Journal of Primary Prevention, 2(2), Winter, 1981
Relationships Between Family Background Problems and Social Problem Solving Skills of Young Normal Children V I V I A N E PEREZ, E L L I S L. GESTEN, EMORY L. COWEN, R O G E R P. W E I S S B E R G , BRUCE R A P K I N and MARY B O I K E ABSTRACT: Relationships between family background problems and social problem solving (SPS) skills were studied in normal third grade children. Twelve urban and suburban classroom teachers provided information about the presence of six family background problems for 243 children. Three problem solving skills were assessed: 1) alternative solution thinking, means-end thinking, and 3) social role taking. Overall, children with..one or more family problems, compared to those with no problems, generated fewereffectivesolutions and were less able to carry out a stepwise plan or to take the point of view of another. Differentialreltionships were found between specific family background problems and specific problem solving skill deficiencies. Implicationsof the findingsfor school-basedpreventiveprogrammingwere considered.
Introduction and Problem This s t u d y examined relationships between family background problems and social problem solving (SPS) skills, among normal 3rd grade school children. Few would contest the assertion t h a t the experiences children have growing up within family units powerfully affect their adjustment, coping styles, and the ways in which they go about resolving interpersonal problems. More specifically, prior findings showing that: a) children with family background problems have more serious school m a l a d j u s t m e n t problems t h a n peers without such histories (Felner, Stolberg & Cowen, 1975; Lorion, Cowen, Kraus & Milling, 1977; Gesten, Scher & Cowen, 1978; Boike, Gesten, Cowen, This study was done with grant support from the N.Y.S. Education Department and the NIMH Experimental and Special Training Branch MH 14547-02. The authors acknowledge that support with gratitude. Reprint gequests to the 3rd author, Department of Psychology, University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y. 14627. Viviane Perez is now at the Jerusalem Psychoeducational Clinic, Jerusalem, Israel. Ellis L. Gesten is presently at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. Bruce Repkin is now at the Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois. 0278-095X(81)1600~0080500.95
80
@1981 Human Sciences Press
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
81
Felner, & Francis, 1978), and b} maladjusted or clinical groups are deficient in SPS skills (e.g., Platt, Scura &Hannon, 1973; Spivack & Shure, 1974; Shure & Spivack, 1972), suggest that children with family background problems might also be deficient in the latter skills. Such linkages, if found, would provide important cues for future primary prevention programming, especially so within the framework of the three step (stressful life-event) paradigm advanced by Bloom (1979): 1) identify stressful life-events that adversely affect many people; 2) through epidemiological and laboratory approaches, study the correlates and consequences of such events and formulate plans for reducing or eliminating negative outcomes; 3) conduct and evaluate preventive interventions based on such knowledge. If children who have experienced stressful life (and adverse familial) -events are found to be deficient in social problem-solving skills, identifying such (atrisk) youngsters early and training them in relevant problem solving skills, could advance primary prevention objectives. The sections to follow review relevant studies in two key areas: relationships between 1) family background problems and maladjustment, and 2} social problem solving deficiencies and maladjustment.
Family Background Problems McCall and Stocking (1980) estimate that nearly half the children born in 1977 will live in a single-parent home (most, through divorce) by their 18th birthday. That "changing reality" focuses growing attention on the problems and consequences of familial disruption. Bloom, Asher and White (1978) marshalled powerful evidence of systematic adverse consequences of marital disruption for adults, on diverse indices of maladjustment and psychopathology. Even more relevant to the present focus, several recent reviews (McCall & Stocking, 1980; Hetherington, Cox, & Cox, 1978; Felner, Farber, & Primavera, 1980} conclude that children of divorce experience farreaching negative effects ranging from inner turmoil and anxiety to behavioral difficulties Iparticularly aggression and acting-out) to academic and adaptive problems in school. Several more specific studies of relationships between family background variables and children's school problems and competencies have been done within the framework of the Primary Mental Health Project tPMHP}--a program for early detection and prevention of school adjustment problems (Cowen, Trost, Lorion, Dorr, Izzo & Isacon, 1975). Felner et al. (1975) for example, studied the
82
Journal of Primary Prevention
school adjustment problem of children referred to PMHP who had experienced either of two crises: death of a parent, or parent separation or divorce, Both crisis groups were found to have significantly more school adjustment problems than demographically matched, referred children without histories of family crisis. Moreover, there were important differences in problem profiles of the two crisis groups: whereas children of separated or divorced parents had elevated actingout referral profiles, children with histories of parental death evidenced more serious problems of anxiety and withdrawal. In a later study, Lorion et al. (1977) showed that children under family pressure to succeed (FPS) academically had major school adjustment problems in the areas of shyness, anxiety and immaturity, whereas those who lacked educational stimulation at home ILES) had elevated learning problems. Also, comparing rejected with overprotected children, Lorion et al. (1977) found that the former had more serious acting-out problems whereas the latter more often had interpersonal and anxiety problems. The preceding findings were replicated and extended in two later studies. Among referred children, Gesten et al. (1978) demonstrated that Ss from families with little interest in education had: more serious problems and fewer competencies than two other groups--referred children with no family background problems and those under family pressure to succeed. Boike et al. (1978) showed that the preceding findings, both for school problems and competencies, generalized to a non-referred rural sample. Social Problem Solving Deficiencies
Social problem solving (SPS) skills, a group of cognitive skills thought to mediate adjustment (Spivack & Shure, 1974; Spivack, Platt & Shure, 1976) have attracted much recent interest within community approaches to mental health. Based on a number of studies they conducted, Spivack et al. (1976) concluded that adjusted children had better interpersonal problem solving skills than maladjusted, or clinical, samples. The abilities to generate alternative solutions (Shure & Spivack, 1970; Note 1) and means-end thinking, i.e., the ability to articulate, planfully step-by-step solutions to interpersonal problems were shown to be among the most important in this family of cognitive skills for latency-age children (Shure & Spivack, 1972; Larcen, Spivack & Shure, 1972, Note 2). Social role-taking, i.e., the ability to take the role of others, though perhaps less central than the two preceding skills, may nevertheless also reflect a cognitive process needed to solve interpersonal problems (Elardo & Caldwell, 1979; Note 3; Chandler, 1973).
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
83
Based on a review of the role of the family and child-rearing practices in the development of problem solving skills, Spivack et al. (1976) reasoned that deficits in S P S skills might result either from general deficiencies in intellectual stimulation at ho~me or family emotional dynamics that restricted the child's opportunities to acquire such skills. Moreover, the crisis literature suggests that stressful or anxiety-arousing situations, such as parent death or divorce can adversely affect a child's normal coping capacities (Lindemann, 1956; Caplan, 1964). Such events m a y also limit the acquisition of S P S skills. The present s t u d y compares the social problem solving and roletaking skills of children with and without family background problems. Based on prior findings, children with family background problems were expected to do less well on measures of interpersonal problem solving and social role-taking. Establishing relationships between family background problems and social problem solving skilldeficiencies would provide both a rationale and specific focus for implementing primary prevention programs to enhance S P S skills in y o u n g children.
Method Subjects Subjects included 243 3rd graders, from 12 urban and suburban schools, who later participated in an SPS training program (Weissberg, Gesten, Rapkin, Cowen, Davidson, Flores de Apodaca, & McKim, 1981). The data reported here, however, were collected before the intervention started. Ninety-six Ss, 43 urban and 53 suburban, were identified by teachers as having one or more of the following family background problems: a) parent separation or divorce, b} serious illness, or death of a family member, c) lack of educational stimulation at home, d) economic difficulties, e) under family pressure to succeed, f) general family difficulties. Those 96 Ss were compared to the remaining 147 no-problem Ss, for sex and urban-suburban status, using X2s. Although there were no sex differences, the urban sample had significantly more Ss with family background problems (i.e., 65% vs. 30%, X 2 p< .001). Separate analyses were one comparing the full problem sample and each of the three largest lJroblem group subsamples (separation/divorce (S/D) - N=41; lack of educational stimulation (LES} - N=32; and family pressure to succeed tFPS} - N=20} to the no-problem group, on all problem solving measures. Seven children appeared in both the S/D and FPS samples and eight children appeared in both the S/D and LES samples. Limited sample size made it impossible to refine the groups
Journal of Primary Prevention
84
further and to analyze the data based on unique "pure-type" problem categories. Separate analyses were not done for the economic difficulty and general family problem subgroups because of excessive subject overlap with the four retained groups.
Procedure Family background problems were determined based on information provided by teachers on the Classroom Adjustment Rating Scale (CARS). Problem solving skills were assessed using three different measures: the Open Middle Test (OMT), Means-End Problem Solving Test (MEPS} and the Social Role Taking Test (SRT). All testing was done by specially trained undergraduate and graduate psychology students. 1). Classroom Adjustment Rating Scale (CARS). Part I of the CARS (Lorion, Cowen & Caldwell, 1975) consists of 41 behavior problems, rated for severity by classroom teachers. Part II, directly relevant to this study, includes the six aforementioned items identifying family problems. Teachers check specific family background problems if they are both: a) known to be present, and b) considered to be related to adjustment problems checked in Part I. Significant internally consistent relationships between such teacher estimates and relevant child outcome measures have been shown, and replicated, in prior studies (e.g., Felner et al., 1975; Boike et al., 1978}. 2) Open Middle Test (OMT). The OMT, an individually administered structured interview, adapted from Shure & Spivack (1970; Note 1) assesses children's ability to generate alternative solutions to interpersonal problems. Children are shown two sets of three cards. Card 1 always depicts a problem situation in progress and Card 3, a successful problem resolution. The middle card, in each case, instructs Ss to describe all the different things that the protagonist could have done to go from the problem situation (Card 1) to the happy resolution (Card 3). Three OMT scores: alternative solutions, irrelevant solutions, and solution effectiveness, were used in this study:
a) Alternative Solutions. All actions taken by a protagonist to resolve the problem. Although raw alternative solutions were scored, since individual stories were found to "pull" for different numbers of alternative solutions, a formula essentially equating story-means, was used to correct for differential card-pull (Weissberg et al., 1981). Corrected alternative solution scores were transformed both to stabilize variance across story distributions and to adjust for non-normality of distributions. b) Irrelevant Responses. Responses that either: a) lack logical connections to problem resolutions, b)describe actions by other than the
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
85
protagonist, or c)deny the problem. Irrelevant responses were also corrected for story pull and transformed. cJ Effectiveness. An average of the effectiveness scores for alternative solutions given to the two stories. If no alternative solution is given, effectiveness cannot be scored. Higher effectiveness scores {1 =minimal, 5 =maximal effectiveness) reflect the judged likelihood that an alternative solution will attain a goal without undesirable consequences. Effectiveness scores were corrected for story pull, but not transformed.
3j Means End Problem Solving (MEPSJ. The MEPS is an adaptation of a measure developed by Shure & Spivack (1972) to assess children's step-by-step planning ability. For each of two stories describing problem situations and their resolutions, children, in individual testing, are asked to "fill in the middle." The two MEPS variables used in the present study, were: a~Active Means.--The number of different steps in a story, to reach a goal. Active means scores were corrected for story pull and transformed. b} Active Means Variants (AMVJ.--The number of variations of active means given, also corrected for story pull and transformed. 4} Social Role Taking(SRT}.--Chandler (1971, Note 4) developed the Social Role-Taking Cartoon Series to measure children's ability to understand social situations from another person's perspective. The SRT consists of three sets of cartoon sequences each requiring the child to tell two stories: 1) a spontaneous story about the cartoon sequence, and 2) a story from the perspective of a bystander who arrives at a critical point in the sequence and has only partial information about what has happened. Raw scores for the three stories, on this measure, reflect a child's egocentrism when telling the story from the bystander's perspective {O=completely non-egocentric and 4 =completely egocentric.) All measures were scored by two trained judges. Scoring reliabilities for all six measures exceeded .80.
Results F o u r s e t s of a n a l y s e s w e r e done c o m p a r i n g e a c h f a m i l y p r o b l e m g r o u p (i.e., " a n y " , S/D, F P S , L E S ) w i t h t h e n o - p r o b l e m sample. E a c h set of a n a l y s e s i n v o l v e d six c o m p a r i s o n s , one for e a c h p r o b l e m s o l v i n g m e a s u r e . T a b l e 1 p r e s e n t s t h e 24 s e t s of Ns, X s , a n d S D s for t h o s e a n a l y s e s as well as t h e 24 t r a t i o s t e s t i n g t h e significance of t h e m e a n differences b e t w e e n the p r o b l e m a n d n o - p r o b l e m s a m p l e s . E i g h t s u c h differences w e r e significant a t p < .05. T h u s , " a n y " - p r o b l e m Ss
Journal of Primary Prevention
86
Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations and ts for No Problem and Family Problem GFoups
Separation/Divorce
Any Problem Variables
N
Alternative SolutionS96 Irrelevant Responses 96 Effectiveness 90 Active Means 96 Active Mean Variants 96 Social Role Taking 59
X
SD
0.89 0.34 7.92 0.49 0.24 2.49
0.13 0.33 1.56 0.27 0,35 1.25
t 0.97 0.85 1.95 2.61c 1.48 2.52 c
Variables
N
Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
41 41 38 41 41 25
X 0.89 0.29 8.01 0.47 0.22 2.57
SD 0.12 0.30 1.62 0.26 0.35 1.25
t 1.07 0.34 1.12 2.50c 1.43 2.18c
No FamilX Problemsa Variables
N
Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
147 147 140 147 147 83
X 0.91 0.31 8.31 0.58 0.31 1.96
SD 0.12 0.28 1.36 0.24 0.34 1.23 Family Pressure to Succeed
Lack of Educational Stimulation Variables Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
N 32 32 27 32 32 20
X 0.84 0.48 8.16 0.41 0.22 2.85
SD 0.16 0.35 1.35 0.28 0.37 1.25
t 2.89c 2.97c 0.50 3.57c 1.39 2.90c
Variables
N
X
Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
20 20 19 20 20 12
0.94 0.33 8.22 0.53 0.18 2.03
SD O.lO 0.37 1.52 0.24 0.28 1.17
t 1.09 0.31 0.25 0.93 1.62 0.18
aSame comparison group used for all subgroup comparisons bHigher scores indicate better performance for Alternative Solutions, Effectiveness, Active Means and Active Mean Variants; lower scores indicate better performance for Irrelevant Responses and Social Role Taking cE < .05
compared to the no-problem group, gave significantly fewer active means, and were significantly more egocentric. At p < .06, they also had lower effectiveness scores. The same significant differences were found based on comparisons of the S/D sample to the no-problem group. The largest number of signficant differences were found in the analyses involving the LES subsample. Compared to the no-problems, LES Ss gave significantly fewer alternative solutions and more irrelevant responses on the OMT, fewer active means on the MEPS, and were more egocentric on the SRT. There were no significant differences between the FPS sample and the no-problem group. Discussion
Overall, the data show that children described by teachers as having family background problems did less well than peers who did not have such problems, on interpersonal problem solving tasks. The preceding
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
87
statement is more or less accurate, depending on the specific group comparison and specific problem solving measure being considered. The variables that most clearly reflected group differences were active means on the MEPS and social role taking; both measures significantly differentiated the "any", S/D and LES Ss from the group with no family problems. Seemingly then, family background problems in children of this age relate most directly to deficiencies in: a} undertaking sequential step-by-step planning in resolving interpersonal problems, and b) taking the role of the other. Both of those skills are potentially important precursors to establishing effective interpersonal relationships. Differential findings for several of the family problem subgroups are of interest. The most serious generalized social problem solving deficiencies were found in the LES subgroup. In addition to doing less well than the no family problems group on active means and social role taking, LES Ss, as already noted, gave significantly fewer alternative solutions and more irrelevant responses than that group. Children from home situations that lack educational interest and stimulation, thus, have significant across-the-board deficiencies in classic social problem solving skills. Whether those deficiencies reflect a lack of teaching {explicit or implicit} of SPS skills, an absence of modeling, or other factors remains to be established. However, to the extent that SPS skills mediate adjustment, as some have argued (Spivack & Shure, 1974; Spivack et al., 1976}, deficits in them may predispose children to behavioral and adaptive problems. By contrast, although family pressures to succeed can adversely affect s o m e aspects of children's school behavior (Lorion et al., 1977; Gesten et al., 1978}, such pressures do not severely impair their social problem solving skills. The significant differences in problem solving skills between Ss with, and without, family background problems, accords well with earlier demonstrations of similar differences in comparisons of normal with maladjusted, or clinical, samples (Spivack & Levine, Note 5; Shure & Spivack, Note 1; Shure, Spivack & Jaeger, 1971; Platt & Spivack, 1973}. The present data are also cofisistent with prior findings showing relationships between family background problems and extent, and type, of school maladjustment. Thus, for example, Felner et al. {1975) showed that the referred children of separated or divorced parents had consistently more serious problems of aggression and acting-out than did demographically matched, also referred, children without such histories. The demonstration, in this study, that children of divorce were both more egocentric and less able to do step-
88
Journal of Primary Prevention
by-step planning than children from no-problem families, provides a linking datum that may help to explain their elevated acting-out profiles in school. In like manner, the marked deficiencies of LES Ss, in problem solving abilities, shown in this study are consistent with the prior finding, both with normal and referred Ss, of linkages between that family circumstance and a child's having learning problems in school (Gesten et al., 1978, Boike et al., 1978). Several of the study's limitations restrict its generalizations. First, overlap among several problem subgroups clouds specific findings for them. Sounder generalizations at that level depend on repeating the study with larger samples, to yield "pure-type" subgroups (i.e., children with only one-family background problem). Second, although the main thrust of the findings holds for urban and suburban Ss, urban Ss are overall-represented in the "problem" samples and thus contribute disproportionately to the findings. Once again, larger samples would permit separate analysis by problem category for urban and suburban Ss. Even so, the study's overall findings go strongly in the anticipated direction, i.e., children with family background problems have less well developed interpersonal problem solving skills than children from families without such histories. That datum is informative in its own right and has "orienting-value" for future primary prevention work. Children who experience stressful life-events or adverse family circumstances can be seen as children at-risk. This study shows that such youngsters have specific deficiencies in social problem solving skills--a set of skills believed by many (e.g., Spivack & Shure, 1974) to mediate good adjustment. That newly established link suggests that primary prevention goals can be advanced by identifying such youngsters early, before deficit patterns crystallize, and by teaching them the social problem solving skills that they lack. Models exist for (home and school-based) interventions of that type (e.g., Shure & Spivack, 1978; Felner, Norton, Cowen & Farber, 1981}. Further effective development of such programming harbors the attractive primary prevention potential of helping young at-risk children to acquire relevant new skills and thus to be able to cope more effectively with the everyday demands of their interpersonal environments.
Reference Notes 1. Shure, M.B. & Spivack, G. Problem solving capacity, social class and adjustment among nursery school children. Paper presented at E a s t e r n Psychological Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, 1970.
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
89
2. Larcen, L.W., Spivack, G., & Shure, M. Problem solving thinking and adjustment among dependent neglected pre-adolescents. Paper presented at E a s t e r n Psychological Association, Boston, Mass., 1972. 3. Elardo, P.T. & Caldwell, B. M. An examination of the relationship between roletaking and social competence. Paper presented at Southeastern Conference on Human Development, Nashville, Tennessee, 1976. 4. Chandler, M. Egocentrism and childhood psychopathology: The development and application of measurement technique. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, March, 1971. 5. Spivack, G. & Levine, M. Self-regulation in acting-out and normal adolescents. Report M-4351, Washington, D.C., National Institute of Mental Health, 1963.
References Bloom, B. L. Prevention of mental disorders: Recent advances in theory and practice. Community Mental Health Journal, 1979, 15, 179-191. Bloom, B.L., Asher, S.J., & White, S.W. Marital disruption as a stressor: A review and analysis. Pychological Bulletin, 1978, 85, 867-984. Boike, M., Gesten, E. L., Cowen, E. L., Felner, R. D., & Francis, R. The relationship between family background problems and the school problems and competencies of young normal children. Psychology in the Schools, 1978, 15, 283-290. Caplan, G. Principles of preventive psychiatry. New York: Basic Books, 1964. Chandler, M. J. Egocentrism and antisocial behavior: The assessment and training of social perspective-taking skills. Developmental Psychology, 1973, 9, 326-332. Cowen, E. L., Trost, M. A., Lorion, R. P., Dorr, D., Izzo, L. D., & Isaacson, R. V. New ways in school mental health: Early detection and prevention of school maladaptation. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1975. Elardo, P. T. & CaldweU, B. M. The effects of an experimental social development program on children in the middle childhood period. Psychology in the Schools, 1979, 16, 93-100. Felner, R. D., Farber, S. S., & Primavera, J. Children of divorce, stressful life events and transitions: A framework for preventive efforts. In R. H. Price, R. F. Ketterer, B. C. Bader, & J. Monahan {Eds.), Prevention in mental health: Research, policy and practice. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1980. Felner, R. D., Norton, P. L., Cowen, E. L., & Farber, S. S. A prevention program for children experiencing life crisis. Professional Psychology, 1981, 12, 446-452. Felner, R. D., Stolberg, A. L., & Cowen, E. L. Crisis events and school mental heatlh referral patterns of young children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1975, 43, 305-310. Gesten, E. L., Scher, K., & Cowen, E. L. Judged school problems and competencies of referred children with varying family background characteristics. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1978, 6, 247-255. Hetherington, E. M., Cox, M., & Cox, R. The aftermath of divorce. In J. H. Stevens & M. Matthews (Eds.), Mother/child, father/child relationships. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1978. Lindemann, E. The meaning of crisis in individual and family living. Teachers College Record, 1956, 57, 310-315. Lorion, R. P., Cowen, E. L., & Caldwell, R. A. Normative and parametric analyses of school maladjustment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 1975, 3, 293-301. Lorion, R. P., Cowen, E. L., Kraus, R. M., & Milling, L. S. Familial correlates of school maladjustment. Journal of Community Psychology, 1977, 5, 142-148.
90
Journal of Primary Prevention
McCall, R. B., & Stocking, S.H. A summary of research about the effects of divorce on families. Boys Town, NE: The Boys Town Center for the Study of Youth Development, 1980. Platt, J., Scura, W., & Hannon, J. Problem solving thinking of youthful heroin addicts. Journal of Community Psychology, 1973,/, 278-281. Platt, J., & Spivack, G. Studies in problem solving thinking of psychiatric patients. Proceedings of the 81st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 1973, 8, 461-462. Shure, M. B. & Spivack, G. Cognitive problem solving skills, adjustment and social class. Research and Evaluation Report //26. Philadelphia: Department of Mental Health Sciences, Hahnemann Community Mental Health/Mental Retardation Center, 1970. Shure, M. B. & Spivack, G. Means-end thinking, adjustment and social class among elementary school aged children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1972, 38, 348-353. Shure, M. B. & Spivack, G. Problem solving techniques in childrearing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1978. Shure, M. B., Spivack, G., & Jaeger, M. Problem solving thinking and adjustment among disadvantaged preschool children. Child Development, 1971, 42, 1791-1803. Spivack, G., Platt, J. J., & Shure, M. B. The problem solving approach to adjustment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1976. Spivack, G. & Shure, M. Social adjustment of young children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1974. Weissberg, R. P., Gesten, E. L., Rapkin, B. D., Cowen, E. L., Davidson, E., Flores de Apodaca, R., & McKim, B. J. The evaluation of a social problem solving training program for suburban and inner-city third grade children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1981, 49, 251-261.
Relationships Between Family Background Problems and Social Problem Solving Skills of Young Normal Children V I V I A N E PEREZ, E L L I S L. GESTEN, EMORY L. COWEN, R O G E R P. W E I S S B E R G , BRUCE R A P K I N and MARY B O I K E ABSTRACT: Relationships between family background problems and social problem solving (SPS) skills were studied in normal third grade children. Twelve urban and suburban classroom teachers provided information about the presence of six family background problems for 243 children. Three problem solving skills were assessed: 1) alternative solution thinking, means-end thinking, and 3) social role taking. Overall, children with..one or more family problems, compared to those with no problems, generated fewereffectivesolutions and were less able to carry out a stepwise plan or to take the point of view of another. Differentialreltionships were found between specific family background problems and specific problem solving skill deficiencies. Implicationsof the findingsfor school-basedpreventiveprogrammingwere considered.
Introduction and Problem This s t u d y examined relationships between family background problems and social problem solving (SPS) skills, among normal 3rd grade school children. Few would contest the assertion t h a t the experiences children have growing up within family units powerfully affect their adjustment, coping styles, and the ways in which they go about resolving interpersonal problems. More specifically, prior findings showing that: a) children with family background problems have more serious school m a l a d j u s t m e n t problems t h a n peers without such histories (Felner, Stolberg & Cowen, 1975; Lorion, Cowen, Kraus & Milling, 1977; Gesten, Scher & Cowen, 1978; Boike, Gesten, Cowen, This study was done with grant support from the N.Y.S. Education Department and the NIMH Experimental and Special Training Branch MH 14547-02. The authors acknowledge that support with gratitude. Reprint gequests to the 3rd author, Department of Psychology, University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y. 14627. Viviane Perez is now at the Jerusalem Psychoeducational Clinic, Jerusalem, Israel. Ellis L. Gesten is presently at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. Bruce Repkin is now at the Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois. 0278-095X(81)1600~0080500.95
80
@1981 Human Sciences Press
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
81
Felner, & Francis, 1978), and b} maladjusted or clinical groups are deficient in SPS skills (e.g., Platt, Scura &Hannon, 1973; Spivack & Shure, 1974; Shure & Spivack, 1972), suggest that children with family background problems might also be deficient in the latter skills. Such linkages, if found, would provide important cues for future primary prevention programming, especially so within the framework of the three step (stressful life-event) paradigm advanced by Bloom (1979): 1) identify stressful life-events that adversely affect many people; 2) through epidemiological and laboratory approaches, study the correlates and consequences of such events and formulate plans for reducing or eliminating negative outcomes; 3) conduct and evaluate preventive interventions based on such knowledge. If children who have experienced stressful life (and adverse familial) -events are found to be deficient in social problem-solving skills, identifying such (atrisk) youngsters early and training them in relevant problem solving skills, could advance primary prevention objectives. The sections to follow review relevant studies in two key areas: relationships between 1) family background problems and maladjustment, and 2} social problem solving deficiencies and maladjustment.
Family Background Problems McCall and Stocking (1980) estimate that nearly half the children born in 1977 will live in a single-parent home (most, through divorce) by their 18th birthday. That "changing reality" focuses growing attention on the problems and consequences of familial disruption. Bloom, Asher and White (1978) marshalled powerful evidence of systematic adverse consequences of marital disruption for adults, on diverse indices of maladjustment and psychopathology. Even more relevant to the present focus, several recent reviews (McCall & Stocking, 1980; Hetherington, Cox, & Cox, 1978; Felner, Farber, & Primavera, 1980} conclude that children of divorce experience farreaching negative effects ranging from inner turmoil and anxiety to behavioral difficulties Iparticularly aggression and acting-out) to academic and adaptive problems in school. Several more specific studies of relationships between family background variables and children's school problems and competencies have been done within the framework of the Primary Mental Health Project tPMHP}--a program for early detection and prevention of school adjustment problems (Cowen, Trost, Lorion, Dorr, Izzo & Isacon, 1975). Felner et al. (1975) for example, studied the
82
Journal of Primary Prevention
school adjustment problem of children referred to PMHP who had experienced either of two crises: death of a parent, or parent separation or divorce, Both crisis groups were found to have significantly more school adjustment problems than demographically matched, referred children without histories of family crisis. Moreover, there were important differences in problem profiles of the two crisis groups: whereas children of separated or divorced parents had elevated actingout referral profiles, children with histories of parental death evidenced more serious problems of anxiety and withdrawal. In a later study, Lorion et al. (1977) showed that children under family pressure to succeed (FPS) academically had major school adjustment problems in the areas of shyness, anxiety and immaturity, whereas those who lacked educational stimulation at home ILES) had elevated learning problems. Also, comparing rejected with overprotected children, Lorion et al. (1977) found that the former had more serious acting-out problems whereas the latter more often had interpersonal and anxiety problems. The preceding findings were replicated and extended in two later studies. Among referred children, Gesten et al. (1978) demonstrated that Ss from families with little interest in education had: more serious problems and fewer competencies than two other groups--referred children with no family background problems and those under family pressure to succeed. Boike et al. (1978) showed that the preceding findings, both for school problems and competencies, generalized to a non-referred rural sample. Social Problem Solving Deficiencies
Social problem solving (SPS) skills, a group of cognitive skills thought to mediate adjustment (Spivack & Shure, 1974; Spivack, Platt & Shure, 1976) have attracted much recent interest within community approaches to mental health. Based on a number of studies they conducted, Spivack et al. (1976) concluded that adjusted children had better interpersonal problem solving skills than maladjusted, or clinical, samples. The abilities to generate alternative solutions (Shure & Spivack, 1970; Note 1) and means-end thinking, i.e., the ability to articulate, planfully step-by-step solutions to interpersonal problems were shown to be among the most important in this family of cognitive skills for latency-age children (Shure & Spivack, 1972; Larcen, Spivack & Shure, 1972, Note 2). Social role-taking, i.e., the ability to take the role of others, though perhaps less central than the two preceding skills, may nevertheless also reflect a cognitive process needed to solve interpersonal problems (Elardo & Caldwell, 1979; Note 3; Chandler, 1973).
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
83
Based on a review of the role of the family and child-rearing practices in the development of problem solving skills, Spivack et al. (1976) reasoned that deficits in S P S skills might result either from general deficiencies in intellectual stimulation at ho~me or family emotional dynamics that restricted the child's opportunities to acquire such skills. Moreover, the crisis literature suggests that stressful or anxiety-arousing situations, such as parent death or divorce can adversely affect a child's normal coping capacities (Lindemann, 1956; Caplan, 1964). Such events m a y also limit the acquisition of S P S skills. The present s t u d y compares the social problem solving and roletaking skills of children with and without family background problems. Based on prior findings, children with family background problems were expected to do less well on measures of interpersonal problem solving and social role-taking. Establishing relationships between family background problems and social problem solving skilldeficiencies would provide both a rationale and specific focus for implementing primary prevention programs to enhance S P S skills in y o u n g children.
Method Subjects Subjects included 243 3rd graders, from 12 urban and suburban schools, who later participated in an SPS training program (Weissberg, Gesten, Rapkin, Cowen, Davidson, Flores de Apodaca, & McKim, 1981). The data reported here, however, were collected before the intervention started. Ninety-six Ss, 43 urban and 53 suburban, were identified by teachers as having one or more of the following family background problems: a) parent separation or divorce, b} serious illness, or death of a family member, c) lack of educational stimulation at home, d) economic difficulties, e) under family pressure to succeed, f) general family difficulties. Those 96 Ss were compared to the remaining 147 no-problem Ss, for sex and urban-suburban status, using X2s. Although there were no sex differences, the urban sample had significantly more Ss with family background problems (i.e., 65% vs. 30%, X 2 p< .001). Separate analyses were one comparing the full problem sample and each of the three largest lJroblem group subsamples (separation/divorce (S/D) - N=41; lack of educational stimulation (LES} - N=32; and family pressure to succeed tFPS} - N=20} to the no-problem group, on all problem solving measures. Seven children appeared in both the S/D and FPS samples and eight children appeared in both the S/D and LES samples. Limited sample size made it impossible to refine the groups
Journal of Primary Prevention
84
further and to analyze the data based on unique "pure-type" problem categories. Separate analyses were not done for the economic difficulty and general family problem subgroups because of excessive subject overlap with the four retained groups.
Procedure Family background problems were determined based on information provided by teachers on the Classroom Adjustment Rating Scale (CARS). Problem solving skills were assessed using three different measures: the Open Middle Test (OMT), Means-End Problem Solving Test (MEPS} and the Social Role Taking Test (SRT). All testing was done by specially trained undergraduate and graduate psychology students. 1). Classroom Adjustment Rating Scale (CARS). Part I of the CARS (Lorion, Cowen & Caldwell, 1975) consists of 41 behavior problems, rated for severity by classroom teachers. Part II, directly relevant to this study, includes the six aforementioned items identifying family problems. Teachers check specific family background problems if they are both: a) known to be present, and b) considered to be related to adjustment problems checked in Part I. Significant internally consistent relationships between such teacher estimates and relevant child outcome measures have been shown, and replicated, in prior studies (e.g., Felner et al., 1975; Boike et al., 1978}. 2) Open Middle Test (OMT). The OMT, an individually administered structured interview, adapted from Shure & Spivack (1970; Note 1) assesses children's ability to generate alternative solutions to interpersonal problems. Children are shown two sets of three cards. Card 1 always depicts a problem situation in progress and Card 3, a successful problem resolution. The middle card, in each case, instructs Ss to describe all the different things that the protagonist could have done to go from the problem situation (Card 1) to the happy resolution (Card 3). Three OMT scores: alternative solutions, irrelevant solutions, and solution effectiveness, were used in this study:
a) Alternative Solutions. All actions taken by a protagonist to resolve the problem. Although raw alternative solutions were scored, since individual stories were found to "pull" for different numbers of alternative solutions, a formula essentially equating story-means, was used to correct for differential card-pull (Weissberg et al., 1981). Corrected alternative solution scores were transformed both to stabilize variance across story distributions and to adjust for non-normality of distributions. b) Irrelevant Responses. Responses that either: a) lack logical connections to problem resolutions, b)describe actions by other than the
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
85
protagonist, or c)deny the problem. Irrelevant responses were also corrected for story pull and transformed. cJ Effectiveness. An average of the effectiveness scores for alternative solutions given to the two stories. If no alternative solution is given, effectiveness cannot be scored. Higher effectiveness scores {1 =minimal, 5 =maximal effectiveness) reflect the judged likelihood that an alternative solution will attain a goal without undesirable consequences. Effectiveness scores were corrected for story pull, but not transformed.
3j Means End Problem Solving (MEPSJ. The MEPS is an adaptation of a measure developed by Shure & Spivack (1972) to assess children's step-by-step planning ability. For each of two stories describing problem situations and their resolutions, children, in individual testing, are asked to "fill in the middle." The two MEPS variables used in the present study, were: a~Active Means.--The number of different steps in a story, to reach a goal. Active means scores were corrected for story pull and transformed. b} Active Means Variants (AMVJ.--The number of variations of active means given, also corrected for story pull and transformed. 4} Social Role Taking(SRT}.--Chandler (1971, Note 4) developed the Social Role-Taking Cartoon Series to measure children's ability to understand social situations from another person's perspective. The SRT consists of three sets of cartoon sequences each requiring the child to tell two stories: 1) a spontaneous story about the cartoon sequence, and 2) a story from the perspective of a bystander who arrives at a critical point in the sequence and has only partial information about what has happened. Raw scores for the three stories, on this measure, reflect a child's egocentrism when telling the story from the bystander's perspective {O=completely non-egocentric and 4 =completely egocentric.) All measures were scored by two trained judges. Scoring reliabilities for all six measures exceeded .80.
Results F o u r s e t s of a n a l y s e s w e r e done c o m p a r i n g e a c h f a m i l y p r o b l e m g r o u p (i.e., " a n y " , S/D, F P S , L E S ) w i t h t h e n o - p r o b l e m sample. E a c h set of a n a l y s e s i n v o l v e d six c o m p a r i s o n s , one for e a c h p r o b l e m s o l v i n g m e a s u r e . T a b l e 1 p r e s e n t s t h e 24 s e t s of Ns, X s , a n d S D s for t h o s e a n a l y s e s as well as t h e 24 t r a t i o s t e s t i n g t h e significance of t h e m e a n differences b e t w e e n the p r o b l e m a n d n o - p r o b l e m s a m p l e s . E i g h t s u c h differences w e r e significant a t p < .05. T h u s , " a n y " - p r o b l e m Ss
Journal of Primary Prevention
86
Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations and ts for No Problem and Family Problem GFoups
Separation/Divorce
Any Problem Variables
N
Alternative SolutionS96 Irrelevant Responses 96 Effectiveness 90 Active Means 96 Active Mean Variants 96 Social Role Taking 59
X
SD
0.89 0.34 7.92 0.49 0.24 2.49
0.13 0.33 1.56 0.27 0,35 1.25
t 0.97 0.85 1.95 2.61c 1.48 2.52 c
Variables
N
Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
41 41 38 41 41 25
X 0.89 0.29 8.01 0.47 0.22 2.57
SD 0.12 0.30 1.62 0.26 0.35 1.25
t 1.07 0.34 1.12 2.50c 1.43 2.18c
No FamilX Problemsa Variables
N
Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
147 147 140 147 147 83
X 0.91 0.31 8.31 0.58 0.31 1.96
SD 0.12 0.28 1.36 0.24 0.34 1.23 Family Pressure to Succeed
Lack of Educational Stimulation Variables Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
N 32 32 27 32 32 20
X 0.84 0.48 8.16 0.41 0.22 2.85
SD 0.16 0.35 1.35 0.28 0.37 1.25
t 2.89c 2.97c 0.50 3.57c 1.39 2.90c
Variables
N
X
Alternative Solutions Irrelevant Responses Effectiveness Active Means Active Mean Variants Social Role Taking
20 20 19 20 20 12
0.94 0.33 8.22 0.53 0.18 2.03
SD O.lO 0.37 1.52 0.24 0.28 1.17
t 1.09 0.31 0.25 0.93 1.62 0.18
aSame comparison group used for all subgroup comparisons bHigher scores indicate better performance for Alternative Solutions, Effectiveness, Active Means and Active Mean Variants; lower scores indicate better performance for Irrelevant Responses and Social Role Taking cE < .05
compared to the no-problem group, gave significantly fewer active means, and were significantly more egocentric. At p < .06, they also had lower effectiveness scores. The same significant differences were found based on comparisons of the S/D sample to the no-problem group. The largest number of signficant differences were found in the analyses involving the LES subsample. Compared to the no-problems, LES Ss gave significantly fewer alternative solutions and more irrelevant responses on the OMT, fewer active means on the MEPS, and were more egocentric on the SRT. There were no significant differences between the FPS sample and the no-problem group. Discussion
Overall, the data show that children described by teachers as having family background problems did less well than peers who did not have such problems, on interpersonal problem solving tasks. The preceding
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
87
statement is more or less accurate, depending on the specific group comparison and specific problem solving measure being considered. The variables that most clearly reflected group differences were active means on the MEPS and social role taking; both measures significantly differentiated the "any", S/D and LES Ss from the group with no family problems. Seemingly then, family background problems in children of this age relate most directly to deficiencies in: a} undertaking sequential step-by-step planning in resolving interpersonal problems, and b) taking the role of the other. Both of those skills are potentially important precursors to establishing effective interpersonal relationships. Differential findings for several of the family problem subgroups are of interest. The most serious generalized social problem solving deficiencies were found in the LES subgroup. In addition to doing less well than the no family problems group on active means and social role taking, LES Ss, as already noted, gave significantly fewer alternative solutions and more irrelevant responses than that group. Children from home situations that lack educational interest and stimulation, thus, have significant across-the-board deficiencies in classic social problem solving skills. Whether those deficiencies reflect a lack of teaching {explicit or implicit} of SPS skills, an absence of modeling, or other factors remains to be established. However, to the extent that SPS skills mediate adjustment, as some have argued (Spivack & Shure, 1974; Spivack et al., 1976}, deficits in them may predispose children to behavioral and adaptive problems. By contrast, although family pressures to succeed can adversely affect s o m e aspects of children's school behavior (Lorion et al., 1977; Gesten et al., 1978}, such pressures do not severely impair their social problem solving skills. The significant differences in problem solving skills between Ss with, and without, family background problems, accords well with earlier demonstrations of similar differences in comparisons of normal with maladjusted, or clinical, samples (Spivack & Levine, Note 5; Shure & Spivack, Note 1; Shure, Spivack & Jaeger, 1971; Platt & Spivack, 1973}. The present data are also cofisistent with prior findings showing relationships between family background problems and extent, and type, of school maladjustment. Thus, for example, Felner et al. {1975) showed that the referred children of separated or divorced parents had consistently more serious problems of aggression and acting-out than did demographically matched, also referred, children without such histories. The demonstration, in this study, that children of divorce were both more egocentric and less able to do step-
88
Journal of Primary Prevention
by-step planning than children from no-problem families, provides a linking datum that may help to explain their elevated acting-out profiles in school. In like manner, the marked deficiencies of LES Ss, in problem solving abilities, shown in this study are consistent with the prior finding, both with normal and referred Ss, of linkages between that family circumstance and a child's having learning problems in school (Gesten et al., 1978, Boike et al., 1978). Several of the study's limitations restrict its generalizations. First, overlap among several problem subgroups clouds specific findings for them. Sounder generalizations at that level depend on repeating the study with larger samples, to yield "pure-type" subgroups (i.e., children with only one-family background problem). Second, although the main thrust of the findings holds for urban and suburban Ss, urban Ss are overall-represented in the "problem" samples and thus contribute disproportionately to the findings. Once again, larger samples would permit separate analysis by problem category for urban and suburban Ss. Even so, the study's overall findings go strongly in the anticipated direction, i.e., children with family background problems have less well developed interpersonal problem solving skills than children from families without such histories. That datum is informative in its own right and has "orienting-value" for future primary prevention work. Children who experience stressful life-events or adverse family circumstances can be seen as children at-risk. This study shows that such youngsters have specific deficiencies in social problem solving skills--a set of skills believed by many (e.g., Spivack & Shure, 1974) to mediate good adjustment. That newly established link suggests that primary prevention goals can be advanced by identifying such youngsters early, before deficit patterns crystallize, and by teaching them the social problem solving skills that they lack. Models exist for (home and school-based) interventions of that type (e.g., Shure & Spivack, 1978; Felner, Norton, Cowen & Farber, 1981}. Further effective development of such programming harbors the attractive primary prevention potential of helping young at-risk children to acquire relevant new skills and thus to be able to cope more effectively with the everyday demands of their interpersonal environments.
Reference Notes 1. Shure, M.B. & Spivack, G. Problem solving capacity, social class and adjustment among nursery school children. Paper presented at E a s t e r n Psychological Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, 1970.
Perez, Gesten, Cowen, Weissberg, Rapkin and Boike
89
2. Larcen, L.W., Spivack, G., & Shure, M. Problem solving thinking and adjustment among dependent neglected pre-adolescents. Paper presented at E a s t e r n Psychological Association, Boston, Mass., 1972. 3. Elardo, P.T. & Caldwell, B. M. An examination of the relationship between roletaking and social competence. Paper presented at Southeastern Conference on Human Development, Nashville, Tennessee, 1976. 4. Chandler, M. Egocentrism and childhood psychopathology: The development and application of measurement technique. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, March, 1971. 5. Spivack, G. & Levine, M. Self-regulation in acting-out and normal adolescents. Report M-4351, Washington, D.C., National Institute of Mental Health, 1963.
References Bloom, B. L. Prevention of mental disorders: Recent advances in theory and practice. Community Mental Health Journal, 1979, 15, 179-191. Bloom, B.L., Asher, S.J., & White, S.W. Marital disruption as a stressor: A review and analysis. Pychological Bulletin, 1978, 85, 867-984. Boike, M., Gesten, E. L., Cowen, E. L., Felner, R. D., & Francis, R. The relationship between family background problems and the school problems and competencies of young normal children. Psychology in the Schools, 1978, 15, 283-290. Caplan, G. Principles of preventive psychiatry. New York: Basic Books, 1964. Chandler, M. J. Egocentrism and antisocial behavior: The assessment and training of social perspective-taking skills. Developmental Psychology, 1973, 9, 326-332. Cowen, E. L., Trost, M. A., Lorion, R. P., Dorr, D., Izzo, L. D., & Isaacson, R. V. New ways in school mental health: Early detection and prevention of school maladaptation. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1975. Elardo, P. T. & CaldweU, B. M. The effects of an experimental social development program on children in the middle childhood period. Psychology in the Schools, 1979, 16, 93-100. Felner, R. D., Farber, S. S., & Primavera, J. Children of divorce, stressful life events and transitions: A framework for preventive efforts. In R. H. Price, R. F. Ketterer, B. C. Bader, & J. Monahan {Eds.), Prevention in mental health: Research, policy and practice. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1980. Felner, R. D., Norton, P. L., Cowen, E. L., & Farber, S. S. A prevention program for children experiencing life crisis. Professional Psychology, 1981, 12, 446-452. Felner, R. D., Stolberg, A. L., & Cowen, E. L. Crisis events and school mental heatlh referral patterns of young children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1975, 43, 305-310. Gesten, E. L., Scher, K., & Cowen, E. L. Judged school problems and competencies of referred children with varying family background characteristics. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1978, 6, 247-255. Hetherington, E. M., Cox, M., & Cox, R. The aftermath of divorce. In J. H. Stevens & M. Matthews (Eds.), Mother/child, father/child relationships. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1978. Lindemann, E. The meaning of crisis in individual and family living. Teachers College Record, 1956, 57, 310-315. Lorion, R. P., Cowen, E. L., & Caldwell, R. A. Normative and parametric analyses of school maladjustment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 1975, 3, 293-301. Lorion, R. P., Cowen, E. L., Kraus, R. M., & Milling, L. S. Familial correlates of school maladjustment. Journal of Community Psychology, 1977, 5, 142-148.
90
Journal of Primary Prevention
McCall, R. B., & Stocking, S.H. A summary of research about the effects of divorce on families. Boys Town, NE: The Boys Town Center for the Study of Youth Development, 1980. Platt, J., Scura, W., & Hannon, J. Problem solving thinking of youthful heroin addicts. Journal of Community Psychology, 1973,/, 278-281. Platt, J., & Spivack, G. Studies in problem solving thinking of psychiatric patients. Proceedings of the 81st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 1973, 8, 461-462. Shure, M. B. & Spivack, G. Cognitive problem solving skills, adjustment and social class. Research and Evaluation Report //26. Philadelphia: Department of Mental Health Sciences, Hahnemann Community Mental Health/Mental Retardation Center, 1970. Shure, M. B. & Spivack, G. Means-end thinking, adjustment and social class among elementary school aged children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1972, 38, 348-353. Shure, M. B. & Spivack, G. Problem solving techniques in childrearing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1978. Shure, M. B., Spivack, G., & Jaeger, M. Problem solving thinking and adjustment among disadvantaged preschool children. Child Development, 1971, 42, 1791-1803. Spivack, G., Platt, J. J., & Shure, M. B. The problem solving approach to adjustment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1976. Spivack, G. & Shure, M. Social adjustment of young children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1974. Weissberg, R. P., Gesten, E. L., Rapkin, B. D., Cowen, E. L., Davidson, E., Flores de Apodaca, R., & McKim, B. J. The evaluation of a social problem solving training program for suburban and inner-city third grade children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1981, 49, 251-261.
