Searching for who benefits most and least: An analysis of moderators of the TRUE Dads fatherhood intervention.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Family Process Pub Date : 2024-05-29 DOI:10.1111/famp.13020
Philip A Cowan, Carolyn Pape Cowan
{"title":"Searching for who benefits most and least: An analysis of moderators of the TRUE Dads fatherhood intervention.","authors":"Philip A Cowan, Carolyn Pape Cowan","doi":"10.1111/famp.13020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Evaluations of interventions to promote fathers' involvement in family life typically focus on whether or not the intervention has a positive impact. Some evaluations also attempt to describe mediators that explain how the intervention is linked to specific outcomes. An evaluation of TRUE Dads, a Randomized Clinical Trial of a couples-based fatherhood intervention for low-income families, reported results that addressed these two issues. Reporting new analyses, the present study addresses a question asked in only a very few fatherhood intervention studies: Are there moderator variables that define characteristics of participants who benefit most or least from the intervention? A total of 46 potential moderators of 2 significant intervention outcomes - reductions in personal distress and in negative evaluations of the parents' relationship with each other - were selected from a 5-domain risk/protective model of family functioning (Cowan & Cowan, 2018. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 92, 111) and from a set of demographic variables associated with these outcomes. An additional 24 potential moderators were tested on 4 outcomes that did not have direct intervention effects. Only 6 of the 70 moderator tests were statistically significant. The intervention provided greater reductions in parents' personal distress when fathers had more economic resources, co-parents had higher levels of education, and the parents were living in the same household on entering the study. There were greater reductions in negative aspects of their couple or co-parenting relationship when the parents at enrollment described more difficulties in the parent-child relationship, fathers were more involved in the children's daily care and were living in the household with their child. No other moderators were found. The results support the conclusion that TRUE Dads was equally effective for a relatively wide range of participants. This search for potential moderators of TRUE Dads outcomes is presented as an example of a needed direction in the evaluation of fatherhood interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":51396,"journal":{"name":"Family Process","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Process","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.13020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evaluations of interventions to promote fathers' involvement in family life typically focus on whether or not the intervention has a positive impact. Some evaluations also attempt to describe mediators that explain how the intervention is linked to specific outcomes. An evaluation of TRUE Dads, a Randomized Clinical Trial of a couples-based fatherhood intervention for low-income families, reported results that addressed these two issues. Reporting new analyses, the present study addresses a question asked in only a very few fatherhood intervention studies: Are there moderator variables that define characteristics of participants who benefit most or least from the intervention? A total of 46 potential moderators of 2 significant intervention outcomes - reductions in personal distress and in negative evaluations of the parents' relationship with each other - were selected from a 5-domain risk/protective model of family functioning (Cowan & Cowan, 2018. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 92, 111) and from a set of demographic variables associated with these outcomes. An additional 24 potential moderators were tested on 4 outcomes that did not have direct intervention effects. Only 6 of the 70 moderator tests were statistically significant. The intervention provided greater reductions in parents' personal distress when fathers had more economic resources, co-parents had higher levels of education, and the parents were living in the same household on entering the study. There were greater reductions in negative aspects of their couple or co-parenting relationship when the parents at enrollment described more difficulties in the parent-child relationship, fathers were more involved in the children's daily care and were living in the household with their child. No other moderators were found. The results support the conclusion that TRUE Dads was equally effective for a relatively wide range of participants. This search for potential moderators of TRUE Dads outcomes is presented as an example of a needed direction in the evaluation of fatherhood interventions.

寻找受益最多和最少的人:对 "真正的父亲"(TRUE Dads)父爱干预措施调节因素的分析。
对促进父亲参与家庭生活的干预措施的评估,通常侧重于干预措施是否产生了积极影响。有些评估还试图描述中介因素,以解释干预措施是如何与特定结果联系在一起的。对 "真正的爸爸"(TRUE Dads)的评估是一项针对低收入家庭的以夫妻为基础的父亲角色干预的随机临床试验,其报告结果解决了这两个问题。本研究报告了新的分析结果,解决了极少数父爱干预研究中提出的问题:是否存在调节变量来确定从干预中受益最多或最少的参与者的特征?从家庭功能的五域风险/保护模型(Cowan & Cowan, 2018. 家庭理论与评论杂志,92, 111)以及与这些结果相关的一组人口统计学变量中,共筛选出了46个潜在的调节因子,这些调节因子可影响2个重要的干预结果--个人痛苦的减少以及对父母之间关系的负面评价的减少。另外 24 个潜在调节因子对 4 个没有直接干预效果的结果进行了测试。在 70 个调节因子测试中,只有 6 个具有统计学意义。当父亲拥有更多的经济资源、共同父母的教育水平更高、父母在进入研究时生活在同一个家庭时,干预措施能更大程度地减轻父母的个人痛苦。如果父母在入学时描述了更多亲子关系中的困难,父亲更多地参与到孩子的日常照顾中,并且与孩子生活在同一个家庭中,那么他们的夫妻关系或共同抚养关系中的消极因素就会减少更多。没有发现其他调节因素。这些结果支持了 "真正的爸爸 "对相对广泛的参与者同样有效的结论。寻找 "真正的好爸爸 "结果的潜在调节因素,是评估父爱干预措施所需的一个方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Family Process
Family Process Multiple-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
5.10%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: Family Process is an international, multidisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal committed to publishing original articles, including theory and practice, philosophical underpinnings, qualitative and quantitative clinical research, and training in couple and family therapy, family interaction, and family relationships with networks and larger systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信