The current study is a randomized intervention trial that tests the efficacy of a family-focused sibling relationship promotion program. The study includes a treatment group and a contact-equivalent attention control condition with 288 sibling dyads and data collection with target parents, target sibling dyads, and teachers at three time points (pre-test, post-test, and 18-month follow-up). Data will be collected using a three-cohort design with 96 families in each of the three cohorts.
The proposed project tests the efficacy of a family-focused program. This innovative program is focused on sibling relationships and parenting of siblings as synergistic targets of change to promote positive interpersonal family dynamics and parent and youth psychosocial and behavioral health and well-being. This translational effort builds on strong theoretical and empirical premises including a successful pilot study (ASU SIBS Program). Using a rigorous design and measurement, aims are to: (a) test the efficacy of SIBS, delivered via 12 weekly afterschool sibling sessions and 3 family nights in the familiar elementary school setting, versus a contact-equivalent attention control condition. Mexican-origin sibling dyads (5th graders and younger siblings; N = 288 dyads) and their parents will be recruited from economically disadvantaged elementary schools and randomly assigned within school to intervention or contact-equivalent attention control conditions. Assessments will be conducted at pre-test, post-test, and 18-month follow-up. Program effects will be tested on primary and secondary outcomes, including sibling relationship quality (i.e., warmth and negativity), sibling relationship skills, children's efficacy (social, emotional), children's internalizing symptoms, parents' stress and depressive symptoms, parent-child warmth and conflict, and family cohesion. Findings will advance prevention science by identifying an efficacious program that capitalizes on cultural assets to promote positive family dynamics and psychosocial well-being among Latinos, including by incorporating daily measurements of intervention targets (sibling relationship skills) to identify mechanisms underlying program effects.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
270
Universal prevention program promoting positive sibling and family relationships conducted in an afterschool setting
Contact-equivalent attention control program in which students play educational games
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona, United States
Parenting of Siblings Measure
The measure assesses parents' perceptions of three constructs: Parents' positive guidance, authoritarian control, and involvement (McHale et al., 2000; Updegraff et al., 2016). For each subscale, scores range from 1 to 5. Higher subscale scores indicate more positive guidance (i.e., better outcome), higher involvement (i.e., better outcome), and higher authoritarian control (i.e., worse outcome). Subscales are not combined into a total score.
Time frame: 16 weeks
Sibling Prosocial Behavior
The measure assesses parents' perceptions of one construct: Parents' ratings of children's supportive and prosocial behaviors (Stormshak, Bellanti, \& Bierman, 1996; Updegraff et al., 2016). Scores range from 1 to 6. Higher scores indicate parents' perceptions of target child's more prosocial behaviors toward their sibling (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
Sibling Intimacy
The measure assesses siblings' ratings of intimacy/emotional support (Blyth \& Foster-Clark, 1987). Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate target child's perceptions of higher sibling intimacy and closeness (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
Sibling Relationship Inventory: Negativity Subscale
The measure assesses parents' ratings of sibling conflict and negativity (Stocker \& McHale, 1992). Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate parents' perceptions of target child's greater negativity toward their sibling (i.e., worse outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
Sibling Relationship Inventory: Negativity Subscale
The measure assesses children's ratings of sibling conflict and negativity (Furman \& Buhrmester, 1985). Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate target child's perceptions of higher sibling conflict and negativity (i.e., worse outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Self-efficacy Measure
This measure assesses children's ratings of two constructs: social self-efficacy and emotional self-efficacy (Muris, 2001). For each subscale, scores range from 1 to 5. Higher subscale scores indicate greater social self-efficacy (i.e., better outcome) and greater emotional self-efficacy (i.e., better outcome). Subscales are not combined into a total score.
Time frame: 16 weeks
Children's Depression Inventory
This measure assesses children's ratings of their depressive symptoms (Kovacs, 1985). Items are scored on a scale from 0 to 2, and higher scores indicate greater depressive symptoms (i.e., worse outcome). If mean scores are used, scores range from 0 to 2. If sum scores are used, scores range from 0 to 52.
Time frame: 16 weeks
Behavior Problem Index
This measure assesses parents' perceptions of children's social emotional functioning in 6 domains (i.e., antisocial, anxious/depressed, headstrong, hyperactive, dependency, peer conflict; Peterson \& Zill, 1986). For all scales, items are scored on a scale from 1 to 3. For each subcale, higher scores indicate higher problem behavior in the domain (i.e., worse outcome). Mean scores are created for each subscale, and a total mean score is created across all domains - in all cases, higher scores indicate worse outcomes.
Time frame: 16 weeks
Center for Epidemiological Depression Scale
The CES-D (Radloff, 1977) assesses parents' depressive symptoms. Items are scored on a scale from 0 to 3, and higher scores indicate greater depressive symptoms (i.e., worse outcome). No subscales are created. If mean scores are used, scores range from 0 to 3. If sum scores are used, scores range from 0 to 60.
Time frame: 16 weeks
Parenting Stress Index
This measure assesses parents' perceptions of parental stress and includes two subscales: parental distress and dysfunctional interaction (Abidin, 1995). Items for each subscale are scored on a scale from 1 to 5. Mean scores can be created for each subscale, and higher scores indicate higher levels of distress (i.e., worse outcome) and higher dysfunctional interaction (i.e., worse outcome). A total scale score can be created across all items and higher scores indicate higher parenting stress (i.e., worse outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
Children's Reports of Parental Behavior Inventory - Parent-Child Warmth
This measure assesses parent and child's report of parent-child warmth (Schaefer, 1965). Items are scored on a scale of 1 to 5. Items are average and higher scores indicate greater perceptions of parent-child warmth (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
Children's Reports of Parental Behavior Inventory - Harsh Discipline
This measure assesses parent's reports of harsh discipline (Schaefer, 1965). Items are scored on a scale of 1 to 5. Items are average and higher scores indicate greater perceptions of harsh discipline (i.e., worse outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
Parent-Child Conflict measure
This measure assesses parents' perceptions of parent-child conflict (Smetana, 1988). Items are scored on a scale from 1 to 6. Average scores are created and higher values indicate greater parent-child conflict (i.e., worse outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks
Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales II
This measure assesses parents' perceptions of family cohesion (Olson, Portner, \& Bell, 1982). Items are scored on a scale from 1 to 5. An average score is created and higher scores indicate greater family cohesion (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 16 weeks