Abstract
Background:
Parental alcohol use has been associated with the development of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. However, little is known about the mechanisms through which parental alcohol use may impact antisocial behavior development. In this study, we explored mechanisms through which parent alcohol use during adolescence may impact the development of antisocial behavior from adolescence into adulthood.
Objectives:
We investigated whether parental monitoring during adolescence (ages 16-17), observed family conflict during adolescence, or young adult alcohol use (ages 21-22), mediated the relationship between parent alcohol during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood (ages 26-30). We completed a secondary data analysis using a longitudinal, community-based sample of families in the Northwestern United States (n = 998; target children were 42% White, 29% Black, 2% Native American, 7% Hispanic or Latinx, 5% Asian American, 1% Pacific Islander, and 53% male; data collection was conducted from 1996 to 2017). Using observational and survey data, we ran a series of mediation models to examine three hypothesized mechanisms.
Results:
Our findings supported a relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and adult antisocial behavior ten years later. Parental monitoring and family conflict during adolescence did not serve as mediators. Young adult alcohol use significantly mediated the relationship between parent alcohol use during adolescence and adult antisocial behavior.
Conclusions:
Our findings support young adult alcohol use as a mechanism through which parent alcohol use during adolescence is associated with adult antisocial behavior. These results highlight the potential impact of parent alcohol use well into adulthood and offer implications for targeted preventive interventions.
Keywords: Antisocial behavior, alcohol use, parenting
Antisocial behaviors, including “criminal and aggressive behaviors, as well as other behaviors that violate the rights of others or major societal norms,” (Frick & Viding, 2009, p. 1,111) have the potential to cause harm in multiple domains (Dishion & Patterson, 2015). Adolescent and young adult antisocial behaviors can result in negative consequences for the individuals engaging in the behavior, such as juvenile legal system involvement (Dishion & Patterson, 2015) and decreased academic performance (Vadivel et al., 2023). From a systemic perspective, there is also evidence that child antisocial behavior can also result in consequences for families (e.g., sibling maladjustment; Snyder et al., 2005) as well as community members (e.g., becoming a victim of violence; Frick & Viding, 2009), however, more empirical research is needed in this area. While some antisocial behavior during adolescence can be considered developmentally normative (Moffitt, 1993; Patterson et al., 1989), antisocial behavior that persists beyond adolescence can result in lifelong consequences, such as mental health problems, financial instability, and increased risk of criminal legal system involvement, (Goulter et al., 2020; Moffitt et al., 2002).
Considerable progress has been made in identifying risk factors associated with the development of antisocial behavior, including the role of parental behaviors and the family environment (LoBraico et al., 2020; Tehrani & Yamini, 2020). Parental use of substances, including alcohol, has been associated with child antisocial behavior (Chassin et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2016; Straussner & Fewell, 2018). However, unlike other parent-related domains, such as parenting practices, we know little about the mechanisms through which parental alcohol use may present risk for antisocial behavior. Furthermore, previous investigations of parental alcohol use as a risk factor for antisocial behavior have most often examined these processes exclusively during childhood (Chassin et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2016; Straussner & Fewell, 2018). The current study sought to address these gaps by focusing on examining processes through which parental alcohol use may lead antisocial behavior development from adolescence into adulthood.
Parental alcohol use and antisocial behavior
Consequences from parental alcohol use (defined here as all types of alcohol use, regardless of clinical significance) and misuse (defined here as clinically significant use or abuse of alcohol) are clearly demonstrated in previous research (Chassin et al., 2019). Parental substance use (including alcohol) is reliably associated with child perceptions of- and engagement in- their own alcohol and drug use (e.g., Wills et al., 1994). In addition, there is robust evidence of a relationship between parental alcohol misuse and negative outcomes during childhood and adolescence, such as externalizing and antisocial behaviors (Chassin et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2016; Straussner & Fewell, 2018). However, there is a paucity of research examining the long-term effects of parental alcohol use and misuse on children’s development of antisocial behavior into adulthood. Currently only one study, to our knowledge, has investigated the implications of parental alcohol misuse for antisocial behavior development into adulthood. In this study focusing on a sample of boys only, maternal alcohol abuse was a significant predictor of involvement in violent crime in adulthood (Christoffersen & Soothill, 2003). We aimed to extend this previous work in the current study by examining the long-term effects of parental alcohol use (inclusive of but not limited to misuse) on general antisocial behavior development into adulthood in a diverse, mixed-gender sample of adolescents.
Pathways from parental alcohol use to antisocial behavior
Notably, little is known about the mechanisms through which parental alcohol use may influence the development of antisocial behavior. A developmental psychopathology perspective emphasizes the importance of understanding the dynamic interplay among different risk factors over development that may lead to antisocial behavior (Eme, 2017; Frick & Viding, 2009). While not previously examined, parental alcohol use may have a cascading impact on other risk domains that contribute to the development of antisocial behavior into adulthood. In the current study, we explored several hypothesized pathways through which parental alcohol use could be associated with an increase in antisocial behavior between adolescence (ages 16–17) and adulthood (ages 26–30), including parental monitoring, family conflict, and adolescent alcohol use.
Parental monitoring
Parental monitoring may contribute to a relationship between parental alcohol use and the development of antisocial behavior into adulthood. Parental monitoring has long been understood as a significant factor in the development of antisocial behavior (Flanagan et al., 2019). Without effective parental monitoring, adolescents are at higher risk to engage with peer groups who engage in and encourage antisocial behaviors (Dishion et al., 2004). Previous research has identified associations between parent substance use and parenting style, with parents who engage in substance use being more likely to have autocratic or indifferent parenting styles (Mayes & Truman, 2002; Straussner & Fewell, 2018). These types of parenting styles may lend themselves to parents being more or less likely (respectively) to engage in monitoring behaviors, however, less is known regarding the specific impact of parental alcohol use on parent monitoring behaviors. We hypothesized that parental alcohol use has the potential to disrupt effective parental monitoring behaviors, contributing to the development of antisocial behavior.
Family conflict
A second contextual factor that could potentially contribute to the relationship between parental alcohol use and child development of antisocial behavior is family conflict. High levels of coercive interactions in families (which includes high levels of family conflict) have reliably been associated with the development of long-term antisocial behavior (LoBraico et al., 2020; Patterson, 2016; Zhang et al., 2024). Parental alcohol use could be a potential precursor for this relationship between family conflict and future antisocial behavior. Alcohol abuse can create significant dysfunction in families that impacts almost all aspects of family life, including family conflict (Graham et al., 1993). However, family conflict has not been previously investigated specifically as a mechanism through which parental alcohol use may contribute to the development of antisocial behavior. Given the current evidence, we hypothesized that family conflict related to alcohol use may play a role in adolescent antisocial behavior development.
Adolescent alcohol use
Finally, it is well-established that parental alcohol use is associated with increased likelihood of adolescent engagement in alcohol use (Chassin et al., 2019; Mares et al., 2011; Wills et al., 1994). In fact, Mares et al. (2011) demonstrated that for parents who use substances, more lenient parental policies around substance use for their children is associated with increased child substance use. In addition, alcohol use during adolescence and even into early adulthood is significantly associated with increased antisocial behaviors (Hammerton et al., 2017). However, to our knowledge, there are no studies examining the full pathway from parental alcohol use during adolescence to antisocial behavior into emerging and early adulthood.
The present study
Despite evidence of parental alcohol use as a risk factor for antisocial behavior in childhood, we know less about the stability of this relationship over development. Furthermore, we know little about the mechanisms through which parental alcohol use may contribute to risk for the development of antisocial behavior. To that end, the present study examined whether there is a relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and the development of antisocial behavior into young adulthood. We also investigated whether parental monitoring, family climate, or adolescent alcohol use mediated that relationship. We hypothesized that parental alcohol use would be associated with the development of antisocial behavior into early adulthood and that parental alcohol use would be associated with the development of antisocial behavior indirectly via parental monitoring, family climate, and adolescent alcohol use.
Methods
Participants and procedures
Data for this study are from Project Alliance, a longitudinal study of families recruited to participate in a randomized controlled trial of the Family Checkup (FCU) that began in 1996 and completed data collection in 2017. Project Alliance received ethics approval from University of Oregon institutional review board. The FCU is a brief prevention program delivered to families with the intent of improving parenting practices to prevent adolescent problem behavior (Dishion & Kavanagh, 2003). Project Alliance participants were recruited from three public middle schools in the northwestern United States. All sixth-graders and their families from those middle schools were eligible to participate. Enrolled families (n = 998) were randomized to either participate in the intervention or control condition. The intervention condition provided multi-tiered support to families based on their level of risk. All families were provided with access to a school-based family resource center. Families of adolescents randomly assigned to the intervention condition who were identified by teachers to be at elevated risk for the development of antisocial behavior were offered the 3-session FCU. For a detailed discussion of the Project Alliance intervention, see Dishion and Kavanagh (2003). Baseline data as well as eleven waves of follow-up data were collected from the enrolled families.
For this study, we used data from Wave 6 (collected in 2004 - target child [TC] age 16–17; referred to henceforth as adolescence), Wave 8 (collected in 2008 - TC age 21–22; referred to henceforth as young adulthood), and Wave 10 (collected in 2015 - TC age 26–30; referred to henceforth as adulthood). We used self-report assessments in which the TC and their parents completed a myriad of self-report surveys. In addition, we used observational data from a task completed in adolescence in which the TC and their parents participated in videorecorded structured discussions.
The final sample for this analysis consisted of 998 parent/child pairs. A plurality of the TCs in the sample were white (42%), 29% were Black, 2% were Native American, 7% were Hispanic or Latinx, 5% were Asian American, 1% were Pacific Islander. In addition, 11% reported multiple races, 2% reported an unlisted race, and less than 1% of participants’ races were unknown. Based on baseline self-report, a majority of TCs were male (53%), 47% were female, and less than 1% of participants’ genders were unknown. The study experienced modest attrition over the extended study period. During adolescence 793 of 998 (79%) total baseline participants completed surveys, during young adulthood 818 (82%) completed surveys, and in adulthood 760 (76%) completed surveys.
Measures
Parental alcohol use
Parental alcohol use was measured via parent-report during adolescence using a scale informed by the Alcohol Problem Scale (Skinner & Allen, 1982). Specifically, parents reported the general frequency of their alcohol use (Never tried – 3 or more drinks a day), as well has how frequently they had three or four drinks in a day and how frequently they had five or six drinks in a day (Never—Nearly every time). For analysis, we converted responses from each item (general frequency, frequency of 3–4 drinks, frequency of 5–6 drinks) for mothers and fathers into separate z-scores for each parent. Then, we created aggregate mean scores of the individual z-scored items for each parent separately. Finally, we created an aggregate parental alcohol use score by taking the mean of mother and father scores. For families that had only one parent’s data present, only the data from that parent was used. Importantly, because we used a z-score to measure the parental alcohol use in this study, references to parental alcohol use refer to general frequency of alcohol use as well as the frequency of high-volume alcohol use for each parent dyad in comparison to the rest of the sample. This means that higher parental alcohol use scores indicate higher alcohol use than the sample average, and lower scores indicate lower alcohol use than the sample average.
Antisocial behavior
Antisocial behavior was measured via TC self-report during both adolescence and adulthood. Different scales were used at each timepoint to appropriately capture the developmental differences in antisocial behavior at age 16 and age 26. During adolescence, TC antisocial behavior was measured via a subscale within the Child and Family Center Questionnaire—Child Version (CFCQC; Child & Family Center, 2001). The CFCQC antisocial behavior measure used a mean score of nine items where adolescents were asked how often they engaged in specific antisocial behaviors in the last month on a six-point scale (Never - More than 20 times). Antisocial items included actions like breaking curfew without parent permission, panhandling, lying, and hanging out with gang members. Response options were assigned numerical values (0 = Never; 5 = More than 20 times) and mean-scored for analysis. We assessed the adolescent TC antisocial behavior scale for internal reliability using Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.69), which represents a slightly suboptimal internal reliability.
An antisocial behavior scale was also administered in adulthood using a subscale of the Project Alliance Young Adult Survey. The scale consisted of sixteen items asking how often participants had engaged in certain behaviors in the last three months on a four-point scale (Never—Everyday). Items in this scale included behaviors such as lying, property destruction, intravenous drug use, prostitution, and theft. Response options were assigned numerical values (0 = Never; 3 = Everyday) and mean-scored for analysis. We assessed the adulthood TC antisocial behavior scale for internal reliability using Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.65), which reflects a marginally suboptimal level of internal reliability.
Parental monitoring
Parental monitoring was measured during adolescence using TC report on a four-item subscale from the CFCQC (Child & Family Center, 2001). The scale asked the adolescents to respond to questions relating to their parents’ monitoring and knowledge about their behaviors in the prior three months on a 5-point scale (Never or almost never—Always or almost always). Items included questions related to parents’ awareness of their child’s activities after school, activities during general time away from home, plans for the next day, and interests and activities. Response options were assigned numerical values (0 = Never or almost never; 4 = Always or almost always) and mean-scored for analysis. The scale demonstrated acceptable reliability using Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.84).
Family conflict
Family conflict was measured using data collected from the Family Interaction Task (FIT), which took place during adolescence. During the FIT, families were videorecorded discussing seven different pre-determined topics for five to eight minutes each (e.g., planning an activity, substance use expectations). The FIT recordings were then analyzed by independent coders who provided ratings regarding a variety of interaction characteristics. To ensure consistency and agreement between independent coders, coders trained with the coding protocol until they reached agreement at or above 80% on training data (Dishion & Stormshak, 2007).
The family conflict variable in this study was coded from a 5-min portion of the FIT that specifically explored aspects of family conflict. Families were told to discuss a disagreement that took place in the last month and how it was resolved. If it was not resolved, families were asked to discuss how it might be resolved. Coders then rated each family member on 5 aspects of conflict within the conversation on a 9-point scale for (1 = “Not at All”; 9 = “Very Much”). The five aspects of conflict considered were criticism of others, viewing others with contempt, escalating conflict, proposing solutions, and listening to others. For this analysis, we created a single score for each family by first taking the mean score from the adolescent and both parents for each item (reverse-coded where necessary), and then taking a mean score of all items. Higher scores reflected conversations that indicate higher levels of family conflict. For this scale, proposing solutions and listening to others were reverse-coded. The scale demonstrated acceptable reliability using Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.74).
Adolescent and young adult alcohol use
TC alcohol use was measured during both adolescence and young adulthood. At both timepoints, participants were asked to separately indicate the total number of drinks they had drank containing beer, liquor, or wine in the last three months. These numbers were then added together to create a final alcohol use score at each timepoint.
Covariates
In all analyses, we accounted for multiple covariates when estimating the relationships between key study variables. Covariates for all analyses included adolescent antisocial behavior, TC gender, TC racial/ethnic minority status, and FCU treatment condition. We included adolescent antisocial behavior as a covariate so that the relationship being studied reflected an increase in antisocial behavior during adulthood above and beyond the antisocial behavior that was present during adolescence. We included TC gender (measured at baseline, when the TCs were in 6th grade) as a covariate because gender tends to be a significant predictor of antisocial behavior (e.g., Barriga et al., 2001). We dummy coded TC gender, where 0 reflected male gender and 1 reflected female gender. There were no other genders represented in this sample, and the demographic record did not differentiate between gender and sex. TC racial/ethnic minority status was also dummy coded, indicating whether the participant identified as White in the demographic survey (racial/ethnic minority = 0; White = 1). Additionally, while intervention effects were not a focus of this analysis, we controlled for treatment condition because the data originated from a randomized control trial of the FCU (intervention = 1; control = 2). In addition, for the third mediation analysis examining young adulthood TC alcohol use as a mediator, we included adolescent TC alcohol use as a covariate.
Analysis plan
Initial data cleaning and descriptive analyses were completed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 27.0 (IBM Corp., 2020). We conducted three mediation analyses using path models in MPlus Version 8.10 (Muthén & Muthén, 2023). Each mediation model examined individual mediators of the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood. The first and second mediation models examined parental monitoring and family conflict as mediators, respectively. These mediators were measured during adolescence, the same timepoint as parental alcohol use, due to their increased relevance when adolescents were living with their parents (as opposed to later timepoints when most adolescents were no longer living with their parents). The third mediation model examined young adult alcohol use as a mediator. This model utilized a distinct timepoint from the first two models by evaluating the mediator of TC alcohol use in young adulthood. Thus, the parental monitoring and family conflict mediation models relied on two assessment points (i.e., adolescence and adulthood), while the young adult alcohol use mediation model utilized three timepoints (i.e., adolescence, young adulthood, and adulthood). We evaluated the indirect effect for these mediation analyses using bias-corrected confidence intervals generated by Mplus using bootstrapping. Missing data were handled using full information maximum likelihood (FIML; Enders & Bandalos, 2001).
Results
Descriptive analysis
Prior to estimating our primary models, we ran descriptive analyses to better understand the baseline levels of alcohol use and antisocial behavior in the sample. We also examined preliminary correlations between the variables. Table 1 includes results of the correlation analysis.
Table 1.
Variable correlations.
| V2 | V3 | V4 | V5 | V6 | V7 | V8 | V9 | V10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V1. % Female | 0.02 | −0.01 | −0.08* | −0.06 | −0.03 | 0.12*** | −0.01 | −0.21*** | −0.17*** |
| V2. Treatment Group | −0.01 | 0.01 | −0.06 | 0.03 | −0.06 | 0.02 | 0.04 | −0.01 | |
| V3. % White | 0.03 | 0.14*** | 0.16*** | 0.07* | 0.04 | 0.26*** | 0.06 | ||
| V4. Antisocial Behavior (Adolescence) | 0.19*** | 0.00 | −0.33*** | 0.15*** | 0.14*** | 0.19*** | |||
| V5. TC Alcohol Use (Adolescence) | 0.04 | −0.11** | 0.06 | 0.12** | 0.16*** | ||||
| V6. Parent Alcohol Use (Adolescence) | 0.04 | −0.01 | 0.20*** | 0.10* | |||||
| V7. Parental Monitoring (Adolescence) | −0.14*** | −0.10** | −0.09* | ||||||
| V8. Family Conflict (Adolescence) | 0.08 | 0.05 | |||||||
| V9. TC Alcohol Use (Young Adulthood) | 0.34*** | ||||||||
| V10. Antisocial Behavior (Adulthood) |
Note.
p < = 0.05.
p < = 0.01.
p < = 0.001.
Parental alcohol use
Parents indicated that, on average, they drank about once a month (M = 4.14, SD = 2.33; Mdn = 4), where 0 indicates never having tried alcohol and 11 indicates drinking alcohol three or more times a day. Parents also indicated that when they drank, they infrequently had three to four drinks (M = 1.73; SD = 0.80; Mdn = 1.5) and almost never had five to six drinks (M = 1.39; SD = 0.70; Mdn = 1), where 1 indicates never drinking to the specified frequency, and 5 indicates drinking to the specified frequency nearly every time. While the average level of parental alcohol use was relatively low, there was a small subset of parents who endorsed heavy drinking. Approximately 6.8% of parent dyads reported drinking alcohol nearly every day. In addition, 6.6% of parents indicated that when they drank, they almost always had more than 3 drinks, with 4.1% of parents almost always having 3–4 drinks, and 2.5% almost always having 5–6 drinks.
Adolescent and adult antisocial behavior
To illustrate the degree of antisocial behavior in the sample, we examined overall and item-specific scores for both adolescence and adulthood. The adolescent antisocial behavior measure had a minimum possible score of zero (answering “Never” to every item), and a maximum possible score of five (answering More than 20 times in the past month to every item). The scores ranged from 0 to 4.22, and the mean score was 0.30 (SD = 0.39). Of the nine items in the measure, adolescents endorsed engaging in 1.72 antisocial behaviors, on average in the last month (SD = 1.84). The adulthood antisocial behavior measure had a minimum possible score of zero (answering “Never or N.A.” to every question), and a maximum possible score of 3 (answering “Everyday”). The scores ranged from 0 to 1.63, and the mean score was 0.27 (SD = 0.20). Of the 20 items on the measure, respondents endorsed engaging in an average of 3.64 antisocial behaviors in the last three months (SD = 2.26). To further illustrate the antisocial behaviors endorsed by the TCs, Table 2 provides item-specific percentages of non-zero answers for both the adolescent and adult measures.
Table 2.
Antisocial behavior prevalence.
| % Endorsed | |
|---|---|
| Adolescence | |
| Lied to your parents about where you have been or who you were with? | 41.0 |
| Stayed out all night without your parents’ permission | 20.8 |
| Intentionally hit or threatened to hit someone at school? | 14.7 |
| Skipped school without an excuse? | 41.6 |
| Stolen or tried to steal things worth $5.00 or more? | 8.8 |
| Purposely damaged or tried to damage property? | 9.5 |
| Panhandled (asked a stranger for money)? | 9.7 |
| Carried or handled a weapon, such as a gun or knife? | 13.9 |
| Spend time with gang members as friends? | 12.9 |
| Adulthood | |
| Break a rule of a supervisor or teacher? | 25.0 |
| Miss class or work without an excuse? | 11.2 |
| Physically fight with someone outside the family? | 2.4 |
| Physically fight with someone inside the family? | 2.8 |
| Tell a lie? | 63.3 |
| Steal something worth less than $50? | 4.6 |
| Destroy another’s property? | 1.8 |
| Tease or bully another person? | 11.4 |
| Carry a weapon such as a hand gun? | 6.8 |
| Spend time with friends who use marijuana? | 60.3 |
| Spend time with friends who drink regularly? | 73.8 |
| Spend time with friends who sell drugs? | 21.1 |
| Sell drugs? | 2.8 |
| Get arrested for any offense? | 1.7 |
| Receive any moving traffic violations? | 7.0 |
| Steal something worth more than $50? | 1.1 |
Note. This table represents the percent of TCs who endorsed a value greater than zero (Never/N.A.) on the assessments of antisocial behavior at adolescence and adulthood.
Adolescent and young adult alcohol use
During adolescence, TCs who reported drinking reported an average of approximately 13 drinks over a three-month period (approximately 4.33 drinks per month), though the number of drinks varied widely among participants, and many reported that they did not drink at all over a three-month period (M = 12.76, SD = 56.75; Mdn = 0). In total, almost 40% of the adolescents in this sample reported some level of alcohol use, and 17.4% of adolescents reported drinking alcohol at rates higher than the average for the sample. During young adulthood, TCs reported drinking an average of 20.64 drinks over a three-month period (approximately 6.88 drinks per month; M = 20.64, SD = 14.96; Mdn = 24). At the young adulthood timepoint, a total of 83.5% of participants endorsed drinking alcohol in the past three months, and approximately 50% of young adults reported drinking more than the sample average.
Mediation analyses
Model 1: Parental monitoring
In the first analysis, we sought to determine whether parental monitoring during adolescence mediated the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood while controlling for antisocial behavior during adolescence, TC gender, TC racial/ethnic minority status, and FCU treatment condition. The full model is illustrated in Figure 1, and the covariate findings for this model are reported in Table 3. The direct effect of parental alcohol use during adolescence on antisocial behavior in adulthood was significant (β = 0.103; p = 0.010; C’ Pathway in Figure 1), indicating that higher levels of parental alcohol use during adolescence were associated with greater antisocial behavior in adulthood. parental alcohol use during adolescence was not significantly related to parental monitoring during adolescence (β = 0.048; p = 0.241; A Pathway). In addition, parental monitoring during adolescence was not significantly related to antisocial behavior in adulthood (β = −0.025; p = 0.565; B Pathway). The indirect effect from parental alcohol use during adolescence to antisocial behavior in adulthood through parental monitoring in adolescence was not significant, indicating that there was no indirect relationship of parental alcohol use during adolescence on antisocial behavior in adulthood via parental monitoring during adolescence (β = −0.110; p = 0.684; 95% CI [−0.012, 0.001]). Therefore, we cannot conclude that parental monitoring during adolescence mediates the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood.
Figure 1.
Parental Monitoring Mediation Model.
Table 3.
Parental monitoring mediation model covariates.
| β | p | |
|---|---|---|
| Parent Alcohol Use During Adolescence | ||
| Treatment | 0.010 | 0.513 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 0.001 | 0.896 |
| Female Gender | −0.010 | 0.511 |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 0.066 | 0.000*** |
| Parental Monitoring During Adolescence | ||
| Treatment | −0.126 | 0.062 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | −0.840 | 0.000*** |
| Female Gender | 0.195 | 0.005** |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 0.154 | 0.022* |
| Adulthood Antisocial Behavior | ||
| Treatment | −0.007 | 0.643 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 0.086 | 0.007** |
| Female Gender | −0.062 | 0.000*** |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 0.012 | 0.423 |
Note.
p < = 0.05.
p < = 0.01.
p < = 0.001.
Model 2: Family conflict
Next, we examined whether the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood was mediated by family conflict during adolescence while controlling for antisocial behavior in adolescence, TC gender, TC racial/ethnic minority status, and FCU treatment condition. The full model is illustrated in Figure 2, and the covariate findings are reported in Table 4. This analysis also indicated a significant association between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood (β = 0.099; p = 0.013; C’ Pathway in Figure 2). In addition, family conflict was not significantly associated parental alcohol use during adolescence (β = −0.009; p = 0.807; A Pathway) or antisocial behavior in adulthood (β = 0.019; p = 0.642; B Pathway). The indirect effect was also not significant, indicating that there was no indirect relationship of parental alcohol use during adolescence on antisocial behavior in adulthood via family conflict during adolescence (β = 0.000; p = 0.920; 95% CI [−0.001, 0.000]). Therefore, we cannot conclude that family conflict during adolescence mediates the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood.
Figure 2.
Family Conflict Mediation Model.
Table 4.
Family conflict mediation model covariates.
| β | p | |
|---|---|---|
| Parent Alcohol Use During Adolescence | ||
| Treatment | 0.010 | 0.511 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 0.001 | 0.899 |
| Female Gender | −0.010 | 0.510 |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 0.065 | 0.000*** |
| Family Conflict During Adolescence | ||
| Treatment | 0.057 | 0.531 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 0.442 | 0.000*** |
| Female Gender | −0.008 | 0.925 |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 0.090 | 0.306 |
| Adulthood Antisocial Behavior | ||
| Treatment | −0.006 | 0.663 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 0.088 | 0.002** |
| Female Gender | −0.063 | 0.000*** |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 0.011 | 0.463 |
Note.
p < = 0.05.
p < = 0.01.
p < = 0.001.
Model 3: Alcohol use during young adulthood
Finally, we sought to determine whether TC alcohol use during young adulthood mediated the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood while controlling for antisocial behavior during adolescence, TC gender, TC racial/ethnic minority status, TC alcohol use during adolescence, and FCU treatment condition. The full model is illustrated in Figure 3, and the covariate findings are reported in Table 5. In this model, there was a significant positive association between parental alcohol use during adolescence and TC alcohol use during young adulthood (β = 0.161; p < 0.001; A Pathway in Figure 3). In addition, increased TC alcohol use during young adulthood was significantly related to higher levels of antisocial behavior in adulthood (β = 0.306; p < 0.001; B Pathway). In the context of these effects, the direct effect of parental alcohol use during adolescence on antisocial behavior in adulthood was not significant (β = 0.052; p = 0.188; C’ Pathway). However, the indirect effect was significant, indicating that the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood was mediated by TC alcohol use during young adulthood (β = 0.049, p < 0.001; 95% CI [0.027, 0.071]), where higher levels of parental alcohol use during adolescence is related to antisocial behavior in adulthood via higher levels of TC alcohol use during young adulthood.
Figure 3.
TC Alcohol Use Mediation Model.
Table 5.
Young adulthood alcohol use mediation model covariates.
| β | p | |
|---|---|---|
| Parent Alcohol Use During Adolescence | ||
| Treatment | 0.009 | 0.561 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 0.001 | 0.932 |
| Female Gender | −0.010 | 0.513 |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 0.063 | 0.000*** |
| TC Alcohol Use During Adolescence | 1.690 | 0.455 |
| Young Adulthood Alcohol Use | ||
| Treatment | 0.376 | 0.246 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 1.376 | 0.005** |
| Female Gender | −1.814 | 0.000*** |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | 2.247 | 0.000*** |
| TC Alcohol Use During Adolescence | 0.004 | 0.565 |
| Adulthood Antisocial Behavior | ||
| Treatment | −0.004 | 0.751 |
| Adolescent Antisocial Behavior | 0.062 | 0.026* |
| Female Gender | −0.038 | 0.008** |
| Race (Racial/Ethnic Minority = 0; White = 1) | −0.022 | 0.163 |
| TC Alcohol Use During Adolescence | 0.000 | 0.109 |
Note.
p < = 0.05.
p < = 0.01.
p < = 0.001.
Discussion
This study examined the relationship between parental alcohol use in adolescence and antisocial behavior in adulthood. We evaluated several hypothesized mechanisms of this relationship, including parental monitoring, family conflict, and adolescent alcohol use. Parental alcohol use during adolescence was significantly associated with antisocial behavior 10 years later. Young adult alcohol use was identified as a mediator, with parental alcohol use in adolescence predicting increased adolescent alcohol use by young adulthood, which, in turn, predicted escalations in antisocial behavior in adulthood. In contrast to our hypotheses, parental monitoring and family conflict did not mediate the relationship between parental alcohol use in adolescence and adult antisocial behavior.
Our findings examining the association between parental alcohol use and antisocial behavior build upon previous research in this area. Our results indicated that even general parental alcohol use during adolescence (as opposed to parental alcohol misuse, which is more often the focus of research in this area) can have a significant relationship with antisocial behavior development into adulthood. Most prior work has focused on the impact of parental alcohol use on child and adolescent antisocial behavior outcomes (e.g., Chassin et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2016; Straussner & Fewell, 2018). In this study, we expanded on this work to show parental alcohol use demonstrates an association with adolescent antisocial behavior well into adulthood. The longitudinal nature of this effect is noteworthy and demonstrates the persistence of this association spanning 10 years and multiple developmental stages.
In exploring relevant mechanisms, we identified that drinking behaviors during young adulthood mediated the relationship between parental alcohol use during adolescence and adult antisocial behavior. Prior research indicates that parental modeling of alcohol use during their children’s high school years is associated with the degree to which their children use alcohol in young adulthood (Abar et al., 2009). Increased alcohol use during young adulthood may disruptive normative behavior development processes. antisocial behavior normatively peaks around age 17 and decreases in prevalence as individuals mature (Farrington, 1986; Monahan et al., 2009). However, problematic alcohol use during this time has been shown to not only increase an individual’s likelihood to engage in antisocial behaviors (Hammerton et al., 2017) but to interrupt the natural desistance of antisocial behavior that is normative for this developmental period (Hussong et al., 2004). Disinhibitory effects resulting from alcohol have been noted to increase risk for antisocial behavior (Hirsh et al., 2011). Together, these processes may create a cascading effect in which elevated levels of parental alcohol use during adolescence increase risk for elevated young adult alcohol use through modeling, which in turn disrupts normative de-escalation of antisocial behaviors into adulthood.
In contrast to our hypotheses, parental monitoring and family conflict did not emerge as potential mechanisms underlying the association between parental alcohol use during adolescence and adult antisocial behavior. Prior work with parents who have been diagnosed with alcohol use disorders indicates that that alcohol abuse negatively impacts parenting behaviors and the family environment (Chassin et al., 2019; Graham et al., 1993; Iacopetti et al., 2021). Our results using a community sample with relatively low mean levels of parental alcohol use did not detect a negative impact on monitoring or family conflict. Other studies using community samples have similarly failed to detect a relationship between alcohol use and parenting (van der Zwaluw et al., 2008). Samples characterized by higher levels of parental alcohol abuse may be necessary to reliably detect these mechanisms. Unlike young adult alcohol use, parental monitoring and family conflict represent family of origin-based mechanisms. It is also possible that these family process, even if negatively impacted by alcohol use, may not produce durable effects after children leave their family home.
Strengths and limitations
When interpreting the current findings, several methodological strengths are noteworthy. First, we used a prospective longitudinal model to examine changes in antisocial behavior over a 10-year period between adolescence and adulthood. In addition, our data came from an ethnically-diverse community sample representative of the local population, supporting the generalizability of our findings. We also utilized multi-source (child self-report, parent self-report, and coder impressions) and multi-method (survey and structured observations) data. These varied methods reduce the potential for single method variance inflating associations between variables and allow for a more holistic view of the developmental trajectory of the target children in our sample.
Several limitations are also important when considering our findings. First, the mediators of parental monitoring and family conflict were measured at the same time point as parental alcohol use. Ideally, these mechanisms would have been measured at a subsequent timepoint in order to better capture change processes over development. However, these constructs were no longer appropriate to measure at subsequent young adult assessments due to many participants no longer living at home. In addition, our analyses of each of the mechanisms were conducted in separate models. Future research should consider combining all mechanisms into one model in order to better understand the relative contributions of each mechanism in the relationship between parent alcohol use and adult antisocial behavior.
Finally, there are two main concerns about the antisocial behavior measures used for adolescence and adulthood. First, these measures evaluated some distinct behaviors and utilized different recall periods (i.e., one month versus three months), potentially evaluating slightly differing operationalizations of antisocial behavior at each assessment point. However, given that these measures evaluated distinct developmental periods, some differences between measures were appropriate to capture developmental changes in recall and display of antisocial behavior. In addition, these measures had slightly suboptimal Cronbach’s alpha scores. However, these measures have been used in previous literature with strong predictive validity (e.g., Piehler & Dishion, 2007; Zhang et al., 2024) and are similar to other widely used and validated measures of antisocial behavior (Elliott & Ageton, 1980; Goodman, 1997; Mezquita et al., 2021).
Conclusion
The results of this study suggest that there is a significant association between parental alcohol use during adolescence and increased risk for antisocial behavior into adulthood. Our exploration of potential mechanisms underlying this association suggest a cascading effect, with parental alcohol use during adolescence predicting alcohol use patterns during young adulthood, which in turn may interfere with the natural desistence in antisocial behavior that is typically seen in young adult development. Parenting interventions aimed at reducing antisocial behavior should consider how parental alcohol use practices and modeling may indirectly impact antisocial behavior, particularly among youth who seem to be at risk for escalations in their own alcohol use. However, more research is needed to identify the specific alcohol use patterns among both parents and their children that may precipitate this relationship. A more nuanced understanding of how parental alcohol use impacts child alcohol use, and the development of antisocial behavior may help parent educators and practitioners put together concrete guidance for safe alcohol use for parents of adolescents as well as strategies to minimize negative impacts associated with use.
Funding
We gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the Project Alliance staff, Portland Public Schools, and the participating families. The research reported in this paper was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Drug Abuse (DA07031) and by the National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse (AA022071) to Ha. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the official views of the National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse.
Footnotes
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Data availability statement
Data supporting the findings of this study are available upon request from the first author.
References
- Abar C, Abar B, & Turrisi R (2009). The impact of parental modeling and permissibility on alcohol use and experienced negative drinking consequences in college. Addictive Behaviors, 34(6-7), 542–547. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.03.019 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Barriga AQ, Morrison EM, Liau AK, & Gibbs JC (2001). Moral cognition: Explaining the gender difference in antisocial behavior. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 47(4), 532–562. 10.1353/mpq.2001.0020 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Chassin L, Hussong AM, Rothenberg WA, & Sternberg A (2019). Parenting and substance use disorder. In Bornstein MH (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (3rd ed., pp. 483–516). Routledge. 10.4324/9780429398995-16 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Child and Family Center. (2001). CFC Youth questionnaire. Unpublished assessment instrument. [Available from the Child and Family Center, 195 W 12th Ave, Eugene, OR, 97401: ] [Google Scholar]
- Christoffersen MN, & Soothill K (2003). The long-term consequences of parental alcohol abuse: A cohort study of children in Denmark. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 25(2), 107–116. 10.1016/S0740-5472(03)00116-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dishion TJ, & Kavanagh K (2003). Intervening in adolescent problem behavior: A family-centered approach (pp. xi, 243). The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- Dishion TJ, Nelson SE, & Bullock BM (2004). Premature adolescent autonomy: Parent disengagement and deviant peer process in the amplification of problem behaviour. Journal of Adolescence, 27(5), 515–530. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.06.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dishion TJ, & Patterson GR (2015). The development and ecology of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. In Developmental psychopathology (pp. 503–541). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 10.1002/9780470939406.ch13 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Dishion TJ, & Stormshak EA (2007). Intervening in children’s lives: An ecological, family-centered approach to mental health care. American Psychological Association. 10.1037/11485-000 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Elliott DS, & Ageton SS (1980). Reconciling race and class differences in self-reported and official estimates of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 45(1), 95–110. 10.2307/2095245 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Eme R. (2017). Developmental psychopathology: A primer for clinical pediatrics. World Journal of Psychiatry, 7(3), 159–162. 10.5498/wjp.v7.i3.159 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Enders CK, & Bandalos DL (2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8(3), 430–457. 10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Farrington DP (1986). Age and crime. Crime and Justice, 7, 189–250. 10.1086/449114 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Flanagan IML, Auty KM, & Farrington DP (2019). Parental supervision and later offending: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 47, 215–229. 10.1016/j.avb.2019.06.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Frick PJ, & Viding E (2009). Antisocial behavior from a developmental psychopathology perspective. Development and Psychopathology, 21(4), 1111–1131. 10.1017/S0954579409990071 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Goodman R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 38(5), 581–586. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Goulter N, McMahon RJ, Pasalich DS, & Dodge KA (2020). Indirect effects of early parenting on adult antisocial outcomes via adolescent conduct disorder symptoms and callous-unemotional traits. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology: The Official Journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53, 49(6), 930–942. 10.1080/15374416.2019.1613999 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Graham AV, Berolzheimer N, & Burge S (1993). Alcohol abuse: A family disease. Primary Care, 20(1), 121–130. 10.1016/S0095-4543(21)00369-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hammerton G, Mahedy L, Murray J, Maughan B, Edwards AC, Kendler KS, Hickman M, & Heron J (2017). Effects of excessive alcohol use on antisocial behavior across adolescence and early adulthood. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 56(10), 857–865. 10.1016/j.jaac.2017.07.781 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hirsh JB, Galinsky AD, & Zhong C-B (2011). Drunk, powerful, and in the dark: How general processes of disinhibition produce both prosocial and antisocial behavior. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 6(5), 415–427. 10.1177/1745691611416992 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hussong AM, Curran PJ, Moffitt TE, Caspi A, & Carrig MM (2004). Substance abuse hinders desistance in young adults’ antisocial behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 16(4), 1029–1046. 10.1017/s095457940404012x[15704826] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Iacopetti C, Londi I, Patussi V, & Cosci F (2021). Family climate in children living with parents who harmfully consume alcohol. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 28(5), 1128–1134. 10.1002/cpp.2562 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- IBM Corp. (2020). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version Version 27.0) [Computer software]. IBM Corp. [Google Scholar]
- LoBraico EJ, Bray BC, Feinberg ME, & Fosco GM (2020). Constellations of family risk for long-term adolescent antisocial behavior. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: Journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 34(5), 587–597. 10.1037/fam0000640 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mares SHW, van der Vorst H, Engels RCME, & Lichtwarck-Aschoff A (2011). Parental alcohol use, alcohol-related problems, and alcohol-specific attitudes, alcohol-specific communication, and adolescent excessive alcohol use and alcohol-related problems: An indirect path model. Addictive Behaviors, 36(3), 209–216. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2010.10.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mayes LC, & Truman SD (2002). Substance abuse and parenting. In Handbook of parenting: Social conditions and applied parenting (2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 329–359). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. [Google Scholar]
- Mezquita L, Bravo AJ, Pilatti A, Ortet G, & Ibáñez MI, Cross-Cultural Addictions Study Team. (2021). Preliminary validity and reliability evidence of the Brief Antisocial Behavior Scale (B-ABS) in young adults from four countries. PLoS One, 16(2), e0247528. 10.1371/journal.pone.0247528 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Moffitt TE (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100(4), 674–701. 10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.674 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Moffitt TE, Caspi A, Harrington H, & Milne BJ (2002). Males on the life-course-persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial pathways: Follow-up at age 26 years. Development and Psychopathology, 14(1), 179–207. 10.1017/S0954579402001104 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Monahan KC, Steinberg L, Cauffman E, & Mulvey EP (2009). Trajectories of antisocial behavior and psychosocial maturity from adolescence to young adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 45(6), 1654–1668. 10.1037/a0015862 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Muthén LK, & Muthén BO (2023). Mplus Version 8.10. [Google Scholar]
- Patterson GR (2016). Coercion theory: The study of change. In The Oxford handbook of coercive relationship dynamics (pp. 7–22). Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Patterson GR, DeBaryshe BD, & Ramsey E (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. The American Psychologist, 44(2), 329–335. 10.1037/0003-066X.44.2.329 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Piehler TF, & Dishion TJ (2007). Interpersonal dynamics within adolescent friendships: Dyadic mutuality, deviant talk, and patterns of antisocial behavior. Child Development, 78(5), 1611–1624. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01086.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Skinner HA, & Allen BA (1982). Alcohol dependence syndrome: Measurement and validation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 91(3), 199–209. 10.1037/0021-843X.91.3.199 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Smith VC, Wilson CR, Ryan SA, Gonzalez PK, Patrick SW, Quigley J, Siqueira L, & Walker LR, Committee on Substance Use and Prevention. (2016). Families Affected by Parental Substance Use. Pediatrics, 138(2). 10.1542/peds.2016-1575 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Snyder J, Bank L, & Burraston B (2005). The consequences of antisocial behavior in older male siblings for younger brothers and sisters. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: Journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 19(4), 643–653. 10.1037/0893-3200.19.4.643 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Straussner SLA, & Fewell CH (2018). A review of recent literature on the impact of parental substance use disorders on children and the provision of effective services. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 31(4), 363–367. 10.1097/YCO.0000000000000421 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tehrani HD, & Yamini S (2020). Parenting practices, self-control and anti-social behaviors: Meta-analytic structural equation modeling. Journal of Criminal Justice, 68, 101687. 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101687 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vadivel B, Alam S, Anwar C, & Teferi H (2023). Examining the relationship between antisocial behavior and the academic performance of teenagers: The role of schools and causes of the antisocial behavior. Education Research International, 2023(, 1–11. 10.1155/2023/9463882 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- van der Zwaluw CS, Scholte RHJ, Vermulst AA, Buitelaar JK, Verkes RJ, & Engels RCME (2008). Parental problem drinking, parenting, and adolescent alcohol use. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 31(3), 189–200. 10.1007/s10865-007-9146-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wills TA, Schreibman D, Benson G, & Vaccaro D (1994). Impact of parental substance use on adolescents: A test of a mediational model. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 19(5), 537–555. 6. 10.1093/jpepsy/19.5.537 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zhang J, Hanson AN, Piehler TF, & Ha T (2024). Coercive parent-adolescent interactions predict substance use and antisocial behaviors through early adulthood: A dynamic systems perspective. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, 52(1), 141–154. 10.1007/s10802-023-01102-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data supporting the findings of this study are available upon request from the first author.