تفاوتهای جنسی در تجاوز آشکار و بزهکاری در میان دانش آموزان مدارس متوسط اقلیت شهری

Abstract Given the recent debate over whether differential pathways to overt aggression and delinquency exist between boys and girls, this study examined sex differences in overt aggressive and delinquent acts along with potential differences in precursors (anger, self-control, family disruption) to antisocial behaviors among a sample of urban minority adolescents (N = 1559). Using a longitudinal design with data from 6th to 7th grade, results showed that girls had greater increases in rates of aggression relative to boys. Delinquency increased over time for both boys and girls, with boys consistently engaging in more delinquency. Girls and boys did not differ on the level of risk factors experienced except for a greater increase in anger over time for girls relative to boys. Across sex, anger and self-control predicted increases in both overt aggression and delinquency; family disruption also predicted increases in delinquency. Implications for subsequent studies on developmental process and preventive interventions are discussed.

1. Introduction Research on the development of antisocial behavior, particularly overt aggression (physical and verbal aggression that is both direct and open) and delinquency, has been conducted primarily among boys. This is in part due to lower prevalence rates among girls. Recently however, studies have begun to address sex and gender differences in the etiology of antisocial behaviors and it has been proposed that the study of such differences can lead to a better understanding of the root causes of aggression and delinquency (Moffitt, Caspi, Rutter, & Silva, 2001). In light of recent research, debate has risen over the extent of sex differences in antisocial acts and whether there are differential pathways to both delinquency and overt aggression for boys and girls (Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber, 1998, Moffitt et al., 2001, Zahn-Waxler, 1993 and Zoccolillo, 1993). The current study extends this line of research by examining potential sex differences in the predictive validity of anger, self-control, and family disruptions on increases in overt aggression and delinquency among young urban adolescents. 1.1. Sex differences in aggression and delinquency That males demonstrate greater overt aggression and delinquency has been well established in the literature (e.g., Coie and Dodge, 1998, Eagly and Steffen, 1986 and Hyde, 1984) with aggressive/delinquent behaviors observed to peak during adolescence (Coie & Dodge, 1998). National data (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, 2004) show over two-fifths (41%) of high school boys report being in a physical fight at least once in the past year as compared to 25% of girls. In addition, 27% of high school boys report carrying a weapon to school whereas this behavior is reported by only 7% of high school girls. Rates of assault and gang membership among 12 to 16 year olds show similar differences, with 23% of boys and 12% of girls reporting assault and 6% of boys versus 3% of girls reporting gang membership (Snyder & Sickmund, 1999). However there is a growing sense that female delinquency and overt aggression is on the rise or, at least, that the difference between boys and girls is narrowing (see Odgers & Moretti, 2002 for a review). Rates of delinquent behaviors and violence for females have shown an increase in recent years and are approaching the rates for males. From 1980 to 2001 juvenile arrests increased proportionately more for females than males. This is particularly true for violent crimes, with aggravated assault having increased by 24% for females, yet decreased by 21% for males. In addition, simple assault increased by 66% for females but only by 18% for males. Sex differences were also found in trends for less serious forms of delinquency, with vandalism having increased by 7% for females and decreased by 32% for males. Weapons possession decreased but with differential rates by sex: Only 8% for females and 37% for males (Snyder, 2003). Similar trends have also been found among Canadian adolescents (Leschied et al., 2001 and Odgers and Moretti, 2002). While interest has recently turned to the development of aggression among adolescent girls, much of this work has been on indirect, relational or social aggression (Crick and Grotpeter, 1995 and Galen and Underwood, 1997) and not on overt or physical aggression or delinquency. Further, the majority of studies that have examined physical aggression and delinquency among girls have used either cross-sectional data (DiNapoli, 2003 and Salmivalli and Kaukiainen, 2004) and/or have included only high-risk girls (Brennan et al., 2003 and Herrera and McCloskey, 2001). The current study examined change in overt aggression and delinquency as boys and girls transition through their first year of middle school. While both overt aggression and delinquency fall under the general rubric of antisocial acts and, according to Problem Behavior Theory (Jessor & Jessor, 1977), share a similar etiology, recent studies have found that some problem behaviors vary with sex of the child whereas others do not. Cheong and Raudenbusch (2000) found delinquency to vary with both age and sex, with older adolescents and boys exhibiting greater delinquency, whereas aggression was similar across age and sex categories. On the other hand, Broidy et al. (2003) found etiologic differences by sex for delinquency but not aggression. Therefore, despite their similarities, it is important to distinguish between aggressive and delinquent behaviors when examining potential differences between male and female children and adolescents. 1.2. Sex differences in risk factors In their seminal study of antisocial disorder among a cohort of New Zealanders from birth to adulthood, Moffitt et al. (2001) found few sex or gender specific risk factors in the etiology of aggression or delinquency. Risk factors assessed in the study included maternal characteristics (such as mother's age at first birth, IQ, and mental health problems), family adversity, neurocognitive deficits, behavioral factors (e.g., temperament, hyperactivity, internalizing), and peer relationships. Overall, these risk factors predicted antisocial behavior in both girls and boys. However, boys experienced more cumulative risk factors than girls, thereby accounting, in large part, for their greater engagement in antisocial acts. 1.2.1. Family disruption Moffitt et al. (2001) did find that family adversity was a slightly stronger risk factor for boys than girls. However, other studies have found that antisocial girls frequently come from homes without two residential parents and from homes with numerous parental changes (see Silverthorn & Frick, 1999 for a review). Claims have been made that home environment, including frequent disruptions in household structure, is a more important predictor of aggression for girls than boys, but these claims have not been well-tested (Kruttschnitt, Gartner, & Ferraro, 2002). The current study examines whether associations between a recent family disruption and overt aggression or delinquency are moderated by sex of the child. 1.2.2. Self-control Associations have also been found between low self-control and a number of deviant behaviors among adolescents, including drunken driving, binge drinking, aggression, and juvenile delinquency (Coie and Dodge, 1998, Farrell and Sullivan, 2000, Griffin et al., 2000, LaGrange and Silverman, 1999, Luengo et al., 1994 and White et al., 1994). The majority of this research has been conducted with males however, and little has been done to examine how adolescent sex moderates the association. In their study of self-control, opportunities to engage in delinquency, and delinquency among Canadian secondary students, LaGrange and Silverman (1999) found measures of self-control, opportunity, and the interaction of self-control with opportunity to substantially reduce the effect of sex on delinquency but not to eliminate it completely. Another study tested the direct and indirect effects of self-control on both major and minor delinquency among high school students, considering male and female students separately (Mason & Windle, 2002). For boys, low self-control had a direct effect on both major delinquency (e.g., major theft, aggression, vandalism, and encounters with the law) and minor delinquency (e.g., oppositional behavior, school deviance, minor theft, and risky sexual behavior) as well as an indirect effect through an association with delinquent peers. For girls, however, low self-control had a direct effect on major delinquency, with no partial mediation through any other tested channels, and no direct effect on minor delinquency. Instead, girls' engagement in minor delinquency was fully mediated through their association with delinquent peers, their academic performance, and family support. These findings suggest that developmental pathways to problem behaviors may be dependent upon the type of delinquency for girls, but not for boys, with low self-control being particularly salient among girls engaged in more serious forms of aggression and delinquency. Moffitt et al. (2001), using a similar construct, directly tested interaction effects of self-control and participant sex and found that constraint (comprised of self-control, harm avoidance and traditionalism) was predictive of antisocial acts for both males and females. But they found a small interaction of constraint by sex that suggested reduced constraint played a greater role for male antisocial behavior than female antisocial behavior. As they found with cumulative risk factors, boys were more likely to have low constraint and high negative affect; and these differences explained 96% of the effect of sex differences on antisocial behavior (Moffitt et al., 2001). The current study tested for sex differences in self-control over time as well as examined whether child/adolescent sex moderates associations between self-control and both aggressive and delinquent behaviors. 1.2.3. Negative affect Anger, a component of negative affect, is often associated with aggression (Novaco, 1976 and Tangney et al., 1996). However, anger is neither a prerequisite for aggression nor does the experience of anger inevitably lead to aggression (Cornell, Peterson, & Richards, 1999). Theories on sex and gender differences in anger often claim women have more problems experiencing and expressing anger than men, whereas men have more difficulty controlling or managing anger than women (Tavris, 1989). Because men are assumed to be more comfortable with both the experience and expression of anger and to have less anger control, their increased levels of aggressive behaviors are seen as an extension of anger expression. However these differences in anger have primarily come from therapeutic experiences and therefore have been assumed more than tested (Sharkin, 1993). Most studies on sex differences in anger have been conducted with adults and primarily with college students. The few studies that have tested participant sex effects in either the experience or expression of anger among adolescents have not shown significant differences (Armstead and Clark, 2002, Reyes et al., 2003 and Yarcheski et al., 2002). One study that focused on anger coping strategies among Caucasian and African American urban adolescents (13–20 years of age) found girls reported greater anger suppression than boys and Caucasians reported greater anger expression than African Americans (Musante & Treiber, 2000). Most of these studies, however, were cross-sectional in nature and did not examine increases in anger during adolescence, nor have they examined the differential effect of anger on antisocial behaviors by sex of participant. It has been suggested that one of the characteristics of the entry into adolescence is increase in moodiness and intensity of moods (Buchanan, 1991, Graber et al., 2005 and Larson et al., 1980) and some evidence suggests that moods may be more intense during the young adolescent period (Buchanan, 1991). Also, in recent work, it has been found that when girls experience rapid physiological changes at puberty they report greater intensity of anger (Graber et al., 2005). Examining potential sex differences in the association between anger and antisocial acts among young adolescents is an important next step for the field. 1.3. Study goals The current study had two primary aims. The first aim was to examine sex differences in aggression and delinquency among a sample of young urban minority adolescents over a one-year period. The second aim was to examine the predictive validity of anger, self-control and family disruption on aggressive and delinquent acts and to formally test for potential sex differences between 6th grade risk and protective factors and 7th grade aggression and delinquency. This study examined these issues over a one-year period from 6th to 7th grades. Entry into middle school is a challenging time for adolescents. In addition to the pubertal changes of early adolescence, these students are exposed to more diverse and unique social situations that require generation of new, as yet untried, solutions. Rates of problem behaviors, such as delinquency and drug use, show the greatest increase after transitioning to a middle or junior high school environment, thereby making it a critical point for implementing preventive intervention (Botvin, 2000). A better understanding of sex differences in risk and protective factors during this period can contribute to the development of more effective prevention programs. In addition, we specifically focused on aggression and delinquency among urban minority youth. Urban minority adolescents are disproportionately involved in aggressive and delinquent acts, particularly with regard to the juvenile justice system (Snyder, 2003). Several studies have examined sex differences in prevalence rates of urban minority youth (Clubb et al., 2001 and Cotton et al., 1994) and have found high levels of aggression and delinquency among both boys and girls, although boys' rates were significantly higher. One study found smaller sex differences among urban as compared to rural adolescents (Farrell, Kung, White, & Valois, 2000). Few studies, however, have examined change over time or potential sex differences in predictors of aggression and delinquency among urban youth. In the current study, sex differences in the risk and protective factors for aggression and delinquency were tested. We hypothesized that sex differences would be found in aggression and delinquency, but that rates among girls would still be high, as has been found in previous studies with urban minority youth (Clubb et al., 2001, Cotton et al., 1994 and Farrell et al., 2000). It was also hypothesized that boys would report greater risk and fewer protective factors than girls. In addition, although boys were expected to report greater risk and fewer protective factors overall, it was hypothesized that individual risk and protective factors would be equally predictive of increases in aggression and delinquency for both boys and girls, as was found by Moffitt et al. (2001).

Results 3.1. Descriptive statistics Overall, the prevalence of aggression was high, with few notable differences between male and female students in the prevalence of engagement in aggressive and delinquent acts. In the 6th grade, rates of reports of one or more aggressive acts were comparable for girls and boys (95% vs. 94%, respectively, χ2(1, N = 1484) = 1.44, ns), and rates of multiple aggressive acts (5 or more incidents in the past month) were lower for girls than boys (64% vs. 69%, respectively, χ2(1, N = 1484) = 4.1, p < .05). In the 7th grade, rates of one or more incidents of aggression were still comparable for male and female students (97% for girls and 95% for boys, χ2(1, N = 1486) = 3.24, ns, but so were rates of multiple incidents of aggression (81% vs. 78%, respectively, χ2(1, N = 1486) = 3.08, ns). Rates of one or more instances of delinquent behavior in the 6th grade differed by sex, with girls reporting fewer such acts of delinquency than boys, 66% vs. 76%, respectively, χ2(1, N = 1512) = 18.16, p < .001. For multiple acts of delinquency (5 or more incidents in the past year) in the 6th grade, the difference between female students and male students was pronounced, with 11% of girls vs. 21% of boys showing such levels of multiple delinquent acts, χ2(1, N = 1512) = 25.71, p < .001. By 7th grade, however, the rates for at least one act of delinquency were comparable for girls and boys, 78% vs. 80%, respectively (χ2[1, N = 1505] = .97, ns), although the sex difference in the rates for multiple acts of delinquency was still significant, 27% for girls vs. 34% for boys (χ2[1, N = 1505] = 9.43, p < .01). Table 2 shows the bivariate associations between study variables. As expected, delinquency and aggression were highly correlated with one another. Correlations between predictor variables, however, were weak to moderate in strength (Cohen, 1988) and therefore indicated no potential problems with multicollinearity. As indicated previously, ethnicity was confounded with school type, which was demonstrated in the significant, but very small positive association between African American ethnicity and public school attendance and the negative association between Caucasian ethnicity and public school attendance. In addition, school type was positively associated with family disruption indices. Further analyses revealed students who attended parochial schools were more likely to reside in families with stable family structure than students who attended public school [χ2(3, N = 1507) = 10.52, p < .05; 88% of parochial school students vs. 79% of public school students]. Table 2. Correlations among study variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. Student sex – 2. Public school − .01 – 3. African Americana − .06⁎ .08⁎⁎ – 4. Latinoa .04 − .03 n/a – 5. Caucasiana .05 − .10⁎⁎ n/a n/a – 6. Two-parent, non-blended family − .00 .13⁎⁎ .20⁎⁎ − .04 − .11⁎⁎ – 7. Aggression .08⁎⁎ .01 .11⁎⁎ .10⁎⁎ .00 .10⁎⁎ – 8. Delinquency .17⁎⁎ .03 .09⁎⁎ − .07⁎⁎ − .02 .07 .71 – 9. Self-control − .00 − .05 .01 − .04 .01 − .02 − .33⁎⁎ − .30⁎⁎ – 10. Anger − .04 .06⁎ .01 − .02 .01 .05 .31⁎⁎ .26⁎⁎ − .24⁎ – 11. Any family disruptionb .01 .08⁎ .02 .02 .06⁎ .19⁎⁎ .07⁎ .08⁎⁎ .06⁎ .04 – Note. For public school, two-parent, non-blended family, and any family disruption 1 indicates presence; for sex 1 = boys. ⁎p < .05. ⁎⁎p < .01. a Correlations were not applicable due to an artifact caused by variable coding. b Variable dichotomized as any family disruption versus no family disruption. Table options 3.2. Sex differences in outcome and predictor variables over time To examine differences over time, four separate 2 (Student sex) × 5 (Ethnicity) × 2 (Time) mixed analyses of variance (ANOVA) with time (grade) as a repeated measure were conducted on aggression scores, delinquency scores, anger scores and self-control scores. Means (and standard deviations) on key constructs are presented in Table 3 by subgroups. For aggression, a significant main effect was found for time [Wilks Λ = .87; F(1, 1542) = 232.39, η2 = .13; p < .001] along with a significant time by sex interaction effect [Wilks Λ = .99; F(1, 1542) = 9.52, η2 = .01; p < .01]. As can be seen in Table 3, girls reported a greater increase in level of aggression from 6th to 7th grade than boys did. There were no time of measurement by ethnicity interaction effects; however there was a significant effect for ethnicity [F(1, 1542) = 10.12, η2 = .03; p < .001]. Post hoc analyses conducted with Bonferroni adjustments showed that African American students reported significantly more aggression than Latino students (p < .001) and Asian American students (p < .001). Table 3. Mean (and SD) levels of aggression and delinquency by student sex and by ethnicity Total Girls Boys African American Hispanic Caucasian Asian American Other M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Aggression 6th Grade 2.27a (1.03) 2.19 e (.97) 2.36 e (1.09) 2.40 i,j (1.05) 2.10 i (.96) 2.27 (1.11) 1.95 j (.83) 2.31 (1.04) 7th Grade 2.90 a (1.20) 2.90 (1.16) 2.89 (1.25) 3.06k,l (1.22) 2.74 k (1.16) 2.88 (1.27) 2.58 l (1.10) 2.78 (1.14) Delinquency 6th Grade 1.36 b (.50) 1.28 f (.39) 1.45 f (.60) 1.41m,n (.53) 1.31 m (.44) 1.33 (.51) 1.24 n (.42) 1.37 (.54) 7th Grade 1.61 b (.73) 1.53 g (.65) 1.69 g (.81) 1.68o,p (.78) 1.55 o (.65) 1.53 (.75) 1.41 p (.50) 1.58 (.73) Anger 6th Grade 2.53 c (.89) 2.56 (.85) 2.49 (.93) 2.54 (.92) 2.50 (.88) 2.57 (.81) 2.58 (.74) 2.53 (.90) 7th Grade 2.72 c (.89) 2.82 h (.88) 2.61 h (.89) 2.50 (.88) 2.69 (.86) 2.72 (.81) 2.71 (.74) 2.72 (.93) Self-control 6th Grade 3.46 d (.58) 3.46 (.57) 3.45 (.59) 3.46 (.57) 3.42 (.57) 3.47 (.59) 3.52 (.59) 3.47 (.63) 7th Grade 3.35 d (.57) 3.33 (.58) 3.37 (.57) 3.36 (.57) 3.30 (.52) 3.31 (.64) 3.46 (.55) 3.37 (.64) Note. Means that share a superscript differ at p < .05. Aggression: Range = 1–5, n = 1557 (6th grade), n = 1558 (7th grade); delinquency: Range = 1–5, n = 1557 (6th grade), n = 1558 (7th grade); anger: Range = 1–5, n = 1557 (6th grade), n = 1391 (7th grade); self-control: Range = 1.3–5, n = 1559 (6th grade), n = 1391 (7th grade). Table options For delinquency, a significant main effect was found for time of measurement [Wilks Λ = .94; F(1, 1542) = 91.33, η2 = .06; p < .001], with significant increases in level of delinquency from 6th to 7th grade. There were no significant interaction effects involving time by student sex or time by ethnicity. There was a significant main effect for student sex [F(1, 1542) = 44.74, η2 = .03; p < .001] with boys reporting greater delinquency than girls. A significant effect for ethnicity [F(1, 1542) = 7.02, η2 = .02; p < .001] was due to African American students' significantly higher reports of delinquency than Latino students and Asian American students (ps < .01). For anger, there was a significant main effect for time of measurement [Wilks Λ = .98; F(1, 1376) = 3.54, η2 = .02; p < .001] as well as a time by student sex interaction [Wilks Λ = 1.0; F(1, 1376) = 5.56, η2 = .01; p < .05]. Girls reported an increase in anger from 6th to 7th grade whereas boys anger levels remained the same (see Table 3). There were no significant effects for ethnicity. For self-control, there was a significant main effect for time of measurement [Λ = .98; F(1, 1339) = 23.30, η2 = .02; p < .001]. As evident by the means reported in Table 3, self-control decreased from 6th to 7th grade. There were no significant effects by ethnicity or by student sex. 3.3. Student sex by risk factor interactions on aggression and delinquency To test for student sex by family disruption interactions, separate 2 (Student sex) × 4 (Family disruption) × 2 (School type) analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs) were computed for each of the four measures of student behavior, with the time 1 baseline measure of the behavior as a covariate. School type was included in the analyses due to the previously observed differences in family disruption by school type. Neither the family disruption by student sex interaction term, nor the family disruption by school type interaction term was significant in either analysis. However, a significant main effect for family disruption was found for both aggression, F(3, 1491) = 4.25, p < .01, and for delinquency, F(3, 1491) = 3.99, p = .01. Post hoc analyses conducted with Bonferroni adjustments showed that students who experienced a change in family structure from a two-parent, non-blended household to any other family structure demonstrated higher levels of delinquency in 6th grade level of delinquency, than students who did not experience a family disruption and from students who experienced a change from any other family structure to a two-parent, non-blended household. Students who experienced a change in family structure from any other family structure to a two-parent, non-blended household demonstrated lower levels of aggression in 7th grade, after controlling for 6th grade level of aggression, than students who experienced a change either within single-parent, blended, or other family structures, or from a two-parent, non-blended household to any other family structure (see Table 4). Table 4. Mean level of 7th grade antisocial behaviors by family disruption, adjusted for baseline behaviors Aggression Delinquency M SD M SE No change 2.83 .04 1.57c .03 Any other family structure to two-parent, non-blended 2.02a,b .31 1.31d .19 Change within single-parent, blended, or other family structure 3.11b .14 1.64 .08 Two-parent, non-blended to any other family structure 3.12a .20 1.94c,d .12 Note. Means that share superscript differ at p < .05. Table options A series of multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine anger and self-control, in interaction with student sex, in relation to both aggression and delinquency. Three hierarchical regression models were conducted using aggression as an outcome measure and using delinquency as an outcome measure. The first model regressed the outcome measure (aggression or delinquency) on student sex and the baseline measure of aggression or delinquency, as appropriate. The second model included variables from that first model as well as the risk factor (anger or self-control) being tested. The final model included all previous variables along with a student sex by risk factor (anger or self-control, as appropriate) interaction term. Model 2, which included the risk factors of anger/self-control, was a significant improvement over Model 1 for each analysis. That is, reporting greater anger in 6th grade was associated with higher levels of aggression, F(3, 1550) = 170.84, p < .001; β = 5.62, and greater delinquency, F(3, 1550) = 161.05, p < .001; β = 4.02, in the 7th grade. Reporting greater self-control in the 6th grade was associated with less aggression, F(3, 1534) = 165.27, p < .001; β = 3.59, and less delinquency, F(3, 1534) = 161.88, p < .001; β = 4.46, in the 7th grade. Model 3, which included student sex, was not a significant improvement over Model 2 for any analysis, indicating sex did not moderate the association between either risk factor with either aggression or delinquency. 3.4. Relative associations among risk factors and aggression/delinquency To examine the relative associations between anger, self-control, and family disruption on increases in aggressive and delinquent behaviors from 6th to 7th grades, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted for each of the outcomes. In these models, ethnicity, student sex, school type, and the 6th grade measure of aggression or delinquency were entered on the first step and on the second step anger, self-control, and family disruption were entered. For these analyses, the family disruption was captured with three dummy-coded variables to indicate each type of family disruption (any other family structure to a two-parent, non-blended household; within single-parent, blended, or other family structures; two-parent, non-blended household to any other family structure), with no family disruption as the reference variable. Due to the previous findings that African Americans engaged in higher levels of aggression and delinquency, the ethnicity variable was dummy-coded to represent African Americans versus all other ethnic groups. Collinearity diagnostics were run for all models and the variance inflation factor (VIF) was found to be well within the acceptable range (between 1.02 and 1.20) for all variables across models, indicating multicollinearity was not a problem in any of the regression analyses (Stevens, 1996). Because none of the student sex by risk interaction terms were found to be significant in any of the previous analyses, they were not included in the current models. Table 5 shows the standardized betas for the final multiple regression models for aggression and delinquency. The behavior (aggression or delinquency as appropriate) at 6th grade was a significant predictor of the same behavior in 7th grade for both outcomes, as was expected. Greater anger and less self-control predicted an increase in aggression over time after accounting for 6th grade aggression. Family disruption was not significantly associated with increases in aggression when anger and self-control were included as predictors in the model. However, greater anger, less self-control, and experiencing a family disruption were associated with greater delinquency over time. Table 5. Final regression models for aggression and delinquency with all predictor variables Aggression Delinquency Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 β β β β Baseline behavior .47⁎⁎⁎ .40⁎⁎⁎ .46⁎⁎⁎ .40⁎⁎⁎ Sex − .05⁎ − .03 .04 .05⁎ African American − .06⁎⁎ − .07⁎⁎ − .06⁎ − .06⁎⁎ Public school .03 .02 .02 .01 Anger – .12⁎⁎⁎ – .09⁎⁎⁎ Self-control – − .09⁎⁎⁎ – − .10⁎⁎⁎ Any other family structure to two-parent, non-blended – − .04 – − .03 Within single-parent, blended, or other family structure – .03 – .02 Two-parent, non-blended to any other family structure – .04 – .07⁎⁎ R2 .23 .25 .23 .25 Model statistic F(4, 1491) = 112.64 F(9, 1486) = 57.68 F(4, 1491) = 109.29 F(9, 1486) = 55.83 ⁎p < .05. ⁎⁎p < .01. ⁎⁎⁎p < .001.