Changes in family socio-economic status as predictors of self-efficacy in 13-year-old Polish adolescents
Joanna Mazur
0
Agnieszka Malkowska-Szkutnik
0
Izabela Tabak
0
0
J. Mazur (&) A. Malkowska-Szkutnik I. Tabak Department of Child and Adolescent Health, Institute of Mother and Child
, Warsaw,
Poland
Objectives The aim of this study is to determine the impact that raised mother's education and a relative change in family affluence might have on adolescent general selfefficacy (GSE). Methods Data on 600 children born in Poland in January 1995 and their families were used. Data from early childhood and adolescence (2008) were considered and the change between these two periods was determined. Results Family affluence increased in 37.3 % of families with mothers, who had raised their education level (12.6 % of the sample), in comparison to 26.8 % in the group with no change, p 0.001. The average GSE scores in those groups were 73.4 and 68.1, respectively, p 0.001. In the best linear regression model adjusted for gender, the independent predictors of GSE turned out to be mother's education change and the family's current affluence. Conclusions Raised mother's education level may encourage building up developmental assets in older children. Based on the structural model, where self-efficacy is the mediator of the relationship between socio-economic status change and the quality of life (KIDSCREEN-10) these results may be of importance in further research.
-
In research concerning adolescent health, particular
attention was focused currently on health-promoting personal
characteristics (Morgan and Zigilio 2007). Self-efficacy
defined as ones capabilities to organize and execute the
courses of action required to produce given attainments
(Bandura 1997) could be considered to be an important
internal resource and health determinant. Self-efficacy
contributed to academic achievements; pro-social
behaviours; and in preventing some mental health problems in
adolescents (Bandura et al. 1999). It was considered to be
one of the most important determinants of health behaviour
and was applied in various models of changes in health
behaviour (Masten et al. 1990; Luszczynska et al. 2011).
Self-efficacy could be associated with psychological
aspects of health (e.g. subjective well-being; feeling happy;
and perceived social support) (Natvig et al. 2003). Bandura
described four sources of self-efficacy: performance
accomplishments; verbal persuasion; emotional arousal;
and vicarious experiences (Bandura 1976). The sources
could be found in family, school and peer environments
and, also, amongst macro-social determinants (van Dinther
et al. 2011).
Until now, not much attention was paid to the impact of
family socioeconomic status (SES) on personal
competences conducive to adolescent health. Although the
relationship between personal characteristics and health
was a subject of research in health psychology, the SES
impact on health was included in sociological research.
Only a few studies attempted to combine the integrated
psycho-sociological model with research on social
inequalities in the life course. Lundberg (1997) presented a
conceptual model which linked childhood conditions;
sense of coherence; adult social class; and adult health. He
concluded that the sense of coherence might have been a
factor involved in shaping of social inequalities in health.
Most studies, which analysed social health inequalities,
from the life course perspective, dealt with the impact of
family SES in early childhood on adult health. There were
less frequent attempts to assess the impact of early
childhood factors on the health of older children and
adolescents. Regardless of the target group, the impact of
living conditions, in childhood, on later life ought to be
discussed along with a number of indirect links with health
(Kuh et al. 2003). Living conditions, in the first years of
life, might have an impact on diseases and developmental
disorders that occurred later in life and, subsequently,
could influence health (Graham and Power 2004).
However, living conditions might act, also, as reinforcement;
shaping positive health behaviours and building up external
and internal health-related resources such as self-efficacy.
Researchers, adopting the life course approach, claimed
that it ought not to be linked simply with longitudinal
studies. The life course approach focused, also, on
developing theoretical models; these would help to understand
biological, psychosocial and behavioural health
determinants in a dynamic setting. The critical development
periods model and the cumulative risk exposure model
were amongst the most frequently quoted (Graham 2002).
The change model, used in this study, was the third most
commonly applied model (Cohen et al. 2010; Walsemann
et al. 2008), in which the change in family SES was
measured usually by devising social mobility patterns or by
creating a cumulated index including information from
different stages of life (Luo and Waite 2005).
Changes, in the family SES, might indicate a number of
parental (...truncated)