Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 May;122(2):406-19.
doi: 10.1037/a0032501.

Does supportive parenting mitigate the longitudinal effects of peer victimization on depressive thoughts and symptoms in children?

Affiliations

Does supportive parenting mitigate the longitudinal effects of peer victimization on depressive thoughts and symptoms in children?

Sarah A Bilsky et al. J Abnorm Psychol. 2013 May.

Abstract

Cohen and Wills (Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A., 1985, Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310-357) described two broad models whereby social support could mitigate the deleterious effects of stress on health: a main effect model and stress-buffering model. A specific application of these models was tested in a three-wave, multimethod study of 1888 children to assess ways parental support (social support) mitigates the effects of peer victimization (stress) on children's depressive symptoms and depression-related cognitions (health-related outcomes). Results revealed that (a) both supportive parenting and peer victimization had main effects on depressive symptoms and cognitions; (b) supportive parenting and peer victimization did not interact in the prediction of depressive thoughts and symptoms; (c) these results generalized across age and gender; and (d) increases in depressive symptoms were related to later reduction of supportive parenting and later increase in peer victimization. Although supportive parenting did not moderate the adverse outcomes associated with peer victimization, results show that its main effect can counterbalance or offset these effects to some degree. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Two-wave cross-panel analyses (w1 → w2 and w2 → w3) of supportive parenting (Supp. Par.), depressive symptoms (Depress.), and peer nomination measures of peer victimization (Peer Vic.).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Two-wave cross-panel analyses (w1 → w2 and w2 → w3) of supportive parenting (Supp. Par.), depressive symptoms (Depress.), and self-report measures of peer victimization (Peer Vic.).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Compensatory effect of high supportive parenting given high peer victimization.

References

    1. Allen JP, Insabella G, Porter MR, Smith FD, Land D, Phillips N. A social-interactional model of the development of depressive symptoms in adolescence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2006;74:55–65. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.74.1.55. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Auerbach RP, Bigda-Peyton JS, Eberhart NK, Webb CA, Ho MR. Conceptualizing the prospective relationship between social support, stress, and depressive symptoms among adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2011;39:475–487. doi: 10.1007/s10802-010-9479-x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barchia K, Bussey K. The psychological impact of peer victimization: Exploring social-cognitive mediators of depression. Journal of Adolescence. 2010;33:615–623. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Beck AT. Depression. Harper and Row; New York: 1967.
    1. Blascovich J, Mendes WB. Challenge and threat appraisals: The role of affective cues. In: Forgas JP, editor. Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2000. pp. 59–82.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources