44:101712. 10.1016/j.ejon.2019.101712. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
73.Chi LP, Yu GL. The Approaches of survey and observation applied in research of parent-child communication. Adv Psychological Science. 2010;18(06):932. [Google Scholar]
74.Li L. The influence of parenting locus of control on junior middle school students’ test anxiety─ the mediating role of parental educational anxiety. Shandong: Ludong University; 2018. p. 13–9. [Google Scholar]
75.Mustillo SA, Dorsey S, Farmer EMZ. Quality of relationships between youth and community service providers: reliability and validity of the trusting relationship questionnaire. J Child Fam Stud. 2005;14(4):577–90. 10.1007/s10826-005-7189-8. [Google Scholar]
76.Zhao J, Li X, Barnett D, Lin X, Fang X, Zhao G, Stanton B. Parental loss, trusting relationship with current caregivers, and psychosocial adjustment among children affected by AIDS in China. Psychol Health Med. 2011;16(4):437–49. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
77.Hohwü L, Lyshol H, Gissler M, Jonsson SH, Petzold M, Obel C. Web-based versus traditional paper questionnaires: a mixed-mode survey with a nordic perspective. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(8):e173. 10.2196/jmir.2595. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
78.Martínez-Gómez P, Mineshima K, Miyao Y, Bekki D. On-demand Injection of Lexical Knowledge for Recognising Textual Entailment. Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers. 2017. p. 710–20. 10.18653/v1/e17-1067.
79.Wickham RE, Macia KS. Examining cross-level effects in dyadic analysis: a structural equation modeling perspective. Behav Res Methods. 2019;51(6):2629–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
80.Volling BL, Tan L, Gonzalez R, Bader LR. Coming together or falling apart: coparenting the first child while expecting the second. In Springer eBooks. 2021. p. 203–24. 10.1007/978-3-030-51988-9_10.
81.Zhou H, Long L. Statistical remedies for common method biases. Adv Psychol Sci. 2004;12(06):942. [Google Scholar]
82.Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879–903. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
83.Wen Z, Hau KT, Herbert WM. Structural equation model testing: Cutoff criteria for goodness of fit indices and chi-square test. Acta Psychol Sin. 2004;36(02):186. [Google Scholar]
84.Sillars A, Koerner AF, Fitzpatrick MA. Communication and Understanding in Parent-Adolescent relationships. Human Commun Res. 2005;31(1):102–28. 10.1093/hcr/31.1.102. [Google Scholar]
85.Bowlby J. The making and breaking of affectional bonds. Br J Psychiatry. 1977;130(3):201–10. 10.1192/bjp.130.3.201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
86.Ma QC, Huebner ES. Attachment relationships and adolescents’ life satisfaction: some relationships matter more to girls than boys. Psychol Sch. 2008;45(2):177–90. [Google Scholar]
87.Jia Yifan, Dai Qingmei, Deng Xiaoyu, Liu Xuelan. Parents’ self-concept clarity, marital satisfaction and parent-child relationship quality: Actor-partner interdependence analyses. J Soc Personal Relation. 2022;(12). 10.1177/02654075221102095.
88.Barnes HA, Olson DL. Parent-adolescent communication and the circumplex model. Child Dev. 1985;56(2):438. 10.2307/1129732. [Google Scholar]
89.Duncan LG, Coatsworth JD, Greenberg MT. A model of mindful parenting: implications for parent-child relationships and prevention research. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2009;12(3):255–70. 10.1007/s10567-009-0046-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
90.Dykstra VW, Willoughby T, Evans A. A longitudinal examination of the relation between lie-telling, secrecy, parent-child relationship quality, and depressive symptoms in late-childhood and adolescence. J Youth Adolesc. 2020;49(2):438–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
91.Zhang W, Wang M, Ying L. Parental mindfulness and preschool children’s emotion regulation: the role of mindful parenting and secure parent-child attachment. Mindfulness. 2019;10(12):2481–91. 10.1007/s12671-019-01120-y. [Google Scholar]
92.Hazel NA, Oppenheimer CW, Technow JR, Young JF, Hankin BL. Parent relationship quality buffers against the effect of peer stressors on depressive symptoms from middle childhood to adolescence. Dev Psychol. 2014;50(8):2115–23. 10.1037/a0037192. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
93.Cote LR, Bornstein MH. Cultural and parenting cognitions in acculturating cultures. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2003;34(3):323–49. 10.1177/0022022103034003006. [Google Scholar]
94.Haslam D, Poniman C, Filus A, Sumargi A, Boediman L. Parenting style, child emotion regulation and Behavioral Problems: The moderating role of cultural values in Australia and Indonesia. Marriage Fam Rev. 2020;56(4):320–42. 10.1080/01494929.2020.1712573. [Google Scholar]
95.Junla D, Yotanyamaneewong S. Cultural values, parenting and child adjustment in Thailand. Int J Psychol. 2024. 10.1002/ijop.13111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

[CR1] 1.Hume S, Brown SR, Mahtani KR. School closures during COVID-19: an overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023;28(3):164–74. 10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR2] 2.Adedoyin OB, Soykan E. Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interact Learn Environ. 2020;31(2):863–75. 10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180. [Google Scholar]

[CR3] 3.Alam BF, Bashir R, Hussain T, Abbas T, Malik SA, Jan SH, Khurshid M. Online vs traditional learning: a comparative analysis of student’s responses during COVID-19. Work. 2023;74(1):21–9. 10.3233/wor-220082. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR4] 4.Hamza EGA, Elsantil YG. Impact of parents’ stress on engagement with online learning during COVID-19. Sustainability. 2023;15(14):10900. 10.3390/su151410900. [Google Scholar]

[CR5] 5.Klein P, Ivanjek L, Dahlkemper MN, Jeličić K, Geyer M, Küchemann S, Susac A. Studying physics during the COVID-19 pandemic: Student assessments of learning achievement, perceived effectiveness of online recitations, and online laboratories. Phys Rev Phys Educ Res. 2021;17(1). 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.17.010117.

[CR6] 6.Styck KM, Malecki CK, Ogg JA, Demaray MK. Measuring COVID-19-related stress among 4th through 12th grade students. Sch Psychol Rev. 2021;50(4):530–45. 10.1080/2372966x.2020.1857658. [Google Scholar]

[CR7] 7.Yu S, Zheng J, Xu Z, Zhang T. The transformation of parents’ perception of education involution under the background of “Double Reduction” Policy: the mediating role of education anxiety and perception of education equity. Front Psychol. 2022;13. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.800039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

[CR8] 8.Chen G, Oubibi M, Liang A, Zhou Y. Parents’ educational anxiety under the “Double Reduction” policy based on the family and students’ personal factors. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2022;15:2067–82. 10.2147/prbm.s370339. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR9] 9.Davies PT, Cummings EM. Exploring children’s emotional security as a mediator of the link between marital relations and child adjustment. Child Dev. 1998;69(1):124–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR10] 10.Denham SA. Maternal emotional responsiveness and toddlers’ social-emotional competence. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1993;34(5):715–28. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1993.tb01066.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR11] 11.Guajardo NR, Snyder G, Petersen RM. Relationships among parenting practices, parental stress, child behaviour, and children’s social-cognitive development. Infant Child Dev. 2009;18(1):37–60. 10.1002/icd.578. [Google Scholar]

[CR12] 12.Scullion F, Cossar J, Wesson C, Power M, Wilson DC. Parental over-protection and higher parental anxiety/depression levels are associated with lower quality of life of teenagers with IBD. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2011;17(suppl_1):S37–8. 10.1093/ibd/17.supplement1.s37c. [Google Scholar]

[CR13] 13.Fenigstein A, Scheier MF, Buss AH. Public and private self-consciousness: assessment and theory. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1975;43(4):522–7. 10.1037/h0076760. [Google Scholar]

[CR14] 14.Mattick RP, Clarke JC. Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety11Editor’s note: This article was written before the development of some contemporary measures of social phobia, such as the Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory (Turner et al., 1989). We have invited this article for publication because of the growing interest in the scales described therein. S.T. Behav Res Ther. 1998;36(4):455–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR15] 15.Bögels SM, Alberts M, De Jong PJ. Self-consciousness, self-focused attention, blushing propensity and fear of blushing. Pers Individ Dif. 1996;21(4):573–81. 10.1016/0191-8869(96)00100-6. [Google Scholar]

[CR16] 16.Langlinais LA, Howard HA, Houghton JD. Trust me: Interpersonal communication dominance as a tool for influencing interpersonal trust between coworkers. Int J Business Commun. 2022:232948842210809. 10.1177/23294884221080933.

[CR17] 17.Aloia LS. Parent-Child relationship satisfaction: the influence of family communication orientations and relational maintenance behaviours. Fam J. 2019;28(1):83–9. 10.1177/1066480719896561. [Google Scholar]

[CR18] 18.Buehler EM, Crowley JL, Peterson A, Jackl JA. Family communication patterns, mediated communication, and well-being: a communication interdependence perspective on parent–adult child relationships. J Soc Personal Relation. 2022:026540752211456. 10.1177/02654075221145628.

[CR19] 19.Galvin K, Braithwaite DO, Schrodt P, Bylund CL. Family communication: cohesion and change. Fam Relat. 1983;32(2):304. 10.2307/584694. [Google Scholar]

[CR20] 20.Stivers C. Parent-adolescent communication and its relationship to adolescent depression and suicide proneness. PubMed. 1988;23(90):291–5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3407491. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR21] 21.De Los Reyes A, Ohannessian CM, Laird RD. Developmental changes in discrepancies between adolescents’ and their mothers’ views of family communication. J Child Fam Stud. 2015;25(3):790–7. 10.1007/s10826-015-0275-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR22] 22.Collins WJ, Newman B, McKenry PC. Intrapsychic and interpersonal factors related to adolescent psychological well-being in stepmother and stepfather families. J Fam Psychol. 1995;9(4):433–45. 10.1037/0893-3200.9.4.433. [Google Scholar]

[CR23] 23.Rohner RP, Lansford JE. Deep structure of the human affectional system: introduction to interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory. J Fam Theory Rev. 2017;9(4):426–40. [Google Scholar]

[CR24] 24.Wang YL, Su HJ. A follow-up study on the relationship between depression and self-ilnjury in adolescents: moderating effect of parentadolescent communication. J Psychol Sci. 2022;45(05):1243–50. [Google Scholar]

[CR25] 25.Bronte-Tinkew J, Scott ME, Lilja E. Single custodial fathers’ involvement and parenting: Implications for outcomes in emerging adulthood. J Marriage Fam. 2010;72(5):1107–27. 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00753.x. [Google Scholar]

[CR26] 26.Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer; 1984. [Google Scholar]

[CR27] 27.Huo W, Luo W, Yan J, Wang Y, Deng Y. Medical artificial intelligence information disclosure on healthcare professional involvement in innovation: a transactional theory of stress and coping model. Int J Human Comput Interact. 2023:1–13. 10.1080/10447318.2023.2266797.

[CR28] 28.Kaveh MH, Mehrazin F, Cousins R, Mokarami H. Effectiveness of a transactional model-based education programme for enhancing stress-coping skills in industrial workers: a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1). 10.1038/s41598-023-32230-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

[CR29] 29.Brantley C, Knol LL, Douglas JW, Hernandez-Reif M, Lawrence JC, Wind SA. 222 Stress and coping efforts among caregivers of children with down syndrome: application of the transactional model of stress and coping. J Clin Transl Sci. 2023;7(s1):68. 10.1017/cts.2023.293. [Google Scholar]

[CR30] 30.Li F, Chen T, Lai X. How does a reward for creativity program benefit or frustrate employee creative performance? The perspective of transactional model of stress and coping. Group Org Manag. 2017;43(1):138–75. 10.1177/1059601116688612. [Google Scholar]

[CR31] 31.Weale V, Lambert KA, Graham M, Stuckey R, Oakman J. Do work–family conflict or family–work conflict mediate relationships between work-related hazards and stress and pain? Am J Ind Med. 2023;66(9):780–93. 10.1002/ajim.23514. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR32] 32.Zhao S. Research on the strategies to alleviate parents’ educational anxiety under the background of the “Double Reduction” Policy. J Educ Res. 2023;1(3):15–9. 10.54097/jeer.v1i3.3936. [Google Scholar]

[CR33] 33.Folkman S, Lazarus RS. An analysis of coping in a Middle-Aged Community sample. J Health Soc Behav. 1980;21(3):219. 10.2307/2136617. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR34] 34.Amin NAL, Tam WW, Shorey S. Enhancing first-time parents’ self-efficacy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of universal parent education interventions’ efficacy. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;82:149–62. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.03.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR35] 35.Yin X, Zhang H, Chen M. The influence of parents’ education anxiety on children’s learning anxiety: the mediating role of parenting style and the moderating effect of extracurricular tutoring. Front Psychol. 2024;15. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1380363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

[CR36] 36.Dorrance-Hall E, Campbell N, Carlisle M, Silverstone J, Immel M, Earle K. Why family members St(r)ay: marginalized family members’ commitment to family. J Fam Commun. 2023;23(3–4):274–93. 10.1080/15267431.2023.2215232. [Google Scholar]

[CR37] 37.Olabisi OI, Olorunfemi O, Bolaji A, Azeez FO, Olabisi TE, Azeez O. Depression, anxiety, stress and coping strategies among family members of patients admitted in intensive care unit in Nigeria. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2020;13:100223. 10.1016/j.ijans.2020.100223. [Google Scholar]

[CR38] 38.Kahana E, Lee JE, Kahana J, Goler T, Kahana B, Shick S, Burk E, Barnes K. Childhood autism and proactive family coping: Intergenerational perspectives. J Intergenerational Relationships. 2015;13(2):150–66. 10.1080/15350770.2015.1026759. [Google Scholar]

[CR39] 39.Sarour EO, Keshky MESE. Almost perfect? Perfectionism and work-family conflict in saudi workers: the contributions of coping strategies and positive automatic thoughts. Curr Psychol. 2022;42(35):30715–25. 10.1007/s12144-022-04053-3. [Google Scholar]

[CR40] 40.Wikle JS, Hoagland A. Adolescent interactions with family and emotions during interactions: variation by family structure. J Fam Psychol. 2020;34(5):544–54. 10.1037/fam0000625. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR41] 41.Ledermann T, Kenny DA. The common fate model for dyadic data: variations of a theoretically important but underutilized model. J Fam Psychol. 2012;26(1):140–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR42] 42.Kenny DA. Models of Non-Independence in Dyadic Research. J Soc Pers Relat. 1996;13(2):279–94. 10.1177/0265407596132007.

[CR43] 43.Galovan AM, Holmes EK, Proulx CM. Theoretical and methodological issues in relationship research. J Soc Pers Relat. 2017;34(1):44–68. [Google Scholar]

[CR44] 44.Astle SM, Jankovich MO, Vennum A, Rogers AA. Parent-Child sexual communication frequency and adolescent disclosure to mothers about sexuality: The moderating role of open communication in a Common Fate Structural Equation model. J Sex Res. 2022;60(7):1045–54. 10.1080/00224499.2022.2045888. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR45] 45.Pivetta E, Costa S, Antonietti J, Marino C, Billieux J, Canale N. Adolescent problematic gaming and its association with maternal behaviours: a dyadic study focusing on the relational-emotional correlates. Addict Behav. 2022:107602. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107602. [DOI] [PubMed]

[CR46] 46.Jensen TM, Ganong LH. Associations between dyadic relationship quality and stepfamily functioning: a common fate modeling approach. Fam Process. 2022. 10.1111/famp.12803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR47] 47.Yang R, Zeng T. The review of parent-child communication and adolescent depression. Int Conference Interdisc Human Commun Stud. 2023;6(1):655–60. [Google Scholar]

[CR48] 48.Borre A, Kliewer W. Parental strain, mental health problems, and parenting practices: a longitudinal study. Pers Individ Dif. 2014;68:93–7. 10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR49] 49.Cox MJ, Paley B. Families as systems. Annu Rev Psychol. 1997;48(1):243–67. 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR50] 50.White LT. Contagion in family affection: mothers, fathers, and young adult children. J Marriage Fam. 1999;61(2):284. 10.2307/353748. [Google Scholar]

[CR51] 51.Combrinck-Graham L. Developments in family systems theory and research. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1990;29(4):501–12. 10.1097/00004583-199007000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR52] 52.Koerner AF, Fitzpatrick MA. Toward a theory of family communication. Commun Theory. 2002;12(1):70–91. 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00260.x. [Google Scholar]

[CR53] 53.Ledermann T, Bodenmann G, Rudaz M, Bradbury TN. Stress, communication, and marital quality in couples. Fam Relat. 2010;59(2):195–206. 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00595.x. [Google Scholar]

[CR54] 54.Leuchtmann L, Milek A, Bernecker K, Nußbeck FW, Backes S, Martin M, Zemp M, Brandstätter V, Bodenmann G. Temporal dynamics of couples’ communication behaviours in conflict discussions: a longitudinal analysis. J Soc Pers Relat. 2018;36(9):2937–60. 10.1177/0265407518806582. [Google Scholar]

[CR55] 55.Weber M, Salloum A, Alvariza A, Kreicbergs U, Sveen J. Outcomes of the grief and communication family support intervention on parent and child psychological health and communication. Death Stud. 2020;46(7):1750–61. 10.1080/07481187.2020.1851816. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR56] 56.Friedberg RD, Thomas J, Tiller-Ormord J, Korte C, Brown K, Mendez E, Mohavedi Y, Zelcer H. Parents’ and children’s intolerance of uncertainty and their reactions to COVID-19: a story of remarkable similarity. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2023;28(4):1243–56. 10.1177/13591045231156346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR57] 57.Bronfenbrenner U. Interacting Systems in Human Development. Research Paradigms: Present and Future (1988). In. Bronfenbrenner U. Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. In SAGE Publications eBooks; 2005. pp. 67–93. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA68633374.

[CR58] 58.Ostovarfar J, Kaveh MH, Vardanjani HM, Ghahramani L, Karimi M, Asadollahi A, Zare R. Improving family health climate, effect of role modeling and maternal support in female students. BMC Primary Care. 2023;24(1). 10.1186/s12875-023-02015-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

[CR59] 59.Pojanapotha P, Boonnag C, Siritikul S, Chalanunt S, Kuntawong P, Wongpakaran N. Helpful family climate moderates the relationship between perceived family support of ADHD symptoms and depression: a conditional process model. BMC Psychol. 2021;9(1). 10.1186/s40359-021-00615-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

[CR60] 60.Buelga S, Martínez-Ferrer B, Cava MJ. Differences in family climate and family communication among cyberbullies, cybervictims, and cyber bully–victims in adolescents. Comput Human Behav. 2017;76:164–73. 10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.017. [Google Scholar]

[CR61] 61.Perry JW, Erikson EH. Childhood and Society. J Marriage Fam. 1965;27(1):115. 10.2307/349827. [Google Scholar]

[CR62] 62.Hestenes SL. Early and middle adolescents’ trust in parents and friends. Ph.D.dissertation, Purue University, United States. 1996. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2791&context=dissertations.

[CR63] 63.Yotyodying S, Dettmers S, Jonkmann K. Quality features of family–school partnerships in German schools: Measurement and association with parent–child communication about school. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2020;115:105078. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105078. [Google Scholar]

[CR64] 64.Lee TH, Ng TK. Stress communication, communication satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction: an actor-partner interdependence mediation model. J Soc Psychol. 2023:1–14. 10.1080/00224545.2023.2171848. [DOI] [PubMed]

[CR65] 65.Cui M, Janhonen-Abruquah H, Darling CA. Parent-child communication, relationship quality, and female young adult children’s well-being in U.S. and Finland. J Comp Fam Stud. 2022;52(4):648–67. 10.3138/jcfs.52.4.06. [Google Scholar]

[CR66] 66.Efrati Y, Gola M. Adolescents’ compulsive sexual behaviour: the role of parental competence, parents’ psychopathology, and quality of parent–child communication about sex. J Behav Addict. 2019;8(3):420–31. 10.1556/2006.8.2019.33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR67] 67.Maslow AH. Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row; 1954. [Google Scholar]

[CR68] 68.Maslow AH. Motivation and personality. In SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks. 1997. pp. 110–133. 10.4135/9781446221815.n7.

[CR69] 69.Maslow AH, Frager R, Fadiman J. Motivation and personality. Pearson. 1987.

[CR70] 70.Pan X, Fang Y, Wu Y, Chen Z. The effect of parental organismic trust on parental anxiety: the moderating role of perceived adolescents’ coping styles. Curr Psychol. 2023. 10.1007/s12144-023-04879-5.37359607 [Google Scholar]

[CR71] 71.Morris SM. Joint and individual interviewing in the context of cancer. Qual Health Res. 2001;11(4):553–67. 10.1177/104973201129119208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR72] 72.Van Schoors M, De Mol J, Verhofstadt LL, Goubert L, Van Parys H. The family practice of support-giving after a pediatric cancer diagnosis: a multi-family member interview analysis. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2020;44:101712. 10.1016/j.ejon.2019.101712. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR73] 73.Chi LP, Yu GL. The Approaches of survey and observation applied in research of parent-child communication. Adv Psychological Science. 2010;18(06):932. [Google Scholar]

[CR74] 74.Li L. The influence of parenting locus of control on junior middle school students’ test anxiety─ the mediating role of parental educational anxiety. Shandong: Ludong University; 2018. p. 13–9. [Google Scholar]

[CR75] 75.Mustillo SA, Dorsey S, Farmer EMZ. Quality of relationships between youth and community service providers: reliability and validity of the trusting relationship questionnaire. J Child Fam Stud. 2005;14(4):577–90. 10.1007/s10826-005-7189-8. [Google Scholar]

[CR76] 76.Zhao J, Li X, Barnett D, Lin X, Fang X, Zhao G, Stanton B. Parental loss, trusting relationship with current caregivers, and psychosocial adjustment among children affected by AIDS in China. Psychol Health Med. 2011;16(4):437–49. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR77] 77.Hohwü L, Lyshol H, Gissler M, Jonsson SH, Petzold M, Obel C. Web-based versus traditional paper questionnaires: a mixed-mode survey with a nordic perspective. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(8):e173. 10.2196/jmir.2595. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR78] 78.Martínez-Gómez P, Mineshima K, Miyao Y, Bekki D. On-demand Injection of Lexical Knowledge for Recognising Textual Entailment. Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers. 2017. p. 710–20. 10.18653/v1/e17-1067.

[CR79] 79.Wickham RE, Macia KS. Examining cross-level effects in dyadic analysis: a structural equation modeling perspective. Behav Res Methods. 2019;51(6):2629–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR80] 80.Volling BL, Tan L, Gonzalez R, Bader LR. Coming together or falling apart: coparenting the first child while expecting the second. In Springer eBooks. 2021. p. 203–24. 10.1007/978-3-030-51988-9_10.

[CR81] 81.Zhou H, Long L. Statistical remedies for common method biases. Adv Psychol Sci. 2004;12(06):942. [Google Scholar]

[CR82] 82.Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879–903. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR83] 83.Wen Z, Hau KT, Herbert WM. Structural equation model testing: Cutoff criteria for goodness of fit indices and chi-square test. Acta Psychol Sin. 2004;36(02):186. [Google Scholar]

[CR84] 84.Sillars A, Koerner AF, Fitzpatrick MA. Communication and Understanding in Parent-Adolescent relationships. Human Commun Res. 2005;31(1):102–28. 10.1093/hcr/31.1.102. [Google Scholar]

[CR85] 85.Bowlby J. The making and breaking of affectional bonds. Br J Psychiatry. 1977;130(3):201–10. 10.1192/bjp.130.3.201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR86] 86.Ma QC, Huebner ES. Attachment relationships and adolescents’ life satisfaction: some relationships matter more to girls than boys. Psychol Sch. 2008;45(2):177–90. [Google Scholar]

[CR87] 87.Jia Yifan, Dai Qingmei, Deng Xiaoyu, Liu Xuelan. Parents’ self-concept clarity, marital satisfaction and parent-child relationship quality: Actor-partner interdependence analyses. J Soc Personal Relation. 2022;(12). 10.1177/02654075221102095.

[CR88] 88.Barnes HA, Olson DL. Parent-adolescent communication and the circumplex model. Child Dev. 1985;56(2):438. 10.2307/1129732. [Google Scholar]

[CR89] 89.Duncan LG, Coatsworth JD, Greenberg MT. A model of mindful parenting: implications for parent-child relationships and prevention research. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2009;12(3):255–70. 10.1007/s10567-009-0046-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR90] 90.Dykstra VW, Willoughby T, Evans A. A longitudinal examination of the relation between lie-telling, secrecy, parent-child relationship quality, and depressive symptoms in late-childhood and adolescence. J Youth Adolesc. 2020;49(2):438–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR91] 91.Zhang W, Wang M, Ying L. Parental mindfulness and preschool children’s emotion regulation: the role of mindful parenting and secure parent-child attachment. Mindfulness. 2019;10(12):2481–91. 10.1007/s12671-019-01120-y. [Google Scholar]

[CR92] 92.Hazel NA, Oppenheimer CW, Technow JR, Young JF, Hankin BL. Parent relationship quality buffers against the effect of peer stressors on depressive symptoms from middle childhood to adolescence. Dev Psychol. 2014;50(8):2115–23. 10.1037/a0037192. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR93] 93.Cote LR, Bornstein MH. Cultural and parenting cognitions in acculturating cultures. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2003;34(3):323–49. 10.1177/0022022103034003006. [Google Scholar]

[CR94] 94.Haslam D, Poniman C, Filus A, Sumargi A, Boediman L. Parenting style, child emotion regulation and Behavioral Problems: The moderating role of cultural values in Australia and Indonesia. Marriage Fam Rev. 2020;56(4):320–42. 10.1080/01494929.2020.1712573. [Google Scholar]

[CR95] 95.Junla D, Yotanyamaneewong S. Cultural values, parenting and child adjustment in Thailand. Int J Psychol. 2024. 10.1002/ijop.13111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

PERMALINK

Parent-child communication and educational anxiety: a longitudinal analysis based on the common fate model

Fengqiang Gao

Chunze Xu

Qing Lv

Yufei Zhao

Lei Han

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Background

Literature review

Transactional model of stress and coping and common fate

The mechanisms of parent-child communication quality on parental educational anxiety

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

The mechanisms of parent-child communication quality on parenting anxiety: the mediating role of the parent-child trust relationship

Fig. 3.

Current study

Method

Participants

Table 1.

Materials

Parent–Child communication quality questionnaire

Parental educational anxiety questionnaire

Parent-child trust relationship questionnaire

Procedure

Data collation and analysis

Results

Common method biases

Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis

Table 2.

The mechanisms of parent-child communication quality on parental educational anxiety: based on the common fate model

Fig. 4.

The effect of parent-child communication quality on parental educational anxiety: a mediation analysis based on the common fate model

Fig. 5.

Discussion

Quality of parent-child communication affects educational anxiety

The mediating role of parent-child trust relationships between parent-child communication quality and parental educational anxiety

Limitations and future directions

Conclusion

Authors’ contributions

Funding

Data availability

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication

Competing interests

Footnotes

References

Associated Data

Data Availability Statement

ACTIONS

PERMALINK

RESOURCES

Similar articles

Cited by other articles

Links to NCBI Databases