Equip de Recerca sobre Infància, Drets dels Infants i la seva Qualitat de Vida

(Research Team on Children, Children’s Rights and their Quality of Life)

http://www.udg.edu/eridiqv

Institut de Recerca sobre Qualitat de Vida(Research Institute on Quality of Life

http://www.udg.edu/irqv Universitat de Girona

•Subjective well-being, life satisfaction and values aspired to•Audiovisual media between adolescents and adults•Children’s rights and child protection systems•Subjective well-being and active and satisfactory aging

ERÍDIQV objectives

2

• Developing quality of life related basic and applied research, mainly in the field of childhood, adolescence and their families, at local, regional, national or international level

• Cooperating with other institutions, organisations and networks in order to promote or develop interdisciplinary research and/or activities related to quality of life, at local, regional, national and international level

• Promoting dissemination and knowledge applicability in relation to quality of life, particularly in relation to research results from Catalonia

Main facets of interest•Well-being perceptions and evaluations•Social rights, social problems and social needs•Cultures, new technologies and quality of life

Research lines

Theoretical and epistemological approachResearch developed by ERIDIQV is grounded on the following premises and

ideological and epistemological considerations:

Theoretical and methodological pluralism. Our research is not grounded on only one socio-psychological paradigm or methodologically approach. We think multi-method approach are more rich (quantitative + qualitative)

Quality-of-life oriented approach: Priority for the evaluation of positive phenomena and positive change. Positive (social) psychology

Attention given to complexity theories: social realities are complex and they may be fuzzy, fractal, chaotic, … - cause-effect relations may not be lineal nor proportional

Complexity + quality-of-life approaches = In order to understand complex realities the perspective of all implied stakeholders (social agents) should be known and considered (and, therefore, children’s and adolescents self-reported evaluations and points of view must always be included in research)

We feel compromised with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and with its implementation. Provision, Protection and Participation rights

We feel compromised with the applicability of our research results: Face statistical invisibility of childhood. Work for availability of subjective social indicators of children and childhood.

Parents and their own child ERIDIQV started to collect data

from 12 to 16-year-old adolescents and their own parents in 1999.

Information given by children and adolescents in Catalonia was often offering unexpected results.

Intergenerational different points of view in relation to some relevant aspects of children’s lives were observed.

The context:an ever more rapidly changing

society Adolescents cultures Interpersonal relationships (ICT) Values. aspirations Environments (material and non-material) Social representations (of childhood. …) Ideas on parental authority Traditional values on how to raise children Ever-quickening pace of social change …..

Unexpected results and challenges (I)

• When 12 to 16-year-old adolescents in European countries think about becoming 21-year-old. what qualities they would like best to be appreciate for by other people?

• What qualities would like parents his o her child has when becomes 21-year-old?

N = 1184 adolescents 12 to 16-year-oldsN = 468 of their own parents.

Catalonia. Spain. December 2003.21 qualities. scored from 0 to 10

Boy Girl Boy’s parent Girl’s parent

Kindness (8.03) Kindness (8.62) Joie de vivre (9.25) Joie de vivre (9.03)

Niceness (7.92) Niceness (8.60) Good manners (9.03)

Personality (8.91)

Personality (7.87) Personality (8.60) Responsibility (8.99) Responsibility (8.82)

Joie de vivre (7.69) Joie de vivre (8.45) Solidarity (8.99) Kindness (8.77)

Family (7.64) Sensitivity (8.08) Personality (8.95) Solidarity (8.76)

Profession (7.55) Family (8.03) Kindness (8.90) Work capacity (8.62)

……………………… …………………………….

……………………………….

…………………………….

Religious faith or spirituality (5.62)

Religious faith or spirituality (5.59)

Religious faith or spirituality (6.87)

Religious faith or spirituality (6.38)

Money (5.61) Money (4.53) Power (4.74) Power (4.83)

Power (5.53) Power (4.51) Money (4.70) Money (4.75)

Unexpected results and challenges (II)

• Why satisfaction with life and with most life domains continuously decrease during adolescence in most countries?

Adolescents 12 to 16-year-olds. Scores from 0 to 10.Catalonia. Spain: 2003 (N = 2,715). 2005 (N = 5,140).

2007 (N= 1,392). 2008 (N = 2,841).

AgePW

I 8

2003 2005 2007 2008

64

68

72

76

80

84

88

12 13 14 15 16 17 18Age

PWI 8

Testing different instruments with samples from 4 different countries

• Catalonia. Spain 2009 (N = 2,900).• Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil: 2009 (N = 1,588)• Valparaiso. Chile: 2009 (N = 843) (only 14-16-year-

olds)• Gran Buenos Aires. Argentina: 2009 (N = 342)

Labels ... in all or only in extreme values?

PWI completely dissatisfied to completely satisfied extremeSWLS strongly agree to strongly disagree extremeBMSLSS

terrible to delighted all

OLS completely dissatisfied to completely satisfied extremeHOL extremely unhappy to extremely happy extremeFordyce

completely unhappy to completely happy all

Spain

Brazil

Argentina

Chile

Four countries

Tendency by agePWI - 7 SWLS BMSLSS

OLS HOL FORDYCE

Unexpected results and challenges (III)

• To be with family members. including parents. is one of the preferred activities for 12 to 16 y.o. adolescents?

• Is watching television another of their preferred activities?

Preferred activities according 12 to 16 years old adolescents

To be with friends 8.77 To practice hobbies 8.08 To listen to music 7.97 To surf in the Internet 7.73 To use a computer 7.66 To play sports 7.43 To be with the mother 7.09 To watch television 7.03

0 to 10 scale. Source: ERIDIQV. April 2006Catalan sample (N = 4,945)

Most enjoying activities. by gender Gender

Boy Girl Total I enjoy watching television 7.01 7.03 7.02 I enjoy using a mobile phone 5.65 7.00 6.32 I enjoy to be with friends 8.51 9.05 8.78 I enjoy to be with my father 6.75 6.72 6.74 I enjoy to be with my mother 6.95 7.27 7.11 I enjoy to be with siblings 5.91 6.38 6.14 I enjoy practicing sports 8.17 6.70 7.44 I enjoy using a computer 7.79 7.51 7.65 I enjoy to be using the I nternet 7.67 7.78 7.72 I enjoy playing video- games 7.89 4.24 6.07 I enjoy playing other kind of games 6.35 4.67 5.51 I enjoy studying 4.06 4.45 4.25 I enjoy listening to music 7.46 8.49 7.98 I enjoy reading 4.57 5.74 5.15 I enjoy spending time with my hobbies 8.07 8.12 8.09 I enjoy being at open air, walking, excursions 6.22 6.87 6.54

I enjoy staying at home doing nothing 3.36 3.71 3.54

Frequency of activities with the father. by gender

Gender Boy Girl Total Frequency father is concerned with you 4.19 4.28 4.24 Frequency father plays video- games with you 1.91 1.69 1.80 Frequency father plays other games with you 2.50 2.37 2.44 Frequency father listens music with you 2.38 2.54 2.46 Frequency father goes to cinema or theatre with you 2.48 2.43 2.46 Frequency father walks around with you 2.61 2.80 2.70 Frequency father goes to excursions with you (to the beach, countryside, ...) 2.97 3.18 3.07

Frequency father goes to religious activities with you 1.52 1.60 1.56 Frequency father practices sports with you 2.57 2.27 2.42 Frequency father uses the Internet with you 2.48 2.41 2.45 Frequency father watches television with you 3.70 3.70 3.70

Topics frequently talked with the father. by gender

Gender Boy Girl Total How often talks with father about school and learning 3.36 3.51 3.43 How often talks with father about television 2.79 2.74 2.77 How often talks with father about cleaning and ordering 2.60 2.81 2.70 How often talks with father about leisure and free time 2.88 2.84 2.86 How often talks with father about feelings 2.10 2.09 2.10 How often talks with father about the future 3.03 3.06 3.04 How often talks with father about computers 2.70 2.68 2.69 How often talks with father about events in the world 2.73 2.84 2.78 How often talks with father about cloths 2.26 2.27 2.27 How often talks with father about eating 2.70 2.77 2.74 How often talks with father about the city o village 2.53 2.62 2.57 How often talks with father about every day life 2.66 2.84 2.75 How often talks with father about the family 2.96 3.29 3.12 How often talks with father about other people and relationships 2.36 2.59 2.47

How often talks with father about video- games 2.26 1.86 2.06 How often talks with father about responsibility and moral values 2.83 3.06 2.95

How often talks with father about religion or spirituality 1.53 1.56 1.55 How often talks with father about sports 3.58 2.96 3.27 How often talks with father about music 2.55 2,69 2,62 How often talks with father about journals you like 1.98 1,80 1,89 How often talks with father about the Internet 2.70 2,72 2,71

Frequency of activities with the mother. by gender

Gender Boy Girl Total Frequency mother is concerned with you 4.54 4.69 4.62 Frequency mother plays video- games with you 1.42 1.40 1.41 Frequency mother plays other games with you 2.33 2.43 2.38 Frequency mother listens music with you 2.43 2.92 2.67 Frequency mother goes to cinema or theatre with you 2.53 2.64 2.58

Frequency mother walks around with you 2.70 3.10 2.90 Frequency mother goes to excursions with you (to the beach, countryside, ...) 2.96 3.30 3.13

Frequency mother goes to religious activities with you 1.56 1.68 1.62

Frequency mother practices sports with you 1.84 1.98 1.91 Frequency mother uses the Internet with you 2.12 2.18 2.15 Frequency mother watches television with you 3.78 3.96 3.87

Topics frequently talked with the mother. by gender

Gender Boy Girl Total How often talks with mother about school and learning 3.81 4.09 3.95 How often talks with mother about television 2.84 3.08 2.96 How often talks with mother about cleaning and ordering 3.39 3.85 3.62 How often talks with mother about leisure and free time 3.00 3.21 3.11 How often talks with mother about feelings 2.40 3.00 2.70 How often talks with mother about the future 3.16 3.44 3.30 How often talks with mother about computers 2.24 2.29 2.26 How often talks with mother about events in the world 2.80 2.98 2.89 How often talks with mother about cloths 3.07 3.88 3.47 How often talks with mother about eating 3.08 3.36 3.22 How often talks with mother about the city o village 2.60 2.73 2.66 How often talks with mother about every day life 2.77 3.09 2.93 How often talks with mother about the family 3.16 3.56 3.37 How often talks with mother about other people and relationships 2.51 3.05 2.78

How often talks with mother about video- games 1.97 1.65 1.81 How often talks with mother about responsibility and moral values 3.04 3.45 3.25

How often talks with mother about religion or spirituality 1.63 1.70 1.67 How often talks with mother about sports 2.55 2.47 2.51 How often talks with mother about music 2.61 3.04 2.83 How often talks with mother about journals you like 1.97 2.40 2.18 How often talks with mother about the I nternet 2,40 2.56 2.48

Unexpected results and challenges (IV)

•Adolescent that self-attribute to be high television consumers are less satisfied with their lives?

(Catalan sample N = 4945). 12 to 16-year-olds. May 2006.

Well-being and self-attribution as television consumer

Self- attribution as television consumer

I ra

rely

watc

h te

levis

ion

I am

a lo

w TV

con

sume

r

I am

a

medi

um T

V co

nsum

er I

cons

ider

my

self

a ra

ther

high

TV

con

sume

r

I am

a v

ery

high

TV

cons

umer

Tota

l

Boy 7,87 7,57 7,95 8,13 8,01 7,93 Girl 7,10 7,67 7,87 7,87 7,99 7,82

Satisfaction with your life as a whole Total 7,49 7,62 7,91 8,00 8,00 7,88

Boy 26,89 25,48 25,83 26,07 26,28 25,90 Girl 24,16 25,80 26,02 25,46 25,06 25,75

Subjective Well- Being (Diener) Total 25,51 25,64 25,93 25,78 25,76 25,82

Boy 73,58 72,82 74,96 76,45 77,56 75,15 Girl 71,85 74,42 75,81 76,34 76,44 75,64

Personal Well- Being Index (Cummins) Total 72,72 73,61 75,40 76,40 77,11 75,39

Boy 39,33 39,03 39,65 40,06 40,02 39,67 Girl 38,42 40,43 41,12 40,64 39,78 40,74

Perceived Social Support from Family Total 38,88 39,73 40,42 40,34 39,92 40,21

Boy 37,38 37,84 37,88 37,66 38,20 37,82 Girl 40,56 40,18 40,88 40,32 39,45 40,54

Perceived Social Support from Friends Total 38,96 38,98 39,46 38,96 38,72 39,19

Unexpected results and challenges (V)

• Is there any relationship between parents and their own child satisfaction with life?

N = 266 paired adolescents 12 to 16-year-olds and their own parents.

Catalonia. Spain. May 2006.

Correlation between parents’ and children’s scores to PWI (Personal Well-Being Index)

J ackknife confidence intervals (1-=0.95) for the Pearson correlations

Correlation

coeffi cient

Standard

error

Lower

confi dence limit

Upper

confi dence limit

Standard of living 0.066 0.087 -0.147 0.279

Health 0.216 0.064 0.059 0.373

Life achievements 0.133 0.063 -0.021 0.287

Relations with other people 0.037 0.057 -0.102 0.176

Personal security 0.124 0.078 -0.067 0.315

Groups of people belonging to 0.117 0.078 -0.074 0.308

Security for the future 0.176 0.035 0.090 0.262

PWI 0.186 0.055 0.051 0.321

Overall lif e satisfaction 0.083 0.055 -0.052 0.218

New samples: Paired parent-child answers in two countries

Country

TotalSpain BrazilParent who

answersMother 895 377 1272

Father 355 110 465

Total 1250 487 1737

Parents and own child well-being. according different scales. Spain.

Spain

Boys

Girls TotalChildre

n

Mothers Fathers TotalParent

sItem 6 BMSLSS 8.23 8.23 8.23 8.08 7.82 8.01CAS satisfied 7.98 7.86 7.91 7.67 7.45 7.61CAS happy 8.41 8.31 8.35 7.88 7.61 7.80Fordyce 7.93 7.84 7.88 7.44 7.38 7.42HOL 7.93 7.89 7.91 7.56 7.37 7.51OLS 8.41 8.26 8.33 7.86 7.53 7.77PWI-7 81.47 82.12 81.83 74.45 71.52 73.62SWLS 74.40 74.44 74.42 71.26 68.53 70.49BMSLSS 80.29 79.72 79.97 79.82 77.84 79.26

Spain

Boys

Girls TotalChildre

n

Mothers FathersTotal

ParentsSat health 8.42 8.57 8.51 7.38 7.25 7.34Sat standard living 8.50 8.62 8.57 7.31 7.09 7.25Sat achievements 7.95 8.07 8.02 7.63 7.28 7.53Sat safety 7.88 7.54 7.69 7.42 7.21 7.36Sat groups I belong to 8.54 8.69 8.62 7.84 7.32 7.69Sat future security 7.58 7.62 7.60 6.70 6.56 6.66Sat relations people 8.15 8.37 8.28 7.83 7.35 7.70Item1 SWLS 6.82 6.57 6.68 6.91 6.76 6.87Item2 SWLS 9.01 9.01 9.01 7.98 7.71 7.90Item3 SWLS 8.41 8.29 8.34 7.85 7.63 7.79Item4 SWLS 7.74 7.92 7.84 7.94 7.69 7.87Item5 SWLS 4.79 4.54 4.65 5.05 5.48 5.17sat.family 8.45 8.25 8.34 8.44 8.20 8.37sat.friends 8.29 8.60 8.46 7.99 7.59 7.88sat.school experience 7.16 7.32 7.25 7.52 7.63 7.55sat.myself 7.89 7.59 7.72 7.74 7.59 7.70sat.place I live in. 8.36 8.09 8.21 8.22 7.91 8.13

Parents and own child domain and overall well-being correlation

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.Pair 1 Satisfaction with health 1737 .072 .003Pair 2 Satisfaction with standard living 1737 .171 .000

Pair 3 Satisfaction with achievements 1737 .098 .000

Pair 4 Satisfaction with safety 1737 .111 .000Pair 5 Satisfaction with groups of

people I belong to1737 .019 .430

Pair 6 Satisfaction with future security 1737 .044 .064

Pair 7 Satisfaction relations people 1737 .059 .014Pair 8 OLS (Overall Life Satisfaction) 1737 .090 .000Pair 9 PWI-7 1737 .121 .000Pair 10 BMSLSS 1737 .124 .000

Pair 11 SWLS 1705 .190 .000

SEM: Parents and own child correlation: 0,17 for BMSLSS, 0,21 for SWLS

and 0,15 for PWI-7

SEM: Parents and own child correlation In order to make groups comparable we tested to

restrict lambdas and taus. Statistics of the models with restricted lambdas fit, but with restricted taus did not fit.

Therefore correlations between parents and own children can be compared: They are significant but very low.

However, that also means that components of the items differ between parents and children when related to the respective overall scale.

Conclusion: Means of the summated scales can’t be compared between parents and own child.

Reflections Adults’ cultures are changing. However, adolescents

cultures are changing very fast and may be constructed with little connection to adults’ cultures.

Intergenerational understanding requires open and easy dialog, otherwise the pace of social change will increase “cultural distance” between adults and the youngest and real communication may become more difficult…. particularly when audio-visual media are “between” adults and children!