essay about generation gap between parents and child

Parent, Adolescent, and Managing the Generation Gap

How to work toward mutual understanding with your teenager..

Posted July 9, 2018 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan

A college student in Thailand sent me some good questions about how to manage the generation gap between parents and teenagers.

What follows are the questions asked and my responses, not based on psychological research, but only expressive of my personal opinions as a practitioner.

Some people say the generation gap is a myth. What is your opinion on that?

The “generation gap” between parents and adolescents is real to the degree that each grows up in a different historical time and culture—imprinted by the tastes and values and icons and events that define that formative period in their lives when the impressionable adolescent begins the process of growing up.

What is the cause of it? Do we blame the parents, the children, or something else?

The generation gap is not to be “blamed” on anyone. It is a function of normal social change. Change is that process that constantly upsets and resets the terms of everyone’s existence all their lives.

Cultural differences between generations are emphasized when parents identify with the old, similar, familiar, traditional, and known, while their adolescent (at a later time) becomes fascinated and influenced by the new, different, unfamiliar, experimental, and unknown.

In most cases, the parents are culturally anchored in an earlier time and the adolescent in a later time. To some degree, social change culturally differentiates the generations. That is just how life is.

Obviously, in socially simpler, stable, low-change cultures where the young identify with parental roles they expect to imitate and occupy when grown-up, there is very little generation gap. Compare this to growing up in a very complex, rapidly changing culture where the old world of the parent stands in marked contrast to that of their adolescent.

For example: The parents grew up before the Internet revolution in one world of experience only—offline. However, their adolescent is growing up in two worlds—offline and online. Thus a profound generation gap can be created, even though parents have acquired online skills in their adulthood.

How does the generation gap affect the relationship between parents and children?

To the degree that parents can bridge the generational difference by showing an interest in the new, this can reduce the gap's potentially estranging influence.

For example, they can encourage a very powerful and esteem-endowing power reversal in their relationship if they treat the adolescent as an “expert” and themselves as "unknowing," with their adolescent as teacher and themselves as students.

For example, the parent might ask: “Can you help me learn to appreciate the music you love—it is so different from what I grew up with and became used to listening to?”

Or, the parent might ask: “Can you show me a little how to play the video game you and your friends so enjoy, because I would like to learn?”

Parents who can’t bridge cultural, generational differences with interest, but ignore or criticize them instead, are at risk of allowing these differences to estrange the relationship.

What should a teenager do when they feel that parents don't understand them?

Once children start separating from childhood , around ages 9 to 13, and start redefining themselves on the way to young adulthood, two avenues for growth are pursued. One is detaching from childhood and family for more freedom of action and independence; the other is differentiating from childhood and parents for more freedom of personal expression and individuality.

In one sense, having parents “not understand” the young person as well as they did in his or her childhood confirms that this adolescent transformation is underway. This is both affirming and lonely , so the adolescent is often ambivalent—wanting and not wanting to be understood by parents.

When young people feel that their parents don’t understand and would like them to, they can take the initiative. Being brave, they can say to parents: “There is something about my growing up that I believe you do not understand, and I would like you to appreciate. Could you listen while I try to explain, and then we can talk because this is important to me.”

When there's conflict, how can we make a compromise acceptable to both sides?

Where intergenerational conflicts arise over what is enjoyable to youth and offensive to adults, like cutting -edge media entertainment, treat conflict not as a power struggle over who will prevail, but as an opportunity to use discussion over a difference to increase communication and understanding in the relationship.

For adults, no authority is sacrificed by listening. Instead, valuable understanding can be gained when parents treat the adolescent not as a stubborn opponent to defeat, but as a valued informant who can help them know their teenager and her or his world more fully. Sometimes giving a hearing and fully listening is enough to ease parental concerns, and sometimes being given a hearing is enough for the adolescent to honor the parents' wishes.

Parents can explain: “We will be firm where we have to be, flexible and willing to compromise where we can, and in either case always want to give a complete hearing to whatever you have to say.”

Is there a way to minimize the effect of the generation gap?

I believe the best way to minimize the potentially estranging effects of the generation gap is for parents to treat their adolescent as a guide who can help them understand a time of growing up that can be quite culturally different from their own youth. When rearing adolescents, parental interest and willingness to listen count for a lot, while those parents who are more fully informed are often less fearful than parents who forbid discussion of what they don’t understand.

In addition, it can help parents and teenagers stay close when they share companionship doing what they still enjoy in common—whether participating in some traditional interests that still hold, eating out together, helping each other, going to movies, or just joking around about what both find funny.

This is the challenge of relating across the generation gap for them both: remaining communicatively connected as adolescence drives them apart—as it is meant to do.

Carl Pickhardt Ph.D. is a psychologist in private counseling and public lecturing practice in Austin, Texas. His latest book is Holding On While Letting Go: Parenting Your Child Through the Four Freedoms of Adolescence.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Essay on Generation Gap for Students and Children

500+ words essay on generation gap.

We all know that humans have been inhabiting this earth for a long time. Over time, times have changed and humans have evolved. The world became developed and so did mankind. Each generation has seen new changes and things that the older generations have not.

This is exactly what creates a generation gap. It is how one generation differs from the other. It is quite natural for a generation gap to exist. Why? Because it shows that mankind is evolving and changing for the better. However, sometimes this gap impacts our lives wrongly.

Generation Gap – Impact on Relations

It is always nice to have fresh ideas and points of view. It is a clear indication of how we are advancing and developing at a great level. However, when this clash of ideas and viewpoints becomes gets too much, it becomes a matter of worry.

The most common result of this clash is distanced relations. Generally, a generation gap is mostly seen between parents and kids. It shows that parents fail to understand their kids and vice versa. The parents usually follow the traditions and norms.

Likewise, they expect their children to conform to the societal norms as they have. But the kids are of the modern age with a broad outlook. They refuse to accept these traditional ways.

This is one of the main reasons why the conflict begins. They do not reach a solution and thus distance themselves because of misunderstandings. This is a mistake at both ends. The parents must try not to impose the same expectations which their parents had from them. Similarly, the kids must not outright wrong their parents but try to understand where this is coming from.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

How to Bridge the Gap?

As we all know there is no stronger bond than that of a kid and his parents. Thus, we must understand its importance and handle it with care. Nowadays, it is very disheartening to see that these precious relationships are getting strained due to a generation gap.

In other words, just because there is a difference of opinion does not mean that people give up on relationships. It is high time both parties understand that no one is completely right or wrong. They can both reach a middle ground and sort it out. Acceptance and understanding are the keys here.

Moreover, there must be a friendly relationship between parents and kids. The kids must be given the space to express themselves freely without the fear of traditional thinking. Likewise, the children must trust their parents enough to indulge them in their lives.

Most importantly, there is a need to set boundaries between the two parties. Instead of debating, it is better to understand the point of view. This will result in great communication and both will be happy irrespective of the generation gap.

In short, a generation gap happens due to the constant changes in the world. While we may not stop the evolvement of the world, we can strengthen the bond and bridge the gap it creates. Each person must respect everyone for their individuality rather than fitting them into a box they believe to be right.

FAQs on Generation Gap

Q.1 How does the generation gap impact relationships?

A.1 The generation gap impacts relationships severely. It creates a difference between them and also a lack of understanding. All this results in strained relationships.

Q.2 How can we bridge the generation gap?

A.2 We can bridge the generation gap by creating a safe environment for people to express themselves. We must understand and accept each other for what they are rather than fitting them in a box.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Essay on Generation Gap

What is the Generation Gap?

Generation Gap is a term given to the gap or age difference between two sets of people; the young people and their elders, especially between children and their parents. Everything is influenced by the change of time- the age, the culture, mannerism, and morality. This change affects everyone. The generation gap is an endless social phenomenon. Every generation lives at a certain time under certain circumstances and conditions. So, all generations have their own set of values and views. Every generation wants to uphold the principles they believe in. This is a problem that has continued for ages.

People born in different periods under different conditions have their views based on the circumstances they have been through. The patterns of life have been changing continuously according to time. Everyone wants to live and behave in his way and no one wants to compromise with his or her values and views. There has always been a difference in attitude or lack of understanding between the younger and older generations. This attitude has augmented the generation gap and it is becoming wider day by day. This gap now has started impacting our lives in the wrong way. 

It is always good to have a wide range of ideas, views, and opinions. It indicates how we are developing and advancing but sometimes this becomes worrisome when the views and ideas are not accepted by both generations. Parents create a certain image in their minds for their children. They want to bring up their children with values that they have been brought up with and expect their children to follow the same. Parents want children to act following their values, as they believe, it is for their benefit and would do well for them. 

Children on the other hand have a broader outlook and refuse to accept the traditional ways. They want to do things their way and don’t like going by any rulebook. Mostly, young people experience conflict during their adolescence. They are desperately searching for self-identity. Parents at times fail to understand the demands of this fast-paced world. Ultimately, despite love and affection for each other both are drained out of energy and not able to comprehend the other. Consequently, there is a lack of communication and giving up on relationships.

Different Ways to Reduce the Generation Gap

Nothing in the world can be as beautiful as a parent-child relationship. It should be nurtured very delicately and so it is important to bridge the gap between the two generations. It is time to realize that neither is completely right nor wrong. Both generations have to develop more understanding and acceptance for each other. Having a dialogue with each other calmly, with the idea of sorting out conflict amicably in ideas, changing their mindset for each other, and coming to a middle ground can be the most helpful instrument in bridging the gap between the two generations. 

Spending more time with each other like family outings, vacations, picnics, shopping, watching movies together could be some effective ways to build up a strong bond with each other. Both the generations need to study the ways of the society during their growing period and have mutual respect for it. To reduce the friction between the two generations, both parents and children have to give space to each other and define certain boundaries that the latter should respect. 

The generation gap occurs because society is constantly changing. It is the responsibility of both generations to fill this gap with love, affection, and trust. Both generations should have mutual respect for the views and opinions that they uphold and advance cautiously with the development of society.

Conclusion 

The generation gap is a very critical concept that occurs because of the different natures of every person. No one can end this generation gap but obviously, you can opt for some way in which it can be reduced. 

There should be efforts made by both sides to get a better relationship between two people. The generation gap may cause conflict between families but if you try to understand the thinking of another person and choose a path in between then you can get a happy living family.

No one wants to live in a tense environment and you always need your elders with yourself no matter what, they are the ones who care for you, they may have different ways of expressing their love and care for you and you might feel awkward but you need to understand them and their ways. Having your elders with you in your family is a blessing, you can talk with them and let them know your views and understand your ways to approach a particular situation.

FAQs on Essay on Generation Gap

1. What do you Understand by Generation Gap?

The gap between the old people and the young is called the generation gap. The generation gap is not only the age difference between young people, their parents, and grandparents, but it is also caused by differences in opinion between two generations; it can be differences in beliefs, differences in views like politics, or differences in values. Therefore a generational gap is a conflict in thoughts, actions, and tastes of the young generation to that of older ones. We can have a good relationship even with a generational gap. All we need to do is understand others' way of thinking.

2. Why Does the Generation Gap Occur?

The generation gap occurs due to differences in views and opinions between the younger and older generation. Both generations want to uphold the principles they believe in. The reason for the generation gap is not only age but it can be because of reasons like:

Difference in beliefs

Difference in interests

Difference in opinion

In today's time, the generational gap has caused conflict between many families. The generational gap occurs because of the following reasons:

Increased life expectancy

The rapid change in society

Mobility of society

The generation gap can be reduced if we work on it with patience and understanding. So whatever may be the reason for the occurrence of the generation gap it can be overcome and a happy relationship can be built between two different people. 

3. How Should the Gap in the two Generations be Bridged?

The gap between the two generations should be bridged by mutual respect, understanding, love, and affection for each other. They both should come to a middle ground and sort things out amicably. Here are a few tips to help children to improve the differences because of the generational gap between their parents and them:

Try to talk more often even if you do not have the time, make time for it.

Spend more time with your parents regularly to develop and maintain your relationship. 

Make them feel special with genuine gestures. 

Share your worries and problems with them.

Respect is the most important thing which you should give them.

Be responsible 

Have patience and understand their perspective in every situation.

4. How Does the Generation Gap Impact Relationships?

Generation gaps disrupt the family completely. Due to a lack of understanding and acceptance, the relationship between the older and the younger generations become strained. Most families can not enjoy their family lives because of disturbed routines either they are too busy with work or other commitments, they are unable to spend time with each other. This increases the generational gap between children and parents. The child is unable to communicate his or her thoughts because of lack of communication and parents are unable to understand what the child is thinking; this causes more differences between them.

The generation gap can cause conflict between a relation of child,  parent, and grandparent. Because of the generational gap, there is a huge difference in the living pattern and pattern in which a person responds to a difficult situation. Elder people often take every situation on themselves and try to seek out the things for others but in today’s generation they believe in working only for themself they do not get bothered by others and they don’t try to seek things for others. But if we work to understand the differences and get a path out in between then the conflicts can be reduced and so the generational gap will not be that bothersome.

5. Where can I find the best essay on Generation Gap?

The generation gap can have a different point of view. Each person has a different way of thinking. Vedantu provides you with the best study material to understand the topic well and write about it. Vedantu is a leading online learning portal that has excellent teachers with years of experience to help students score good marks in exams. The team of Vedantu provides you with study material by subject specialists that have deep knowledge of the topic and excel in providing the best knowledge to their students to get the best results. Visit Vedantu now! 

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Ii. generations apart — and together.

A Pew Research Center survey released earlier this summer found that 79% of the public says there is a generation gap , defined in the question as “a major difference in the point of view of younger people and older people today.” That’s nearly 20 percentage points higher than in 1979 when the same question was asked in a national survey by CBS and The New York Times , and it’s marginally greater than the 74% of adults who reported a generation gap in a 1969 Gallup survey.

The recent Pew Research finding raised some intriguing questions. How could the generation gap today be as large as or even larger than it was in the tumultuous 1960s when the mantra of the young was, “Don’t trust anyone over 30”? Might the term “generation gap” mean something different now than it did then — if the phrase retains any meaning at all?

To answer these questions, the Pew Research Center conducted a new survey to probe more deeply into today’s generation gap. Specifically, the survey asked whether or not young people and older people differ on eight core values or traits: their work ethic, moral values, religious beliefs, racial and social tolerance, musical preferences, use of new technology, political beliefs and the respect they show others. 3 In addition, the new survey attempted to find out whether these differences translated into conflicts between the generations — either in society at large, or at home between parents and children.

But the survey is equally clear that these differences have not translated into serious conflicts. Only about a quarter of the public (26%) says there is strong conflict in society today between the young and old. By contrast, far higher shares see strong social conflict today between blacks and whites (39%), rich and poor (47%), and immigrants and the native born (55%).

Meantime, inside the home, something approximating peace seems to have broken out between parents and teenagers. According to the survey, parents today are having fewer serious arguments with their children and are spending more time with them than their own parents did with them a generation ago.

The following three sections explore each of these findings in depth.

Generational Differences

Americans see differences between young and older adults in each of eight values and characteristics tested, and for the most part they say these generation gaps are large.

The biggest perceived differences emerged in two predictable areas: use of new technology and preferences in music. Nearly nine-in-ten respondents say the generations differ in the way they use the Internet, computers and other kinds of new technology (87%). Moreover, nearly three-quarters of those interviewed (73%) say young and older people are “very different” in the way they handle these new tools of the information age — the single largest difference recorded in the poll.

Nearly nine-in-ten also agree that the generations differ in the kinds of music they like (86%), a view shared by virtually identical proportions of adults regardless of age (89% among those 29 or younger and 86% among those 65 or older). Here again, the public believes the gaps are the size of canyons. More than two-thirds (69%) say the younger and older generations are “very different” in terms of the music they like — a finding that no doubt resonates in every household where a parent has ever admonished a teenager to “turn down that awful racket!”

The Values Gap

The cultural conflicts of the 1960s were largely fought over values and along generational lines. Forty years later, the public still believes the generations embrace many fundamentally different values and beliefs.

About eight-in-ten say young people and older adults hold different moral values (80%), have a different work ethic (80%) and differ in the respect they show other people (78%). Moreover, majorities say the generations are “very different” on each of these three core values.

Somewhat smaller majorities see generational differences in other areas. About seven-in-ten say that young and older people are different in terms of their political beliefs (74%), their tolerance for races and groups different from themselves (70%) and in the generations’ religious beliefs (68%).

The Demographics of Generational Difference

Perceptions of a generation gap on values vary surprisingly little along social or demographic lines, but some differences do emerge. Three-quarters of respondents younger than 30 say the generations differ in terms of their racial and social tolerance, a view shared by only about half of those 65 and older. Also, young people are more likely than older adults to say the generations have different political and religious beliefs (although majorities of both groups share this view).

Similarly, about seven-in-ten blacks (69%) say the generations are “very different” in terms of the respect they show others, compared with about half of all whites (51%) and Hispanics (52%). Also, middle-aged adults — regardless of race — are somewhat more likely that younger or older people to see big differences between the generations in terms of the respect they show others.

Taken together, the findings suggest that Americans believe the generation gap has multiple dimensions. In fact, a 54% majority of the public says the generations differ on at least seven of the eight values tested, and three-in-ten say older and younger adults are different in all eight. In contrast, fewer than one-in-five (17%) perceive a generation gap in four or fewer areas.

Which Generation Has Better Values?

The generations agree that big differences exist between the values of the older and younger generations. But whose values are better? The survey asked that question of those who said the generations differed on any of four core values: work ethic, moral values, respect for others and tolerance of different races and other groups.

The public’s judgment is unmistakable on three of the four values tested. Regardless of age, about two-thirds or more of the public believes that older Americans are superior in terms of their moral values, respect for others and work ethic. The younger generation is viewed as being more socially tolerant, though the verdict is less one-sided.

Similarly, seven-in-ten adults say older people have better moral values than the younger generation, a judgment shared by 66% of all young adults and 69% of adults ages 50 and older.

About seven-in-ten adults also believe the older generation is more respectful of others (71%), an assessment that is made by 67% of respondents younger than 30 and 69% of those 50 and older. Again, early middle-aged adults and those slightly younger appear to offer the harshest assessment of young people: About three-quarters of those 30 to 49 say the older generation is more respectful.

The story is different on one value tested — social tolerance. By a ratio of more than two-to-one, young people are viewed as being more tolerant of races and groups different from their own than the older generation (47% vs. 19%). Again, the generations are in general agreement: a 55% majority of young adults say their generation is more tolerant, while somewhat more than a third (37%) of all adults 50 and older share that view.

Generational Differences but Not Conflicts

These views are shared by all age groups. Substantial majorities of those younger than 30 (69%) as well as adults 65 or older (62%) agree that conflicts between the younger and older generations are minor, at most.

In fact, when compared with other major social divisions, the generation gap ranks at the bottom of the list. A substantially larger proportion of the public says there are serious conflicts between immigrants and native-born Americans (55% vs. 37%). And comparatively larger proportions also perceive more conflict between the rich and the poor (47%) as well as between blacks and whites (39%).

While this finding might suggest that generational tensions are at least as high now as they were at the height of the ’60s culture and political wars, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Fully 40% of all survey participants were born after 1969 and thus had no direct exposure to the generational battles of that turbulent era over women’s liberation, civil rights, the counterculture and the Vietnam War. More reliable firsthand reports may come from adults ages 50 to 64 who — as teenagers or young adults — were on the front lines of many of these generational conflicts. Among these baby boomers, significantly more report there is less conflict between young and old now than there was back then (43% less vs. 29% more).

One factor boosting the proportions that see no decline in tensions between the older and younger generations is the disproportionately large share of minorities who believe generational conflict has increased. Fully half of all blacks and about four-in-ten Hispanics say tensions between the generations have increased from the 1960s, a view shared by only about a quarter of all whites.

All (Relatively) Quiet on the Home Front

According to the survey, only one-in-ten parents with children ages 16 to 24 report they “often” had (or have) major disagreements with their children. In contrast, nearly twice as many adults (19%) say that when they themselves were teenagers or in their early 20s, they often had serious arguments with their parents.

Of course, it’s possible that parents are downplaying the seriousness of disagreements with their children or are offering a somewhat more dramatic version of their own childhood conflicts with their mothers and fathers. But an analysis of the survey findings among the different age groups of respondents shows that, broadly speaking, parents’ and children’s accounts of intrafamily quarreling were consistent.

Among parents with children ages 16 to 24, slightly fewer than half (45%) say they have major disagreements “often” or “sometimes.” When respondents ages 16 to 24 were asked a complementary question about disagreements with their parents, a virtually identical proportion (42%) report they often or sometimes have serious arguments with their parents.

Fewer Big Arguments, More Time with the Kids

Nearly half (48%) of all parents with children 16 or younger say they are spending more time with their children than their parents spent with them, up from 42% in a survey conducted for Newsweek magazine in 1993.

One other sign that today’s moms and dads are spending more time with younger children: Among parents in the Pew Research Center survey whose children are older than 16, barely four-in-ten (41%) say they spent more time with their children when they were growing up than their parents spent with them.

Whether accurate reflections of family life or self-serving versions of history, these findings together with other survey results suggest that tensions between the generations appear to have eased considerably in recent decades — both in the home and in society at large.

• These characteristics were chosen on the basis of responses to an open-ended question about generational differences in the earlier Pew Research survey. ↩
• To determine what percentage of the public believes that older and younger adults have the better values, the percentage of the total sample who see differences between older and younger people on each value tested was multiplied by the percentage of the public that say older people or younger were better on that value. In this case, 80% of those interviewed say young and older people differ with respect to their work ethic, and of this group, 91% say that older people have the better work ethic. Multiplying those two percentages produces the estimate that about 74% of all people 16 and older believe older people have the superior work ethic. ↩

Social Trends Monthly Newsletter

Sign up to to receive a monthly digest of the Center's latest research on the attitudes and behaviors of Americans in key realms of daily life

Report Materials

Table of contents, how teens and parents approach screen time, who are you the art and science of measuring identity, u.s. centenarian population is projected to quadruple over the next 30 years, older workers are growing in number and earning higher wages, teens, social media and technology 2023, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

• Essay On Generation Gap

Generation Gap Essay

500+ words generation gap essay.

The generation gap means the difference between two generations. It often causes conflict between parents and kids. The term can also be explained as the difference of opinions and ideologies between two generations. The views can also be different in religious belief, attitude towards life and political views.

People from different generations differ from each other in various aspects of life. For example, people born before Independence are different from today’s generation. The thinking of both generations is poles apart in terms of the economic, cultural and social environment. Our world keeps changing, and the vast difference between the two generations is inevitable.

Our society keeps on changing at a constant pace, and because of it, people’s opinions, beliefs, ideologies, and behaviour also change with time. These changes bring positive changes to our society by breaking the stereotypes. However, it becomes a cause of conflict between two generations most of the time.

Generation Gap – Impact on Relationships

We should always welcome fresh and new ideas. Accepting new changes indicates that we are advancing and developing significantly. But, there will be a clash between the opinions and views of both generations. The result of this clash leads to distanced relations. If this clash gets too much, it will be a matter of worry.

We can see the generation gap, usually between parents and kids. Parents typically want to follow the traditions and norms and expect the same thing from their kids. But in the modern age, kids with broad thinking refuse to accept such traditions and customs. They want to live their life according to their ways. They fail to understand each other, which sometimes turns into clashes. It is considered one of the primary reasons for conflict between parents and kids.

Both parents and their kids fail to reach a solution that distances them from each other and creates misunderstandings. Parents should not impose their expectations on them to avoid such conflicts. Similarly, the kids should also try to understand their parents’ situation and where it is coming from.

Reasons for Generation Gap:

A generation gap does not mean an age difference. It means the overall difference in their views and opinions, way of talking, style of living, etc. Even there is a vast difference of belief towards cultures and traditions of old and new generations. The primary reasons behind this generation gap are the communication gap, advanced technology, the old mentality, and today’s nuclear family concept. Nowadays, children and grandparents hardly communicate, which leads to a generation gap.

How to Bridge the Generation Gap?

1. Communicate

To reduce the generation gap, communication should be the initial step. Lack of communication between parents and kids leads to this gap. You should talk to your parents about your daily routine, feelings, etc. By doing so, you can bridge the gap between you and your parents, which will help you to become more attached. The feeling of affection will grow stronger.

2. Spend time with your parents

Kids should spend quality time with their parents to understand each other better. They can spend quality time watching a match together or going for an evening walk. This will surely help you get closer to your parents and bridge the generation gap. You can even make your parents learn new games and play with them someday.

3. Share your problems

You should share your problems with your parents to help you with solutions. Initially, they might scold you, but at last, they will support you and suggest some solutions.

4. Show genuine gestures

Effective gestures often prove to be successful and can convey more than words. It can be a gift to your parents on their birthdays, anniversaries, Mother’s or Father’s Day, etc.

5. Act Responsibly

Parents feel delighted when they see their kids behaving like grown-ups. As we grow up, our responsibilities also get bigger. It’s better for us if we understand it as fast as possible.

To sum it up, we can say that the generation gap happens due to constant changes in the world.

While we may not stop the evolution of the world, we can strengthen the bond and bridge the gap it creates. Each person must respect everyone for their individuality, rather than fitting them into a box they believe to be correct.

From our BYJU’S website, students can also access CBSE Essays related to different topics. It will help students to get good marks in their exams.

Frequently Asked Questions on Generation gap Essay

How can the generation gap issue be overcome.

It can be overcome by taking proactive steps like actively involving all family members in discussions. Also, we must not ignore or disrespect elderly people and try to explain your point of view if any difference in opinion occurs.

How should parents/ grandparents treat their children in order to avoid generation gaps?

Be friendly with children and advise them in a subtle and patient way. Also, inform them about the major decisions which are to be taken in the family and make them feel included.

What are the main reasons for generation gaps?

The ever-changing technology and the invention of several new things on a daily basis are one of the main reasons for the generation gap.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Counselling

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Sociology of Generations — Generation Gap

Essays on Generation Gap

Generation gap essay, types of gap generation essay:.

• Societal Impact Essay: This type of essay examines how the generation gap impacts society as a whole. It explores the differences in beliefs, attitudes, and values between generations and how they contribute to social change.
• Family and Parenting Essay: This essay explores the differences in parenting styles and attitudes between generations. It discusses the challenges faced by parents in bridging the generation gap and the impact it has on family dynamics.
• Cultural and Technological Essay: This type of essay examines how technological advancements and cultural changes contribute to the generation gap. It explores the differences in values and attitudes towards technology and cultural practices.

Societal Impact Essay

• Conduct research: To write a generation gap societal impact essay, research is essential. Gather information on how the generation gap affects society, culture, politics, and economics. Utilize credible sources such as academic journals, books, and articles from reputable publications.
• Select a topic: Choose a topic that reflects the societal impact of the generation gap. For example, you could write about how the generation gap affects family relationships, the workplace, politics, or cultural norms.
• Develop an outline: Plan out your essay by creating an outline that includes your main points, supporting evidence, and a conclusion. Ensure that your thesis statement is clear and concise and directly relates to the societal impact of the generation gap.
• Use relevant examples: Use real-life examples to illustrate the societal impact of the generation gap. This could be a current event, a personal experience, or a case study.
• Be objective: Avoid being biased or making sweeping generalizations about a particular generation. Instead, focus on presenting an objective analysis of the societal impact of the generation gap.

Family and Parenting Essay

• Start by identifying specific examples of generation gaps in your family or other families. Think about how different values, attitudes, and beliefs have caused conflicts or misunderstandings.
• Provide background information on how the generation gap has evolved over time and how it is influenced by cultural and social changes.
• Analyze how the generation gap affects the parent-child relationship, communication, and decision-making. You can explore the challenges that parents face in trying to understand and connect with their children, or the struggles that children face in trying to assert their independence and establish their own identities.
• Use personal anecdotes, interviews, and research studies to support your arguments. This will help you provide a more nuanced and realistic picture of the challenges and opportunities that come with the generation gap.
• Finally, offer suggestions or recommendations on how families can bridge the generation gap and build stronger relationships. This can include strategies for better communication, more understanding and empathy, and mutual respect for different perspectives and values.

Cultural and Technological Essay

• Choose a specific cultural or technological aspect: The generation gap can be analyzed in various cultural and technological aspects such as music, fashion, communication, social media, etc. Choose a specific aspect that interests you and that you think you can write about in depth.
• Research and gather information: Research the cultural or technological aspect you want to analyze, and gather information from different sources such as books, articles, and academic journals. Make sure to use reliable and reputable sources.
• Compare and contrast the differences: Analyze the differences in attitudes, beliefs, and values between the generations in relation to the cultural or technological aspect you are examining. Compare and contrast these differences to provide a clear picture of the generation gap.
• Provide examples: To make your essay more engaging, provide specific examples that illustrate the generation gap in the cultural or technological aspect you are examining.
• Be objective: When writing your essay, avoid being biased or judgmental. Instead, present the facts objectively and let the reader draw their conclusions.

Tips for Choosing a Topic:

• Brainstorm: Start by brainstorming ideas related to the generation gap that interest you. Think about the different aspects of society that are impacted by the generation gap, such as politics, education, or media.
• Research: Conduct research on the chosen topic to gather relevant information and statistics. This will help you to develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter and provide a factual basis for your arguments.
• Identify Controversies: Look for controversies and debates related to the generation gap that could make for interesting essay topics. For example, you could explore the debate around the impact of technology on the generation gap.
• Personal Experience: Draw from personal experiences with the generation gap to develop a unique perspective on the topic. Reflect on your own experiences and those of others to gain insights into the challenges and opportunities presented by the generation gap.

The Gap Between Three Generations: Mine, My Parents’, and My Children’s

Generation gap: how today's generation is different from their parents' generation, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Generation Gap in Workplace: Conflicts Between Generations

Generation gap: regarding building bridges between generations and reviving lost values, generation gap: technology differences between generations, how generational gaps started: an introduction to the conflict, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Yu Fang Vs. Jung Chang: a Generation Gap

The generational gap and rock 'n' roll in the 1950s, the case of dympna ugwu-oju and generational gaps, generation gap and the diversity cultures between two countries in "the dining room", relevant topics.

• Millennial Generation
• Effects of Social Media
• Media Analysis
• American Identity
• Cultural Appropriation
• Family Relationships

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Search Menu
• Volume 8, Issue 4, 2024 (In Progress)
• Volume 8, Issue 3, 2024 (In Progress)
• Volume 8, Issue 2, 2024
• Advance Articles
• Special Issues
• Calls for Papers
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Why Submit to the GSA Portfolio?
• Advertising & Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• About Innovation in Aging
• About The Gerontological Society of America
• Editorial Board
• GSA Journals
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

What has changed in parents’ ties to young adults, why parent/offspring ties have changed, implications of changes in young adulthood for midlife parents’ well-being, future consequences of today’s young adulthood for parents entering late life, directions for future research and conclusions, conflict of interest, acknowledgments.

• < Previous

Millennials and Their Parents: Implications of the New Young Adulthood for Midlife Adults

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Karen L Fingerman, Millennials and Their Parents: Implications of the New Young Adulthood for Midlife Adults, Innovation in Aging , Volume 1, Issue 3, November 2017, igx026, https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igx026

• Permissions Icon Permissions

The period of young adulthood has transformed dramatically over the past few decades. Today, scholars refer to “emerging adulthood” and “transitions to adulthood” to describe adults in their 20s. Prolonged youth has brought concomitant prolonged parenthood. This article addresses 3 areas of change in parent/child ties, increased (a) contact between generations, (b) support from parents to grown children as well as coresidence and (c) affection between the generations. We apply the Multidimensional Intergenerational Support Model (MISM) to explain these changes, considering societal (e.g., economic, technological), cultural, family demographic (e.g., fertility, stepparenting), relationship, and psychological (normative beliefs, affection) factors. Several theoretical perspectives (e.g., life course theory, family systems theory) suggest that these changes may have implications for the midlife parents’ well-being. For example, parents may incur deleterious effects from (a) grown children’s problems or (b) their own normative beliefs that offspring should be independent. Parents may benefit via opportunities for generativity with young adult offspring. Furthermore, current patterns may affect future parental aging. As parents incur declines of late life, they may be able to turn to caregivers with whom they have intimate bonds. Alternately, parents may be less able to obtain such care due to demographic changes involving grown children raising their own children later or who have never fully launched. It is important to consider shifts in the nature of young adulthood to prepare for midlife parents’ future aging.

Clinicians will be able to help normalize situations when midlife parents are upset due to involvement with their young adult children. Policy makers may be able to foresee and plan for future issues involving aging parents and midlife children.

Young adulthood has changed dramatically since the middle of the 20th century. Research over the past two decades has documented this restructuring, relabeling the late teens and 20s under the auspices of “transitions to adulthood” or “emerging adulthood” ( Arnett, 2000 ; Furstenberg, 2010 ). As such, the life stage from ages 18 to 30 has shifted from being clearly ensconced in adulthood, to an interim period marked by considerable heterogeneity. Historically, young people also took circuitous paths in their careers and love interests ( Keniston, 1970 ; Mintz, 2015 ), but a recent U.S. Census report shows that young people today are less likely to achieve traditional markers of adulthood such as completion of education, marriage, moving out of the parental home or securing a job with a livable wage as they did in the mid to late twentieth century ( Vespa, 2017 ). Individuals who achieve such markers do so at later ages, and patterns vary by socioeconomic background ( Furstenberg, 2010 ).

Much of the research regarding this stage of life has focused on antecedents of young adult pathways or implications of different transitions for the young adults’ well-being ( Schulenberg & Schoon, 2012 ). Yet, the prolongation of entry into adulthood involves a concomitant prolongation of midlife parenthood; implications of parenting young adult offspring remain poorly understood. This article focuses on midlife parents’ involvement with grown children from the parents’ perspective (and does not address implications for grown children).

Several theoretical perspectives suggest that parents will be affected by changes in the nature of young adulthood. The life course theory concept “linked lives” suggests that events in one party’s life influence their close relationship partners’ lives. Family systems theory posits that changes in one family member’s life circumstances will reverberate throughout the family, even when children are grown ( Fingerman & Bermann, 2000 ). Further, the developmental stake hypothesis suggests that parents’ high investment and involvement with young adult children may generate both a current and a longer term impact on parental well-being ( Birditt, Hartnett, Fingerman, Zarit, & Antonucci, 2015 ). These theories collectively suggest that events in young adults’ lives may reverberate through their parents’ lives.

As such, this article addresses changes that midlife parents experience stemming from shifts in young adulthood. Specifically it describes (a) what has changed in ties between midlife parents and young adults over the past two decades, (b) why these changes have occurred, and (c) the implications of these changes for parents’ well-being currently in midlife, and in the future if they incur physical declines, cognitive deficits, or social losses associated with late life.

Parental involvement with young adult children has increased dramatically over the past few decades. Notably, there has been an increase in parents’ contact with, support of, coresidence, and intimacy with young adult children ( Arnett & Schwab, 2012a ; Fingerman, 2016 ; Fingerman, Miller, Birditt, & Zarit, 2009 ; Fry, 2016 ; Johnson, 2013 ).

Parental Contact With Young Adult Children

Parents have more frequent contact with their young adult children than was the case thirty years ago. Research using national US data from the mid to late twentieth century revealed that only half of parents reported contact with a grown child at least once a week ( Fingerman, Cheng, Tighe, Birditt, & Zarit, 2012 ). Because most parents have more than one grown child, by inference many grown children had even less frequent contact with their parents. Recent studies in the twenty-first century, however, found that nearly all parents had contact with a grown child in the past week, and over half of parents had contact with a grown child everyday ( Arnett & Schwab, 2012b ; Fingerman, et al., 2016 ).

It would be remiss to imply that all midlife parents have frequent contact with their grown children, however, because a small group shows the opposite trend. From the child’s perspective, national data reveal 20% of young adults lack contact with a father, and 6.5% lack contact with a mother figure in the United States ( Hartnett, Fingerman, & Birditt, 2017 ). Similarly, research examining Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) young adults suggests that some parents reject grown children who declare a minority sexuality or gender identity, but this appears to be a relatively rare occurrence. Instead, a representative survey found that LGBT young adults choose whether to come out to parents; only 56% had told their mother and only 39% had told their father ( Pew Research Center, 2013 ). As such, it seems that LGBT young adults who are likely to be rejected by parents may decide not to tell them about their sexuality. Death accounted for some of the lack of parents (4% of young adults lack a father due to death and 3% lack a mother). Rather, divorce, incarceration, and other factors such as addiction or earlier placement in foster care may account for estrangement from a parent figure ( Hartnett et al., 2017 ). Of course, estrangement may be different from the parents’ perspective. For example, one study of aging mothers found that 11% of aging mothers reported being estranged from one child ( Gilligan, Suitor, & Pillemer, 2015 ), but these mothers rarely reported being estranged from all of their children. Nevertheless, a significant subgroup of parents may be excluded from increased involvement described here for other parents.

Parental Support of Young Adult Children

Parents also give more support to grown children, on average, than parents gave in the recent past. Across social strata, parents provide approximately 10% of their income to young adult children, a shift from the late twentieth century (Kornich & Furstenberg, 2013). From the 1970s through the 1990s, parents spent the most money on children during the teenage years. But since 2000, parents across economic strata have spent the most money on children under age 6 or young adult children over the age of 18 (Kornich & Furstenberg, 2013). Indeed, some scholars have suggested that over a third of the financial costs of parenting occur after children are age 18 ( Mintz, 2015 ).

The amount of financial support parents provide varies by the parents’ and grown child’s SES, however. Parents from higher socioeconomic strata provide more financial assistance to adult children ( Fingerman et al., 2015 ; Grundy, 2005 ). This pattern is not limited to the United States; better off parents invest money in young adult offspring who are pursuing education or who have not yet secured steady employment in most industrialized nations ( Albertini & Kohli, 2012 ; Fingerman et al., 2016 ; Swartz, Kim, Uno, Mortimer, & O’Brien, 2011 ). Yet, this pattern may perpetuate socioeconomic inequalities in the United States, rendering lower SES parents more likely to have lower SES grown children ( Torche, 2015 ).

In addition to financial support, many parents devote time to grown children (e.g., giving practical or emotional support; Fingerman et al., 2009 ). Young people face considerable demands gaining a foothold in the adult world (e.g., education, jobs, evolving romantic ties; Furstenberg, 2010 ). In response, parents may offer adult offspring help by making doctor’s appointments, or giving advice and emotional support at a distance, using phone, video technologies, text messages, or email.

Such nonmaterial support may stem from early life patterns. In early life, parenting has become more time intensive over the past few decades, particularly among upper SES parents ( Bianchi & Milkie, 2010 ). Lower SES parents may work multiple jobs or face constraints (e.g., rigid work hours, multiple shifts) that preclude intensive parenting more typical in upper SES families ( Conger, Conger, & Martin, 2010 ). It is not clear whether such differences in time persist in adulthood.

Rather, the types of nonmaterial support may differ by SES. Research suggests better off parents are more likely to give information and to spend time listening to grown children, and less well-off parents provide more childcare (i.e., for their grandchildren; Fingerman et al., 2015 ; Henretta, Grundy, & Harris, 2002 ). Grown children in better off families are more likely to pursue higher education, and student status is strongly associated with parental support (including time as well as money) throughout the world ( Fingerman et al., 2016 ; Henretta, Wolf, van Voorhis, & Soldo, 2012 ). Yet, less well-off parents are more likely to coreside with a grown child.

Nevertheless, research suggests that across SES strata, midlife parents attempt to support grown children in need. A recent study found that overall, lower SES parents gave as much or more support than upper SES parents, but lower SES young adult children were still likely to receive less support on average (i.e., due to greater needs across multiple family members in lower SES families; Fingerman et al., 2015 ).

Parental Coresidence With Young Adult Children

Coresidence could be conceptualized as a form of support from parents to grown children; grown children who reside with parents save money and may receive advice, food, childcare or other forms of everyday support. In industrialized nations, rates of intergenerational coresidence have risen in the past few decades. In the United States in 2015, intergenerational coresidence became the modal residential pattern for adults aged 18 to 34, surpassing residing with romantic partners for the first time ( Fry, 2015 , 2016 ). Rates of coresidence have increased in many European countries as well in the past 30 years, though rates vary by country. Coresidence is common in Southern European nations (e.g., 73% of adults aged 18 to 34 lived with parents in Italy in 2007), but relatively rare in Nordic nations (e.g., 21% of young adults lived with parents in Finland in 2007). Coresidence rates in Southern European countries evolved from historical patterns, but also reflect an increase over the past 40 years. For example, in Spain in 1977, fewer than half of young adults remained in the parents’ home, but by the early 21st century over two-thirds of young adults did ( Newman, 2011 ). Coresidence appears to be an extension of the increased involvement between adults and parents (as well as reflecting offspring’s economic needs).

Parental Affection, Solidarity, and Ambivalence Towards Young Adult Children

In general, affection between young adults and parents seems to be increasing in the twenty-first century as well. It is not possible to objectively document changes in the strength of emotional bonds due to measurement issues and ceiling effects—most people have reported close ties to parents or grown children across the decades. Still, it seems intergenerational intimacy is on the rise. In the 20th century in Western societies, marriage was the primary tie. Yet, over 15 years ago, Bengtson (2001) speculated that the prominence of multigenerational ties would rise in the 21st century due to changes in family structure (e.g., dissolution of romantic bonds) and longevity (e.g., generations sharing more years together). Bengtson’s predictions seem to be coming to fruition.

Increases in midlife parents’ affection for young adult children would be consistent with a rise in intergenerational solidarity. Intergenerational solidarity theory was developed in the 20th century to explain strengths in intergenerational bonds ( Bengtson, 2001 ; Lowenstein, 2007 ). Solidarity theory is mechanistic in nature, suggesting that positive features of relationships (e.g., contact, support, shared values, affection) co-occur like intertwining gears. In this regard, we might conceptualize the overall increase in parental involvement as increased intergenerational solidarity.

It is less clear whether conflictual or negative aspects of the relationship have changed in the past few decades. It was only towards the end of the 20th century that researchers began to measure ambivalence (mixed feelings) or conflict in this tie ( Fingerman, 2001 ; Luescher & Pillemer, 1998 ; Pillemer et al., 2007 ; Suitor, Gilligan, & Pillemer, 2014 ). As such, it is difficult to track changes in ambivalence across the decades. Nevertheless, one study found that midlife adults experienced greater ambivalence or negative feelings for their young adult children than for their aging parents ( Birditt et al., 2015 ), suggesting the parent/child tie may have shifted towards greater ambivalence in that younger generation.

Indeed, scholars have argued that ambivalence arises when norms are contradictory, such as the norm for autonomy versus the norm of dependence for adult offspring ( Luescher & Pillemer, 1998 ). And as I discuss, norms for autonomy contrast current interdependence in this tie, providing fodder for ambivalence. Moreover, frequent contact provides more opportunity for conflicts to arise ( van Gaalen & Dykstra, 2010 ). Taken together, these trends suggest that intergenerational ambivalence between midlife parents and grown children also may be on the rise.

The Multidimensional Intergenerational Support Model (MISM) provides a framework to explain behaviors in parent/child ties. The model initially pertained to patterns of exchange between generations, but extends to a broader understanding of increased parental involvement. Drawing on life course theory and other socio-contextual theories, the basic premise of the MISM model is that structural factors (e.g., economy, technology, policy), culture (norms), family structure (e.g., married/remarried), and relationship and individual (e.g., affection, gender) factors coalesce to generate behaviors in intergenerational ties ( Figure 1 .) Likewise, changes in the parent/child tie and the reasons underlying those changes reflect such factors.

Multidimension intergenerational involvement model.

MISM is truly intended as a framework for stipulating the types of factors that contribute to parents’ and grown children’s relationship behaviors rather than a model of causal influences. Scholars interested in ecological contexts of human development have often designated hierarchies or embedding of different types of contexts (e.g., family subsumed in economy; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006 ; Elder, 1998 ). Intuitively, young adults’ and midlife parents’ relationships do respond to economic factors, with the Great Recession partially instigating the increase in coresidence ( Fry, 2015 ). Yet, economies arise in part from families and culture as well; in Western democracies, policies, and politicians are a reflection of underlying beliefs and values of the people who vote (as post-election dissection of Presidential voting in the United States suggests). As such, I propose that each of these levels—structural (e.g., economy, policy), cultural (beliefs, social position), family (e.g., married parents/single parent), and relationship or individual factors contribute to midlife parents’ involvement with grown children without implying a hierarchy of influence among the factors. As discussed later, a second aspect of Figure 1 pertains to understanding how parent/child involvement is associated with parental well-being.

Societal Shifts Associated With Changes Between Parents and Young Adults

Economic factors.

Economic changes in the past 40 years weigh heavily on the parent/child tie. Young adults’ dependence on parents reflects complexities of gaining an economic foothold in adulthood. The U.S. Census shows that financial independence is rare for young people today. Compared to their mid twentieth century counterparts, young people today are more likely to fall at the bottom of the economic ladder with low wage jobs. In 1975, fewer than 25% of young adults fell in the bottom of the economic ladder (i.e., less than $30,000 a year in 2015 dollars), but by 2016, 41% did ( Vespa, 2017 ).

Further, roughly one in four young adults who live with their parents in the United States (i.e., 32% who live with parents; Fry, 2016 ) are not working or attending school ( Vespa, 2017 ). These 8% of young adults might reside with parents while raising young children of their own. But notably, the rate of young women who were homemakers fell from 43% in 1975 to just 14% in 2016 ( Vespa, 2017 ) and as I discuss later, fertility has also dropped in this age group ( World Bank, 2017a ). Moreover, a large proportion of young adults who live with parents have a disability of some sort (10%; Vespa, 2017 ). Thus, factors other than childrearing such as disability, addiction, or life problems seem more likely to account for the 2.2 million 25–34 year olds residing with parents not engaged in work or education.

Moreover, the shift toward coresidence with parents is not purely economic—one can imagine a society where young people turn to friends, siblings, or early romantic partnership to deal with a tough economy. Thus, other factors also contribute to these patterns.

Public policies

Public policies play a strong role in shaping relationships between adults and parents in European countries, but may play a lesser role in shaping these ties in the United States. In European countries, the government provides health coverage and long-term care, and government investments in older adults result in transfers of wealth to their middle generation progeny ( Kohli, 1999 ). Similar processes occur with regard to midlife parents and young adults in Europe. Differences in programs to support young adults in Nordic countries versus Southern European countries are associated with the type of welfare state; that is, social democratic welfare regimes assist young adults in Nordic countries towards autonomy, whereas conservative continental or familistic welfare regimes encourage greater dependence on families in southern Europe ( Billari, 2004 ). The coresidence patterns described previously conform to the type of regime. As such, patterns of parental involvement in Europe seem to be associated with government programs.

These patterns are less clear in the United States. Indeed, lack of government support for young adults may help explain many aspects of the intensified bonds. For example, as college tuition has increased and state and federal funding of education has decreased, parents have stepped in to provide financial help or co-sign loans for young adult students. When U.S. policies do address young adults, the policies seem to be popular. For example, in 2017, when the U.S. Congress debated repealing the Affordable Care Act (i.e., Obamacare), there was bipartisan support for allowing parents to retain grown children on their health insurance until age 26, even if these young adults were not students. This policy, instigated in 2011, seemed to be a reaction to the greater involvement of parents in supporting young adults rather than a catalyst of such involvement.

Related to economic changes, a global rise in parental support of young adults may partially reflect the prolonged tertiary education that has occurred throughout the world (i.e., rates of college attendance have risen worldwide; OECD, 2016 ). In the United States, in 2016, 40% of adults aged 18–24 were pursuing higher education ( National Center for Education Statistics, 2017 ), the highest rate observed historically. Similarly, in industrialized nations, young adults are more likely to attend college today than in the past (Fingerman, Cheng, et al., 2016 ).

The influence of education on parental involvement has been observed globally. In young adulthood, students receive more parental support than nonstudents ( Bucx, van Wel, & Knijn, 2012 ; Johnson, 2013 ). A study of college students in Korea, Hong Kong, Germany, and the United States revealed that, across nations, parents provided advice, practical help, and emotional support to college students at least once a month ( Fingerman et al., 2016 ). Young people who don’t pursue an education may end up in part time jobs with revolving hours or off hour shifts and may depend on parents for support ( Furstenberg, 2010 ), but students typically receive more parental support ( Henretta et al., 2012 ).

Technology and geographic stability

Recent technologies also have altered the nature of the parent/child bond, allowing more frequent conversations and exchanges of nontangible support (e.g., advice, sharing problems). Beginning in the 1990s, competitive rates for long distance telephone calls facilitated contact between young adults and parents who resided far apart. Since that time, cell phone, text messages, email, and social media have provided almost instantaneous contact at negligible cost, regardless of distance (Cotten, McCollough, & Adams, 2012).

Parents and grown children also may have more opportunities to visit in person. Residential mobility decreased in the United States from the mid-20th century into the 21st century. Data regarding how far young adults reside from their parents in the United States are not readily available. But in 1965, 21% of U.S. adults moved households; mobility declined steadily over the next 40 years and by 2016 had dropped to 11% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011, 2016). As such, parents and grown children may be more likely to reside in closer geographic proximity. Deregulation of airlines in 1978 in the United States established the basis for airline competition and declining prices in airfare (with concomitant diminished quality of air travel experience), facilitating visits between parents and grown children who reside at longer distances.

Cultural Beliefs Associated With Changes Between Parents and Young Adults

Culture also contributes to the nature of parent/child ties. Parents and grown children harbor values, norms or beliefs about how parents and grown children should behave. Shifts in cultural values have also contributed to increased involvement.

Historical changes in values for parental involvement

The cultural narrative regarding young adults and parents in the United States has shifted over the past few decades. During the 1960s and 1970s, popular media and scholars referred to the “generation gap” involving dissension between midlife parents and young adult children ( Troll, 1972 ). This cultural notion of a gap reflected the younger generation’s separation from the older one during this historical period. For example, in 1960, only 20% of adults aged 18–34 lived with their parents ( Fry, 2016 ). Into the 1970s, 80% of adults were married by the age of 30 ( Vespa, 2017 ). As such, the generations were living apart. Cultural attention to a generation gap reflected the younger generation’s independence from the older generation. Notably, there was not much empirical evidence of generational dissension . And in the 21st century, this conception of separation of generations and intrafamily conflict seems antiquated.

Today’s cultural narrative is consistent with increased intimacy and dependence of the younger generation, while also disparaging this increased parental involvement. Recent media trends and scholarly work in the early 21st century focus on “helicopter parents” who are too involved with their grown children (Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselmann, et al., 2012 ; Luden, 2012 ). Although the concept of the helicopter parent implies intrusiveness, it is also a narrative that reflects increased contact, intimacy, and parental support documented here. The pejorative aspect of the moniker stems from retention of norms endorsing autonomy; the relationships are deemed too close and intimate. Although intrusive parents undoubtedly exist, there is little evidence that intrusive helicopter ties are pervasive (outside small convenience studies of college students). Rather, young adults seem to benefit from parental support in many circumstances (Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselmann, 2012), but to perhaps question their own competency under some circumstances of parental support ( Johnson, 2013 ). Nevertheless, a cultural lag is evident in beliefs about autonomy in young adulthood versus the increased parental involvement. Many midlife parents believe young adults should be more autonomous than they are (Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselmann, et al., 2012 ).

Historical changes in sense of obligation

Shifts in beliefs are notable with regard to a diminished sense of obligation to attend to parent/child ties as well. Obligation has been measured most often with regard to midlife adults’ beliefs concerning help to aging parents (i.e., filial obligation). For example, Gans and Silverstein (2006) examined four waves of data regarding adults’ ties to parents from 1985 to 2000; they documented a trend of declining endorsement of obligation over that period. Similarly, many Asian countries (e.g., China, Korea, Singapore) traditionally followed Confucian ideals involving a high degree of respect and filial piety. But over the past three decades, these values have eroded in these countries ( Kim, Cheng, Zarit, & Fingerman, 2015 ). As such, norms obligating parent/child involvement seem to be waning.

Instead, the strengthened bonds and increased parental involvement may reflect a loosening of mores that govern relationships in general. Scholars have suggested that increased individual freedom and fewer links between work, social activity, and family life characterize modern societies over the past decades. These changes also are associated with evolving family forms (e.g., divorce and stepties) as well as decreased fertility ( Axinn & Yabiku, 2001 ; Lesthaegh, 2010 ). Likewise, this loosening of rules has rendered the parent/child relationship more chosen and voluntary in nature. This is not to say the tie has become reciprocal; parents typically give more to offspring than they receive ( Fingerman et al., 2011 ). Yet, the increased involvement and solidarity may stem from freedom parents and grown children experience to retain strong bonds (rather than following norms of autonomy).

National and ethnic differences in beliefs about parent/child ties

The role of beliefs and values in shaping ties between young adults and parents is evident in cross national differences. High parental involvement occurs most often in cultures where people highly value such involvement. Analysis of European countries has found that in countries where adults and parents coreside more often, adults place a higher value on parental involvement with grown children ( Hank, 2007 ; Newman, 2011 ). For example, families in Southern Europe (Spain, Italy, Greece) coreside most often and also prefer shared daily life. Based on this premise, we would expect to see a surge in norms in the United States endorsing intergenerational bonds and young adults’ dependence on parents, but this is not necessarily the case.

In addition to the cultural lag mentioned previously, within the U.S. ethnic differences in parental beliefs about involvement with young adults are evident. For example, Fingerman, VanderDrift, and colleagues (2011) examined three generations among Black and non-Hispanic White families. Findings revealed that overall, non-Hispanic White midlife adults provided more support of all types to their grown children than to their parents. Black midlife adults also provided more support overall to their grown children than to their parents, but they provided more emotional support, companionship, and practical help to their parents. Importantly, midlife adults’ support to different generations was consistent with ethnic/racial differences in value and beliefs—Black and non-Hispanic adults’ support behaviors were associated with their perceived obligation to help grown children and rated rewards of helping grown children and parents (above and beyond factors such as resources, SES, offspring likelihood of being a student, and familial needs) ( Fingerman, VanderDrift, et al., 2011 ). These findings were consistent with a study conducted in the late 20th century using a national sample of young adults; that study found that racial and immigration status differences in parents’ support of young adults reflected factors in addition to young adult resources, family SES, or other structural factors (Hardie & Selzter, 2016), presumably cultural differences. As such, the overall culture surrounding young adults and family may play a role in increased parental involvement.

Family Factors Associated With Changes Between Parents and Young Adults

Changes in family structure are likely to affect the nature of parent/child relationships, including (a) proportion of mothers married to a grown child’s father, (b) likelihood of a midlife parent having stepchildren, and (c) the grown child’s fertility. Collectively, these family changes contribute to the nature of bonds between young adults and parents, and raise questions about the future of this tie.

Declines in married parents and rise of stepfamilies

Changes in parents’ marital status contribute to relationships with grown children in complex ways. Some changes facilitate the strengthened bonds observed, but other changes diminish the likelihood of a strong bond. As such, while the overall trend shows greater parental involvement, specific groups of midlife parents may have only tenuous or conflicted ties with their grown children.

The previous few decades saw a shift from families where two parents were likely to be married to one another toward single parents and complex family forms. From 1970 to 2010, the marriage rate for women in the United States declined steadily, particularly for Black women (in 2010 only 26% of Black women were married; Cruz, 2013 ). Mothers who raise children alone typically have stronger ties when those children grow into young adults. By contrast, never-married fathers may have little contact and are more likely to be estranged from those children ( Hartnett et al., 2017 ).

Further, midlife adults are more likely to have ties to grown children through remarriage (i.e., stepchildren) than in the past. Divorce rates rose and plateaued in the mid to late twentieth century. Divorce is associated with greater tensions between young adults and parents, particularly for fathers ( Yu, Pettit, Lansford, Dodge, & Bates, 2010 ).

Remarriage rates also continued to rise over the past few decades; 40% of all marriages involve at least one partner who was previously married ( Livingston, 2014 ). A recent survey found 18% of adults in the United States aged 50–64 and 22% of adults over age 65 had a stepchild ( Pew Research Center, 2011 ). Stepparents are less involved with grown stepchildren ( Aquilino, 2006 ) and feel less obligated to help stepchildren than biological/adoptive parents do ( Ganong & Coleman, 2017 ; Pew Research Center, 2011 ). Thus, many midlife adults have ties to grown children that do not involve the intensity of biological relationships. Yet, it is not clear whether these same midlife adults have biological children to whom they remain close.

Young adults’ marriage and fertility

Young adults’ marital and procreation patterns may contribute to more intense bonds with midlife parents. In well-off families, young adults are delaying marriage ( Cherlin, 2010 ). Given that marriage typically draws young adults away from parents ( Sarkisian & Gerstel, 2008 ), this delay may contribute to more intense ties with parents. Upper SES young adults are more likely to marry, but do so at later ages ( Vespa, 2017 ) and thus, also retain stronger ties to parents.

Changes in childbearing also may facilitate prolonged ties to parents. The transition to adulthood co-occurs with the period of highest fecundity, but several factors contribute to diminished fertility since 1960s ( World Bank, 2017a ). Rising levels of women’s education and effective contraception are associated with lower birth rates ( Lesthaegh, 2010 ). Americans no longer believe parenthood is a key marker of adulthood ( Vespa, 2017 ). Further, declines in fertility occur during economic downswings, such as the Great Recession ( Mather, 2012 ).

Declines in fertility lengthen the period of time in which young adult retain child-free ties to parents, and also shape the midlife adults’ transition to grandparenthood. Yet, the likelihood and experience of being a grandparent also differs by socioeconomic position. In lower SES families, young adult women are more likely to become mothers without a long term partner ( Cherlin, 2010 ); their midlife mothers (the grandmothers) may help with childcare, housing, and other support. Further, lower SES midlife parents are more likely to be involved in living with or raising grandchildren (Ellis & Simons, 2014; U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). Thus, a majority of midlife adults remain in limbo with regard to whether and when they will become grandparents and their involvement with their own children reflects a prolongation of prior parental involvement, but a subset of typically under-privileged midlife parents may be highly involved in care for grandchildren.

Relationship and Individual Characteristics Associated With Parent/Child Ties

Finally, ties between midlife adults and their grown children occur between two people, and the characteristics of these people and their shared history account for the nature of those relationships.

History of the relationship

Close relationships in young adulthood may arise from strong relationships in childhood and adolescence. Attachment theory suggests children form bonds to parents in infancy that endure into their relationship patterns in adulthood, and theorists also argue that parents retain bonds to children formed earlier in life ( Antonucci & Akiyama, 1994 ; Kahn & Antonucci, 1980 ). Of course, these assumptions raise questions about what types of relationships are likely to be stronger in childhood and adolescence.

Similar structural, cultural, and family contexts contribute to childhood patterns and to continuity into adulthood. For example, upper socioeconomic status parents are more likely to engage in intensive parenting when their children are young such as playing games with them and ferrying them to soccer practice ( Bianchi & Milkie, 2010 ; Sayer, Bianchi, & Robinson, 2004 ). Likewise, parental marital status plays a role in these patterns, with divorced or single fathers less involved with young children than coresident married fathers ( Kalmijn, 2013a ; Sweeney, 2010 ). Lower socioeconomic mothers may be involved with their children because they are more likely to be never married or divorced. A complete review of the factors that shape ties between young children and parents is beyond the scope of this article, but suffice it to say that the factors that account for ties between young adults and parents also shape ties earlier in the lifespan, and that observed relationships between young adults and parents in part arise from these earlier relationships.

Individual Characteristics and Within Family Differences

In addition, midlife parents bring individual characteristics to their relationships with grown children, including their gender, socioeconomic position, and marital status. Socioeconomic position has already been covered with regard to provision of support, and marital status was reviewed with regard to family structure.

But parental gender also plays a key role, favoring maternal involvement with grown children. The pattern of current maternal involvement is not new; research from the mid twentieth century documented that mothers were consistently more involved than fathers were with grown children of all ages ( Rossi & Rossi, 1990 ; Umberson, 1992 ).

Parental gender is situated in a variety of other contextual variables, including SES (single mothers likely to be poorer, with fewer financial resources for children) and marital status (e.g., unmarried mothers are closer to their grown children, unmarried/remarried fathers have lessened involvement or may be estranged from grown children). Yet, studies find that mothers have more frequent contact with grown children, provide more support, and report greater closeness and conflict at midlife even after controlling for social structure and marital status (e.g., Arnett & Schwab, 2012a ; Fingerman et al., 2009 ; Fingerman et al., 2016 ).

Notably, relationships between young adults and parents also vary within families. That is, parents do not have equally intense relationships with each of their children ( Suitor et al., in press ). Parents respond to their children’s characteristics and their sense of compatibility with each child. Parents provide support in reaction to crises (e.g., divorce, illness) or ongoing everyday needs associated with a child’s statuses (e.g., child is a parent; student) or age ( Hartnett et al., 2017 ). Parents also are more likely to give support to young adult and midlife children whom they view as successful, with whom they have closer relationships, or with whom they share values ( Kalmijn, 2013b ; Suitor, Pillemer, & Sechrist, 2006 ; Suitor et al., 2016 ).

Declining fertility described previously may diminish within-family variability in the future ( World Bank, 2017a ). Today’s midlife adults grew up in larger sibships than today’s young adults, and parents invest more in each child in smaller sibships ( Fingerman et al., 2009 ). As such, the intensity of ties between midlife parents and their grown children is generally higher than in the past, and likely to remain high, with diminishment of within family variability.

All of these issues raise the question—do changes in parents’ ties to young adults matter for the parents? Theory and research regarding the effects of parental involvement have focused on the grown child (e.g., Johnson, 2013 ) rather than on the parent.

Emerging evidence suggests involvement with young adult offspring has implications for midlife parents’ current well-being, however. The research literature on this topic is nascent, beginning in the past 10 years (perhaps reflecting the increase in parental involvement during that period). Further, most studies examine effects of parental involvement without contextual factors such as SES or marital status. As such, the MIS model ( Figure 1 ) is comprised of two models, one model predicting parental involvement from a variety of factors, and the other model predicting parental well-being from parental involvement. Several of the connections between levels of the model are theoretical and warrant additional research attention. In describing associations between parental involvement and well-being, I highlight which factors might warrant particular research attention in the future.

Generativity and benefits of parental involvement

Midlife parents may benefit from involvement with their grown children. Erikson’s (1963) theory of lifespan development indicated the task of midlife is generativity—that is, midlife adults derive rewards from giving to the next generation. In the context of the parent/child tie, one study found that parents who gave more instrumental support to their grown children reported better well-being (fewer depressive symptoms) over time ( Byers, Levy, Allore, Bruce, & Kasl, 2008 ). Similarly, another study found that parents shared laughter and enjoyable exchanges with grown children in their daily interactions. Over the course of the study week, 90% of the parents ( N = 247) reported having an enjoyable encounter with a grown child, and 89% reported laughing with a grown child ( Fingerman, Kim, Birditt, & Zarit, 2016 ).

Yet, not all parents experience such generativity and enjoyment of grown children. The family factors described previously may play a role in whether parents benefit from, or are harmed by, involvement with grown children. Parents who are estranged from offspring (i.e., fathers) may suffer diminished well-being due to the loss of this normative role. Similarly, stepparents may incur fewer rewards due to lessened involvement with grown children. Future research should focus specifically on opportunities for generativity in different populations, particularly among midlife men.

Further, as mentioned, midlife adults are less likely to be grandparents due to young adults’ delayed fertility (or decisions to not have children). Midlife adults who are grandparents are often highly involved with their grandchildren (as well as their grown children), providing childcare on a frequent basis ( Hank & Buber, 2009 ). Grandparents typically find the grandparenting role rewarding ( Fingerman, 1998 ). Future research should ask whether midlife adults who have grown children, but not grandchildren experience frustration or longing.

Emotional involvement and grown children’s problems

Parental well-being also may align with events in their grown children’s lives. Coregulation of emotions has been found in marital couples and in ties between parents and younger children who live in their home ( Butler & Randall, 2013 ). Likewise, the increased frequency of contact with grown children may generate an immediate emotional response to problems grown children experience. Indeed, factors that have facilitated contact between generations, such as technologies, decreased mobility, and coresidence allow parents to experience immediate reactions to events in grown children’s lives. For example, in the 1980s, a grown child who failed a college exam might call at the end of the week to relate that story to a parent, along with the resolution of the problem (the professor offered extra credit because students did not perform well on that test). The parent learned of the events without reacting emotionally. By contrast, in the 21st century, young adults text or call their parents in the throes of crisis, and parents experience the vicissitudes of young adulthood in the moment.

In particular, midlife parents incur detriments from grown children suffering life crises such as divorce, health problems, job loss, addiction, or being the victim of a crime. Researchers have found that even one grown child experiencing one problem has a negative effect on a midlife parent, regardless of how successful other children in the family might be ( Fingerman, Cheng, Birditt, & Zarit, 2012 ). Similarly, in late life, mothers suffer when grown children experience such crises, irrespective of their favoritism or feelings about the grown child ( Pillemer, Suitor, Riffin, & Gilligan, 2017 ). These effects on parental well-being may reflect a variety of responses including a sense that one has failed in the parenting role, worry about the child, empathy with the grown child, or stress of trying to ameliorate the situation (Fingerman, Cheng, Birditt, et al., 2012 ; Hay, Fingerman, & Lefkowitz, 2008 ). Again, structural factors such as SES are associated with the likelihood parents will have a grown child who experiences such problems. That is, lower SES is associated with increased risks of a grown child experiencing financial and other life problems.

The familial changes noted previously also may play a role regarding which parents are affected by grown children. Stepparents may incur fewer rewards from stepchildren and less harm when their stepchildren suffer problems compared to biological (or adopted early in life) children. Yet, the marriage may suffer if the stepparent objects to the biological parents’ involvement with a grown children who has incurred a life crisis. Future research should address these issues.

In sum, many midlife parents incur benefits from their stronger ties to grown children. But when grown children experience life crises—job loss or serious health problems—these problems may undermine their parents’ well-being, particularly when parents are highly involved with those grown children.

Beliefs About Involvement With Grown Children

Parents’ beliefs about their involvement with grown children may also be pivotal in the implications of that involvement for their well-being. Cognitive behavioral theories suggest that individuals’ perspectives on these relationships determine the implications of involvement with family members. Indeed, research regarding intergenerational caregiving has established that beliefs about the caregiving role and subjective burden contribute to the implications of caregiving more than the objective demands of caregiving ( Aneshensel, Pearlin, Mullan, Zarit, & Whitlatch, 1995 ; Zarit, Reever, & Bach-Peterson, 1980 ).

Similar processes may be evident regarding midlife parents’ involvement with their grown children. It is not so much the involvement, per se, as the parents’ perceptions of that involvement that affects the parents’ well-being. For example, in one study, when midlife parents provided support to grown children several times a week, parents’ ratings of the child’s neediness were associated with parental well-being. Parents who viewed their grown children as more needy than other young adults reported poorer well-being, but the frequency of support the parents provided was not associated with the parents’ well-being (though more frequent support was beneficial from the grown child’s perspective; Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselmann, et al., 2012 ).

Shifts in beliefs and the associations with well-being may reflect both the overall cultural norms for parental involvement and the economy. For example, a study in the United States before the Great Recession (when intergenerational coresidence was less common) found that adults of all ages endorsed coresidence between generations solely when the younger generation incurred economic problems or was single and childless ( Seltzer, Lao, & Bianchi, 2012 ). A more recent study of the “empty nest” found that midlife parents who had children residing in their home in 2008 had poorer quality marital ties. But in 2013 (when intergenerational coresidence became more common), parents residing with offspring reported poorer marital quality only when their children suffered life problems ( Davis, Kim, & Fingerman, in press ). Thus, norms for parental involvement with grown children and the economic context may shape the implications of that involvement for parents’ marital ties and well-being. Parents are harmed when they believe their grown children should be more autonomous (Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselmann, et al., 2012 ; Pillemer et al., 2017 ).

Given the implications of young adult children for midlife parents’ well-being, it is worth considering how relationships with grown children may shape parents’ later years. We might consider two possible pathways with regard to parental aging. First, parents may continue in the role of parenting by giving support to the next generation even as the offspring transition to midlife. Second, most parents will require assistance at some point in the aging process. Again, the economic structures, norms, and family structures evident today may shape these processes, but the research is not well-developed regarding variability in these patterns.

Continued Involvement in the Parenting Role

Given current patterns of heavy involvement, parents may persist in the parenting role into late life. Primates demonstrate a general parenting predisposition long past the years of the progeny’s immaturity (at least among mothers). Jane Goodall, the famous primatologist reported her observations of Flo, an elderly female chimp. One day, Flo viciously attacked a young male chimp who had engaged in a fight with her son, Figan. Despite the aged Flo’s weaker status, she jumped in to protect her grown offspring ( Montgomery, 2009 ).

Human “primates” behave in a similar manner, continuing in the parental role and providing for their children in need, even in late life ( Suitor et al., 2006 ; Suitor, Sechrist, & Pillemer, 2007 ). These patterns are evident across cultural groups. Research regarding Western countries throughout Europe found that parents gave more support to grown children than the reverse ( Grundy & Henretta, 2006 ; Kohli, Albertini, & Kunemond, 2010). In the United States, Becker, Beyene, Newsom, and Mayen (2003) conducted a qualitative study of family ties among older adults in four different ethnic groups (Latino, African American, Vietnamese, and Filipino). Although the scholars noted ethnic differences in how groups viewed coresidence and family ties, older relatives in all four groups attempted to give financial or practical help such as child care to the younger generation.

Moreover, although Asian cultures have traditionally endorsed Confucian values for grown children to provide support to parents ( Kim et al., 2015 ), research in China finds that rural older adults still provide practical support to grown children or childcare for their grandchildren (i.e., if the grandchildren’s parents move to urban areas; Chen & Silverstein, 2000 ). Thus, despite cultural and economic differences, overall parents may remain heavily invested in the parenting role into late life and are likely to do so in the future.

Parental Needs for Care

Nevertheless, parents also typically incur needs for support by the end of life when physical health or cognitive abilities decline. Midlife children have been a mainstay of this support. As such, we ask how today’s young adults will care for their parents in old age.

The strengthening of intergenerational bonds may serve many older parents well at the end of life. Research examining current cohorts of older adults suggests that aging parents are more likely to receive care from a child who shares their values and with whom they have had a close relationship ( Pillemer & Suitor, 2013 ). Extending this pattern into future cohorts, the prolonged transition to adulthood provides opportunities for parents and young adult children to develop strong bonds. By midlife, these ties may facilitate a seamless transition to caregiving tasks because the two parties already engage in daily exchanges of emotional and practical help ( Fingerman et al., 2016 ; Fingerman, Huo, Kim, & Birditt, in press ).

By contrast, prolonged dependency on parents may stymie the offspring’s psychological growth and could impede the ability of midlife adults to care for their parents in late life. Researchers have shown that investment in adult roles (e.g., work, family) is associated with personality changes consistent with providing care to others (e.g., increased agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability; Bleidorn et al., 2013 ; Lodi-Smith & Roberts, 2007 ). As such, exclusion from these roles may diminish psychological growth associated with helping parents in late life.

Yet, evidence suggests offspring will step in when the time come based on current patterns. A survey of over 1,000 caregivers in the United States revealed that nearly a quarter of them were aged 18–34 ( AARP, 2015 ). Granted, these younger caregivers typically were involved as secondary caregivers and put in fewer hours than older adults who were caring for a spouse. Nevertheless, these data suggest millennials are already stepping in to care for family.

Of course, patterns may vary within and between families. Some of the best predictors of relationship qualities in parent/child relationships over time are prior relationship qualities (Belsky, Jaffee, Shieh, & Silva, 2001; Suitor, Gilligan, & Pillemer, 2013 ). In essence, it is likely that parent/child ties that are well-functioning in young adulthood may persist in this manner, providing excellent care to aging parents. By contrast, relationships that are already fraught with difficulties may disband or generate inadequate parent care in late life.

Factors associated with future support

The factors that underlie current parental involvement may also shape the likelihood and type of future support that parents receive in old age. Yet structural factors may evolve over time. Thus, for any individual midlife parent today, future circumstances may be different.

Regarding socioeconomic status, prolonged parental support of young adults may have implications for parents’ financial well-being, even among parents who are not badly off today. Money is finite. As such, when midlife parents provide financial support to grown children, that support may come at the expense of the parents’ current and future financial well-being (e.g., own retirement savings). These patterns may be exacerbated for Americans in the bottom half of the economic ladder, who are unlikely to save for retirement at all ( Rhee, 2013 ). Yet, it is not clear how current financial demands on midlife parents bode for the future. For example, coresidence is more common among lower SES parents and adult children. And this coresidence may be setting up patterns now that facilitate support of parents in late life. A recent survey found that nearly half of grown children who reside with parents paid rent and nearly 90% contributed to household expenses ( Pew Research Center, 2012 ). When parents age, these children may step in with financial support providing lower SES parents with a safety net.

The role of technology in future ties with aging parents also is unclear. The technological advances of the early 21 century facilitated communication between adults and parents, as cell phones saturated markets nearly worldwide by 2015 ( World Bank, 2017b ). Yet, as the 21st century unfolds, social media are a dominant force in communication patterns. More importantly, social media platform usage differs by cohort. For example, 62% of adults who are online use Facebook, but young adults are more likely to use Instagram (59% of adults aged 18–29 in 2015 used Instagram, compared to only 8% of older adults; Pew Research Center, 2016 ). If these patterns persist, by late life, current midlife parents who use a certain form of social media may be shut out of communication if their grown children use a different social media platform. Perhaps this alienation will be avoided if both parties use a single social media platform—even a new one that emerges in the future.

Family structure may also have implications for parents as they grow older and require care. In the 20th century, scholars debunked the idea of the “sandwich generation” as a falsehood; most midlife caregivers had children who were grown and were not raising young children while caring for aging parents (Fingerman et al., 2010; Grundy & Henretta, 2006 ). If anything, today’s midlife adult is likely to be in a “club sandwich” where they confront demands from layers of generations—caregiving for an aging parent and responding to crises and everyday needs among their young adult offspring in sequence and simultaneously ( Fingerman, Pitzer, et al., 2011 ; Grundy & Henretta, 2006 ).

For young adults today who have children at later ages, however, a true sandwich may occur, with both generation pressing on the midlife generation squished like jelly in between. Aside from the increased stress on the midlife caregiver, quality of care may suffer. Older parents may worry about burdening their grown children and may not ask for help they need. Even older parents who seek assistance may suffer due to constraints on the midlife child who is consumed with raising her own children. In some families, adolescent grandchildren may supplement care provided by a midlife adult ( AARP, 2015 ; Hamil, 2012 ), and future research should examine this type of supplementary care. In sum, in the future, parents may find that their midlife children are experiencing strains balancing children in the home and aging parents, but some families may come together in caregiving with a third generation joining in.

Finally, with declining fertility rates, parents may selectively turn to midlife children who lack children of their own for care. Yet, the evidence for this assertion is mixed. In one study, aging mothers identified the grown child they anticipated would provide care and then examined who actually did provide care 7 years later. That study found no such association regarding whether the midlife child had children of his/her own ( Pillemer & Suitor, 2013 ), perhaps because adults who have children of their own assume nurturing roles toward their parents as well as their children. Other research has found that gay and lesbian married couples do a better job of supporting one another when providing care to aging parents than do heterosexual marital couples ( Reczek & Umberson, 2016 ). The authors attributed some of this spousal support of caregiving to gendered roles in marriage (i.e., men expect women to do caregiving but this not the case in gay and lesbian couples). Still, heterosexual couples are also more likely to have children who generate additional burdens competing with parental caregiving. Future research will need to examine how the current generation of parents elicits care from their offspring who may or may not have children of their own.

Parents are considerably more involved with their grown children aged 18–34 than was the case 40 years ago. Parents engage in more frequent contact, give more support, are more likely to live with a grown child, and experience greater affection. Societal changes in the form of economic challenges to attaining adulthood, new technologies facilitating communication, and public policies that place greater reliance on family contribute to these stronger bonds.

Distinct subgroups of parents warrant additional research attention. For example, although LGBT youth have received research attention—particularly with regard to coming out to parents ( Pew Research Center, 2013 ), studies examining LGBT midlife parents and their young adult offspring are all but absent from the literature. It is likely that these relationships are as involved as relationships involving married or single heterosexual parents, but the history of discrimination and inability to marry earlier in life may offer unique features to these ties.

Moreover, cultural values and beliefs are in flux. Many parents in the United States continue to endorse beliefs about grown children’s autonomy ( Fingerman, Cheng, Wesselman, et al., 2012 ; Vespa, 2017 ). It is not clear when (and whether) those values will shift and future studies should focus on this issue. Research should also seek to understand parental beliefs about goals during the adolescent years and the types of tasks parents expect their adolescent children to perform to prepare for young adulthood.

Of equal concern is the dearth of recent data regarding ethnic and racial differences in parents’ ties to young adults. Many publications regarding ethnic and racial differences among parents and young adult children still analyze data from the 1990s (e.g., Hardie & Seltzer, 2016 ), and it is not clear whether the findings are relevant in 2017.

Finally, there has been little attention to potential distinctions between rural and urban settings with regard to the transition to adulthood, and young adults’ ties to their midlife parents. Studies have examined these differences in China where urban residence requires permits that aging parents often lack ( Chen & Silverstein, 2000 ). Given the outflux of young people from rural areas in the United States, this topic warrants consideration in the United States as well.

The penultimate issue is how ties between midlife parents and young adult children will evolve into tomorrow’s support for aging parents. Rather than judge or criticize current patterns (e.g., young adults are immature), future research might seek to identify how the strengths of current patterns could lead to support of aging parents. Indeed, decades of research addressing marriage has generated algorithms to predict divorce and to provide interventions for maladaptive marital relationship patterns. Similar initiatives may be warranted with regard to intergenerational ties which seem to be replacing romantic partnerships as the primary relationships for many adults today.

Anecdotally, young adults seem to be involved in ways that facilitate their midlife parents’ well-being in many situations today. When Hurricane Harvey hit the Gulf Coast during the first week of classes at UT Austin in late August, 2017, the Provost sent a memo to faculty asking them to be flexible for the many students from Houston affected by the hurricane. In that memo, the Provost correctly pointed out that many of these young people would spend the semester going back and forth to Houston to help their parents move in and out of shelters and to restart their lives. This disaster brought to light the ways in which millennials reciprocate their parents’ involvement and investment via a strong sense of family cohesion in return.

In conclusion, involvement with young adult children has ramifications for midlife parents in positive and negative ways. Parents benefit from a close tie with frequent contact, and many parents find it rewarding to be involved in their grown children’s lives. Parents may also suffer if they vicariously experience their children’s life crises. Nevertheless, parental involvement may help mitigate children’s crises and improve the parents’ well-being as a result. And the offspring may step up and be there in moments of crisis as well. In sum, most parents view their grown children as valuable relationship partners from whom they benefit in the present, and may benefit in the future.

This study was supported by grants from the National Institute on Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health (R01AG027769) the Family Exchanges Study II to K. L. Fingerman, Principal Investigator. This research also was supported by grant (5 R24 HD042849) awarded to the Population Research Center (PRC) at The University of Texas at Austin by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), National Institutes of Health.

None reported.

I am grateful to Steven Zarit for helpful comments on a draft of this article. Gianna Colera and Jaimee Liem assisted with proofreading a draft of this article.

AARP Public Policy Institute . ( 2015 ). Caregiving in the US: 2015 Report . Retrieved from http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/ppi/2015/caregiving-in-the-united-states-2015-report-revised.pdf .

Albertini , M. , & Kohli , M . ( 2012 ). The generational contract in the family: An analysis of transfer regimes in Europe . European Sociological Review , 29 , 828 – 840 . doi: 10.1093/esr/jcs061

Google Scholar

Aneshensel , C. , Pearlin , L. I. , Mullan , J. T. , Zarit , S. H. , & Whitlatch , C. J . ( 1995 ). Profiles in caregiving: The unexpected career . New York : Academic Press .

Google Preview

Antonucci , T. C. , & Akiyama , H . ( 1994 ). Convoys of attachment and social relations in children, adolescents, and adults . In F. Nestmann & K. Hurrlelmann (Eds.), Social networks and social support in childhood and adolescence (pp. 37–52). New York : Walter de Gruyter . doi:10.1515/9783110866377.37

Aquilino , W. S . ( 2006 ). Family relationships and support systems in emerging adulthood . In J. J. Arnett & J. L. Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century (pp. 193 – 217 ). Washington, DC : American Psychological Association .

Arnett , J. J . ( 2000 ). Emerging adulthood. A theory of development from the late teens to the late twenties . American Psychologist , 55 , 469 – 480 . doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469

Arnett , J. J. , & Schwab , J . ( 2012a ). The Clark University poll of emerging adults . Worcester, MA : Clark University .

Arnett , J. J. , & Schwab , J . ( 2012b ). The Clark University Poll of parents of emerging adults . Worcester, MA : Clark University .

Axinn , W. G. , & Yabiku , S. T . ( 2001 ) Social change, the social organization of families, and fertility limitation . American Journal of Sociology , 106 , 1219 – 1261 . doi:10.1086/320818

Becker , G. , Beyene , Y. , Newsom , E. , & Mayen , N . ( 2003 ). Creating continuity through mutual assistance: Intergenerational reciprocity in four ethnic groups . Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences , 58 , S151 – S159 .

Belsky , J. , Jaffee , S. , Hsieh , K. H. , & Silva , P. A . ( 2001 ). Child-rearing antecedents of intergenerational relations in young adulthood: A prospective study . Developmental Psychology , 37 , 801 – 808 . doi:10.1037//0012-1649.37.6.801

Bengtson , V. L . ( 2001 ). Beyond the nuclear family: The increasing importance of multigenerational bonds . Journal of Marriage and Family , 63 , 1 – 16 . doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00001.x

Bianchi , S. M. , & Milkie , M. A . ( 2010 ). Work and family research in the first decade of the 21st century . Journal of Marriage and Family , 72 , 705 – 725 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00726.x

Billari , F. C . ( 2004 ). Becoming and adult in Europe: A macro(/micro)-demographic perspective . Demographic Research , 3 , 15 – 44 . doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2004.S3.2

Birditt , K. S. , Hartnett , C. S. , Fingerman , K. L. , Zarit , S. , & Antonucci , T. C . ( 2015 ). Extending the intergenerational stake hypothesis: Evidence of an intraindividual stake and implications for well-being . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 77 , 877 – 888 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12203

Bleidorn , W. , Klimstra , T. A. , Denissen , J. J. , Rentfrow , P. J. , Potter , J. , & Gosling , S. D . ( 2013 ). Personality maturation around the world: A cross-cultural examination of social-investment theory . Psychological Science , 24 , 2530 – 2540 . doi: 10.1177/0956797613498396

Bronfenbrenner , U. , & Morris , P. A . ( 2006 ). The bioecological model of human development . In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol.1: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 793 – 828 ). New York, NY : Wiley .

Bucx , F. , van Wel , F. , & Knijn , T . ( 2012 ). Life course status and exchanges of support between young adults and parents . Journal of Marriage and Family , 74 , 101 – 115 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2011.00883.x

Butler , E. A. , & Randall , A. K . ( 2013 ). Emotional coregulation in close relationships . Emotion Review , 5 , 202 – 210 . doi: 10.1177/1754073912451630

Byers , A. L. , Levy , B. R. , Allore , H. G. , Bruce , M. L. , & Kasl , S. V . ( 2008 ). When parents matter to their adult children: Filial reliance associated with parents’ depressive symptoms . The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 63 , P33 – P40 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/63.1.P33

Chen , X. , & Silverstein , M . ( 2000 ). Intergenerational social support and the psychological well-being of older parents in China . Research on Aging , 22 , 43 – 65 . doi:10.1177164027500221003

Cherlin , A . ( 2010 ). Demographic trends in the United States: a review of research in the 2000s . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 72 , 403 – 419 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00710.x

Conger , R. D. , Conger , K. J. , & Martin , M. J . ( 2010 ). Socioeconomic status, family processes, and individual development . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 72 , 685 – 704 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00725.x

Cotten , S. R. , McCullough , B. M. , & Adams , R. G . ( 2012 ). Technological influences on social ties across the lifespan . In K. L. Fingerman , C. A. Berg , J. Smith , & T. C. Antonucci (Eds.), Handbook of lifespan development (pp. 647 – 672 ). New York, NY : Springer Publishers .

Cruz , J . ( 2013 ). Marriage: More than a century of change . Bowling Green University: National Center for Family and Marriage Research . OH: Bowling Green. Retrieved from https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/FP-13-13.pdf

Davis , E. M. , Kim , K. , & Fingerman , K. L . ( in press ). Is an empty nest best? Coresidence with adult children and parental marital quality before and after the Great Recession . The Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences . doi:10.1093/geronb/gbw022

Elder , G. H. , Jr . ( 1998 ). The life course as developmental theory . Child Development , 69 , 1 – 12 . doi: 10.1111/j.1467–8624.1998.tb06128.x

Ellis , R. R. , & Simmons , T . ( 2014 ). Coresident grandparents and their grandchildren: 2012 . Washington, DC: United States Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration .

Erikson , E . ( 1963 ). Childhood and society . New York : Norton .

Fingerman , K. L . ( 1998 ). The good, the bad, and the worrisome: Emotional complexities in grandparents’ experiences with individual grandchildren . Family Relations , 47 , 403 – 414 . doi: 10.2307/585271

Fingerman , K. L . ( 2001 ). Aging mothers and their adult daughters: A study in mixed emotions . New York : Springer .

Fingerman , K. L . ( 2016 ). The ascension of parent–child ties in the twenty-first century . The Psychologist , 29 , 114 – 118 .

Fingerman , K. L. , & Bermann , E . ( 2000 ). Applications of family systems theory to the study of adulthood . International Journal of Aging & Human Development , 51 , 5 – 29 . doi: 10.2190/7TF8-WB3F-TMWG-TT3K

Fingerman , K. L. , Cheng , Y. P. , Birditt , K. S. , & Zarit , S . ( 2012 ). Only as happy as the least happy child: Multiple grown children’s problems and successes and middle-aged parents’ well-being . The Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences , 67 , 184 – 193 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbr086

Fingerman , K. L. , Cheng , Y. P. , Kim , K. , Fung , H. H. , Han , G. , Lang , F. R. ,… Wagner , J . ( 2016 ). Parental involvement with college students in Germany, Hong Kong, Korea, and the United States . Journal of Family Issues , 37 , 1384 – 1411 . doi: 10.1177/0192513X14541444

Fingerman , K. L. , Cheng , Y. P. , Wesselmann , E. D. , Zarit , S. , Furstenberg , F. , & Birditt , K. S . ( 2012 ). Helicopter parents and landing pad kids: Intense parental support of grown children . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 74 , 880 – 896 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00987.x

Fingerman , K. L. , Cheng , Y.-P. , Tighe , L. A. , Birditt , K. S. , & Zarit , S. H . ( 2012 ). Relationships between young adults and their parents . In A. Booth , S. L. Brown , N. Landale , W. Manning , & S. M. McHale (Eds.), Early adulthood in a family context (pp. 59 – 85 ). New York : Springer Publishers .

Fingerman , K. L. , Hay , E. L. , & Birditt , K. S . ( 2004 ). The best of ties, the worst of ties: Close, problematic, and ambivalent relationships across the lifespan . Journal of Marriage and Family , 66 , 792 – 808 . doi: 10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00053.x

Fingerman , K. L. , Huo , M. , Kim , K. , & Birditt , K. S . ( in press ). Coresident and noncoresident young adults’ daily experiences with parents . Emerging Adulthood. doi:10.1177/2167696816676583

Fingerman , K. L. , Kim , K. , Birditt , K. S. , & Zarit , S. H . ( 2016 ). The ties that bind: Midlife parents’ daily experiences with grown children . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 78 , 431 – 450 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12273

Fingerman , K. L. , Kim , K. , Davis , E. M. , Furstenberg , F. F. , Jr , Birditt , K. S. , & Zarit , S. H . ( 2015 ). “I’ll give you the world”: Parental socioeconomic background and assistance to young adult children . Journal of Marriage and Family , 77 , 844 – 865 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12204

Fingerman , K. , Miller , L. , Birditt , K. , & Zarit , S . ( 2009 ). Giving to the good and the needy: Parental support of grown children . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 71 , 1220 – 1233 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00665.x

Fingerman , K. L. , Pitzer , L. M. , Chan , W. , Birditt , K. S. , Franks , M. M. , & Zarit , S. H . ( 2011 ). Who gets what and why: Help middle-aged adults provide to parents and grown children . The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Social Sciences , 66 , 87 – 98 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbq009

Fingerman , K. L. , Sechrist , J. , & Birditt , K . ( 2013 ). Changing views on intergenerational ties . Gerontology , 59 , 64 – 70 . doi: 10.1159/000342211

Fingerman , K. L. , VanderDrift , L. E. , Dotterer , A. M. , Birditt , K. S. , & Zarit , S. H . ( 2011 ). Support to aging parents and grown children in black and white families . The Gerontologist , 51 , 441 – 452 . doi: 10.1093/geront/gnq114

Fry , R . ( 2015 ). More millennials living with family despite improved job market . Washington, DC : Pew Research Center . Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/07/29/more-millennials-living-with-family-despite-improved-job-market/

Fry , R . ( 2016 ). For the first time in modern era, living with parents edges out other living arrangements for 18- to 34-year-olds . Washington, DC : Pew Research Center . Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2016/05/24/for-first-time-in-modern-era-living-with-parents-edges-out-other-living-arrangements-for-18-to-34-year-olds/

Furstenberg , F. F. , Jr . ( 2010 ). On a new schedule: Transitions to adulthood and family change . Future of the Child , 20 , 67 – 87 . doi: 10.1353/foc.0.0038

Ganong , L. , & Coleman , M . ( 2017 ). Stepfamily relationships: Development, dynamics, and intervention (2nd ed.). New York : Springer . doi: 10.10078/978-1-4899-7702-1

Gans , D. , & Silverstein , M . ( 2006 ). Norms of filial responsibility for aging parents across time and generations . Journal of Marriage and Family , 68 , 961 – 976 . doi: 10.11111/j.17413737.2006.00307.x

Gilligan , M. , Suitor , J. J. , & Pillemer , K . ( 2015 ). Estrangement between mothers and adult children: The role of norms and values . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 77 , 908 – 920 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12207

Grundy , E . ( 2005 ). Reciprocity in relationships: Socio-economic and health influences on intergenerational exchanges between third age parents and their adult children in Great Britain . The British Journal of Sociology , 56 , 233 – 255 . doi: 10.1111/ j.1468-4446.2005.00057.x

Grundy , E. , & Henretta , J. C . ( 2006 ). Between elderly parents and adult children: A new look at the intergenerational care provided by the ‘sandwich generation’ . Ageing and Society , 26 , 707 – 722 . doi: 10.1017/S0144686X06004934

Hamil , S. B . ( 2012 ). Caring for grandparents with Alzheimer’s disease: Help from the forgotten generation . Journal of Family Issues , 33 , 1195 – 1217 .

Hank , K . ( 2007 ). Proximity and contacts between older parents and their children: A European comparison . Journal of Marriage & Family , 69 , 157 – 173 .

Hank , K. , & Buber , I . ( 2009 ). Grandparents caring for their grandchildren: Findings from the 2004 Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe . Journal of Family Issues , 30 , 53 – 73 .

Hardie , J. H. , & Seltzer , J. A . ( 2016 ). Parent–child relationships at the transition to adulthood: A comparison of Black, Hispanic, and White immigrant and native-born youth . Social Forces , 95 , 321 – 354 . doi: 10.1093/sf/sow033

Hartnett , C. S. , Fingerman , K. L. , & Birditt , K. S . ( 2017 ). Without the ties that bind: Young adults who lack active parental relationships . Manuscript under review.

Hay , E. L. , Fingerman , K. L. , & Lefkowitz , E. S . ( 2008 ). The worries adult children and their parents experience for one another . International Journal of Aging & Human Development , 67 , 101 – 127 . doi: 10.2190/AG.67.2.a

Henretta , J. C. , Grundy , E. , & Harris , S . ( 2002 ). The influence of socio-economic and health differences on parents’ provision of help to adult children: A British-United States comparison . Ageing and Society , 22 , 441 – 458 . doi: 10.1017/S0144686X02008735

Henretta , J. C. , Wolf , D. A. , Van Voorhis , M. F. , & Soldo , B. J . ( 2012 ). Family structure and the reproduction of inequality: Parents’ contribution to children’s college costs . Social Science Research , 41 , 876 – 887 . doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch. 2012.02.008

Johnson , M. K . ( 2013 ). Parental financial assistance and young adults’ relationships with parents and well-being . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 75 , 713 – 733 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12029

Kahn , R. L. , & Antonucci , T. C . ( 1980 ). Convoys over the life course: Attachment, roles, and social support . In P. B. Baltes & O. B. Brim (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (Vol. 3 ., pp. 253 – 268 ). New York : Academic Press .

Keniston , K . ( 1970 ). Youth: A “new” stage of life . The American Scholar , 39 , 631 – 654 .

Kalmijn , M . ( 2013a ). Adult children’s relationships with married parents, divorced parents, and stepparents: Biology, marriage or residence ? Journal of Marriage and Family , 75 , 1181 – 1193 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12057

Kalmijn , M . ( 2013b ). How mothers allocate support among adult children: Evidence from a multiactor survey . The Journals of Gerontology. Series b, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 68 , 268 – 277 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbs110

Kim , K. , Cheng , Y.-P. , Zarit , S. H. , & Fingerman , K. L . ( 2015 ). Relationships between adults and parents in Asia . In S.-T. Cheng , I. Chi , H. H. Fung , L. W. Li , & J. Woo (Eds.), Successful aging: Asian perspectives (pp. 101 – 123 ). New York : Springer .

Kohli , M . ( 1999 ). Private and public transfers between generations: Linking the family and the state . European Societies , 1 , 81 – 104 .

Kohli , M. , Albertini , M. , & Künemund , H . ( 2010 ). Linkages among adult family generations: Evidence from comparative survey research . In P. Heady and M. Kohli (Eds.), Family, kinship and state in contemporary Europe: Perspectives on theory and policy (pp. 225 – 248 ). Frankfurt, Germany : Campus Verlag .

Kornrich , S. , & Furstenberg , F . ( 2013 ). Investing in children: Changes in parental spending on children, 1972–2007 . Demography , 50 , 1 – 23 . doi: 10.1007/s13524-012-0146-4

Lesthaegh , R . ( 2010 ). The unfolding story of the second demographic transition . Population and Development Review , 36 , 211 – 251 . doi: 10.111/j.1728-4457.210.00328.x

Livingston , G . ( 2014 ). The demographics of remarriage . Washington, DC : Pew Research Center . Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/11/14/chapter-2-the- demographics-of-remarriage/

Lodi-Smith , J. , & Roberts , B. W . ( 2007 ). Social investment and personality: A meta-analysis of the relationship of personality traits to investment in work, family, religion, and volunteerism . Personality and Social Psychology Review , 11 , 68 – 86 . doi: 10.1177/1088868306294590

Lowenstein , A . ( 2007 ). Solidarity-conflict and ambivalence: Testing two conceptual frameworks and their impact on quality of life for older family members . The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 62 , S100 – S107 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/62.2.S100

Luden , J . ( 2012 ). Helicopter parents hover in the workplace . National Public Radio . Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2012/02/06/146464665/helicopter-parents- hover-in-the-workplace

Luescher , K. , & Pillemer , K . ( 1998 ). Intergenerational ambivalence: A new approach to the study of parent–child relations in later life . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 60 , 413 – 425 . doi: 10.2307/353858

Mather , M . ( 2012 ). Fact sheet: The decline in US fertility . World Population Data Sheet . Retrieved from http://www.prb.org/publications/datasheets/2012/world-population-data-sheet/fact-sheet-us-population.aspx

Mintz , S . ( 2015 ). The prime of life: A history of modern adulthood . Cambridge, MA : Belknap Press of Harvard University Press .

Montgomery , S . ( 2009 ). Walking the great apes: Jane Goodall, Dian Fossey, Birute Galdikas . White River Junction, VT : Chelsea Green Publishing .

National Center for Education Statistics ( 2017 , August). Fast facts: Back to school statistics . Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Education . Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

Newman , K . ( 2011 ). The accordion family: Boomerang kids, anxious parents, and the private toll of global competition . Boston, MA : Beacon Press .

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) . ( 2016 ). Education at a glance 2016: OECD indicators . Washington, DC: OECD Publishing .

Pew Research Center . ( 2011 ). A portrait of stepfamilies. Social and Demographic Trends . Washington, DC : Author . Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/01/13/a-portrait- of-stepfamilies/

Pew Research Center . ( 2012 ). The boomerang generation: Who are the boomerang kids? Washington, DC : Author . Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/03/15/who-are-the-boomerang-kids/

Pew Research Center . ( 2013 ). A survey of LGBT Americans . Washington, DC : Author . Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/06/13/a-survey-of-lgbt-americans/

Pew Research Center . ( 2016 ). Social media update 2016 . Washington, DC : Author . Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/11/social-media-update-2016/

Pillemer , K. , & Suitor , J. J . ( 2013 ). Who provides care? a prospective study of caregiving among adult siblings . The Gerontologist , 54 , 589 – 598 . doi: 10.1093/geront/gnt066

Pillemer , K. , Suitor , J. J. , Mock , S. E. , Sabir , M. , Pardo , T. B. , & Sechrist , J . ( 2007 ). Capturing the complexity of intergenerational relations: Exploring ambivalence within later-life families . Journal of Social Issues , 63 , 775 – 791 . doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00536.x

Pillemer , K. , Suitor , J. J. , Riffin , C. , & Gilligan , M . ( 2017 ). Adult children’s problems and mothers’ well-being: Does parental favoritism matter ? Research on Aging , 39 , 375 – 395 . doi: 10.1177/0164027515611464

Reczek , C. , & Umberson , D . ( 2016 ). Greedy spouse, needy parent: The marital dynamics of gay, lesbian, and heterosexual intergenerational caregivers . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 78 , 957 – 974 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12318

Rhee , N . ( 2013 ). The retirement savings crisis: Is it worse than we think? Washington, DC : National Institute on Retirement Security . Retrieved from http://www.controller.ca.gov/Files-EO/2013_sco_flac_retirement_savings_crisis_final_natl_institute_retirement.pdf

Rossi , A. S. , & Rossi , P. H . ( 1990 ). Of human bonding: Parent–child relations across the life course . New York, NY : Aldine de Gruyter .

Sarkisian , N. , & Gerstel , N . ( 2008 ). Till marriage do us part: Adult children’s relationships with parents . Journal of Marriage & Family , 70 , 360 – 376 . doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00487.x

Sayer , L. C. , Bianchi , S. M. , & Robinson , J. P . ( 2004 ). Are parents investing less in children? Trends in mothers’ and fathers’ time with children . American Journal of Sociology , 110 , 1 – 43 . doi: 10.1086/386270

Schulenberg , J. , & Schoon , I . ( 2012 ). The transition to adulthood across time and space: Overview of special section . Longitudinal and Life Course Studies , 3 , 164 – 172 . doi: 10.14301/llcs.v3i2.194

Seltzer , J. A. , Lau , C. Q. , & Bianchi , S. M . ( 2012 ). Doubling up when times are tough: a study of obligations to share a home in response to economic hardship . Social Science Research , 41 , 1307 – 1319 . doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.05.008

Suitor , J. J. , Gilligan , M. , Peng , S. , Con , G. , Rurka , M. , & Pillemer , K . ( 2016 ). My pride and joy? Predicting favoritism and disfavoritism in mother–adult child relations . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 78 , 908 – 925 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12288

Suitor , J. J. , Gilligan , M. , & Pillemer , K . ( 2013 ). Continuity and change in mothers’ favoritism toward offspring in adulthood . Journal of Marriage and Family , 75 , 1229 – 1247 . doi: 10.1111/jomf.12067

Suitor , J. J. , Gilligan , M. , & Pillemer , K . ( 2014 ). Conceptualizing and measuring intergenerational ambivalence in late life . The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 66 , S769 – S781 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbr108

Suitor , J. J. , Gilligan , M. , Pillemer , K. , Fingerman , K. L. , Kim , K. , Silverstein , M. , & Bengtson , V. L . ( in press ). Applying within-family differences designs to enhance understanding of the complexity of intergenerational relations in well-being . The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Social Sciences .

Suitor , J. J. , Pillemer , K. , & Sechrist , J . ( 2006 ). Within-family differences in mothers’ support to adult children . The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 61 , S10 – S17 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/61.1.S10

Suitor , J. J. , Sechrist , J. , & Pillemer , K . ( 2007 ). Within-family differences in mothers’ support to adult children in Black and White families . Research on Aging , 29 , 410 – 435 . doi: 10.1177/0164027507303636

Swartz , T. T. , Kim , M. , Uno , M. , Mortimer , J. , & O’Brien , K. B . ( 2011 ). Safety nets and scaffolds: Parental support in the transition to adulthood . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 73 , 414 – 429 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00815.x

Sweeney , M. M . ( 2010 ). Remarriage and stepfamilies: Strategic sites for family scholarship in the 21st century . Journal of Marriage and Family , 72 , 667 – 684 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00724.x

Torche , F . ( 2015 ). Analyses of intergenerational mobility: An interdisciplinary review . The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , 657 , 37 – 62 . doi: 10.1177/0002716214547476

Troll , L . ( 1972 ). Is parent–child conflict what we mean by the generation gap ? The Family Coordinator , 21 , 347 – 349 .

Umberson , D . ( 1992 ). Relationships between adult children and their parents: Psychological consequences for both generations . Journal of Marriage and Family , 544 , 664 – 674 . doi: 10.2307/353252

U.S. Census Bureau . ( 2011 ). Mover rate reaches record low, Census Bureau reports . Washington, DC : Author . Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/mobility_of_the_population/cb11-193.html

U.S. Census Bureau . ( 2014 ). Coresident grandparents and their grandchildren . Washington, DC : Author . Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2014/demo/p20-576.html

U.S. Census Bureau . ( 2016 ). CPS historical migration/geographic mobility tables . Washington, DC : Author . Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/geographic-mobility/historic.html

van Gaalen , R. I. , & Dykstra , P. A . ( 2010 ). Where is the exit? Intergenerational ambivalence and relationship quality in high contact ties . Journal of Aging Studies , 24 , 105 – 114 . doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2008.10.006

Vespa , J . ( 2017 ). The changing economics and demographics of young adulthood: 1975–2016 . U.S. Census Bureau: Current Population Reports . Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2017/demo/ p20-579.pdf

Yu , T. , Pettit , G. S. , Lansford , J. E. , Dodge , K. A. , & Bates , J. E . ( 2010 ). The interactive effects of marital conflict and divorce on parent–adult children’s relationships . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 72 , 282 – 292 . doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00699.x

World Bank . ( 2017a ). Fertility rate, total (births per woman) . United Nations Population Division . Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN

World Bank . ( 2017b ). Mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people) . Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.CEL.SETS.P2

Zarit , S. H. , Reever , K. E. , & Bach-Peterson , J . ( 1980 ). Relatives of the impaired elderly: Correlates of feelings of burden . The Gerontologist , 20 , 649 – 655 .

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Advertising and Corporate Services

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 2399-5300
• Copyright © 2024 The Gerontological Society of America
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Generation Gap

• Reference work entry
• Cite this reference work entry

• Nancy Mendez  

2245 Accesses

1 Citations

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Suggested Readings

El Nasser H, Grant L (2005, June 9). Diversity tints new kind of generation gap. USA Today, pp A4

Google Scholar  

Harms W (2000) Survey: generation gap closing. University of Chicago Chronicle, 20(4) (online journal)

McGraw J (2001) Closing the gap: a strategy for bringing parents and teens together. Simon & Schuster, New York

Download references

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio

Sana JD Loue PhD, MPH

School of Medicine, University Hospitals Case Medical Center Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio

Martha Sajatovic MD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Mendez, N. (2008). Generation Gap. In: Loue, S.J., Sajatovic, M. (eds) Encyclopedia of Aging and Public Health. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-33754-8_195

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-33754-8_195

Publisher Name : Springer, Boston, MA

Print ISBN : 978-0-387-33753-1

Online ISBN : 978-0-387-33754-8

eBook Packages : Medicine Reference Module Medicine

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Bridging the Generation Gap

Increasing the level of understanding between parent and child.

January 22, 2021

Customs and traditions, which greatly contribute in shaping the identity of an individual, change and evolve as years pass. Thus, those who were born decades ago will not necessarily have the same principles and ideologies that people born a few years back subscribe to. This is a clear manifestation of the “generation gap”, a term coined by anthropologist Margaret Mead that relates to the differentiation of values, attitudes or behaviors between members of an older and younger generation.

Studies in social psychology reveal that, left unchecked, generation gap can bring about an increase in ambiguity and discord between parents and children. This can lead to aged parents alienating themselves from their families, making them more dependent instead on external support such as government aids. As such, it is important to bridge the generation gap before it becomes a chasm that tears your family apart. Here are some of the ways to heighten the level of understanding between parent and child:

Be Open to New Ideas.

Some parents think that just because they are older and have therefore experienced more in life, they automatically know better. However, with the ever-changing societal landscape, parents should keep an open mind about concepts that didn’t exist when they were growing up. Just the same, the younger generation should also be willing to learn from their elders instead of pushing only for what they know is right.

Make Time for Daily Catch-Ups.

A gap in communication is one of the factors that can further widen the distance between parent and child. Get closer with each other by allotting a portion of your day to just talk about how each of you were able to spend it. In finding out the different activities that you prefer to engage in, you’ll also get an idea about what makes your parent or child happy, and even consider to join them so you can feel what it’s like to be in their shoes.

Don’t Just Dictate – Listen.

There are parents who, by virtue of age and experience, believe that their word is law. Strong-willed children, on the other hand, can be fueled by entitlement. Instead of fighting to direct a conversation, learn to listen to each other before speaking. Process the thoughts that the other party is trying to convey. This would make them feel that what they want or feel matters, and will encourage them to be more receptive of what you have to say, in return.

Agree to Meet Halfway.

If your parent or child has a personality as strong as yours, conversations can quickly turn sour. Before statements become disagreements, consider arriving at a compromise. Take the good parts that will be mutually beneficial for all parties involved. Look at it as a collaboration instead of a dictatorship, and this should foster better relations with your family members.

Love Unconditionally.

If there’s anything that can transcend generations, it’s love. Take advantage of any possible moment to show that despite your differences, you accept the other person for who they are and what they believe in, and are willing to keep the relationship tight above it all. When you hit a roadblock, always remember that at the end of the day, you are members of the same family, and a family sticks together for as long as it takes.

When faced with a situation that highlights the generation gap between you and the other person, remember that you were young once or you will get to your parents’ age, too. Always observe humility and respect in everything that you do.

I'm Gen Z, and my parents are baby boomers. We didn't have much in common, but I'm grateful for what they taught me.

• My parents were older than the parents of most of my peers. 
• As members of the baby boomer generation, there were differences in how they parented.
• They taught me independence, good manners, and to be well-rounded. 

Generation Z has been primarily raised by Generation X . But not me. My parents were born toward the end of the baby boomer years and had me, a Gen Zer, when they were both 43. It wasn't until I was older that I truly understood the age difference between my parents and those of my classmates. I have faint memories of celebrating my parents' 50th birthdays when I was turning seven, and I'm still the youngest at every family gathering by a pretty big margin.

While these particular experiences reflect being the child of older parents of any generation, I've recently thought about how my parents might have raised me differently specifically because they're part of the boomer generation. Now, as a young adult, I appreciate what they taught me that might differ from what their younger Gen X counterparts taught their kids, from small to large lessons.

They fostered a sense of early independence

My parents pushed me to embrace independence, even at a young age. Growing up an only child with two parents working full-time, I had to get comfortable finding ways to occupy myself.

Related stories

My mother loves telling a story about when I was around three or four years old and poured myself a glass of orange juice for myself while she was busy on a phone call. I just got a glass, went to the fridge, and poured the juice. It overflowed onto the counter and the floor, so naturally, I got a dish towel and wiped everything up. My mom, who was watching me the whole time, was amazed. She recognized I was safe and let me learn to be responsible and do things on my own. Of course, she later had to go in and redo my cleaning job.

Throughout my childhood, while many of my peers weren't allowed to ride their bikes down other streets, they let me go sledding without an adult accompanying me. I was also allowed to walk home from school and stay home alone at a young age. This time to explore and handle daily life without adult supervision showed me how important early independence is for positive personal development and confidence.

They wanted me to be well-rounded and work hard

My parents put me in a little bit of everything growing up. Where other kids did on a sport or two and maybe music lessons, I got to test out a lot of different extracurriculars . This is a privilege I recognize not everybody has and it was made easier by the fact I am an only child. I played soccer, learned how to ski and swim, and took figure skating, diving, piano, and gymnastic lessons.

Not everything was to my liking (I cried before a few ballet classes), but my parents wanted me to learn skills like swimming or skating that they were never taught growing up. Even the things that I didn't enjoy taught me adaptability in new situations.

I was also encouraged to read a lot and do my best in school, which was highly important for my baby boomer parents. The emphasis on academics and being well-rounded encouraged me to be active, hard-working, open-minded, and collaborate well with others.

And while most parents try to teach their kids to say "please" and "thank you," so this isn't necessarily a boomer thing, I'm glad my parents put a strong emphasis on good manners and respect for others. I have distinct memories of my mother always emphasizing before I went to a friend's house to say, "Thank you for having me," or always reminding me to say, "Please," whenever I asked for anything. Impressing the importance of manners on me led me to be a respectful and appreciative person.

They treated me like an adult

Constantly being surrounded by older adults like my parents, their friends, and family members, made me mature well beyond my years as a child, and so did some decisions my parents made. My parents always spoke to me as an adult instead of using "kid talk" or "baby talk."

My parents never planned trips around me ; they planned vacations they wanted to take, and happened to take me along with them. When other kids were at Disneyland at the age of 10, I was touring Pompeii in Italy with my family. Though secretly I'd still love to go to Disneyland, I had plenty of fun as a child. My maturity has helped me get to where I am today, and much of it can only be attributed to being raised by baby boomer parents.

While my parents were older than those of my peers and sometimes I felt like I didn't have a lot in common with my parents because of this generational gap, I'm grateful for how they raised me, and I know I'll bring a lot of their parenting decisions into how I raise my kids.

Watch: Here's what descendants of 5 former presidents say about the role age plays in politics

• Main content

Latest Education and Career News

Generation Gap Essay In English for Students and Children

Generation Gap: The generation gap is defined simply as the dissimilarity between the two generations. It can be understood best…

Reported by NVSHQ Team

Published on 12 November 2022

Generation Gap : The generation gap is defined simply as the dissimilarity between the two generations. It can be understood best by the example of a child and his or her grandfather or can be their grandmother. Here we are considering a relationship between a boy and his grandfather. If one can imagine then obviously it is apparent that there is a huge age difference between the two of them. Furthermore, there will be obvious differences in their views in terms of belief, political views and their attitude toward living life.

So if we analyse and dig a little deeper, we will find that there will be a huge difference between the two of them on the basis of the above points. Therefore now people can easily understand what is a generation gap.

Introduction

As mentioned in the above example, people from different generation behaves differently. Their ideologies and opinions are very much different. Let us take another example. If we observe the behaviour of people born before our independence, we will find that they are different from us socially as well as culturally. It can be noticed that this difference will keep on growing and can not be avoided. It is important to note that there is a huge impact of the environment in which a person had born. The circumstances in which he has been brought up also play a key role in setting up their mentality. Overall, the generation gap is nothing but the group of people coming from a different era with their beliefs, and culture. Furthermore, they have different mannerisms and morality which they follow.

The world around us is varying at a very fast pace and it is happening due to the thought process of people that are also changing rapidly with time. These changes are also bringing development to the world as well as creating conflicts among the people.

Impression on our Relationships

We all have experienced our relationships going wrong due to the generation gap. We often get into arguments with our seniors due to the difference in opinions. It leads us to the wrong path and it impacts our relationships badly. The common relationships that get impacted are :

Relationships between Parents and their Children

We have come across these types of scenarios personally, publically as well as in our relatives. In the initial days of parenting, the contradiction of ideas is normally taken as a joke by the parents as well as the children. But in later years, as the children reach the age of 17 and 18, these things become messier. This results in conflict between the parents and their children. It is apparent that parents were born in different eras with distinct circumstances but this is not the case with their children.

Parents enforce their culture and rudimentary ideas on their children and force them to follow these traditions and customs. But as expected, they are not the ones to follow these things without any scientific proof. Eventually, what happens is that parents and children engage in heated arguments and that destroys their relationships. This results in kids not talking to their children.

Relationships between Teachers and Student

The problem of the generation gap also arises between teachers and students. Teachers always want the students to study a particular topic from their method of teaching. As a result, students do not want that, they want to follow their method in this case. Here let us take an example of that from my personal experience. In my school days, my mathematics faculty used to solve maths problems from their method but in contrast, I used to do that from the method which I found quite easy. Here, differences of opinion arouse and obviously the relationship also got impacted badly.

Factors Contributing to Generation Gap

There are many factors that contribute to the generation gap and that results in conflict and thus makes our relationship bad. The reason for the generation gap is discussed briefly below here:

Communication Gap

The communication gap is a major factor that contributes to the generation gaps. One can say that one of the synonyms of the generation gap is a communication gap. We have seen many times in our home also that there is a natural communication barrier between our parents and us. But do we think that is why this communication gap is there between both of us? It is majorly because we both do not try to understand the perspectives of each other. We do not try to step up in their shoes. If we try to think like this we will definitely break the communication barriers. We should not be fanatical about our views and should not think that it is the only thing right.

We should talk to our elders and should calmly listen to their views and should try to understand them. Here I would insist on communicating with them. There should not be a communication gap at any point of time.

One of the major factors that contribute to the generation gap is Technology. According to the experts, technology is the major factor because of which the generation gap has increased manifolds. As we can see in our daily lives, we are too much engrossed in our smartphones that we do not care about what the other person is telling us. We are just addicted to that device very much. In our free time, we are just engaged in our smartphones and on the other hand, our parents and grandparents are just sitting and staring at our faces creating a communication barrier. And as we just discussed in the previous para the communication barrier is just another word for communication gap.

Just like these two factors, there are many other factors that create the ruckus such as enforcing your way of living on others and being fanatic about traditions, and cultures. All the factors like these create conflicting situations.

Ideas to Overcome Generation Gap

As we have identified the most common reasons for the generation gap, now we will try to provide some solutions regarding the gap. Some solutions have been listed below:

• Communication

The two different generations should always be encouraged to talk. Many times people can be heard saying that they do not have topics to talk about with another person. But let me tell you that these are only the excuses that only widen the road between the generation. The more conversation takes place between the two generations, the more they will understand each other. Due to this conversation, the gap obviously reduces between the generations.

• Spending time

Children are advised to spend time with their parents as well as with their elders.

• Sharing each other problems

Parents and children should their problems with each other. It could be possible that the children might be having any unexpected solution.

The use of technology should be minimal at the time of any family gathering.

The generation gap is a critical issue not only in India but also in many developed countries. It will increase with time. We should understand that we can not completely eliminate this problem rather we can reduce its effects. For reducing the efforts of the generation gap, both the generation should talk to each other and should understand each other beliefs, ideology and the circumstances they have been through. After analysing these things, we can minimise the generation gap in our family as well as in our society.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Most recent.

Bharati Vidyapeeth University Result 2024 (Out): Odd/Even Sem Exams

Bodoland University Result 2024 OUT: Check Semester Results

IGNOU Revaluation Result 2024: ignou.ac.in June/Dec TEE Copy Rechecking Results

Bangalore University Result 2024 OUT BA, B.Sc, B.Com UG PG Diploma Courses

TE Kerala Diploma Result 2024 Polytechnic Result – Check Odd/Even Sem Result

Osmania University Revaluation Result 2024 Released: Get OU Degree Supply Result

Welcome to NVSHQ.ORG. Here you will get all the latest information about the trending things on the internet around India. We focus on how to study tips, Exam guides, education, working techniques, case studies, Exam Answers Keys, Exam Admit card articles.

Dehradun, Uttarakhand

Call Us: +91 9997526894

[email protected]

NVSHQ.ORG is part of the  Applaud Web Media  publishing family.

An official website of the United States government

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.

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.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Intergenerational Cultural Dissonance, Parent–Child Conflict and Bonding, and Youth Problem Behaviors among Vietnamese and Cambodian Immigrant Families

Yoonsun choi.

School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, 969 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA e-mail: ude.ogacihcu@nusnooy

School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, 969 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA

Tracy W. Harachi

School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105, USA

Intergenerational cultural dissonance (ICD)—a clash between parents and children over cultural values—is a frequent issue for Asian American youth. Using longitudinal data from the Cross Cultural Families Project, this study examines the mechanisms by which ICD contributes to problem behaviors, including whether ICD predicts parent–child conflict, whether parent–child conflict then has a direct effect on youth problem behavior, and whether positive bonding with parents mediates the effects of such conflict on youth problem behaviors among Vietnamese ( n = 164) and Cambodian ( n = 163) families with adolescents [average age = 15.2 years ( SD = 1.05)]. The results from the path analyses show that, in both groups, ICD indirectly predicts problem behaviors by increasing parent–child conflict, which in turn weakens positive parent–child bonding. Interventions that target youths' perception of intergenerational cultural gaps, help them manage conflict, and help strengthen bonds with parents may prevent problem behaviors among Cambodian and Vietnamese families. This study contributes to inform how to effectively prevent problems and difficulties among these families.

Introduction

Intergenerational cultural dissonance (ICD)—a clash between parents and children over cultural values—occurs so commonly among immigrant families that it is regarded as a normative experience ( Lee et al. 2005 ; Sluzki 1979 ; Ying et al. 1999 ). A typical scenario finds immigrant parents adhering to their traditional cultural beliefs while their children endorse dominant Western values, resulting in a clash. This clash is likely to be more serious among families from non-Western cultures, such as Vietnamese and Cambodian families, who share few commonalities with mainstream U.S. culture ( Ying and Chao 1996 ). Asian American adolescents, specifically Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Filipino youth, report higher levels of culture conflict with parents than other groups of adolescents ( Phinney et al. 2000 ; Rumbaut 1996 ). However, we have limited knowledge about how such cultural conflicts influence youth and their families.

Several scholars have suggested connections between ICD (also labeled acculturation gap) and a variety of negative consequences for families and children, including troubled parent–child relationships, psychological difficulties among family members, and school problems among youth (e.g., Chung 2001 ; Kibria 1993 ; Lee et al. 2005 ; Min 1998 ; Nguyen and Williams 1989 ; Szapocznik et al. 1978 ). However, only a few studies have specifically examined the relationship between such dissonance and problem behaviors, or the mechanisms through which ICD contributes to youth problem behaviors (see e.g., Go and Le 2005 ). It is possible that this dissonance leads to problem behaviors either directly or indirectly by, for example, disrupting family processes, that is, increasing family conflict and weakening bonding between parent and child ( McQueen et al. 2003 ). A more specific understanding of ICD and its connection to problem behaviors can lead to more effective interventions to prevent problem behaviors.

Vietnamese and Cambodian Immigrant Families

Studies of Asian Americans as a group are scarce ( Choi and Lahey 2006 ; Harachi et al. 2001 ; Levesque 2007 ). Subgroup-specific studies are even scarcer ( Choi, in press ; Harachi et al. 2001 ). Among the few existing studies, Southeast Asians, including Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians, and Hmong, are often analyzed together, despite critical differences, such as premigration background, language, culture, religion, and the level of industrialization in their country of origin (e.g., Chung 2001 ). For example, Vietnamese culture is heavily influenced by China, while other Southeast Asian cultures such as Cambodian are more influenced by India ( Bankston and Hidalgo 2007 ). Even though Buddhism is a traditional religion for both countries, Cambodians generally practice Hinayana Buddhism while the Vietnamese practice Mahayana Buddhism ( Bankston and Hidalgo 2007 ; Kim 2002 ). The latter emphasizes compassion to and cohesion with others as a pathway to individual enlightenment, while Hinayana focuses more on achieving individual enlightenment and personal development as a path to helping others ( Kim 2002 ).

Vietnamese and Cambodian youth have adapted differently to life in the U.S. Vietnamese youth, in general, are faring well academically and behaviorally, while Cambodian youth are doing less well ( Choi, in press ; Kim 2002 ; Portes and Rumbaut 2001 ). Cambodian youth demonstrate greater academic difficulties on average (e.g., high school dropout and truancy) and show signs of other maladjustment (e.g., involvement in ethnic gangs) ( Goldberg 1999 ; Ima 1995 ; Kim 2002 ). Chung (2001) reports that cultural conflicts are greatest among the foreign-born (first generation) parents and U.S.-born children, a category into which a large proportion of Vietnamese and Cambodian families now falls. These two refugee/immigrant groups received some attention during their early years of settlement in the 1980s, particularly on the effects of war and refugee status and subsequent high rates of psychopathology and other adjustment problems among adults (e.g., Kinzie et al. 1984 ; Mollica et al. 1987 ). Yet little research has examined the adjustment of children whose parents may remain affected by their war-conflict experiences. Thus, despite the potential high vulnerability and significant group differences, our knowledge and understanding of family dynamics among Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrant and refugee families remain particularly limited ( Dinh et al. 1994 ). Comparative studies can provide valuable insights into ethnic-specific and common factors that predict youth behaviors, including ICD and family processes ( Chung 2001 ). An enhanced understanding of family dynamics and conflict and any mediating effects across Vietnamese and Cambodian families can shed light on the apparent differences and disparities between these two groups and suggest appropriate interventions.

Intergenerational Cultural Dissonance and Family Processes

Many scholars have speculated an indirect effect of ICD, in which ICD disrupts family processes and complicates the typical generation gap during adolescent years by increasing misunderstandings and miscommunications. The latter may eventually result in arguments and disagreements between parents and adolescent children (e.g., Lee et al. 2000 ; McQueen et al. 2003 ). However, studies are limited that explicitly investigate this mechanism. Using findings from Mexican American samples, McQueen et al. (2003) suggested that a high level of acculturation among youth increased deviant behaviors, mediated by high levels of conflict and lack of secure bonding between parent and child. However, their study did not test cultural conflict per se. Their underlying assumption was that the high level of acculturation among youth would likely produce cultural conflict between parents and children. The difficulty with this assumption is that, without specifically testing the discrepancy in cultural values, it is impossible to identify parents' level of acculturation. Parents may in fact be as acculturated as their children and hence the high level of acculturation of youth will not necessarily lead to dissonance. Using the level of ICD reported by youth, we test the indirect and predictive role of ICD on problem behaviors by first hypothesizing that ICD leads to parent–child conflict (see Fig. 1 ).

Conceptual model

Parent–Child Conflict and Bonding

A large body of literature documents parent–child conflict during childhood (characterized by frequent disagreements, fights, arguments, and anger) as a significant risk factor for a range of both externalizing youth problems (e.g., antisocial behaviors, aggression, and conduct problems) and internalizing problems (e.g., depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem) ( Barber and Delfabbro 2000 ; Formoso et al. 2000 ; Hawkins et al. 1992 ; Hill et al. 2005 ; Ingoldsby et al. 2006 ). The detrimental impact of parent–child conflict during childhood may go beyond the adolescent years, for example, influencing social and psychological adjustment during young adulthood ( Hannum and Dvorak 2004 ). The impact has also been found to be significant across genders ( Harachi et al. 2006b ) and racially and ethnically diverse samples ( Constantine 2006 ).

On the other hand, a strong and positive bonding between parent and child can serve as a protective factor against adolescent problems ( Arbona and Power 2003 ; Dryfoos 1998 ). The effect of secure parent–child bonding has been confirmed for a variety of youth outcomes and among diverse samples, such as problem behaviors among Latino adolescents ( Eamon and Mulder 2005 ) and among a group of African American, European American, and Mexican American adolescents ( Arbona and Power 2003 ), and on a psychological and social adjustment indicator for college students ( Hannum and Dvorak 2004 ). Throughout adolescence, parents continue to influence their children ( Arbona and Power 2003 ; Catalano and Hawkins 1996 ). Although changes in parent–child relationships, including the nature of parental attachment, are likely inevitable during adolescence, the healthy process of maturation has generally been characterized by continuous and close relationships with parents while also developing autonomy ( McQueen et al. 2003 ). In this study, it is hypothesized that parent–child conflict positively predicts problem behaviors while positive and strong parent–child bonding negatively predicts problem behaviors (see Fig. 1 ).

Findings are mixed on the specific mechanisms by which parent–child conflict leads to youth problems. Although several studies have found a direct association between parent–child conflict and problems among young and school-aged children (e.g., Ingoldsby et al. 2006 ), others have noted that the effect of parent–child conflict is consistent but not large ( Formoso et al. 2000 ) and, when considered simultaneously with other family processes such as bonding with parents, the effect may no longer be significant (e.g., Eamon and Mulder 2005 ; Fleming et al. 2002 ; Hill et al. 2005 ). The effect of parent–child conflict may be indirect, that is, mediated by positive parent–child bonding. For example, Hannum and Dvorak (2004) have found that parent–child bonding fully mediates the link between parent–child conflict and problem behaviors. In other words, parent–child conflict reduces the level of secure parent–child bonding, which in turn is related to social and psychological adjustments.

At the same time, studies have shown that parent–child conflict and bonding significantly and independently influence youth behaviors. Specifically, they both influence substance use and deviant behaviors among Mexican American youth ( McQueen et al. 2003 ) and depression and conduct problems among an ethnically diverse sample of youth ( Formoso et al. 2000 ). Constantine (2006) further showed that parent–child conflict had both a direct and indirect effect on youth behaviors, with positive parent–child bonding partially and significantly mediating the effect of perceived conflicts. A clearer understanding of these relationships can help develop specific and effective interventions.

In this study, parent–child conflict is hypothesized to have both a direct and indirect effect on problem behaviors ( Fig. 1 ). Parent–child conflict is fairly common among families with adolescents ( Phinney et al. 2000 ), with a certain level of conflict regarded as a normal and necessary process of establishing independence during adolescence ( Steinberg 1991 ). Many adolescents who experience conflict with parents do not have serious adjustment problems ( Formoso et al. 2000 ). It may be because a mutual bonding can be maintained while tolerating the conflict that might occur while youth increasingly assert their autonomy ( Constantine 2006 ). Parent–child bonding, in fact, can gain more salience, especially in the presence of familial conflict ( Constantine 2006 ). A strong and positive parent–child bond can assure youth that parents will be a continued source of stability and support, despite conflicts or disrupted family relationships ( Formoso et al. 2000 ). Although several studies (mentioned above) have demonstrated quite strong evidence of a direct effect of parent–child conflict on youth behaviors, findings on the mediating effect of parent–child bonding have been somewhat inconsistent, and relatively little research has been devoted to explicitly testing the mediated relationship ( Formoso et al. 2000 ). This study adds to the literature by testing the direct and mediated relationships among parent–child conflict and bonding. The study also contributes to the literature by testing these relationships with Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrant families.

Present Study and Hypotheses

This study empirically tests the relationships shown in Fig. 1 by ethnic group. The hypotheses are summarized as follows: (1) ICD will be associated with increased parent–child conflict as reported by both youth and parents; (2) parent–child conflict, in turn, will directly and positively predict problem behaviors, and positive parent–child bonding will negatively predict problem behaviors; and (3) the effects of conflict are anticipated to be both direct and mediated by positive parent–child bonding. Because it is important to include both parents' and youths' perceptions of family conflict ( Lee et al. 2005 ), the study uses both maternal and youth reports of conflict.

It is impossible to develop specific a priori hypotheses regarding group differences, owing to a lack of current research on these two groups. Studies have documented different demographic characteristics or general cultural differences across these two groups (e.g., Waters et al. 2007 ), but none has specifically related family dynamics to youth outcomes. Thus, the study simply tests the null hypotheses, which assume the relationships will not be significantly different across groups.

This study uses longitudinal data from the Cross Cultural Families (CCF) Project. Unlike many of the studies on Southeast Asian immigrants and refugees, the CCF Project, although regional, used community-based random samples of the populations. Clinical or nonrandom convenience samples not only limit the generalizability of findings to the general population, but also bias the findings owing to sample-specific characteristics. Findings from CCF Project data can better inform intervention targets for the general population.

As the number of immigrant families continues to rise—by 2010, children of immigrants alone will account for 22% of the school-age population ( Portes and Rumbaut 2001 )—it is imperative that those who work with youth and their families understand the difficulties that immigrant families face. Moreover, the majority of contemporary immigrants, including Vietnamese and Cambodian families, are from cultures that emphasize less independence among youth and more interdependence, obedience, and family obligations ( Zhou and Lee 2004 ). Thus, for these immigrant parents, the reach for autonomy during adolescence can be unanticipated and puzzling ( Ying et al. 1999 ). It also comes with added challenges such as cultural conflict. Yet, children whose cultures emphasize family loyalty and preservation of strong emotional ties among family members may be more likely to benefit from the buffering effects of positive bonding when faced with high levels of cultural dissonance and parent–child conflict ( Formoso et al. 2000 ). Thus, if cultural conflicts within immigrant families indeed affect problem behaviors, it is critical to illuminate the pathways by which ICD influences problem behaviors to identify the source of risk as well as the buffering factors that mitigate the impact of conflicts.

Overview of Study and Sample Selection

The CCF Project (P.I. Tracy W. Harachi) is a longitudinal study examining the developmental trajectories of a panel of Cambodian ( n = 164) and Vietnamese ( n = 163) youth, including the occurrence of problem behaviors and the relations between risk and protective factors and different outcome behaviors. Potential respondents were identified through locator information obtained from an urban Pacific Northwest school district. In 2001, the project contacted a random sample of Vietnamese and Cambodian families with a child enrolled in Grades 3−6 in the school district. The overall consent rate was approximately 85%. Data collected for the longitudinal study include annual maternal interviews, youth interviews, teachers' report of student behaviors, and school and police records. We used maternal and youth data collected in 2004 (wave 4) and 2005 (wave 5) for our analysis.

Sample Description

The sample includes 327 mothers and children respectively. At the first interview (in 2001), the average age of the Cambodian mothers was 41.8 years ( SD = 8.37), and 42.3 years ( SD = 6.87) for Vietnamese mothers. On average, the Cambodian mothers had lived in the U.S. for 16 years ( SD = 4.09), and Vietnamese mothers had lived in the country for 11 years ( SD = 5.15). A total of 72% of mothers in both groups reported receiving public assistance, food stamps, or qualifying for the free/reduced price school lunch program. Slightly more than one-fourth (27%) of Vietnamese mothers and one-half of Cambodian mothers were single parents. Parental education levels were low. Among Cambodian mothers, 80.1% had less than a high school degree, while 65.8% of the Vietnamese parents lacked a high school degree. Only 4.1% of the Cambodians and 16.8% of the Vietnamese had some college or higher education, either in their country of origin or in the U.S. The majority of Cambodian mothers (88.6%), and one-half of Vietnamese mothers (47.5%) were Buddhist; 37% of Vietnamese mothers were Catholic. The two groups differed significantly by age ( F 158, 158 = .6743, p < .01), single parenthood ( χ 2 = 16.291, p < .001), education (completed in the native country [ t 217 = −3.72, p < .001] but not in the U.S. [ t 235 = −.7729, p = .440]), and year of arrival to the U.S. ( F 158, 155 = 1.583, p < .01).

About 49% of the child sample were male (79 Vietnamese, 81 Cambodian) and 51% were female (84 Vietnamese, 83 Cambodian). In 2004 (wave 4), the average age of the children in both groups was 15.2 years ( SD = 1.05 in both groups). Among Cambodian children, 88% were born in the U.S., in contrast to 34% of Vietnamese children. Of those not born in the U.S., the average age of arrival in the U.S. was 4.6 for Cambodian and 4.3 for Vietnamese children ( SD = 3.9 and 2.4, respectively). Hence, the bulk of this subsample's schooling and socialization occurred in the U.S., and these youngsters would likely be more similar to U.S.-born, second-generation youth than first-generation newcomers.

The model has five constructs. The four predictor variables (ICD, reports of conflicts by parent and child, and parent–child bonding) are drawn from wave 4 and the outcome variable (youth problem behaviors) from wave 5 to establish a temporal order. The survey questionnaires were translated to Vietnamese and Khmer and back-translated and tested for validity. For example, the measurement equivalence of several major constructs was examined by testing several forms of invariance, including conceptual, functional, item and scalar equivalence. Results are reported elsewhere (e.g., Choi and Harachi 2002 ; Choi et al. 2006 ; Harachi et al. 2006a ). In summary, findings from these studies suggest many equivalent items across groups and even when two groups (Vietnamese and Cambodians) or three groups (Vietnamese, Cambodian, and European Americans) endorse items differently, examining correlations and relationships (but not mean scores) would be appropriate.

In testing a path or structural model, it is ideal to follow a two-step estimation process ( Anderson and Gerbing 1988 ) to first estimate the fit of the measurement model while creating latent constructs ( Shumow and Lomax 2002 ), and then to test the fit of the structural model. However, creating latent constructs requires much larger sample sizes than the present data can provide. Thus, we created “measured constructs” rather than latent constructs. In other words, we defined the constructs as an unweighted sum of the response scores of the individual items. We normalized each scale with the minimum of zero and the maximum of 10 to make them comparable by using the linear transformation of values; within each construct, we coded the items such that high scores reflect a high value of the construct. A limitation of using measured constructs is an inability to account for measurement errors in estimating the fit of the structural model. To address this limitation, prior to fitting the proposed structural path model, we applied a series of exploratory statistical analyses at the item and scale levels to examine the reliability of measurements and to detect patterns in the data that may not be explicit in a path analysis fit. We describe some of these findings when necessary in the text. Table 1 shows the correlations among constructs and descriptive statistics of each construct in this study.

Correlations among constructs

** p < .01

Intergenerational Cultural Dissonance

(wave 4) was assessed by 10 items adopted from the Asian American Family Conflict Scale—Likelihood ( Lee et al. 2000 ). Youth were first asked “How likely is this type of situation to occur in your family?” followed by, for example, “Your parents tell you that a social life is not important at this age, but you think it is,” and “Your parents don't want to bring shame upon the family, but you feel that your parents are too concerned with saving face.” Response options ranged from (1) “never” to (5) “always.” The reliability coefficient was .86. There was no significant difference in the rate of ICD between Vietnamese and Cambodian youth (mean 4.56 vs. 4.88, SD 2.14 vs. 2.02, χ 2 = 35.30, p = .549).

Parent's Report of Conflict

(wave 4) consisted of eight items adopted from the Conflict Behavior Scale (CBQ, Prinz et al. 1979 ), in which mothers reported the level of conflict with the child. Example questions include: “My child and I almost never seem to agree” and “At least three times a week, we get angry at each other.” The response options were (0) “false” and (1) “true.” We summed the items to indicate the construct (range from 0 to 8), and the reliability coefficient was .83. We found significant differences in the rate of conflict across Vietnamese and Cambodian families (mean 2.63 vs. 2.87, SD 3.15 vs. 3.00, χ 2 = 17.11, p < .05); Cambodian mothers reported a higher rate of conflict than Vietnamese mothers.

Child's Report of Conflict

(wave 4) was assessed by four items, also adopted from the CBQ. Examples include “My parents never listen to my side of the story,” and “My parents nag me a lot.” The response options were (0) “no” and (1) “yes.” The reliability coefficient was .64. We found no significant difference in the rate of youth-reported conflict between Vietnamese and Cambodian families (mean .72 vs. 1.51, SD 1.72 vs. 2.40, χ 2 = 6.34, p = .175).

We did find a discrepancy between parental and youth reports of family conflict. For example, 16.8% of the Vietnamese and 32.3% of the Cambodian youth responded that they and their parents get angry with each other at least three times a week, while their mothers denied such frequency based on the same item. Conversely, 17.6% of the Cambodian mothers and 8% of the Vietnamese mothers reported arguing a lot about rules, while their children reported no such conflict. Consequently, the correlation between parent and youth reported conflict was low ( r = .12 for Vietnamese and r = −.18 for Cambodians).

Bonding with Parents

(wave 4) was assessed by 14 youth-reported items, seven of which pertained to their relationship with their mother, and another seven to relationships with their father ( Armsden and Greenberg 1987 ; Hawkins and Catalano 1990 ). We used the sum of seven items for single-parent families, and we used the average of summed scores of bonding with both parents (14 items) for two-parent families. Questions include “Are you close to your mother (or father)?” and “I wish I had different mother/father (reverse-coded).” Response options were (1) “NO!” (2) “no” (3) “yes” and (4) “YES!” for six items, and (1) “never,” to (5) “always” for eight items. Using the same method as described above, we recoded the response options to make them comparable. The reliability coefficient was .88 for the scale. We identified no group differences between Vietnamese and Cambodian families in the rate of bonding with parents (mean 6.18 vs. 5.56, SD 2.05 vs. 2.01, χ 2 = 135.01 p = .484).

Youth Problem Behaviors

(wave 5) was measured with 15 items, which included questions on the frequency in the year prior to the interview of being arrested, trespassing, drawing graffiti, shoplifting, setting fire, carrying a weapon to school, hurting others, initiating a fight, running away from home, going out late without parental permission, damaging other's property just for fun, and hitting parents. The scale also included items that asked whether respondents tease, lie (responses ranged on a scale of 1−4, from emphatic NO! to emphatic YES!), or belong to a gang (no (1)/yes (2)). The response options to the frequency questions were (1) “0 times,” (2) “1−2 times,” (3) “3−4 times,” and (4) “5 or more times.” We adopted the items from several sources, including the Seattle Social Development Project ( Hawkins and Catalano 1990 ) and Seattle Personality Questionnaires ( Kusche et al. 1988 ) to cover a range of problem behaviors.

Because only a few youth reported committing a behavior more than one or two times, we first dichotomized each item so that responses were either 0 for no incidence of the behavior or 1 for any incidence of the behavior, and then we summed the items (range from 0 to 15). Among the youth, 114 (45.7%) reported no problem behaviors, and most of youth reported one ( n = 66, 20.9%), two ( n = 36, 11.4%), three ( n = 30, 9.5%) or four ( n = 23, 7.3%) problem behaviors. The most common problem behaviors in the sample were teasing, lying, fighting, shoplifting, and having gone out late. The alpha reliability was .67. In addition, Cambodian youth reported significantly higher counts of problem behaviors than Vietnamese youth (Cambodian youth mean 1.76, SD 1.39 vs. Vietnamese youth mean .93, SD 1.97, χ 2 = 22.84, p < .01). Among respondents who reported more than four problem behaviors, only two respondents were Vietnamese while 14 were Cambodian. Because nearly one-half of the respondents reported having no problem behaviors, we further dichotomized the scale into binary variable, 0 for no problem behaviors and 1 any problem behaviors. A total of 43% of Vietnamese youth and 65% of Cambodian youth reported instances of any problem behavior. We conducted subsequent analyses with the dichotomized outcome. In addition, we adjusted the youth behaviors for gender and age in the model owing to the significant differences in the outcome variable by these control variables.

Analysis Strategy

We examined the relationships between ICD and parent–child conflict and whether parent–child conflict had a direct effect on youth problem behavior. We also examined whether parent–child bonding mediated the effects of family conflict on youth problem behaviors (see Fig. 1 ). To estimate the proposed model, we conducted path analyses with weighted least squares mean and variance-adjusted χ 2 -test statistic (WLSMV) with robust standard errors estimations. WLSMV estimation is appropriate for binary dependent variables, and we used path analysis to test the mediational hypotheses ( Baron and Kenny 1986 ; Hoyle and Smith 1994 ). The latter is also a useful strategy for simultaneously investigating the combined and the unique effects of each variable ( Ramirez-Valles et al. 1998 ). We relied on MPlus 4.1 for analysis ( Muthén and Muthén 2005 ).

In testing the path model, we examined the fit of the model in each group first and used multiple-group methods to determine whether the hypothesized relationships among the model variables were equivalent across Vietnamese and Cambodian families ( Byrne 1994 ). Multiple-group path analyses compared two nested models (i.e., unconstrained and constrained models) ( Byrne 1994 ). The unconstrained model allows all model parameters to be estimated freely for each group. In the constrained path model, cross-group equality constraints are placed on all hypothesized paths between constructs ( Hancock et al. 1999 ). These constraints enable us to identify any statistically significant differences in the magnitudes of path parameters across groups.

We assessed the fit of all models by examining model chi-square ( χ 2 ), the Comparative Fit Indices (CFI, Bentler 1990 ), and the Root Mean Squared Error Approximation (RMSEA, Browne and Cudeck 1993 ). A good fit is indicated by CFI values of greater than .90 ( Byrne 1994 ). Values of less than .05 for the RMSEA are considered evidence of a good fit, values between .05 and .08 indicate a fair fit, and values greater than .10 represent a poor fit ( Browne and Cudeck 1993 ). We examined the statistical significance of the estimated parameters with z statistics and a .05 level of statistical significance.

We used several measures to evaluate the statistical significance of the difference between the unconstrained and the constrained models, that is, any statistically significant group difference in path models between Vietnamese and Cambodian families. The change in χ 2 relative to the change in degrees of freedom indicates whether the constrained model has statistically significantly poorer fit than the unconstrained model, which is also an indication of statistically significant group difference ( Byrne 1994 ). The DIFFTEST on the constrained models further shows which equality constraints contribute most to degradation in model fit ( Muthén and Muthén 2005 ). We also used Modification Indices (MI) function to investigate whether data suggest adding any particular path in the model. We used MI as a purely exploratory step to inform future studies.

About 70% of the data were complete for both groups. Nearly 20% of the Vietnamese and 15% of Cambodian samples had missing data on just one variable. Only 4% of the Vietnamese and 10% of the Cambodian samples had missing data on three or more variables. The analyses were conducted both with and without missing data imputations. Mplus uses maximum likelihood (ML) to estimate the models with missing data. The results from analyses with and without missing data imputations were similar; hence, we report the results using the missing data imputations.

Path Analysis in Each Group

We first estimated the path model with each group. The results ( Table 2 and Fig. 2 ) indicate that the model using the WLSMV estimator fits the data well. Fit indices for the Vietnamese families were: χ 2 (7) = 14.93, p = .003, CFI = .93, RMSEA = .009. For Cambodian families, the fit was: χ 2 (7) = 15.24, p = .004, CFI = .91, RMSEA = .088. The model accounted for 21% of the total variance in the outcome variable for Vietnamese families and 28% for Cambodian families.

The model with path coefficients

Model fits and path statistics for each group

The statistically significant paths found in the model were similar to the results of the pair-wise correlations, with the exception of the relationship among Cambodians between parent-reported conflict and problem behavior, which was not significant in pair-wise correlations but was significant in the full model. Results showed statistically significant paths with p values of .05 or less for both groups between ICD → Youth Report of Conflict ( β = .681 for Vietnamese, and .560 for Cambodians) and Youth Report of Conflict → Parent–Child Bonding ( β = −.700 for Vietnamese, and −.516 for Cambodians). The path between Parent Report of Conflict → Problem Behavior ( β = .246) was significant only among Cambodians. Figure 2 shows the standardized path coefficients of the model for each group. Table 2 presents the path coefficients and corresponding statistics for the theoretical model organized by ethnic group.

Indirect Effects

MPlus provides information about the combined and unique, as well as direct and indirect, effects of the modeled constructs on the outcome variable. ICD had significant indirect effects on problem behaviors ( p ≤ .05) in both groups ( β = .240 for Vietnamese, and .173 for Cambodian families) but no direct effect. This means that the effect of ICD is fully mediated by other variables, as posited in the model. For the Vietnamese subgroup, youth report of conflict ( β = −.700) was significantly associated with its immediate dependent variable (parent–child bonding), but it did not explain any variance in the outcome variable.

Group Differences in Paths

The unconstrained path analyses using the WLSMV estimator fit the data well ( χ 2 [14] = 30.170, p = .007; CFI of .921; RMSEA of .087). The constrained model also showed a fair/good fit ( χ 2 [22] = 39.012, p = .001; CFI of .917; RMSEA of .071). The difference between the two models showed very little improvement over the unconstrained model (Δ χ 2 [8] = 8.842, .500 < p < .250, ΔCFI = .004). Thus, the conceptual model overall did not differ significantly by ethnic group.

Model Testing with Full Sample

Because there was no significant group difference in the overall fit of the conceptual model, as a next step we combined the groups to test the model with the full sample. The results are presented in Table 3 and Fig. 2 . The model fit the data fairly well with the full sample, ( χ 2 [7] = 27.710, p = .0002; CFI of .907; RMSEA of .098). The model accounted for 26% of the total variance in the outcome variable.

Model fits and path statistics with combined samples

* p < .05

The statistically significant paths were ICD → Youth Report of Conflict ( β = .628, p < .001), and Youth Report of Conflict → Parent–Child Bonding ( β = −.617, p < .001), Parent–Child Bonding → Problem Behavior ( β = −.246, p < .01), and Parent Report of Conflicts → Problem Behavior ( β = .242, p < .01). Similar to the results from the subgroup analyses, ICD had significant indirect effects on problem behaviors ( β = .228, p ≤ .05) but no direct effect with the full sample.

The MI provides information regarding paths that may be added to the estimated model that result in a reduction of the χ 2 value of the model fit. Paths that would significantly improve the fit of the model would have a chi-square value of 3.84 ( p = .05 for df = 1) or greater. The only path that satisfies this criterion was the path between Parent–Child Bonding → Youth Report Conflict.

Significant life-changing events such as migration are likely to exact physical and emotional tolls on the family ( Chung 2001 ; Sluzki 1979 ). Immigrant and refugee families face challenges to reestablish family roles and patterns in an unfamiliar society with a new language and socio-cultural environment. Although many immigrant families adjust well and make a positive transition ( Chan and Leong 1994 ), many other immigrant parents lose their authority and confidence as parents in the process of renegotiating and adjusting ( Foner and Kasinitz 2007 ; Kibria 1993 ). This challenging adjustment process may result in ICD and subsequent family conflict. Parent–child intergenerational cultural conflicts are the most frequent problem among Asian American youth and young adults who seek counseling ( Lee et al. 2005 ), and they are found among all Asian American subgroups ( Ying et al. 1999 ). The high level of psychopathology among refugee parents may further confound family relationships and exacerbate cultural dissonance ( Go and Le 2005 ; Ying and Chao 1996 ).

To better understand this common difficulty among immigrant/refugee families, this study examined whether ICD was associated with parent–child conflict, and whether such conflict led directly to youth problem behaviors or indirectly to such behaviors by weakening parent–child bonding. The results show that the proposed conceptual model is not significantly different across Vietnamese and Cambodian families, indicating that the mechanisms by which ICD leads to problem behaviors are similar across these two groups. Thus, the model was tested again with the combined samples. The following discussion focuses on the results from the full sample unless otherwise noted.

The findings provide insights into the pathways through which ICD may lead to problem behaviors. As hypothesized, ICD indirectly increases problem behaviors by disrupting family processes, that is, by significantly heightening parent–child conflict, but only conflict that is perceived by youth (but not by parent). In other words, if youth perceive gaps in cultural values with their parents, they report higher rates of disagreements and arguments with their parents. These conflicts in turn significantly weaken the sense of parent–child bonding reported by youth. Thus, if both cultural discrepancy and parent–child conflict are present, the affective relationship with parents is likely to be compromised, which predicts an increase in the level of problem behaviors among youth. Parents' reports of conflict (but not youth reports), on the other hand, are a significant predictor of problem behaviors. Given that parent reports of conflict are not highly correlated with youth reports in the combined sample or in either group—in fact, these two reports are incongruent—it is possible that parent- and youth-reported conflict may differently and uniquely predict different constructs, or they may be assessing different constructs. Alternatively, this may be a result of a reporting artifact. If we had a parent-reported parent–child bonding measure, parent-reported conflict might have been mediated by that construct.

More critically, the findings of this study confirm the buffering effects of youth-reported parent–child bonding against youth-reported conflict. In the presence of ICD and parent–child conflict among Vietnamese and Cambodian youth, a secure sense of bonding can help mitigate the deleterious effect of conflict on problem behaviors.

The Modification Indices suggested adding a path from Parent–Child Bonding to Youth Report Conflict. The path from Youth Report Conflict to Parent–Child Bonding as proposed in the model was significant both in subgroup analyses and in full sample analyses. The findings from the MI may indicate that these two constructs are highly correlated (as shown in pair-wise correlations) and they may bidirectionally influence each other. To specifically test the directionality of the relationship, it would be necessary to examine these two constructs at different time points. However, the data did not provide these constructs at other time points; therefore, this question should be investigated in the future studies.

This study aimed to identify ethnic-specific and common predictors of problem behavior. The results show common predictors and mechanisms of those predictors. Although the commonality across the two groups is helpful in informing interventions, it is critical to identify group-specific factors as well, especially because Cambodian youth report a significantly higher rate of problem behaviors than Vietnamese youth in this sample, which is consistent with other studies (e.g., Kim 2002 ). The higher rate of problem behaviors among Cambodian youth does not stem from ICD because the mean of ICD was not significantly different across the two groups. This suggests that other reasons must be further explored to explain the high vulnerability of Cambodian youth.

In Lee and his colleagues' focus groups (2000) , many children of immigrants reported that ICD with their parents was not limited to adolescence but was a natural part of life beyond adolescence, and may not be necessarily harmful to the well-being of their family. However, the results from this study show that if families fail to resolve these ICDs, these gaps can result in a high level of parent–child conflict, which, in turn, may weaken secure bonding with parents and increase problem behaviors. Immigrant parents faced with new environments tend to attempt to preserve their culture regardless of its fit with their new surroundings. Time spent in the U.S. does not appear to alter parents' core familial values (e.g., Chung 2001 ; Kibria 1993 ; Lee et al. 2005 ; Min 1998 ; Nguyen and Williams 1989 ). In addition, parents who perceive the mainstream culture as a threat may idealize their culture of origin and attempt to rigorously reinforce it with their children, which can increase tensions and family conflict ( Chung 2001 ; Foner and Kasinitz 2007 ). Additional study of family dynamics among immigrants and refugees can shed light on how to prevent ICD and related difficulties among Vietnamese and Cambodian families. It is also important to identify the predictors of ICD and to target those factors as a way to lessen ICD among immigrant families.

The study is not without limitations. Although randomly selected and more representative than many existing studies, the CCF data are regional. Thus, the generalizability to the national population of Vietnamese and Cambodian youth is limited. The samples are also largely poor and undereducated. However, these characteristics are generally reflective of the Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrant groups in the U.S. The study did not account for measurement errors in testing the structural model, and it is hoped that future studies with larger sample sizes can test the model to provide further support for the findings. The CCF data are based on youth and parent self-reports. However, such reports are generally found to be reliable for many variables ( Johnston et al. 2001 ). Lastly, larger sample sizes would have been ideal to examine subgroup differences in the model.

Despite these limitations, this study adds to the literature by providing information about how ICD contributes to problem behaviors among Vietnamese and Cambodian families. Although additional studies are needed to continue to contribute to the field, the findings from this study can inform interventions that aim to prevent or treat problem behaviors among Vietnamese and Cambodian youth. In sum, the findings identify common predictors and family processes, and suggest that interventions targeting youth perceptions of intergenerational cultural gaps, conflict management with families, and improved bonding with parents may help prevent problem behaviors in both Cambodian and Vietnamese families and potentially other Asian immigrant families.

Acknowledgment

This study was supported by a Research Scientist Development Award from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) (K01 MH069910) to the first author and funded by NIMH and National Institute of Child and Human Development (NICHD) (5 R01 MH059777-05) to the third author.

Yoonsun Choi is an Assistant Professor at the School of Social Service Administration University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. Her fields of special interest include minority youth development; effects of race, ethnicity, and culture in youth development; children of immigrants; Asian American youth; prevention of youth problem behaviors; and research methods.

Michael He is a research assistant at the School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. He earned his B.S. in mathematics and M.S. in statistics at Stanford University.

Tracy W. Harachi is Associate Professor in the School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Her interests include prevention science, and migration and its effects on family socialization and child development.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This PDF receipt will only be used as the basis for generating PubMed Central (PMC) documents. PMC documents will be made available for review after conversion (approx. 2−3 weeks time). Any corrections that need to be made will be done at that time. No materials will be released to PMC without the approval of an author. Only the PMC documents will appear on PubMed Central -- this PDF Receipt will not appear on PubMed Central.

Contributor Information

Yoonsun Choi, School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, 969 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA e-mail: ude.ogacihcu@nusnooy .

Michael He, School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, 969 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.

Tracy W. Harachi, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105, USA.

• Anderson JC, Gerbing DW. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin. 1988; 103 (3):411–423. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arbona C, Power TG. Parental attachment, self-esteem, and antisocial behaviors among African American, European American and Mexican American adolescents. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2003; 50 (1):40–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Armsden GC, Greenberg MT. The inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 1987; 16 (5):427–454. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bankston CL, III, Hidalgo DA. Southeast Asia: Laos, Cambodia, Thailand. In: Waters MC, Ueba R, Marrow H, editors. The new Americans: A guide to immigration since 1965. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, MA: 2007. pp. 624–640. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barber JG, Delfabbro P. Predictors of adolescent adjustment: Parent–peer relationships and parent–child conflict. Child and Adolescent Social Work. 2000; 17 (4):275–288. [ Google Scholar ]
• Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986; 51 (6):1173–1182. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bentler PM. Fit indexes, Lagrange multipliers, constraint changes and incomplete data in structural models. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1990; 25 (2):163–172. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS, editors. Testing structural equation models. Sage; Newbury Park, CA: 1993. pp. 136–162. [ Google Scholar ]
• Byrne BM. Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Sage; Thousand Oaks: 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
• Catalano RF, Hawkins JD. The social development model: A theory of antisocial behavior. In: Hawkins JD, editor. Delinquency and crime: Current theories. Cambridge University Press; New York: 1996. pp. 149–197. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chan S, Leong CW. Chinese families in transition: cultural conflicts and adjustment problems. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless. 1994; 3 (3):263–281. [ Google Scholar ]
• Choi Y. Diversity within: Subgroup differences of youth behaviors among Asian Pacific Islander American adolescents. Journal of Community Psychology. (in press) [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Choi Y, Harachi TW. The cross-cultural equivalence of the Suinn-Lew Asian Self-Identity Acculturation Scale among Vietnamese and Cambodian Americans. The Journal of Social Work Research and Evaluation. 2002; 3 (1):5–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Choi Y, Lahey BB. Testing model minority stereotype: Youth behaviors across racial and ethnic groups. Social Service Review. 2006; 80 (3):419–452. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Choi Y, Mericle A, Harachi TW. Using Rasch model to test the cross-cultural item equivalence of the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist across Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrant mothers. Journal of Applied Measurement. 2006; 7 (1):16–38. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chung RHG. Gender, ethnicity, and acculturation in intergenerational conflict of Asian American college students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2001; 7 (4):376–386. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Constantine MG. Perceived family conflict, parental attachment, and depression in African American female adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2006; 12 (4):697–709. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dinh KT, Sarason BR, Sarason IG. Parent–child relationships in Vietnamese immigrant families. Journal of Family Psychology. 1994; 8 (4):471–488. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dryfoos JG. Safe passage: Making it through adolescence in a risky society: What parents, schools, and communities can do. Oxford University Press; New York: 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eamon MK, Mulder C. Predicting antisocial behavior among Latino young adolescents: An ecological systems analysis. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 2005; 75 (1):117–127. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fleming CB, Kim H, Harachi TW, Catalano RF. Family processes for children in early elementary school as predictors of smoking initiation. Journal of Adolecent Health. 2002; 30 :184–189. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Foner N, Kasinitz P. The second generation. In: Waters MC, Ueba R, Marrow HB, editors. The new Americans: A guide to immigration since 1965. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, MA: 2007. pp. 270–282. [ Google Scholar ]
• Formoso D, Gonzales NA, Aiken LS. Family conflict and children's internalizing and externalizing behavior: Protective factors. American Journal of Community Psychology. 2000; 28 (2):175–199. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Go CG, Le TN. Gender differences in Cambodian delinquency: The role of ethnic identity, parental discipline, and peer delinquency. Crime and Delinquency. 2005; 51 (2):220–237. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldberg M. Truancy and dropout among Cambodian students: Results from a comprehensive high school. Social Work in Education. 1999; 21 (1):49–63. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hancock GR, Stapleton LM, Berkovits I. Loading and intercept invariance within multisample covariance and mean structure models.. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association; Montreal. 1999. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hannum JW, Dvorak DM. Effects of family conflict, divorce, and attachment patterns on the psychological distress and social adjustment of college freshmen. Journal of College Student Development. 2004; 45 (1):27–42. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harachi TW, Catalano RF, Kim S, Choi Y. Etiology and prevention of substance use among Asian American youth. Prevention Science. 2001; 2 (1):57–65. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harachi TW, Choi Y, Abbott RD, Catalano RF, Bliesner SL. Examining cross-cultural equivalence of concepts and measures in diverse samples. Prevention Science. 2006a; 7 (4):359–368. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harachi TW, Fleming CB, White HR, Ensminger ME, Abbott RD, Catalano RF, et al. Aggressive behavior among girls and boys during middle childhood: Predictors and sequelae of trajectory group membership. Aggressive Behavior. 2006b; 32 :279–293. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hawkins JD, Catalano RF. Seattle Social Development Project, Ninth-Grade Interview. Seattle, WA: 1990. (unpublished) [ Google Scholar ]
• Hawkins JD, Catalano RF, Miller JY. Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin. 1992; 112 (1):64–105. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hill KG, Hawkins JD, Catalano RF, Abbott RD, Guo J. Family influences on the risk of daily smoking initiation. Journal of Adolecent Health. 2005; 37 :202–210. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoyle RH, Smith GT. Formulating clinical research hypotheses as structural equation models: a conceptual review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1994; 62 (3):429–440. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ima K. Testing the American dream: Case studies of at-risk Southeast Asian refugee students in secondary schools. In: Rumbaut RG, Cornelius WA, editors. California's immigrant children: Theory, research and implications for educational policy. Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of California San Diego; San Diego: 1995. pp. 191–208. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ingoldsby EM, Shaw DS, Winslow E, Schonberg M, Gilliom M, Criss MM. Neighborhood disadvantage, parent–chilld confliict, neighborhood peer relationships, and early antisocial behavior problem trajectories. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2006; 34 (3):303–319. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnston LD, O'Malley PM, Bachman JG. The monitoring the future national survey results on adolescent drug use: Overview of key findings, 2000. National Institute on Drug Abuse; Rockville, MD: 2001. (National Institutes of Health Publication no. 00−4923) [ Google Scholar ]
• Kibria N. Family tightrope: The changing lives of Vietnamese Americans. Princeton University; Princeton, NJ: 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim RY. Ethnic differences in academic achievement between Vietnamese and Cambodian children: Cultural and structural explanations. The Sociological Quarterly. 2002; 43 (2):213–235. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kinzie JD, Fredrickson RH, Ben R, Fleck J, Karls W. Posttraumatic stress disorder among survivors of Cambodian concentration camps. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1984; 141 (5):645–650. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kusche CA, Greenberg MT, Beilke R. Seattle personality questionnaire for young school-aged children. University of Washington, Department of Psychology; Seattle: 1988. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee RM, Choe J, Kim G, Ngo V. Construction of the Asian American Family Conflicts Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2000; 47 (2):211–222. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee RM, Su J, Yoshida E. Coping with intergenerational family conflict among Asian American college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2005; 52 (3):389–399. [ Google Scholar ]
• Levesque RJR. The ethnicity of adolescent research. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2007; 36 :375–389. [ Google Scholar ]
• McQueen A, Getz JG, Bray JH. Acculturation, substance use, and deviant behavior: Examining separation and family conflict as mediators. Child Development. 2003; 74 (6):1737–1750. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Min PG. Changes and conflicts. Allyn and Bacon; Boston: 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mollica RF, Wyshak G, Lavelle J. The psychosocial impact of war trauma and torture on Southeast Asian refugees. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1987; 144 (12):1567–1572. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user's guide. Muthen & Muthen; Los Angeles, CA: 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nguyen NA, Williams HL. Transition from east to west: Vietnamese adolescents and their parents. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 1989; 28 (4):505–515. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Phinney JS, Ong A, Madden T. Cultural values and intergenerational value discrepancies in immigrant and nonimmigrant families. Child Development. 2000; 71 (2):528–539. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Portes A, Rumbaut RG, editors. Legacies: the story of the immigrant second generation. University of California Press & Russell Sage Foundation; Berkeley, New York: 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Prinz RJ, Foster SL, Kent RN, O'Leary KD. Multivariate assessment of conflict in distressed and nondistressed mother-adolescent dyads. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1979; 12 (4):691–700. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ramirez-Valles J, Zimmerman MA, Newcomb MD. Sexual risk behavior among youth: Modeling the influence of prosocial activities and socioeconomic factors. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1998; 39 (3):237–253. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rumbaut RG. The crucible within: Ethnic identity, self-esteem, segmented assimilation among children of immigrants. In: Portes A, editor. The new second generation. Russell Sage Foundation; New York: 1996. pp. 119–170. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shumow L, Lomax R. Parental efficacy: Predictor of parenting behavior and adolescent outcomes. Parenting: Science and Practice. 2002; 2 (2):127–150. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sluzki CE. Migration and family conflict. Family Process. 1979; 18 (4):379–390. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steinberg L. The logic of adolescence. In: Edelman R, Ladner J, editors. Adolescence and poverty. Center for National Policy Press; Washington, DC: 1991. pp. 19–36. [ Google Scholar ]
• Szapocznik J, Scopetta MA, Aranalde MA, Kurtines W. Cuban value structure: Treatment implications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1978; 46 (5):961–970. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ying Y-W, Chao CC. Intergenerational relationship in lu Mien American families. Amerasia Journal. 1996; 22 :44–64. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ying Y-W, Coombs M, Lee PA. Family intergenerational relationship of Asian American adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 1999; 5 (4):350–363. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waters MC, Ueba R, Marrow H. The new Americans: A guide to immigration since 1965. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, MA: 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhou M, Lee J. Introduction: The making of culture, identity, and ethnicity among Asian American youth. In: Lee J, Zhou M, editors. Asian American youth: Culture, identity and ethnicity. Rutledge; New York: 2004. pp. 1–30. [ Google Scholar ]