Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Sep 6.
Published in final edited form as: J Child Fam Stud. 2009 Sep 16;19(2):203–217. doi: 10.1007/s10826-009-9304-8

Table 2.

Comparisons of study condition intervention effects

SFP vs. Control MSFP vs. Control MSFP vs. SFP
Mothers’ reports
 Mindful parenting .02 .66* .63*
 Discipline consistency .43 .15 −.28
 Monitoring .23 .17 −.06
 Rules communication .84** .76** −.08
 Inductive reasoning .17 .35 .18
 Emotional style parenting −.18 .19 .37
 Anger management −.12 .43 .56+
 Mother’s positive affect/behavior toward youth .21 .32 .12
 Mother’s negative affect/behavior toward youth .09 .30 .22
 Youth’s positive affect/behavior toward mother −.40 .22 .62*
 Youth’s negative affect/behavior toward mother −.17 .18 .3+
Youths’ reports
 Discipline consistency −.6+ −.04 .6+
 Monitoring −.79* .21 1.00***
 Anger management −.11 .36 .46
 Mother’s positive affect/behavior toward youth .26 .30 .04
 Mother’s negative affect/behavior toward youth −.32 .02 .34
 Youth’s positive affect/behavior toward mother −.26 .23 .49
 Youth’s negative affect/behavior toward mother −.79** −.36 .43

Note: Negative affect/behavior scales were recoded such that high scores indicate more positive functioning (e.g. lower levels of negative affect)

+

p < .10

*

p < .05

**

p< .01

***

p < .001