CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Child Abuse and TraumaFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Race/Ethnicity, Gender, Parentification, and Psychological Functioning: Comparisons Among a Nationwide University Sample

Hooper, Lisa M., Tomek, Sara, Bond, Justin M., Reif, Meagan S.·2015·The Family Journal
DOI 10.1177/1066480714547187
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Childhood parentification has been reported to have enduring effects on psychological, relational, and physical functioning across the life span. Few studies have examined the implications of race/ethnicity and gender on the levels of parentification. We examined racial/ethnic and gender differences in 977 American college students (81% female, 5% Latino/Latina American, 10% Black American, and 85% White American) who reported a history of childhood parentification. We also examined the extent to which current level of functioning (as indicated by self-rated depressive symptoms, well-being, and posttraumatic growth) is associated with parentification in the current nationwide sample (mean age = 21.39, SD = 5.84). Overall, we found differences in parentification scores based on race/ethnicity and gender. Males had significantly higher levels of parentification than females; this finding was consistent across all racial/ethnic groups. White Americans reported lower levels of parentification compared to Black Americans and Latino/Latina Americans, who shared similar parentification levels. Both gender and race/ethnicity affected some—but not all—of the significant relations among study variables as well. Latino/Latina Americans appeared to receive positive psychological benefit from parentification, while this was not true of Black Americans and White Americans. Future researchers and family counselors should develop research studies and pose clinical questions that account for cultural differences in the assessment and treatment of parentification and its possible wide-ranging aftereffects. The results of the current study suggest that both the benefits and detriments associated with parentification should be considered equally in practice and research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1066480714547187

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other positive life outcomes such as posttraumatic growth, happiness, school achievement, social competence, prosocial behavior, and empathy were studied no more than twice, but findings tentatively suggested that parentification may be associated with beneficial outcomes.

    “Other positive life outcomes such as posttraumatic growth [17,66], happiness [97], school achievement [8], social competence [102], prosocial behavior [42], and empathy [103] were studied no more than twice, but findings tentatively suggested that parentification may be associated with beneficial outcomes.”

    From Parentification Vulnerability, Reactivity, Resilience, and Thriving: A Mixed Methods Systematic Literature Review (2023) · cites this paper as [66]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hooper, L. M., Tomek, S., Bond, J. M., & Reif, M. S.
Affiliations
University of Alabama (US)
Corresponding author
Hooper, Lisa M.
ORCID
Venue
The Family Journal
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2014-08-21
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
33-48
ISSN
  • 1066-4807 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3950
DOI
10.1177/1066480714547187
OpenAlex
W2006869012
Cited by
43
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
The Family Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
race and ethnicity, gender differences, African Americans, White Americans, depressive symptoms, well-being, posttraumatic growth, university students, psychological functioning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review