Gao Huiyuan, Guan Yue, Pei Wenyue, Gao Yuhan, Mao Jiayue, Liao Suqun, Zeng Can
School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China.
School of Nursing, Hubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan 430065, China.
Behav Sci (Basel). 2025 Jul 22;15(8):999. doi: 10.3390/bs15080999.
(1) Background: This study used latent profile analysis (LPA) to investigate family patterns of paternal and maternal responses to adolescents' discrete emotions (happiness, sadness, and anger) and examined the relationship between these profiles and demographic factors, as well as adolescents' emotion adjustment (emotion regulation and depressive symptoms). (2) Methods: A sample of 666 adolescents reported parental responses and their emotional adjustment; their mothers provided family information. (3) Results: (a) The LPA identified four profiles for adolescent happiness, including high enhancing but low dampening and neglect from both parents (Consistent Supportive); low enhancing but high dampening and neglect from both parents (Consistent Unsupportive); low to moderate scores on each response from both parents (Consistent Disengaging); and high maternal dampening and neglect but relatively low scores on the paternal response (Inconsistent). There were two profiles for sadness (Consistent Supportive, Consistent Unsupportive) and three for anger (Consistent Supportive, Consistent Unsupportive, Consistent Disengaging). (b) Parents with boys, higher incomes, better education, and greater marital satisfaction were likely to be classified into the Consistent Supportive profile across emotions. (c) When adolescents perceived their parents with the Consistent Supportive profile, they would show the best emotional adjustment; while for parents with the Inconsistent profile (for happiness) and the Consistent Unsupportive profile, the adolescents had the poorest outcome. Interestingly, adolescents who perceived their parents as fitting the Consistent Disengaging profile (especially for anger) exhibited comparatively less adverse adjustment. (4) Implications: A person-centered approach highlights different patterns of emotion socialization, underscores the importance of fostering parental cooperation and supportive responses to adolescents' happiness, and suggests that joint disengagement from anger may promote healthier emotional development.
(1) 背景:本研究采用潜在类别分析(LPA)来探究父母对青少年离散情绪(快乐、悲伤和愤怒)反应的家庭模式,并检验这些类别与人口统计学因素以及青少年情绪调节(情绪调节和抑郁症状)之间的关系。(2) 方法:666名青少年的样本报告了父母的反应及其情绪调节情况;他们的母亲提供了家庭信息。(3) 结果:(a) LPA确定了青少年快乐情绪的四种类别,包括父母双方高度强化但低度抑制和忽视(一致支持型);父母双方低度强化但高度抑制和忽视(一致不支持型);父母双方每种反应得分低至中等(一致疏离型);以及母亲高度抑制和忽视但父亲反应得分相对较低(不一致型)。悲伤情绪有两种类别(一致支持型、一致不支持型),愤怒情绪有三种类别(一致支持型、一致不支持型、一致疏离型)。(b) 有男孩、收入较高、教育程度较高且婚姻满意度较高的父母更有可能被归为各种情绪下的一致支持型类别。(c) 当青少年认为父母属于一致支持型类别时,他们会表现出最佳的情绪调节;而对于不一致型(针对快乐情绪)和一致不支持型的父母,青少年的结果最差。有趣的是,认为父母符合一致疏离型类别(尤其是针对愤怒情绪)的青少年表现出相对较少的不良调节。(4) 启示:以人为主的方法突出了情绪社会化的不同模式,强调了促进父母合作以及对青少年快乐情绪给予支持性反应的重要性,并表明对愤怒情绪的共同疏离可能促进更健康的情绪发展。