1. Does the non-residential parent matter? On the link between parenting and self-esteem Kim Bastaits, Koen Ponnet, Dimitri Mortelmans

2. 2 Outline of presentation 1.Overview of literature 2.Research questions 3.Method 4.Results 5.Conclusions 6.Further research

3. 3 Outline of presentation 1.Overview of literature 2.Research questions 3.Method 4.Results 5.Conclusions 6.Further research

4. 4 1. Overview of literature Parental divorce  (-) well-being child (Amato, 2000; Amato & Keith, 1991; Hetherington & Stanley-Hagen, 1999; Lansford, 2009) Mostly focus on residential parent & 1 family type  now focus on residential and non-residential parent  now focus on different family types Mostly negative indicators  now positive indicator (self-esteem) Most important mediator: parental involvement 3 types (Lamb e.a., 1987): -Engagement -Availability -Responsibility

5. 5 1. Overview of literature Involvement of NR parent  (+) well-being child (King, 1994; King & Sobolewski, 2006; Simons e.a., 1994; Stewart, 2003)  quality over quantity So focus on parental engagement (Lamb e.a., 1987) = Parenting style  2 dimensions: support and control (Baumrind, 1971; Maccoby & Martin, 1983)

6. 6 Outline of presentation 1.Overview of literature 2.Research questions 3.Method 4.Results 5.Conclusions 6.Further research

7. 7 2. Research questions How does the non-residential parent contribute to the well-being of the child?  controlled for parenting style of the residential parent Does contact with the NR parent matter?  comparison between joint custody and non-residential parents  controlled for and interaction with contact with non- residential parent

8. 8 2. Research questions Parenting style residential parent Parenting style non-residential parent Self-esteem child Background variables of parents and child Contact with non-residential parent H1 H2

9. 9 Outline of presentation 1.Overview of literature 2.Research questions 3.Method 4.Results 5.Conclusions 6.Further research

10. 10 3. Method: sample Preliminary data from “Divorce in Flanders” (DiF)  multi-actor multi-method study This research used a subsample of the DiF-data (N=436) -1 Child between 10 and 18 year (contact with both parents) -1 parent (with information on both parents) Divided into 5 family types 1.Married parents (N=138) 2.Joint custody (N=91) 3.Mother= residential parent & father= non-residential parent (N=148) 4.Father= residential parent & mother= non-residential parent (N=21) 5.Both parents are non-residential (N=5)  Group 4 & 5 are too small to include in our analyses  Final sample N=377

11. 11 3. Method: variables Background variables of both parents (parent reports) -Age -Educational level (lower secundary or lower, higher secundary, higher education) -New partner: yes/no? Background variables of child (child reports) -Gender -Age -Duration since divorce Independent variables (child reports) -Perceived parenting style of both parents  subscale support & subscale control (PSI II by Darling & Toyokawa, 1997) -Contact with non-residential parent Dependent variable (child reports) -Self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale, 1965)

12. 12 Outline of presentation 1.Overview of literature 2.Research questions 3.Method 4.Results 5.Conclusions 6.Further research

13. 13 4. Results: descriptive analysis Difference in self-esteem? -All children = high self-esteem -No significant difference between family type -Girls have lower self-esteem than boys (except in joint custody) Link between parenting style and self-esteem -Support mother & father (+) self-esteem child -No correlation between self-esteem and control mother/father Link between contact and parenting style -NR father less support & control than married or co-parent fathers -more contact with NR father (+) more support NR father -No effect for control NR father

14. 14 4. Results: Regression analysis

15. 15 4. Results: Regression analysis

16. 16 4. Results: Regression analysis

17. 17 4. Results: Regression analysis

18. 18 Parenting style NR parent *contact with NR parent No significant effect in regression model Effect of support NR father stays 4. Results: Interaction effect

19. 19 Outline of presentation 1.Overview of literature 2.Research questions 3.Method 4.Results 5.Conclusions 6.Further research

20. 20 5. Conclusions Does the NR parent matter? Yes, the NR parent matters: Support NR father  (+) self-esteem child  why not with other family types (effect disappears in married family)? Contact with NR father no (indirect) effect in expected direction (see King, 1994; King & Heard,1999) In all family types: Support mother  (+) self-esteem child Control of mother/father: no effect on self-esteem child

21. 21 Outline of presentation 1.Overview of literature 2.Research questions 3.Method 4.Results 5.Conclusions 6.Further research

22. 22 6. Further research Why support father only important if father is non-residential? Conflict hypothesis: conflict higher when parents have more contact  lower self-esteem? - No effect in 3 family types of conflict - Effect of support father does not appear in joint custody & married families  no explanation Hidden effect of father-child closeness? - No effect in 3 family types - Effect of support NR father does not disappear  no explanation

23. 23 6. Further research Same sex hypothesis: parents raise boys and girls differently? Married: support mother  (+) self-esteem boys Joint custody:support mother  (+) self-esteem girls R –NR: support mother  (+) self-esteem boys & girls support father  (+) self-esteem girls  No explanation Opposite model? Positive effect of self-esteem child on NR father parenting style (Hawking, Amato & King, 2007) -Self-esteem child  (+) support of NR father ** R²=0,120 (lower than former model R²= 0,211) - Self-esteem child no effect on control of NR father

24. 24 6. Further research Joint custody and married type more alike?  not quality above quantity but quantity and then quality? (King, 1994; King & Sobolewski, 2006) Could be: see interaction effect + no effect in joint custody  Why? quality important with feeling of “abandonment”? Used items from BAS-4 (Boss, Greenberg, & Pearce-McCall, 1990) - Since the divorce, I find it more difficult to talk to my father about things I need from him (money, time, advice). Item  (-) self-esteem (not significant) Support father  (-) item (not significant) Item*support father  (-) self-esteem (not significant) - In both of my parents’ homes, I feel comfortable, like I belong. Item  (+) self-esteem* Support father  (+) item* Item*support father  (+) self-esteem (not significant)

25. Does the non-residential parent matter? On the link between parenting and self-esteem. kim.bastaits@ua.ac.be

26. 26 3. Method: sample

27. 27 4. Results: background variables

28. 28 4. Results: Interaction effect contact with NR father*parenting style NR father

29. 29 4. Results: Interaction effect gender of child*parenting style mother

30. 30 6. Further research: conflict

31. 31 6. Further research: closeness

32. 32 6. Further research Other indicators of well-being - Positive indicator: satisfaction with life - Negative indicator: psycho-somatic complaints