Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Feb 19.
Published in final edited form as: J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2016 Apr 4;47(SUP1):S21–S34. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2016.1141358

TABLE 3.

Cross-Lagged Paths to Delinquency

Measures Single Rater Cross Rater
Autoregressive Stability Paths
G9 Delinquency—G10 Delinquency .526* .527*
G9 Curfew Rules—G10 Curfew Rules .507* .376*
G9 Discussions—G10 Discussions .469* .578*
G9 Communication—G10 Communication .508* .471*
Cross-Lagged Paths
Predicting Changes in Delinquency From Aspects of Monitoring
G9 Communication—G10 Delinquency .003 −.059
G9 Curfew Rules—G10 Delinquency .041 .037
G9 Discussions—G10 Delinquency −.113 −.037
Predicting Changes in Active Monitoring Efforts From Delinquency
G9 Delinquency—G10 Curfew Rules −.044 .024
G9 Delinquency—G10 Discussions .053 −.047
Predicting Changes in Active Monitoring Efforts From Communication
G9 Communication—G10 Curfew Rules .013 .023
G9 Communication—G10 Discussions .145* .092
Cross-Lagged Paths to Communication
G9 Curfew Rules—G10 Communication .017 −.043
G9 Discussions—G10 Communication .091 .027
G9 Delinquency—G10 Communication .070 −.019
Cross-Lagged Paths Between Active Monitoring Efforts
G9 Curfew Rules—G10 Discussions .015 .090
G9 Discussions—G10 Curfew Rules .146* .119*

Note: N = 753. G9 = Grade 9; G10 = Grade 10; Discussions = parental discussions of daily activities; Communication = adolescent communication with parents.

*

p < .05.