Approximately 20% of adolescents develop depressive symptoms. Family, friends, and teachers are crucial sources of social support for adolescents, but it is unclear whether social support impacts adolescents directly (principle-effect model) or by moderating the effect of stress (stress-buffer model) and whether each source of social support remains meaningful when their influence is studied simultaneously. To help fill this gap, we followed 1452 Australian students (average age at enrollment = 13.1, SD = 0.5; range: 11-16 years; 51.9% female) for 5 years. Based on our findings, each source of support is negatively related to depressive symptoms one year later when studied independently but when combined, only family and teacher support predicted depressive symptoms. Family support in all grades and teacher support in grade 8 to 10 but not in grade 11 directly impacted adolescent depressive symptoms 1 year later. Family support in grades 8 and 11 also buffered against the negative impact of stress on depressive symptoms one year later. Based on the unexpected findings, the most important limitations seem to be that the used instruments do not allow for a separation of different groups of friends (e.g., classmates, same-gender peers, romantic partners), types of social support, and stress. In addition, the high, nonrandom attrition rate with adolescents reporting less social support, more stressful events, a higher frequency of depressive symptoms, and/or being of Torres Strait Islander or Aboriginal background limits the generalizability of our findings. Summarized, our findings demonstrate that adolescents facing stress might benefit more from family support compared to their peers without stressful life events and that friends may have a weaker presence in adolescent lives than expected.

No abstract

Background: The Coping Health Inventory for Parents (CHIP) has demonstrated good psychometric properties in several language forms and has been used to assess the coping behaviors of families facing disease. However, the CHIP has not been validated in Mexico among families of children with chronic conditions, where it could be useful for research and intervention. The objectives of this instrumental study were to obtain a version of the CHIP for the Spanish language in Mexico, establish the factor structure of the Mexican version of the CHIP, probe its internal consistency reliability, and assess its concurrent construct validity. Methods: A nonprobability sample of 405 family caregivers of children with chronic diseases responded to a battery of measurement instruments that included the CHIP, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Beck Depression Inventory. The sample was randomly divided into two parts. In one subsample (190 participants), an exploratory factor analysis was performed using a principal component analysis and oblique rotation. In the second subsample (215 participants), a confirmatory factor analysis was performed using maximum likelihood estimation. Results: The scale was reduced to 16 items (CHIP-16) with factorial loads greater than .50. The empirical criteria used to determine the number of factors converged on the following five factors: belief and trust (McDonald ω = .85), spouse/partner relationship (ω = .79), home care (ω = .77), family involvement (ω = .75), and security/ stability (ω = .79). The overall internal consistency was good (ω = .88). The five-factor model showed acceptable fit indices and high parsimony. The mean CHIP-16 scores and the Spouse/partner relationship scores among the caregivers with anxiety were greater than those among the caregivers without anxiety. The mean home-care scores among the women were greater than those among men. Conclusions: The 16-item version of the CHIP showed good internal consistency and construct validity; thus, the CHIP-16 is a useful instrument for measuring and assessing coping in family caregivers of children with chronic diseases.

No abstract

This meta-analysis of five studies examined the effect of school-based intervention programs on psychosocial well-being of gifted racial/ethnic minority students in K-12 school settings. Analyses determined the overall effect sizes for various intervention programs and compared the effect sizes for subgroups by grade (i.e., elementary vs. secondary) and program developer (i.e., local district vs. national institution). Results indicated a significant impact of school-based intervention programs on students' psychosocial well-being overall. The impact did not significantly differ by grade or program developer. The significance of these results is discussed.