INT’L. J. AGING AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, Vol.

72(2) 111-135, 2011

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARENT ADULT

RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (PARQ)*

LINDSAY PITZER
KAREN L. FINGERMAN
Purdue University
EVA S. LEFKOWITZ
Pennsylvania State University

ABSTRACT

Relationships between adults and parents are characterized by positive and

negative qualities. Existing measures of relationship qualities and ambiv-
alence often rely on items that are unbalanced in number of positive and
negative items, emotional tone, or missing negative items completely. Three
studies established validity (construct, convergent, discriminant) and reli-
ability (internal consistency, test-retest) for the Parent Adult Relationship
Quality (PARQ) scale. Study 1 found high internal consistency and test-
retest correlations among undergraduates. Study 2 found associations with
measures of positive relationship quality and high test-retest correlations
using a sample of parents. Study 3 established convergent and discriminant
validity with other measures of relationship quality, including an observa-
tional measure. The PARQ is a succinct measure that captures positive and
negative aspects of support and interactions in relationships between adults
and their parents.

*This study was supported by grant R01AG17916 “Problems Between Parents and Offspring
in Adulthood” and R01 AG027769, “The Psychology of Intergenerational Transfers” from
the National Institute of Aging.

111

Ó 2011, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc.

doi: 10.2190/AG.72.2.b
http://baywood.com
112 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

The parent-child tie is both a source of support and a source of irritation across
the lifespan. Moreover, qualities of relationships with parents and adult off-
spring have been linked to well-being (Fingerman, Pitzer, Lefkowitz, Birditt, &
Mroczek, 2008; Lowenstein, 2007; Ward, 2008). Yet, it remains unclear whether
it is positive qualities, negative qualities, or a mixture of sentiments that account
for these associations. Because the study of parent-adult child relationships
is multi-faceted, it is important to provide: (a) a measure that is brief in length;
(b) assesses positive and negative facets of this relationship with regard to balance
in the tone of the questions; and (c) includes items that are applicable to all
parent-adult child relationships, regardless of distance. Such a measure would
serve to complement the study and measurement of other aspects of the parent-
adult child relationship.
Early research regarding parent-adult child relationships involved the inter-
generational solidarity perspective, which provides evidence of cohesion in
parent-adult child relationships (Bengtson & Schrader, 1982). Over the past
decade, however, the field turned to the intergenerational ambivalence model
(Lowenstein, 2007; Luescher & Pillemer, 1998; Pillemer & Suitor, 2002).
This model is conceived of as: (a) feeling mixed or torn in the relationship; or
(b) experiencing both positive and negative sentiments toward a parent or grown
child (Luescher & Pillemer, 1998; Priester & Petty, 2001). The latter definition,
the social psychological perspective, has received the majority of research atten-
tion (Fingerman, Chen, Hay, Cichy, & Lefkowitz, 2006; Fingerman et al., 2008;
Peters, Hooker, & Zvonkovic, 2006; Willson, Shuey, & Elder, 2003). This
model, however, is also hampered by measurement issues. Despite strong research
interest in this topic, there is a lack of adequate measurement for the construct.
Therefore, the Parent Adult Relationship Quality (PARQ) scale was designed to
be a useful measure of positive and negative relationship qualities for researchers
who are seeking to enhance and broaden understanding of intergenera-
tional relationships, ambivalence, and well-being. This measure is an emotionally
balanced, concise (in terms of number of items), and useful measurement tool
for parent-adult child ties across varying geographic differences.

EXTANT MEASURES OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN

ADULTS AND PARENTS
Several measures have been designed to assess intergenerational relationships,
and PARQ adds to this group by filling gaps left by current assessments. A
succinct measure that makes the use of emotionally balanced items would allow
direct comparisons of positive and negative feelings in the tie, without having
to attribute possible differences to intensity of the items (e.g., being very angry vs.
being satisfied). Furthermore, it is important that the measure takes into con-
sideration that nearly half of adults reside more than 50 miles from their parents
(Greenwell & Bengtson, 1997; Lin & Rogerson, 1995). Despite geographic
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 113

separation from parents, offspring who reside at a distance from parents typically
report positive and negative relationship qualities comparable to qualities reported
by more proximate offspring (Fingerman, Hay, Cichy, Tang, Chen, & Lefkowitz,
2003; Lawton, Silverstein, & Bengtson, 1994).

Measures of Parent/Child Ties

Over time, assessments of parent-adult child ties have varied in content and
structure. While many types of assessments may be useful, researchers who wish
to measure multiple aspects of the parent-adult child tie may seek a measure
of relationship qualities specific to this tie. Therefore, measures tapping solely
positive aspects of parent-adult child relationships (e.g., Positive Affect Index;
Bengtson & Schrader, 1982), or feelings of secure attachment bonds attachment
with older parents (e.g., Adult Attachment Scale; Cicirelli, 1995), may fall short
in assessing the breadth of relationship qualities in this tie.
Meanwhile, measures that do include both positive and negative items either
are not balanced or are too concise to capture a broader range of positive and
negative qualities. A few existing scales are balanced in number of positive
and negative items, but not tone. For example, Fingerman and colleagues (2006)
and Umberson (1992) used an existing balanced measure from the American
Changing Lives Survey, which included two positive items (“How much does
he/she make you feel loved and cared for” and “How much does he/she understand
you?”) and two negative items (“How much does he/she criticize you” and “How
much does he/she make demands on you?”). The measure is limited because it
captures only four aspects of the relationship. Moreover, the negative items in
this measure also seem more intense in tone than the positive ones. Furthermore,
Bengtson and colleagues also introduced a measure of solidarity-conflict in
adult intergenerational relationships (Giarrusso, Silverstein, Gans, & Bengtson,
2005). While this measure includes four items to examine affectual solidarity
(general closeness, communication, camaraderie, understanding in the relation-
ship), and four items to assess conflict (general conflict, tension, and disagree-
ments; criticism; arguments; demands in the relationship), the items do not mirror
one another. Likewise, Willson et al. (2003) used six items measuring positive
and negative feelings that were balanced in number, but not in tone.

Social Network Measure

In 2005, Newsom and colleagues developed one of the only measures of
positive and negative social exchanges that included parallel and balanced items
for both positive and negative behaviors (Newsom, Rook, Nishishiba, Sorkin, &
Mahan, 2005). Although some of these questions could be applied to assessment
of parent-adult child relationships, most of these items do not apply to adults
and their parents who reside at a distance (e.g., “Include you in things that they
were doing,” or “Provide you with good company or companionship”). Moreover,
114 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

the complete measure is 24 questions in length (12 positive and 12 negative),

thus not providing a succinct measurement of positive and negative relationship
qualities. A brief and emotionally balanced assessment specific to this relationship
would enhance understanding of affection, conflict, and ambivalence between
adults and their parents.

PARENT AND ADULT RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE

(PARQ) DEVELOPMENT

The following studies assess the Parent and Adult Relationship Questionnaire
(PARQ) as a concise and emotionally balanced instrument of positive and
negative qualities in the parent-adult child tie, regardless of the geographical
distance between parents and children. The literature regarding adults and
parents uses the term “relationship quality” broadly in reference to either
positive and negative feelings (Lefkowitz & Fingerman, 2003), supportive
behaviors or demands (Umberson, 1989, 1992), manifestations of respect or
affection (Bengtson & Schrader, 1982), and/or interpersonal problems (Birditt,
Miller, Fingerman, & Lefkowitz, 2009). Likewise, we use a broad definition of
“quality” here.
To determine whether the new measure adequately captures positive and
negative qualities, convergent and discriminant validity should be evident
(Campbell & Fiske, 1959). An appropriate assessment of positive and negative
relationship qualities should be associated with existing measures of relationship
quality and not associated with constructs conceptually distinct from relationship
qualities. We expected that the PARQ would be associated with other measures
of positive relationship qualities (Bengtson & Schrader, 1982; Cicirelli, 1991,
1993; Koropeckyj-Cox, 2002; Sweet, Bumpass, & Call, 1988), and of positive and
negative qualities in this tie (ACL; Fingerman et al., 2006; Umberson, 1992;
Willson et al., 2003) We also expected the PARQ would not be associated with
conceptually dissimilar measures of other aspects of the parent-child tie, such
as filial anxiety (offspring’s worries about parents’ future care needs; Cicirelli,
1988) or frequency of face-to-face contact. We also considered several other
important aspects of measurement development. Namely, it is important that
such a measure assess qualities of the tie in the absence of face-to-face contact.
We developed the PARQ with relevant items for adults and parents regardless
of geographic distance between the parties.
We also sought to develop a measure that is appropriate for survey research.
Survey researchers have become increasingly interested in measures that can be
administered via a variety of methodologies (e.g., paper, telephone, and internet;
Boyer, Olson, Calantone, & Jackson, 2002; Herzog & Rodgers, 1988; Knapp &
Kirk, 2003). We administered the PARQ through multiple approaches to ensure
that reliability and validity of the PARQ was comparable across methods.
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 115

Finally, we developed the PARQ to be applicable to men and women, and

considered gender differences in offspring’s relationships with parents. Mothers
typically have more frequent contact (Lawton et al., 1994; Rossi & Rossi,
1990) and more emotionally intense relationships with offspring than fathers
(Fingerman, 2001; Martini, Grusec, & Bernardini, 2001; Willson et al., 2003).
Development of the PARQ was through items cultivated by Newsom, Morgan,
Nishishiba, and Rook (2000) to assess positive and negative social exchanges
with network members. Newsom et al. (2000) started with an initial pool of
80 items and culled 40 items deemed most fruitful in the first phases of their
measurement development (Newsom, Nishishiba, Morgan, & Rook, 2003).
Newsom et al. (2005) then went on to develop a 24-item measure regarding
rewarding social exchanges from this pool of 40 items. We compiled the eight
PARQ items from Newsom et al.’s (2003) 40 items but did not use the same items
as the measure applicable to the broader social network (Newsom et al., 2005;
see Appendix, Table A1). The eight items in the PARQ were derived from the
40 items generated in the process of development and only two items were
similar to those used in Newsom et al.’s (2005) final social network measure.
The following studies establish reliability and validity for the PARQ using
multiple methods. Study 1 examined the PARQ in a sample of college students to
assess construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. Study 2
examined the PARQ among mothers and fathers of grown offspring to assess
construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent
validity. Study 3 examined convergent and discriminant validity between the
PARQ and: (a) other measures of relationship quality; (b) a measure of a distinct
construct; and (c) observed behaviors of parents’ and offsprings’ positive and
negative interactions based on video taped conversations.

STUDY 1: TEST-RETEST AND INTER-ITEM RELIABILITY

IN AN COLLEGE STUDENT SAMPLE

Methods
Study 1 had three aims. First, we examined construct validity in a sample
of young adults through: (a) exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and
(b) internal consistency, a. Next, we determined reliability using test-retest
methods. Finally, given that relationship qualities with mother and with father
may differ, we assessed reliability for mothers and fathers separately.

Participants

Participants included 228 female and 108 male undergraduate students

(N = 336) enrolled in a variety of courses. Participants were aged 18 to 23 (M =
20.17, SD = 1.24). The majority of the sample was White (88%), while other
116 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

ethnicities included African American (5%), Hispanic (4%), and Asian or

Pacific Islander (3%).

Procedures

Participants were recruited from five undergraduate classes which offered the
PARQ as an option to participate in research. All undergraduate students were
volunteers. In some classes, participation in research was a class requirement and
completing the PARQ was one option to fulfill the requirement. In other classes,
students received extra credit for participation in research. Other research using
college student samples have used similar methods of recruitment (e.g., Coles,
Cook, & Blake, 2007; Falkenbach, Poythress, & Creevy, 2008).
To establish test-retest reliability, participants completed the measure twice,
approximately 4 weeks apart. Students completing the PARQ at both time points
received class credit. We randomized whether participants answered questions
about their mother or father first. All participants included in this study answered
on both their mother and father. The completion rate at Time 2 was 68% of the
Time 1 sample. Although completion rates were relatively low, other studies that
have used college student samples have the same issue (e.g., Cranford, McCabe,
Boyd, Slayden, Reed, Ketchie, et al., 2008; Hingson, Zha, & Weitzman, 2009).

Measures

PARQ

Participants completed the four positive and four negative quality items
regarding their mother and father. The PARQ items are measured on a 5-point
Likert scale, where 1 = never, 2 = rarely, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, and 5 = always.
Items included in the PARQ are given in the Appendix, Table A1. The means and
standard deviations of the PARQ items can be found in the Appendix, Table A2.

Background and Contact

At the end of each questionnaire, participants provided information about

their age (in years), gender (male or female), and ethnicity (1 = African American
or Black; 2 = Hispanic; 3 = White; 4 = Asian or Pacific Islander; 5 = Other).

Results
We first conducted a series of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses
to determine which items best represented the two-factor construct of relation-
ship qualities. We began by conducting a principal components factor analysis
(PCA) with varimax rotation of the eight PARQ items (Birditt, Fingerman,
Lefkowitz, & Kamp-Dush, 2008; Bryant, 2000) and constrained the solution
to two factors. Items were considered as a part of a factor if it had loadings of .30
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 117

on their respective factors and lower loadings on the other (Borjesson, Aarons,
& Dunn, 2003; Stoppelbein, Greening, Jordan, Elkin, Moll, & Pullen, 2005).
Indeed, we found that the four positive and four negative items loaded .30 or
higher on each of their respective subscales, with each component (or subscale)
having eigenvalues of 1.0 or higher (see Table 1).
Table 1 also shows instances where items loaded highly on both scales. For
instance, “supportive of decisions” loaded highly on the “negative” factor and
“insensitivity or unsympathetically” loaded highly on the “positive” factor. This
could have happened for a couple of reasons, including the fact that these items
were strongly correlated with the items from the opposite factor and also with
their respective factors. Furthermore, the extraction and rotation method we
employed assumes correlation among factors (oblique rotation) and the variables
(PCA). Indeed, these are situations that may generate the cross-loading of certain
items on the factors. Examination of the factor loadings from confirmatory
factor analysis, however, revealed that these items did not load as highly on
the opposite factors as PCA suggested. For example, for offspring reporting
on mothers, “Supportive of decisions” loaded –.32 on the negative factor and

Table 1. Exploratory Factor Analyses of the Eight PARQ Items

(N = 336): Study 1 Factor Loadings

Positive Negative Decision

Offspring about mother

Warm or affectionate .79 –.23 Positive
Thoughtful or considerate .87 –.22 Positive
Favors or other little things .75 –.15 Positive
Supportive of decisions .42 –.62 Positive
Angry or hostile –.21 .72 Negative
Insensitivity or unsympathetically –.42 .64 Negative
Made demands for favors –.18 .61 Negative
Questioned or doubted –.01 .83 Negative

Offspring about father

Warm or affectionate .85 –.20 Positive
Thoughtful or considerate .88 –.26 Positive
Favors or other little things .85 –.11 Positive
Supportive of decisions .70 –.35 Positive
Angry or hostile –.20 .79 Negative
Insensitivity or unsympathetically –.52 .65 Negative
Made demands for favors –.05 .77 Negative
Questioned or doubted –.32 .70 Negative
118 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

“Insensitivity” loaded –.22 on the positive factor. For offspring reporting on

fathers, “Supportive of decisions” loaded –.22 on the negative factor and “Insen-
sitivity” loaded –.27 on the positive factor.
There has been some disagreement in the literature on how to handle items
that load onto multiple factors (Pett, Lackey, & Sullivan, 2003). However, Pett
and colleagues suggest placing the item with the factor that it is most closely
related to conceptually. Even though these items load on both factors, we show
below that the internal consistencies for both subscales are more than adequate,
indicating that the subscales hold together. Therefore, we placed the items with
the factor that made the most theoretical sense. This factor structure held for
reports on mothers and fathers and at Time 1 and Time 2.
Next, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses using AMOS version 7
(Table 2, Study 1). We used the Chi-square statistic, CFI (Comparative Fit
Index), TLI (Tucker-Lewis Index), GFI (Goodness-of-Fit Index), and RMSEA
(Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation) to determine model adequacy.
Acceptable-to-good fit for the CFI, TLI, and GFI are represented by coefficients
between .90 and .95, whereas good fit for the RMSEA is between .05 to .08
(Birditt et al., 2008; Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Bryant & Yarnold, 1995). The
two-factor model had a good fit for offspring about mothers (c2 (n = 18) = 60.14,
p < .01, TLI = .93, CFI = .95, GFI = .96, RMSEA = .08) and for fathers (c2 (n = 18)
= 60.95, p < .001, TLI = .95, CFI = .97, GFI = .96, RMSEA = .08). See Table 2
for information on the loadings.
Both scales also had high internal consistency. The positive scale alphas for
mothers and fathers were: a = .79 and a = .88 at Time 1 and .83 and .91 at Time 2,
respectively. Negative scale alphas for mothers and fathers were a = .72 and a =
.78 at Time 1 and .79 and .80 at Time 2, respectively. Correlations between the
subscales were r(336) = –.57, p < .001 for mothers and r(336) = –.58, p < .001 for
fathers at Time 1.
Finally, we examined test-retest correlations. The scales had high test-retest
reliability; r(336) = .77 for positive scale responses about mothers and r(335) =
.85 for responses about fathers; r(336) = .73 and r(335) = .80 for negative scale
responses about mothers and fathers, respectively.

Discussion

This study shows that the PARQ involves two distinct subscales with high
internal consistency. Test-retest reliability also demonstrated stability in responses
over time. However, Study 1 relied on an undergraduate student sample. Given
the widespread use of college student samples in research on adult relationships,
it is important to demonstrate the PARQ’s measurement features in this popu-
lation of offspring. The PARQ, however, is intended for use with a wider popula-
tion including older offspring, non-college students, and parents.
 Table 2. Unstandardized Loadings (Standard Errors) and Standardized Loadings for Two-Factor
Confirmatory Model of the PARQ Scale for Studies 1 through 3

Study 1 Study 1
Offspring about mother Offspring about father Study 2 Study 3

Unstan- Stan- Unstan- Stan- Unstan- Stan- Unstan- Stan-

dardized dardized dardized dardized dardized dardized dardized dardized

Positive
Warm or affectionate 1.15 (.11) .76 1.37 (.10) .83 1.25 (.15) .64 1.24 (.10) .70
Thoughtful or considerate 1.25 (.12) .86 1.42 (.10) .93 1.55 (.16) .91 1.36 (.10) .81
Favors or other little things 0.99 (.11) .62 1.31 (.10) .78 1.27 (.15) .69 0.96 (.08) .61
Supportive of decisions 1.00 (—) .58 1.00 (—) .69 1.00 (—) .59 1.00 (—) .58

Negative
Angry or hostile 1.29 (.16) .71 1.15 (.11) .71 1.06 (.13) .68 1.04 (.09) .69
Insensitivity or unsympathetically 1.43 (.18) .79 1.60 (.14) .88 1.16 (.13) .76 1.22 (.10) .78
Demands for favors 1.16 (.18) .49 0.86 (.11) .48 1.19 (.17) .55 0.76 (.09) .42
Questioned or doubted decisions 1.00 (—) .49 1.00 (—) .62 1.00 (—) .64 1.00 (—) .61
DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ
/ 119
120 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

STUDY 2: CONSTRUCT VALIDITY AND TEST-RETEST

RELIABILITY IN A PARENT SAMPLE
Study 2 had four aims. First, we examined construct validity by considering
the factor structure, internal consistency, and the convergent and discriminant
validity of the measure in a sample of parents. Convergent validity was examined
with widely used measures of parent/offspring relationship quality (Cicirelli,
1991, 1993; Sweet et al., 1988; Umberson, 1992) and discriminant validity with
a measure of contact frequency (both in person and through phone and e-mail).
Second, we examined potential measurement mode effects by administering
the items in different formats (e.g., paper and pencil, internet). Third, test-retest
reliability was assessed through a subsample of parents who completed ques-
tionnaires approximately 6 weeks apart.

Methods

Participants

Included in this study were 153 mothers and 101 fathers (N = 254). Participants
were aged 41 to 88 (M = 55.48, SD = 8.34); mothers and fathers did not differ
by age. These parents reported on 141 adult daughters and 113 adult sons at
Time 1, who ranged in age from 18 to 57 (M = 28.21, SD = 8.41). This sample was
98% White.
A subset of parents completed the survey at Time 2 to establish test-retest
reliability. This subsample included 79 mothers and 50 fathers reporting on 67
adult daughters and 62 adult sons (n = 129). We examined possible differences
between the subset of participants who completed the survey only at Time 1
(n = 125) and the subset of participants of participants who completed the survey at
Times 1 and 2 with regard to age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, marital status,
physical health, child’s gender, and child’s age. Independent t-tests revealed no
significant differences between participants on these background characteristics.
The completion rate at Time 2 was 51%.

Procedures

Recruitment of participants took place though convenience sampling including

word-of-mouth via faculty, staff, and undergraduates who asked parents of adult
children to participate. Study criteria required participants to have at least one
adult child age 18 and older. Participants had the option of completing the survey
via the internet or by paper and pencil. The sample included 148 parents who
completed the web survey and 106 parents who completed the paper survey.
At Time 2, 67 completed the web survey and 62 completed the paper survey.
To establish test-retest reliability, a subsample of parents completed question-
naires approximately 6 weeks apart.
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 121

Measures

PARQ—Participants completed the four positive and four negative quality

items regarding a son or daughter. To randomize selection of child selected for
assessment, parents who had more than one child selected the child whose
name started with a letter closest to the beginning of the alphabet. We used this
selection criterion over other possibilities (e.g., having parents choose their
oldest/youngest child, the one with the earliest/latest birthday), as there may be
implications with choosing their focal child in other ways (e.g., they might give
more to their parents or receive more from their parents, etc.). The random
selection criterion used in this study has the potential to enrich the sample with
answers on a broader spectrum of adult children. Please see Study 1 for a
description of the PARQ scale.

Adult Attachment Scale (AAS)—Participants answered three items that assess

feelings of comfort/security and distress over separation in the parent-child tie
from the AAS, rated 1 (not at all, disagree completely) to 7 (definitely true, agree
completely; Cicirelli, 1991, 1993). An example item included, “Being with my
child makes me feel very happy,” a = .65.

Social support/relationship strains—Participants answered four items reflect-

ing positive and negative aspects of relationships from the American’s Changing
Lives survey (ACL; Fingerman et al., 2006; Umberson, 1992; Willson et al.,
2003) that have been widely used in relationships between adults and their
parents, rated 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). Example items included, “How
much does your (mother/father/child) make you feel loved and cared for?” and
“How much does your child criticize you?” Internal consistency was comparable
to that presented in other research (Fingerman et al., 2006), a = .80 for positive
items and a = .62 for negative items.

Overall relationship quality—Participants provided a global rating of the

parent-adult child relationship (“How would you rate the overall quality of your
relationship with your child at present?”) from the National Survey of Families
and Households (NSFH; Koropeckyj-Cox, 2002; Sweet et al., 1988), rated from 1
(poor) to 5 (excellent).

Background information and contact—Participants provided information

about their age, gender, and ethnicity, as well as their child’s age and gender
and rated how often they see their child in person from 1 (Less often than one to
five months) to 6 (Once a week or more often) and how often they communicate
with their child via phone or e-mail, rated 1 (Less often than once a month) to
7 (Every day).
122 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

Results

Internal Consistency, Test-Retest Reliability and Convergent Validity

We verified that the PARQ consisted of two subscales among a sample of

parents. We confirmed the factor structure with a confirmatory factor analysis,
using the sample from Time 1 (Table 2, Study 2). The two-factor model provided
an excellent fit (c2 (n = 18) = 30.33, p < .001, TLI = .97, CFI = .98, GFI = .97,
RMSEA = .08; see Table 2).
At Time 1, internal consistency was high for mothers (a = .74 positive, .72,
negative scale) and for fathers (a =. 82 positive, .78, negative scale). Examination
of the PARQ by each mode of measurement revealed equally high internal
consistency, a = .77 (positive) and .70 (negative) for the web survey and a = .81
for both positive and negative scales for the paper and pencil survey. We also
found comparable internal consistency at Time 2, separately by subscale, parental
gender, and survey format (a = .71 to .84). The correlation between subscales
was r(254) = –.46, p < .001.
Next, we considered convergent validity by examining correlations between the
PARQ subscales and other measures of relationship quality obtained at Time 1,
separately by mother and father (see Table 3). To establish convergent and
discriminant validity, we used a correlation cut-off of .15. That is, any correla-
tion equal to .15 or above shows convergence, while correlations lower than .15
shows divergence. Although there are no established criteria for convergent and
divergent validity, many other studies have used a cutoff of r = .15 (see Hendrick
& Hendrick, 2006; Kring, Smith, & Neale, 1994; Kubany, Leisen, Kaplan, &
Kelly, 2000). For both mothers and fathers, the PARQ positive and negative
scales were positively and negatively correlated with the appropriate measures
in anticipated directions (Table 3). These findings held when we examined
convergent validity separately among those who took the web survey and the
paper survey. Also, as expected, we did not find significant associations between
frequency of contact and each subscale of the PARQ in Study 2.
Finally, we performed correlations between the Time 1 and Time 2 PARQ
scales to assess test-retest reliability. Test-retest reliability was high for the
full sample (r(129) = .76 positive and r(129) = .80 negative). All correlations
were above .73 for mothers and fathers separately. We also assessed test-retest
reliability for individuals who took the paper and pencil version and those
who took the web version separately and all correlations were above .72.

Discussion
The results of Study 2 further established validity and reliability among a
sample of parents of grown children. With regard to validity, the PARQ subscales
converged with other measures of positive and negative behaviors in the expected
directions. We also found high test-retest reliability. A particular strength of Study
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 123

Table 3. Convergent Validity of the PARQ Scale

(N = 254): Study 2

PARQ PARQ
Positive Negative
Measure Subscale Subscale

Mothers
Adult Attachment Scale .26*** –.16**
Americans Changing Lives positive quality scale .69*** –.32***
Americans Changing Lives negative quality scale –.35*** .71***
Global relationship quality .65*** –.24***

Fathers
Adult Attachment Scale .46*** –.36**
Americans Changing Lives positive quality scale .79*** –.56***
Americans Changing Lives negative quality scale –.35*** .77***
Global relationship quality .73*** –.54***
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

2 was the ability to look at different survey formats. Indeed, properties of the
PARQ were consistent in both web-based and paper and pencil formats for
mothers and fathers.
Limitations of this study involve the sample being almost exclusively White.
Additionally, participants chose their preference for web and paper surveys.
Reliability might be lower if participants were randomly assigned to format.
Also, convenience and word-of-mouth sampling present possible biases: a less
representative sample of the population and a limited generalizability of the
results. Another limitation of Study 2 is that the measures used to validate the
PARQ were all self-report and, therefore, validation did not include observational
measures of relationship quality. Study 3 addresses these concerns.

STUDY 3: CONSTRUCT VALIDITY IN A SAMPLE

OF ADULTS AND THEIR PARENTS

The aims of Study 3 were twofold. First, we assessed construct validity of the
PARQ by considering the factor structure, internal consistency, and convergent
and discriminant validity in a distinct sample including parents and their grown
children. Convergent validity was assessed through association with extant self-
report measures of relationship quality, while discriminant validity was assessed
through non-association with unrelated features of the relationship (e.g., filial
anxiety). Second, we also compared responses on the PARQ to observations of
124 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

positive and negative behaviors. Observed conversations coded by trained raters

provide an outside perspective on the relationship, thus lending a stronger argu-
ment for instrument validity.

Methods

Participants

Data were from the Adult Family Study, a study of 213 families with adults
aged 22 to 49 (M = 34.97, SD = 7.28), their mother (mean age = 61.26, SD = 8.79)
and father (mean age = 63.00. SD = 9.27) conducted in the greater Philadelphia
area (N = 639). Study 3 includes a subset of those participants (158 families;
n = 474) who completed telephone interviews, face-to-face videotaped inter-
views, and self-report questionnaires. This subset did not differ from the
larger sample and was collected at the same time as the rest of the data from
the Adult Family Study (see Fingerman et al., 2006, for details). Both parents
and the grown child completed the face-to-face videotaped interviews, allow-
ing examination of convergent validity with observational measures of
positive and negative emotional behaviors. Approximately one-third of the
sample was African American, while the remaining two-thirds was European
American.

Procedure

Parents and adult offspring each completed a 1-hour telephone interview.

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) software permitted random order
of administration of sections pertaining to mother and to father across offspring
interviews. Offspring then participated in a face-to-face interview with their
mother and father separately. Each parent-child dyad participated in videotaped
conversations and then independently completed questionnaires.
Face-to-face videotaped interviews took place in either the parent’s or
offspring’s home. Offspring participated in two videotaped interviews, one
with their mother and one with their father. The participants were videotaped
while discussing three topics: (a) what they enjoy about each other; (b) what
worries them about each other; and (c) what bothers them about each other.
The “enjoy” conversation always occurred first as a warm-up task. The order
of the worry and problem conversations was counterbalanced. Only behaviors
from the problem conversations were used in this study because prior research
has used similar conversations to assess positive and negative relationship
qualities between adults and their parents (e.g., Flannery, Montemayor, & Eberly,
1994). The interviewers provided instructions for each conversation and
then left the room to allow dyads to freely discuss topics. The conversation
lasted 8 minutes.
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 125

Measures

PARQ—Participants completed the four positive and four negative items.

Please see Study 1 for a description of the PARQ scale.
Bengtson Positive Affect Index (PAI)—Parents rated five items reflecting posi-
tive aspects of the parent-child relationship from the larger PAI (Bengtson
& Schrader, 1982). An example item included, “How much respect do you feel
that your father/mother/child has toward you?,” a = .85 consistent with prior
studies using the PAI (Fincham, Beach, Arias, & Brody, 1998).
Positive and negative emotions—Participants indicated how often they experi-
enced 14 emotions in their relationship with their mother/father/offspring in
the past 12 months, from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Positive emotions included:
proud, relaxed, interested, happy, delighted, and pleased. Negative items included:
guilty, worried, jealous, irritated, disgusted, angry, disappointed, and embar-
rassed. These emotions were derived from scales assessing positive and negative
emotions (Izard, Libero, Putnam, & Haynes, 1993; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen,
1988), a = .87 for the positive emotion subscale and a = .78 for the negative
emotion subscale.
Social support/relationship strain—As in Study 2, participants completed the
same four items from the American’s Changing Lives survey (ACL; Fingerman
et al., 2006; Umberson, 1992; Willson et al., 2003), a = 69 for positive items
and a = .60 for negative items.
Filial anxiety—Participants completed 13 items from Cicirelli’s (1988) filial
anxiety measure, rated 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Example items
include, “I feel uneasy about being away from my parents for too long now that
they are getting older” and “I keep in close touch with my parents to be sure
nothing is wrong,” a = .81.
Observational data—Eleven independent raters coded the videotaped conver-
sations of relationship problems for positive and negative emotional behaviors
based on a coding scheme developed for the Adult Family Study (Lefkowitz,
Cichy, Hay, Espinosa-Hernandez, & Fingerman, 2008). The codes were derived
from self-report and observational measures used in previous studies (e.g., Izard
et al., 1993; Lefkowitz & Fingerman, 2003). Positive behaviors were assessed
with six items (i.e., encouraging, humorous, supportive, involved, enthusiastic,
and happy), while negative behaviors were assessed with three items (i.e., critical,
annoyed, and judgmental). Coders rated the parent and offspring separately during
different coding sessions. They watched the entire conversation and considered
all aspects (i.e., verbal and nonverbal) when rating each behavior on a 5-point
scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (a great deal). Because at least two raters
coded each videotape, reliability was based on the entire sample and reported
as the mean intra-class correlation across all possible coder pairs. The intra-class
126 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

correlations ranged from .94 to .97 for positive and .94 to .96 for negative codes.
Reliability coefficients for the scales of combined codes were a = .76 for the
positive scale and a = .82 for the negative scale.
Background information and contact—Participants provided information
about their age, gender, and ethnicity. Participants also rated often how they
see each other in person from 1 (Less than once a year) to 8 (Once a week or
more often) and how often they communicate with each other via phone, e-mail,
or other forms of contact rated 1 (Twice a year or less often) to 8 (Every day).

Results and Discussion

The first step involved verifying that the PARQ consisted of two subscales.
We confirmed the factor structure with a confirmatory factor analysis. The two-
factor model provided an excellent fit (c2 (n = 19) = 103.94, p < .001, TLI = .88,
CFI = .93, RMSEA = .08; see (Table 2, Study 3). The correlation between the
positive and negative scales was r(629) = –.36, p < .001.
The next step involved assessing convergent validity by examining associa-
tions between the PARQ and the Bengtson PAI, positive and negative emo-
tional experience scales, positive and negative subscales from the American’s
Changing Lives, and observed positive and negative behavior subscales. We
tested discriminant validity by examining associations between the PARQ and
a measure of filial anxiety.
Bivariate associations are found in Table 4. As in Study 2, for parents and
offspring, both positive and negative dimensions of the PARQ showed con-
vergence with conceptually similar measures. The two subscales were associated
in anticipated directions with comparable positive or negative subscales in
the literature. Likewise, the PARQ was associated with a measure of observed
behavior. Although the correlations between the PARQ and the measure of
observed behaviors were not high, correlations suggest that the PARQ, as a
self-report measure, is tapping qualities that are evident in actual conversations
as noted by outside raters.
With regard to divergent validity, both PARQ subscales diverged with the
measure of filial anxiety, as expected. In sum, the PARQ showed adequate
convergent validity with extant self-report measures and observed behaviors,
as well as divergence from a conceptually dissimilar instrument.
We also conducted additional analyses to determine whether the PARQ has
the ability to work as a measure of ambivalence. As in prior studies of inter-
generation ambivalence (Birditt et al., 2009; Fingerman et al., 2006, 2008),
we calculated ambivalence scores using Griffin’s Similarity and Intensity of
Components Formula (Thompson, Zanna, & Griffin, 1995). We found that higher
levels of ambivalence scores were correlated with higher levels of depression
(r(627) = .20, p < .001), lower levels of life satisfaction (r(629) = –.27, p < .001),
and higher levels of neuroticism (r(632) = .21, p < .001).
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 127

Table 4. Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the PARQ Scale

for Parents and Offspring (N = 474): Study 3

PARQ PARQ
Positive Negative
Measure Subscale Subscale

PARENTS
Convergent Measures
Americans Changing Lives negative quality scale –.27*** .47***
Americans Changing Lives positive quality scale .51*** –.34***
Positive emotional experiences .56*** –.51***
Negative emotional experiences –.40*** .63***
Bengtson Positive Affect Index .51*** –.41***

Observed behaviors
Observed positive behaviors .16*** –.05
Observed negative behaviors –.12*** .28***

Divergent Measures
Filial anxiety — —

OFFSPRING
Convergent Measures
Americans Changing Lives negative quality scale –.19*** .62***
Americans Changing Lives positive quality scale .69*** –.37***
Positive emotional experiences .73*** –.45***
Negative emotional experiences –.35*** .63***
Bengtson Positive Affect Index .61*** –.50***

Observed behaviors
Observed positive behaviors .26*** –.16**
Observed negative behaviors –.15* .29***

Divergent Measures
Filial anxiety –.13* .11*
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
128 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Overall, these studies empirically validated a concise and emotionally balanced

measure of positive and negative relationship qualities applicable to adults and
their parents regardless of geographic distance. High construct validity (i.e.,
factor structure, internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validity)
and test-retest reliability were characteristic of the PARQ. Consistent with other
measures of relationship qualities in close relationships (e.g., Newsom et al.,
2005), alpha coefficients were at acceptable levels across samples. We also found
test-retest reliability using different assessment formats (e.g., paper and pencil;
telephone; web-based surveys; Miller, Neal, Roberts, Baer, Cressler, Metrik, et al.,
2002). Moreover, self-ratings on this measure were consistent with observed
behaviors in conversations between adults and their parents. The positive and
negative relationship components of this measure may have broader implications
for measurement of intergenerational ambivalence.

Ambivalence, Solidarity, and

Parent-Adult Child Relationships

The PARQ was developed to complement the study of parent-adult child

relationships. Indeed, the contribution of the PARQ to the pool of existing
measures is important to consider. Research on intergenerational solidarity and
ambivalence already provides perspectives on positive and negative relation-
ship qualities between adults and their parents (Bengtson, Giarrusso, Marby,
& Silverstein, 2002; Fingerman et al., 2006, 2008; Willson et al., 2003). Yet
measures of affectual solidarity and ambivalence fall short of providing either
concise or emotionally balanced measures. Although Newsom and colleagues
(2005) have a measure that taps positive and negative relationship qualities in
the social network, it was not specifically developed to assess the parent/child
tie. Furthermore, some items included in the Newsom et al. (2005) measure are
not appropriate for parents and adult children who live at a distance.
Analyses in Study 3 suggest that the PARQ may be a good measure of
intergenerational ambivalence. We found that higher levels of ambivalence were
associated with higher levels of depression and neuroticism and lower levels of
life satisfaction, consistent with other studies of ambivalence (Fingerman et al.,
2008; Uchino, Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Bloor, 2004). Therefore, the PARQ may
be a good measure to use to understand more about ambivalent feelings and
psychological well-being (Finch, Okun, Pool, & Ruehlman, 1999; Newsom et al.,
2005; Rook, 1998, 2001, 2003).
Furthermore, use of the PARQ may also serve to enhance Solidarity Theory.
Regarding solidarity theory, a major criticism is that it focuses solely on the
positive aspects of relationships. Therefore, the PARQ could provide a stronger
measure of solidarity by including negative items, in addition to items assessing
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 129

conflict (e.g., doubting a decision; Clarke, Preston, Raskin, & Bengtson, 1999;
Fingerman, 1996).
As expected, the PARQ was associated with self-reported and observed
measures of relationship quality. Associations between the PARQ and self-
reported measures of relationship quality suggest that the underlying constructs
of the PARQ include positive and negative qualities. Most importantly, however,
associations with observed behaviors demonstrate that the PARQ may pick up
on actual interactions between adults and parents that also can be seen by trained
raters. Because observations of behaviors are time consuming and costly, the
PARQ represents a concise and low-cost means of assessing these qualities of
the relationship. To the best of our knowledge, no other measure of positive
and negative qualities in the parent-adult child tie has been validated using
observed behaviors.
Further, associations were not evident between frequency of contact and the
two subscales of the PARQ, suggesting that the measure taps aspects of relation-
ship quality distinct from amount of contact. Prior studies suggest that offspring
may retain strong emotional bonds with their parents, despite geographic separ-
ation and absence of frequent face-to-face contact (Fingerman et al., 2006; Rossi
& Rossi, 1990), and that negative qualities also are evident among offspring who
reside at a distance from parents (Fingerman et al., 2003). The PARQ successfully
assesses these qualities for both proximate and distant offspring.

Limitations

The three studies have limitations, however. Studies 1 and 2 were primarily
limited to White participants. Further, although the sample in Study 3 was
one-third Black, we only assessed construct validity with this sample. Future
studies will need to determine whether the PARQ is a stable measure of relation-
ship qualities in more diverse samples. Second, the PARQ is a self-report assess-
ment, which can elicit (or are susceptible to) socially desirable responding (Birditt
et al., 2008). We addressed this problem to some extent in Study 3 by finding
associations between the PARQ and observed behaviors between adults and
their parents. Finally, the mean scores on the PARQ negative scales were low,
suggesting that individuals did not experience many negative feelings for parents
or offspring. (Fingerman, 2001; Fingerman et al., 2006; Lefkowitz & Fingerman,
2003; Willson et al., 2003).
Overall, the PARQ is an important addition to the assessment of positive and
negative qualities in the parent-adult child tie. Findings suggest that the PARQ is a
stable and balanced measure of relationship quality over time among adults and
their parents. This measure assesses positive and negative relationship qualities
among adults and their parents in a concise and emotionally balanced manner,
above and beyond what other assessments of relationship qualities and ambiv-
alence can provide.
130 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

APPENDIX
Table A1. PARQ Items

PARQ Positive Subscale PARQ Negative Subscale

How often has your (mother/father/child) How often has your (mother/father/child)
acted warm or affectionate toward you? acted angry or hostile toward you?

How often has your (mother/father/child) How often has your (mother/father/child)
acted thoughtful or considerate toward acted insensitively or unsympathetically
you? toward you?

How often has your (mother/father/child) How often has your (mother/father/child)
done favors or other little things for you? made demands for favors or other little
things from you?
How often has your (mother/father/
child) been supportive of the How often has your (mother/father/child)
decisions you’ve made? questioned or doubted your decisions?

Table A2. Means and Standard Deviations of the

PARQ Items and Subscales

Study 1 Study 1
Offspring Offspring
about about Study 2 Study 3
mother father

Item M SD M SD M SD M SD

Positive
Warm or affectionate 4.41 .66 3.65 1.00 4.11 .84 4.00 1.01
Thoughtful or considerate 4.43 .64 3.90 .92 4.07 .72 4.18 .86
Favors or other little things 4.35 .70 3.69 1.02 3.44 .78 3.98 .84
Supportive of decisions 4.22 .75 3.98 .88 3.96 .73 4.11 .90

Negative
Angry or hostile 2.31 .70 2.44 .83 2.01 .69 1.62 .71
Insensitivity or unsympathetically 2.04 .69 2.42 .93 2.02 .67 1.67 .74
Demands for favors 2.59 .91 2.43 .91 2.19 .95 1.85 .85
Questioned or doubted decisions 2.32 .79 2.32 .84 2.12 .70 1.94 .77

Subscales
Positive 4.35 .54 3.80 .82 3.89 .60 4.07 .70
Negative 2.31 .57 2.40 .68 2.09 .57 1.82 .65
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 131

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank Dr. Jason Newsom and Drs. Nishishiba,
Morgan, and Rook for generously granting us permission to further develop
the PARQ using their initial items. We are grateful to Drs. Erina MacGeorge,
Charles Calahan, Shawn Whiteman, Sara Kubik, as well as Amber Seidel for
assistance in collecting data. We also thank Drs. Kira Birditt and Jori Sechrist
for thoroughly reading a draft of this article. Finally, we thank Laura Miller and
Shelley Hosterman, as well as Drs. Kelly Cichy and Elizabeth Hay for assistance
with all aspects of the AFS study.

REFERENCES

Bengtson, V., Giarrusso, R., Mabry, J., & Silverstein, M. (2002). Solidarity, conflict,
and ambivalence: Complementary or competing perspectives on intergenerational
relationships? Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 568-576. doi: 10.1111/
j.1741-3737.2002.00568.x
Bengtson, V. L., & Schrader, S. S. (1982). Parent-child relations. In D. J. Mangen &
W. A. Peterson (Eds.), Research instruments in social gerontology: Social roles and
social participation (pp. 115-129). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Birditt, K., Miller, L., Fingerman, K., & Lefkowitz, E. (2009).Tensions in the parent
and adult child relationship: Links to solidarity and ambivalence. Psychology and
Aging, 24, 287-295. doi: 10.1037/a0015196
Birditt, K. S., Fingerman, K. L., Lefkowitz, E. S., & Kamp-Dush, C. M. (2008). Parents
perceived as peers: Filial maturity in adulthood. Journal of Adult Development, 15,
1-12. doi: 10.1007/s10804-007-9019-2
Borjesson, W., Aarons, G., & Dunn, M. (2003). Development and confirmatory factor
analysis of the abuse within intimate relationships scale. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 18, 295-309. doi: 10.1177/0886260502250089
Boyer, K., Olson, J., Calantone, R., & Jackson, E. (2002). Print versus electronic surveys:
A comparison of two data collection methodologies. Journal of Operations
Management, 20, 357-373. doi: 10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00004-9
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In
K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Bryant, F. B. (2000). Assessing the validity of measurement. In L. G. Grimm & P. R.
Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding more multivariate statistics (pp. 99-146).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory
and confirmatory factor analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading
and understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 99-136). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Campbell, D., & Fiske, D. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-
multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105. doi: 10.1037/h0046016
Cicirelli, V. (1988). A measure of filial anxiety regarding anticipated care of elderly
parents. The Gerontologist, 28, 478-482. doi: 10.1093/geront/28.4.478
132 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

Cicirelli, V. (1991). Attachment theory in old age: Protection of the attached figure. In
K. Pillemer & K. McCartney (Eds.), Parent-child relations throughout life (pp. 25-42).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cicirelli, V. (1993). Attachment and obligation as daughter’s motives for caregiving
behavior and subsequent effect on subjective burden. Psychology and Aging, 8,
144-155. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.8.2.144
Cicirelli, V. (1995). A measure of caregiving daughters’ attachment to elderly mothers.
Journal of Family Psychology, 9, 89-94. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.9.1.89
Clarke, E., Preston, M., Raskin, J., & Bengtson, V. (1999). Types of conflicts and
tensions between older parents and adult children. The Gerontologist, 39, 261-270.
doi: 10.1093/geront/39.3.261
Coles, M., Cook, L., & Blake, T. (2007). Assessing obsessive compulsive symptoms
and cognitions on the internet: Evidence for the comparability of paper and
internet administration. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45, 2232-2240. doi:
10.1016/j.brat.2006.12.009
Cranford, J., McCabe, S., Boyd, C., Slayden, J., Reed, M., Ketchie, J., et al. (2008).
Reasons for nonresponse in a web-based survey of alcohol involvement among
first-year college students. Addictive Behaviors, 33, 206-210. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.
2007.07.008
Falkenbach, D., Poythress, N., & Creevy, C. (2008). The exploration of subclinical
psychopathic subtypes and the relationship with types of aggression. Personality
and Individual Differences, 44, 821-832. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.012
Finch, J., Okun, M., Pool, G., & Ruehlman, L. (1999). A comparison of the influence
of conflictual and supportive social interactions on psychological distress. Journal of
Personality, 67, 581-621. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.00066
Fincham, F., Beach, S., Arias, I., & Brody, G. (1998). Childrens attributions in the family:
The children’s relationship attribution measure. Journal of Family Psychology, 12,
481-493. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.12.4.481
Fingerman, K. L. (1996). Sources of tension in the aging mother and adult daughter
relationship. Psychology and Aging, 11, 591-606. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.11.4.591
Fingerman, K. L. (2001). Aging mothers and their adult daughters: A study in mixed
emotions. New York: Springer.
Fingerman, K. L., Chen, P.-C., Hay, E. L., Cichy, K., & Lefkowitz, E. (2006). Ambivalent
reactions in the parent and offspring relationship. Journal of Gerontology: Psycho-
logical Sciences, 61(3), P152-P160.
Fingerman, K. L., Hay, E. L., Cichy, K. E., Tang, C. Y, Chen, P. C., & Lefkowitz, E. S.
(2003, November). Close ties with distant parents: Geographic separation in inter-
generational ties. Poster presented at the Gerontological Society of America Annual
Meeting, San Diego, CA.
Fingerman, K. L., Pitzer, L., Lefkowitz, E. S., Birditt, K. S., & Mroczek, D. K. (2008).
Ambivalent relationship qualities between adults and their parents: Implications
for the well-being of both parties. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences,
63(6), P362-P371
Flannery, D., Montemayor, R., & Eberly, M. (1994). The influence of parent negative
emotional expression on adolescents’ perceptions of their relationships with their
parents. Personal Relationships, 1, 259-274. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1994.
tb00065.x
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 133

Giarrusso, R., Silverstein, M., Gans, D., & Bengtson, V. (2005). Ageing parents and
adult children: New perspectives on intergenerational relationships. In M. L. Johnson
(Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of age and ageing (pp. 413-421). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Greenwell, L., & Bengtson, V. (1997). Geographic distance and contact between middle-
aged children and their parents: The effects of social class over 20 years. Journals
of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 52B(1), S13-S26. doi: 10.1093/geronb/52B.1.S13
Hendrick, S., & Hendrick, C. (2006). Measuring respect in close relationships. Journal
of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 881-899. doi: 10.1177/0265407506070471
Herzog, A. R., & Rodgers, W. (1988). Interviewing older adults: Mode comparison
using data from a face-to-face survey and a telephone resurvey. The Public Opinion
Quarterly, 52, 84-99. doi: 10.1086/269083
Hingson, R., Zha, W., & Weitzman, E. (2009). Magnitude and trends in alcohol-related
mortality and morbidity among U.S. college students ages 18-24, 1998-2005. Journals
of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 16, 12-20.
Izard, C. E., Libero, D. Z., Putnam, P., & Haynes, O. M. (1993). Stability of emotion
experiences and their relations to traits of personality. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 64, 847-860. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.847
Knapp, H., & Kirk, S. (2003). Using pencil and paper, Internet, and touch-tone phones
for self-administered surveys: Does methodology matter? Computers in Human
Behavior, 19, 117-134. doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00008-0
Koropeckyj-Cox, T. (2002). Beyond parental status: Psychological well-being in middle
and old age. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 957-971. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.
2002.00957.x
Kring, A., Smith, D., & Neale, J. (1994). Individual differences in dispositional expressive-
ness: Development and validation of the emotional expressivity scale. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 934-949. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.934
Kubany, E., Leisen, M., Kaplan, A., & Kelly, M. (2000). Validation of a brief measure
of posttraumatic stress disorder: The Distressing Event Questionnaire (DEQ). Psycho-
logical Assessment, 12, 197-209. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.12.2.197
Lawton, L., Silverstein, M., & Bengtson, V. (1994). Affections, social contact, and
geographic distance between adult children and their parents. Journal of Marriage
and the Family, 56, 57-68.
Lefkowitz, E. S., Cichy, K. E., Hay, E. L., Espinosa-Hernandez, G. E., & Fingerman, K. L.
(2008). Emotionally-charged conversations between adult offspring and their mothers
and fathers. Unpublished manuscript.
Lefkowitz, E. S., & Fingerman, K. L. (2003). Positive and negative emotional feelings
and behaviors in mother-daughters ties in late life. Journal of Family Psychology, 17,
607-617. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.17.4.607
Lin, G., & Rogerson, P. (1995). Elderly parents and the geographic availability of their
adult children. Research on Aging, 17, 303-331. doi: 10.1177/0164027595173004
Lowenstein, A. (2007). Solidarity-conflict and ambivalence: Testing two conceptual
frameworks and their impact on quality of life for older family members. Journal
of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 62B, S100-S107.
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.
134 / PITZER, FINGERMAN AND LEFKOWITZ

Martini, T., Grusec, J., & Bernardini, S. (2001). Effects of interpersonal control, per-
spective taking, and attributions on older mothers’ and daughters’ satisfaction with
their helping relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 688-705. doi: 10.1037/
0893-3200.15.4.688
Miller, E., Neal, D., Roberts, L., Baer, J., Cressler, S., Metrik, J., et al. (2002). Test-retest
reliability of alcohol measures: Is there a difference between internet-based assess-
ment and traditional methods. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 56-63. doi:
10.1037/0893-164X.16.1.56
Newsom, J. T., Morgan, D. L., Nishishiba, M., & Rook, K. S. (2000, November). Devel-
opment of new comparable measures of negative and positive social exchanges. Poster
presented at the Gerontological Society of America annual meeting, Washington, DC.
Newsom, J., Nishishiba, M., Morgan, D., & Rook, K. (2003). The relative importance
of three domains of positive and negative social exchanges: A longitudinal model
with comparable measures. Psychology and Aging, 18, 746-754. doi: 10.1037/0882-
7974.18.4.746
Newsom, J., Rook, K., Nishishiba, M., Sorkin, D., & Mahan, T. (2005). Understand-
ing the relative importance of positive and negative social exchanges: Examining
specific domains and appraisals. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences,
60B, P304-P312. doi: 10.1093/geronb/60.6.P304
Peters, C., Hooker, K., & Zvonkovic, A. (2006). Older parents’ perceptions of ambiv-
alence in relationships with their children. Family Relations, 55, 539-551. doi:
10.1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00424.x
Pett, M., Lackey, N., & Sullivan, J. (2003). Making sense of factor analysis: The use
of factor analysis of instrument development in health care research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pillemer, K., & Suitor, J. J. (2002). Explaining mothers’ ambivalence toward their adult
children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 602-613. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.
2002.00602.x
Priester, J., & Petty, R. (2001). Extending the bases of subjective attitudinal ambivalence.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 19-34. doi: 10.1037/00223514.80.1.19
Rook, K. (1998). Investigating the positive and negative sides of personal relationships:
Through a lens darkly? In B. Spitzberg & W. Cupach (Eds.), The dark side of
close relationships (pp. 369-393). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rook, K. (2001). Emotional health and positive versus negative social exchanges:
A daily diary analysis. Applied Developmental Science, 5, 85-97. doi: 10.1207/
S1532480XADS0502_4
Rook, K. (2003). Exposure and reactivity to negative social exchanges: A preliminary
investigation using daily diary data. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences,
58B, P100-P111. doi: 10.1093/geronb/58.2.P100
Rossi, A. S., & Rossi, P. H. (1990). Of human bonding: Parent-child relations across
the life course. New York: de Gruyter.
Stoppelbein, L., Greening, L., Jordan, S., Elkin, T. D., Moll, G., & Pullen, J. (2005).
Factor analysis of the pediatric symptom checklist with a chronically ill pediatric
population. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 26, 349-355.
Sweet, J., Bumpass, L., & Call, V. (1988). The design and content of the National Survey of
Families and Households (Working Paper NSFH-1). Madison, WI: University of
Wisconsin, Center for Demography and Ecology.
 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE PARQ / 135

Thompson, M., Zanna, M., & Griffin, D. (1995). Let’s not be indifferent about (attitudinal)
ambivalence. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents
and consequences (pp. 361-385). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Uchino, B., Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T., & Bloor, L. (2004). Heterogeneity in social
networks: A comparison of different models linking relationships to psychological
outcomes. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 123-139. doi: 10.1521/
jscp.23.2.123.31014
Umberson, D. (1989). Relationships with children: Explaining parents’ psychological
well being. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 999-1012.
Umberson, D. (1992). Relationships between adult children and their parents: Psycho-
logical consequences for both generations. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
544, 664-674.
Ward, R. A. (2008). Multiple parent-adult child relations and well-being in middle and
later life. Journal of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological and Social Sciences, 63(4),
S239-S247.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief
measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS Scales. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1079. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
Willson, A., Shuey, K., & Elder, G. (2003). Ambivalence in the relationship of adult
children to aging parents and in-laws. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 1055 1072.
doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.01055.x

Direct reprint requests to:

Lindsay Pitzer
Department of Psychology
University of Notre Dame
206 Haggar Hall
Notre Dame, IN 46556
e-mail: lindsay.m.pitzer.1@nd.edu