Redalyc

Sistema de Información Científica

Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal

López-Jáuregui, Alicia; Oliden, Paula Elosua

Adaptation of the ESPA29 Parental Socialization Styles Scale to the Basque Language:
Evidence of Validity
The Spanish Journal of Psychology, Vol. 12, Núm. 2, noviembre-sin mes, 2009, pp. 737
-745
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
España

Disponible en: http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/src/inicio/ArtPdfRed.jsp?iCve=17213008033

The Spanish Journal of Psychology

ISSN (Versión impresa): 1138-7416
psyjour@sis.ucm.es
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
España

¿Cómo citar? Número completo Más información del artículo Página de la revista

www.redalyc.org
Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto
The Spanish Journal of Psychology Copyright 2009 by The Spanish Journal of Psychology
2009, Vol. 12, No. 2, 737-745 ISSN 1138-7416

Adaptation of the ESPA29 Parental Socialization Styles

Scale to the Basque Language: Evidence of Validity

Alicia López-Jáuregui and Paula Elosua Oliden

Universidad del País Vasco (Spain)

The aim of this study is to adapt the ESPA29 scale of parental socialization styles in
adolescence to the Basque language. The study of its psychometric properties is based on
the search for evidence of internal and external validity. The first focuses on the assessment
of the dimensionality of the scale by means of exploratory factor analysis. The relationship
between the dimensions of parental socialization styles and gender and age guarantee the
external validity of the scale. The study of the equivalence of the adapted and original
versions is based on the comparisons of the reliability coefficients and on factor congruence.
The results allow us to conclude the equivalence of the two scales.
Keywords: parental socialization styles, adolescence, test adaptation.

El objetivo de este trabajo es adaptar al euskera la escala de estilos de socialización

parental ESPA29. El estudio de sus propiedades psicométricas descansa en la búsqueda
de evidencias internas y externas de validez. Las primeras se centran en la evaluación
de la dimensionalidad de la escala a través de un análisis factorial exploratorio. La relación
entre las distintas dimensiones de la socialización y las variables sexo y edad garantizan
la validez externa de la escala. El estudio de equivalencia entre las versiones original y
adaptada se apoya en la comparación entre los coeficientes de fiabilidad y de la congruencia
factorial. Los resultados permiten concluir la equivalencia entre las dos escalas.
Palabras clave: estilos de socialización parental, adolescencia, adaptación de tests.

This work was developed within the framework of research projects: SEJ2005-01694 and PSI2008-00856, financed by the Ministry
of Education and Science and the GIU 08/17, subsidized by the University of the Basque Country.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Alicia López Jáuregui. Departamento de Psicología Social y Metodología
de las Ciencias del Comportamiento. Facultad de Psicología, Universidad del País Vasco, Avenida de Tolosa, 70, 20018 San Sebastián-
Guipúzcoa (Spain). Phone: 34-943- 018340. E-mail: alicia.lopez@ehu.es

737
738 LÓPEZ AND ELOSUA
The role of the family as the transmitter of values,
attitudes, and behaviors is unquestionable. Hence, the interest
of sociologists, psychologists, and pedagogues has focused
on analyzing the relationships within the family. Processes
of parental socialization and their consequences on children
have been the object of research in the cross-cultural (Arnett,
1995; Scarr, 1993), psychological and educational dimensions
(Musitu & Allat, 1994).
Adolescence is a critical stage in the lives of individuals,
in which they consolidate their values and identity and they
conquer autonomy (Allen, Hauser, Bell, & O´Connor, 1993;
Collins, 1990), achievements that frequently lead to
psychological and relational tensions and the risk of
problematic or maladaptive behaviors (Moore & Rosenthal,
1993).
Many studies coincide in stating that the quality of
relationships in adolescence determines children’s adjustment
and psychological well-being. Parents’ warmth, proximity,
and involvement, combined with vigilance and control,
contribute to good psychosocial, academic, and behavioral
adjustment (Martínez & García, 2007; Oliva, Parra, &
Sánchez-Quejía, 2002; Steinberg, Darling, & Fletcher, 1995;
Steinberg, Dornbusch, & Brown, 1992), higher social
competence and autonomy (Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg,
& Dornbusch, 1991), positive attitudes towards school and
work, academic achievement, and self-esteem (Linver &
Silverberg, 1997; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Steinberg,
Lamborn, Darling, Mounts, & Dornbusch, 1994; Steinberg,
Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling, 1992), as well as a lower
incidence of depression, school problems, delinquency, and
drug abuse (Baumrind, 1971; Darling & Steinberg, 1993;
Jacobson & Crockett, 2000; Parish & McCluskey, 1992).
In contrast, hostility and the use of punishments and coercion
combined with scarce vigilance and control contribute to
the emergence of problematic and antisocial behaviors in
adolescence (Conger, Patterson, & Ge, 1995; Dishion,
Patterson, Stoolmiller, & Skinner, 1991).
However, the impact of parental practices on the children
is not independent of the social and ethnic-cultural context
in which the family system is inset (Lin & Fu, 1990;
Martínez & García, 2007; Zern, 1984). For example, whereas
in Asian cultures, high levels of discipline and imposition
have a positive influence on the children (Chao, 2001), in
western cultures, optimum adjustment is obtained with high
levels of affection, acceptance, and involvement. The
explanation of these cross-cultural divergences lies in the
diverse meanings of socialization practices, depending on
the cultural context (Chao, 1994).
In order to systematize parental socialization practices
and explain their effect on children, traditionally, two
independent constructs have been postulated, which, in
general terms, could be called involvement and supervision
(Barber, Chadwick, & Oerter, 1992; Barnes & Farrell, 1992;
Chao,2001; Foxcroft & Lowe, 1991; Lamborn et al., 1991;
Martínez & García, 2007; Musitu & García, 2001, 2004;
Paulson & Sputa, 1996; Shucksmith, Hendry, & Glendinning,
1995; Smetana, 1995; Steinberg et al., 1994; Villalobos,
Cruz, & Sánchez, 2004.) Involvement refers the support,
acceptance, and warmth shown by parents to their children,
and supervision refers to their degree of control, demands,
and discipline. The combination of these two independent
dimensions leads to the definition of four types of parental
socialization styles: (a) authoritative, with high involvement
and high supervision; (b) permissive or indulgent, with
high involvement and low supervision; (c) authoritarian,
with low involvement and high supervision; and (d)
negligent, with low involvement and low supervision
(Baumrind, 1991; Lamborn et al., 1991; Musitu & García,
2004; Martínez & García, 2007; Steinberg et al., 1994;
Villalobos et al., 2004)
The methods used to assess parental practices have
evolved since the first observational studies and parents’
reports (interviews and questionnaires), moving towards
the preferential use of the children’s report (retrospective
or otherwise) of their parents’ behavior (Locke & Prinz,
2002). In this sense, a large number of instruments (Holden
& Edwards, 1989) have been designed to assess the
children’s perception of their parents’ behavior, among
which the following are noteworthy: the Parental Attitude
Research Instrument and the Child’s Report of Parent
Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; Droppleman & Schaefer,
1963), the Egna Minnen Betraffande Uppfostran (EMBU;
Perris, Jacobsson, Lindstrom, Von Knorring, & Perris, 1980),
the Parental Bond Instrument (PBI; Parker, Tupling, &
Brown, 1979), the Measure of Parenting Style (MOPS;
Parker, Roussos, Hadzi-Pavlovic, Mitchell, Wilhelm &
Austin, 1997) and the “Escala de socialización parental”
(ESPA29; translated: the Parental Socialization Scale;
Musitu & García, 2001).
The Parental Socialization Scale (ESPA29) analyzed herein
assesses the socialization style of the father and the mother
separately, and is substantially different from the rest of the
above-mentioned instruments in that this assessment is carried
out with reference to specific daily life scenarios from the
western culture. This scale has been standardized and validated
in the population of Spanish adolescents and used in various
works (Cerezo, 2006; Martínez & García, 2007, 2008;
Martínez, García, & Yubero, 2007). It is based on the
previously described model, and the two socialization axes
are named involvement/acceptance and coercion/imposition.
The acceptance/involvement dimension is positively related
to parents’ reactions of approval and affection in the case of
rule-abiding behaviors, or of dialogue in the case of
adolescents’ inadequate or objectionable behaviors. In contrast,
the involvement/acceptance dimension is negatively related
to parents’ indifference to adequate behaviors and to their
displeasure when rules are broken. The coercion/imposition
dimension is positively related to parents’ actions of verbal
coercion, physical coercion, or deprivation when faced with
adolescents’ inadequate behaviors.
 ADAPTATION OF THE ESPA29 TO THE BASQUE LANGUAGE 739

The construct of socialization style, besides its defining
dimensions, has other distinctive characteristics that are the
object of analysis in the adaptation of the ESPA29. Among
them is its developmental and differential nature. Socialization
patterns develop over time and differ as a function of sex
(Musitu & García, 2001). In general, as children grow up
and increase their autonomy, the parents’ influence decreases
and, as a consequence, their socialization techniques change.
Regarding sex differences, the more frequent use of the
acceptance/involvement style with daughters and the more
frequent use of punishment and deprivation with sons are
congruent with the different roles our society assigns to
men and women (Calhoun, Light, & Keller, 2000).
Within this theoretical framework that defines parental
socialization styles from a bidimensional and dynamic model,
the goal of this work is to analyze the ESPA29 version adapted
to the Basque language. This goal is upheld by two pillars;
on the one hand, the standards of the elaboration and use of
tests provided by the American Psychological Association
(APA), American Educational Research Association (AERA),
and the National Council on Measurement in Education
(NCME) (1999; Elosua, 2003a) and, on the other, the guidelines
of the International Test Commission (ITC) on the adaptation
of tests (ITC, 2001; Elosua, 2003b). Within this methodological
context, the goal of the work is to provide evidence that justifies
the use of the adapted version of the ESPA29.
Method
Participants
initial sample of 1384 participants, we only retained those
who responded to at least 50% of the items in each one of
the scales (referring both to the father and the mother), so
the final sample comprised 1184 participants. Of them, 598
are boys and 586 are girls. Table 1 shows the distribution
of the Basque-speaking sample as a function of sex and
age, under the column Adapted Sample
Selection of the adapted sample was carried out in two
stages: in the first one, the population was stratified as a
function of two criteria: public/private/concerted center and
rural/urban center. Once the population was defined, in the
second stage of sample selection, the selection criteria were
incidental. The scales were administered by psychology
students who were informed about the goals of the investigation
and trained in the method of administration of the test.
Instrument
The Parental Socialization Styles Scale (ESPA29) presents
29 relevant daily life situations (i.e., “If I fight with a friend
or with one of my neighbors”), about which the adolescent
assesses the frequency of parents’ different reactions (i.e.,
“—- hits me,” “—-talks to me,” “—-doesn’t care,” “—-
scolds me”), referring both to the father and the mother.
In total, there are 106 items with four response categories
(never, sometimes, frequently, always), belonging to seven
subscales: affection, dialogue, displeasure, indifference,
physical coercion, coercion verbal, and deprivation, referring
both to the father and the mother, the first four are
components of the acceptance/involvement dimension and
the last three of the coercion/imposition dimension.

The sample used in the adaptation comprises students Adaptation

aged between 10 and 17 years, attending school in the three
provinces of the Autonomous Basque Community at the
educational levels of Primary and Secondary Education
and High School, and who are studying the linguistic model
D (in this model, the Basque language is the vehicular
language for all the subjects except for Spanish). Of the
The linguistic adaptation of the ESPA29 to the Basque
language followed the guidelines set out for inverse translation.
This is a judgment technique to maintain the linguistic quality
of adaptations (Elosua, 2003a), that has basically three stages:
in the first stage, the test is adapted to the target language;

Table 1
Distribution of the samples by sex and age
Adapted sample Original sample
Age (years)
Sons Daughters Total Sons Daughters Total
10 70 66 136 68 69 137
11 84 74 158 109 134 243
12 62 57 119 96 128 224
13 78 71 149 196 245 441
14 70 96 166 141 186 327
15 87 69 156 99 175 274
16 79 73 152 45 66 111
17 68 80 148 3 40 43
Total 598 586 1184 757 1043 1800
740 LÓPEZ AND ELOSUA

in the second one, a group of independent translators
retranslates the adapted version back to the original language;
and lastly, the possible divergences between the two versions
in the source language are studied and refined. Each one of
the stages was carried out by a professional translator.
Analysis
The validity of the results of the scale was analyzed using
two sources of evidence: internal and external. As an internal
source of evidence, we examined the dimensionality of the
instrument. In order to examine in depth the relationships
of the scale with external variables, we analyzed the relations
among the dimensions of the ESPA29 (adapted version),
sex, and age.
The analysis of the internal structure was performed
with exploratory factor analysis to collect evidence in support
of the substantive model (Elosua, 2003b). The factors
were extracted using the SPSS 11.5 program with the
principal axes method and the varimax with Kaiser
normalization rotation method.
The equivalence of the original and the adapted versions
of the ESPA29 was based on the equivalence of the
reliability coefficients and the factor congruence. A more
rigorous and complete assessment of the metric equivalence
would require the progressive analysis of the factor
invariance of the scales corresponding to the two test
versions (Elosua, 2005b; Elosua & López, 2004); however,
because of the poor fit obtained in the confirmatory factor
analysis, both in the original test (χ2 [76, N = 1800 ] =
6602.04 root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA]
= .22, goodness of fit index [GFI] = .71) and in the adapted
one (χ2[76, N = 1184] = 5853.22, RMSEA = .25, GFI =
.64), we focused the analysis on the study of factor
congruence, which is operationalized by the Tucker and
Levine indexes (Levine, 1977; Tucker, 1951).
The significance of the differences observed in the
subscales with regard to sex and age was assessed within
the general linear model using multivariate analysis of factor
variance and univariate analysis for each dependent variable
separately. Before carrying out these analyses, we analyzed
the differences among the age groups with a one-factor
design. As no significant differences were found between
the pairs of 10-11 years, 12-13 years, 14-15 years, and 16-
17 years, the 8 age levels of this study were recoded.
Results
Descriptive Statistics and Reliability
The classic descriptive indexes for each subscale,
arithmetical mean, standard deviation, and corrected
discrimination index, estimated with Pearson’s product-
moment correlation coefficient, are shown in Table 2. The
global reliability of the scale was estimated with Cronbach’s
internal consistency coefficient, which reached the value
of .97. Table 3 shows the reliability coefficients of the seven
subscales, both for the father and for the mother. The values
are very high, ranging from the minimum value of .835
for the subscale physical coercion (mother) to the maximum
of .940 for the subscale dialogue (father). The similar values
of the same subscales referred to the father and to the mother
can be observed.

Table 2
Descriptive indexes and discrimination indexes of the subscales (adapted sample)
Arithmetical mean Standard deviation Discrimination
Subscale
M SD min max M SD min max M SD min max
Father
Dialogue 2.76 .33 2.18 3.34 .99 .07 .90 .99 .61 .04 .52 .68
Affection 2.97 .30 2.55 3.62 .96 .12 .73 .96 .71 .08 .54 .81
Displeasure 1.31 .13 1.15 1.61 .65 .11 .50 .65 .47 .07 .24 .54
Indifference 1.45 .16 1.14 1.70 .79 .15 .46 .79 .61 .11 .40 .74
Physical coercion 1.07 .03 1.04 1.14 .33 .07 .25 .33 .52 .11 .34 .73
Deprivation 1.74 .24 1.20 2.08 .84 .12 .57 .84 .60 .08 .40 .71
Verbal coercion 2.26 .32 1.29 2.62 .92 .10 .59 .92 .55 .09 .29 .66
Mother
Dialogue 2.98 .29 2.43 3.47 .95 .07 .80 1.07 .66 .04 .58 .72
Affection 3.18 .27 2.78 3.72 .92 .14 .63 1.14 .72 .08 .52 .80
Displeasure 1.24 .12 1.10 1.48 .59 .13 .41 .86 .48 .08 .34 .58
Indifference 1.35 .14 1.11 1.60 .72 .15 .43 .95 .58 .10 .34 .72
Physical coercion 1.06 .02 1.02 1.11 .30 .08 .18 .51 .48 .14 .23 .72
Deprivation 1.76 .22 1.25 2.12 .86 .11 .61 1.04 .67 .07 .48 .76
Verbal coercion 2.34 .32 1.41 2.68 .95 .08 .71 1.05 .60 .09 .35 .69
 ADAPTATION OF THE ESPA29 TO THE BASQUE LANGUAGE 741

Dimensionality of the Scale

The theoretical model postulates two socialization

dimensions: Acceptance/Involvement and Coercion/Imposition,
referring both to the mother and the father. The former is
positively related to the subscales of affection and dialogue
and negatively to displeasure and indifference. The second
dimension is positively related to the subscales verbal coercion,
deprivation, and physical coercion. This bidimensional
structure was tested by means of exploratory factor analysis.
The loadings for each subscale on the two components are
shown in Table 3. To facilitate interpretation, the highest Figure 1. Scree plot.
loadings on each factor are represented in boldface.
In Figure 1, the sample scree plot shows the inflection the process of creation of the ESPA29 in its original version
point for the Eigenvalue corresponding to the third factor, (Musitu & García, 2001). Their description by sex and age
thus ratifying the plausibility of the bifactorial model. Internal can be seen in Table 1. This sample is made up of 1800
consistency was very high for the two dimensions (.967 for students, of whom 42.1% are boys and 57.9% are girls.
Acceptance/involvement and .963 for Coercion /imposition).
Equivalence of the Internal Consistency Coefficients
Equivalence with the Original Scale
The Cronbach´s alpha coefficient of the original sample
To analyze the equivalence between the original version was .968. The equivalence of the internal consistency
of the ESPA29 and its adaptation to the Basque language, coefficients was assessed with the statistic proposed by
we had to analyze the metric equivalence of both scales. Feldt (1969). The value obtained indicates that we can accept
In order to perform the equivalence analyses, we used as a the hypothesis of the equivalence of the coefficients (w =
reference sample part of the normative group employed in 1.032, p = .276).

Table 3
Factor loadings of the subscales and internal consistency (adapted test)
Scale Factor 1 Factor 2 α coefficient
Father
Affection .728 .036 .939
Indifference –.776 .142 .902
Displeasure –.612 –.013 .846
Dialogue .538 .265 .917
Verbal coercion .129 .759 .895
Deprivation .128 .767 .912
Physical coercion –.126 .396 .878

Mother
Affection .702 .029 .940
Indifference –.753 .120 .889
Displeasure –.558 .006 .846
Dialogue .473 .245 .933
Verbal coercion .112 .737 .913
Deprivation .127 .781 .936
Physical coercion –.081 .398 .835

Eigenvalue 4.179 3.095

Percentage of variance 24.818 2.006
α coefficient .967 .963 .969
742 LÓPEZ AND ELOSUA

Factor Congruence Relation with External Variables

The analysis of the similarity of the factors was
performed by means of two indexes; the congruence
coefficient (Tucker, 1951) and the root mean square deviation
(Levine, 1977). Both of them simultaneously assess similarity
of form and magnitude between the diverse factor loadings.
The results can be seen in Table 4.
The two indexes provide satisfactory values, indicating
that we can accept the congruence of the factor configurations
of the adapted and the original test.
In Table 5 are the descriptive statistics of each subscale
as a function of age and sex.
The 2  4 multivariate analysis of factor variance (Table
6) shows that the main effects were significant, although
there was no significant interaction between them, Λ = 0,964,
F(42, 3450.78) = 1.009, p = .454.
In order to analyze the dimensions and the scales that
contribute to the differences detected in the multivariate
analysis, we applied a 2  4 factor design (additive model)

Table 4
Factor congruence indexes (adapted test/original test)
Tucker Adequate value Levine Adequate value
Acceptance/involvement .996 .043
≥ .80 ≤ .20
Coercion/imposition .961 .100

Table 5
Means and standard deviations (in brackets) by age group and sex (adapted sample)
10-11 years 12-13 years 14-15years 16-17 years Boy Girl
Acceptance/involvement 3.42 (.38) 3.37 (.36) 3.16 (.45) 3.09 (.44) 3.39 (.96) 3.47 (.37)
Mother
Dialogue 3.04 (.74) 2.98 (.66) 2.95 (.67) 2.93 (.61) 2.89 (.64) 3.06 (.70)
Affection 3.47 (.66) 3.35 (.60) 3.03 (.72) 2.91 (.69) 3.11 (.71) 3.25 (.70)
Displeasure 1.22 (.38) 1.20 (.29) 1.25 (.32) 1.27 (.30) 1.29 (.37) 1.18 (.26)
Indifference 1.23 (.35) 1.25 (.38) 1.36 (.47) 1.44 (.48) 1.37 (.47) 1.27 (.39)
Acceptance/involvement 3.42 (.38) 3.37 (.36) 3.16 (.45) 3.09 (.44) 3.22 (.41) 3.30 (.45)
Father
Dialogue 2.91 (.67) 2.85 (.65) 2.69 (.67) 2.71 (.65) 2.75 (.64) 2.82 (.69)
Affection 3.33 (.68) 3.18 (.63) 2.78 (.73) 2.65 (.71) 2.91 (.74) 3.04 (.74)
Displeasure 1.27 (.40) 1.23 (.26) 1.33 (.37) 1.40 (.38) 1.34 (.38) 1.28 (.35)
Indifference 1.27 (.38) 1.33 (.42) 1.47 (.54) 1.59 (.55) 1.45 (.52) 1.38 (.47)
Coercion/imposition
Mother
Physical coercion 1.14 (.30) 1.05 (.15) 1.04 (.10) 1.01 (.06) 1.06 (.18) 1.05 (.19)
Deprivation 1.98 (.69) 1.96 (.63) 1.66 (.57) 1.48 (.46) 1.81 (.65) 1.71 (.60)
Verbal coercion 2.36 (.68) 2.43 (.63) 2.31 (.62) 2.30 (.57) 2.36 (.62) 2.33 (.64)
Coercion/imposition 1.80 (.40) 1.78 (.35) 1.64 (.33) 1.55 (.27) 1.71 (.36) 1.66 (.35)
Father
Physical coercion 1.15 (.29) 1.06 (.15) 1.06 (.17) 1.02 (.08) 1.08 (.20) 1.07 (.18)
Deprivation 1.95 (.60) 1.91 (.57) 1.65 (.48) 1.47 (.41) 1.78 (.57) 1.70 (.54)
Verbal coercion 2.31 (.62) 2.37 (.58) 2.22 (.58) 2.16 (.50) 2.29 (.58) 2.22 (.57)

Table 6
2  4 factor MANOVA of sex and age group with the two dimensions and subscales (adapted sample)
Source of variation Λ F df between df error p
Age .668 11.947 42 3450.78 < .001
Sex .940 5.248 14 1163 < .001
Age  Sex .964 1.009 42 3450.78 .45
 ADAPTATION OF THE ESPA29 TO THE BASQUE LANGUAGE 743

Table 7
2  4 Factor ANOVAs (additive model) of groups of age and sex in the two main dimensions and subscales (adapted sample)
AGE SEX

MOTHER FATHER MOTHER FATHER

F (3, 1179) p F (3, 857) p F (1, 1179) p F (1, 857) p

Acceptance/involvement 25.920 < .001 44.840 < .001 37.970 < .001 14.284 < .001
Dialogue 1.957 .119 7.937 < .001 19.684 < .001 3.828 .050
Affection 47.267 < .001 66.017 < .001 15.507 < .001 13.183 < .001
Displeasure 2.720 .043 11.960 < .001 31.869 < .001 7.776 .005
Indifference 17.195 < .001 26.629 < .001 2.277 < .001 8.424 .004
Coercion/imposition 24.860 < .001 35.627 < .001 3.650 .050 4.959 .026
Physical coercion 28.664 < .001 25.365 < .001 .640 .424 .325 .569
Deprivation 47.826 < .001 55.445 < .001 7.192 .007 4.620 .032
Verbal coercion 2.379 .068 7.499 < .001 .492 .483 3.408 .065

separately for each dependent variable. These ANOVAs
are summarized in Table 7.
As shown in the table, there are differences among the
age groups in all the subscales referring to the father, as
well as in the two main dimensions, Acceptance/involvement
and Coercion /imposition. Only in the verbal coercion and
dialogue subscales were no significant differences observed,
F(3, 1179) = 2.379, p = .068 and F(3, 1179) = 1.957, p =
.119, respectively, both of them referring to the mother.
Table 5 shows that in the scores in dialogue and affection
decrease with age, whereas the scores of displeasure and
indifference increase, and this occurs both in the subscales
referring to the father and to the mother.
Physical coercion and deprivation decrease across the
age levels, whereas verbal coercion increases at first, and
subsequently drops as of the age of 13 years, and continues
to decrease until the age of 17 years. The variation patterns
in the three subscales that make up the dimension
Coercion/imposition are completely consistent for both parents.
There were differences between daughters and sons in
the main dimensions and in all the subscales except for
physical and verbal coercion referred to both parents. As
seen in Table 5, these differences indicate that the daughters’
scores in dialogue (3.06) and affection (3.25) that they
perceive in the mother are higher than those observed by
the sons (2.89 and 3.11, respectively). The differences also
favor the daughters with regard to the degree of dialogue
(2.82) and affection (3.04) observed in the father (versus
2.75 and 2.91 in the boys). The opposite is observed with
regard to the other two components of the dimension; the
sons scored higher than the daughters in parents’ displeasure
and indifference, both in the case of the father and of the
mother. The greatest difference was in the subscale of the
mother’s displeasure, where the sons obtained a mean of
1.29 versus the daughters’ mean of 1.18. The only subscale
of the Coercion/imposition dimension with significant
differences was deprivation, where the sons obtained a higher
mean than the daughters, both in the case of the mother
(1.81 versus 1.71) and of the father (1.78 versus 1.70).
Conclusions
The goal of this work was to construct and analyze the
version adapted to the Basque language of the parental
socialization styles scale, ESPA29. The results obtained
show that these goals were fulfilled. The version of the
ESPA29 adapted to the Basque language has adequate
internal consistency; both the external and the internal
evidence analyzed support the validity of the version
analyzed; lastly, the new scale is equivalent to the original
test. Within the sources of internal evidence, we analyzed
dimensionality, the equivalence of the reliability coefficients,
and factor equivalence. The assessment of the internal
structure supports the model of parental socialization styles
postulated by the authors; the new ESPA29 presents a
structure with two dimensions: Acceptance/involvement
and Coercion/imposition.
As this is an adaptation, it is essential to study its
equivalence to the original test (Elosua & López, 1999). In
this sense, the present work shows that the factor congruence
between the scales is high. The factor structure is similar
in the two samples and in the two tests. The differential
analyses are in accordance with the results of the latest
investigations: parental socialization is different in sons
and daughters, and it changes during adolescence (Cross &
Madson, 1997; Garside & Klimes-Dougan, 2002; Klimes-
Dougan, Brand, Zahn-Waxler, Usher, Hastings, Kendziora
& Garside, 2007). The dimensions of parental socialization
behave differently as a function of sex and age.
To sum up, the differential analyses performed allow
us to state that parental style in the dimensions
Acceptance/involvement and Coercion/imposition follows
the same developmental pattern in both parents: an
744 LÓPEZ AND ELOSUA
uninterrupted decrease associated with the increasing age
of the children. In contrast, both the father and the mother
used Acceptance/involvement more frequently with their
daughters than with their sons during the interval studied,
but their degree of Coercion/imposition was similar for
sons and daughters; however, they resorted more frequently
to deprivation with their sons than with their daughters.
Ultimately, the version of ESPA29 adapted to the
Basque language meets the psychometric conditions
demanded of a test (Elosua, 2005a); it is consistent, it
presents an internal structure in accordance with the
substantive model, it is sensitive to external variables, and,
moreover, it is equivalent to the original version
References
Allen, J. P., Hauser, S.T., Bell K. L., & O’Connor T. G. (1993).
Longitudinal assessment of autonomy and relatedness in family
interactions as predictors of adolescent ego development and
self-esteem, Child Development, 65, 179-194.
American Psychological Association, American Educational
Research Association, & National Council on Measurement
in Education (1999). Standards for educational and
psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Arnett, J.J. (1995). Broad and narrow socialization: The family
in the context of a cultural theory. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 57, 617-628.
Barber, B. K., Chadwick, B. A., & Oerter, R. (1992). Parental
behaviors and adolescent self-esteem in the United States and
Germany. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 128-141.
Barnes, G.M., & Farrell, M. (1992). Parental support and control
as predictor of adolescent drinking, delinquency, and related
problem behaviors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54,
763-776.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Harmonious parents and their preschool
children. Developmental Psychology, 41, 92-102.
Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent
competence and substance use. The Journal of Early
Adolescence, 11, 56-95.
Calhoun, G., Light, D., & Keller, S. (2000). Sociología. Madrid:
McGraw-Hill.
Cerezo, F. (2006). Comparative analysis of differential
socioemotional variables among those involved in bullying:
Study of a bully-victim case. Annuary of Clinical and Health
Psychology, 2, 27-34.
Chao, R.K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian
parenting style: Understanding Chinese parenting through the
cultural notion of training. Child Development, 65, 1111-1119.
Chao, R.K. (2001). Extending research on the consequences of
parenting style for Chinese Americans and European Americans.
Child Development, 72, 1832-1843.
Collins, W.A. (1990). Parent-child relationships and the transition
to adolescence: Continuity and change in interaction, affect
and cognition. In R. Montemayor, G.R. Adams, & T.P. Gullotta
(Eds.), From childhood to adolescence: A transitional period?
(Advances in adolescent development). Vol. 2 (pp. 86-106).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Conger, R. D., Patterson, G. R., & Ge, X. (1995). It takes two to
replicate: A mediational model for the impact of parents’ stress
on adolescent adjustment, Child Development, 66, 80-97.
Cross, S., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals
and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5-37.
Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting. Psychological
Bulletin, 113, 487-496.
Dishion, T.J., Patterson G.R., Stoolmiller M., & Skinner, M.L.
(1991). Family, school, and behavioural antecedents to early
adolescent involvement with antisocial peers, Developmental
Psychology, 27, 172-180.
Droppleman, L. F., & Schaefer, E.S. (1963). Boys’ and girls’ reports
of maternal and paternal behavior, Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 67, 648-654.
Elosua, P. (2003a). Testen euskaratzea. Balizko alborapenaren
iturriak. Tantak, 30, 17-38.
Elosua, P. (2003b). Sobre la validez de los tests. Psicothema, 15,
315-321.
Elosua, P. (2005a). Psikometria. Testen eraketa eta erabilpena.
Bilbao (Spain): Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea.
Elosua, P. (2005b). Evaluación progresiva de la invarianza factorial
entre las versiones original y adaptada de una escala de
autoconcepto). Psicothema, 17, 356-362.
Elosua, P., & López, A. (1999). Funcionamiento diferencial de
los ítems y sesgo en la adaptación de dos pruebas verbales.
Psicológica, 20, 23-40.
Elosua, P., & López, A. (2004, September). Análisis factorial
multigupo. Paper presented at the III Congreso de Metodología
de Encuestas. Granada (Spain).
Feldt, L.S. (1969). A test of the hypothesis that Cronbach’s alpha
or Kuder-Richardson coefficient twenty is the same for two
tests. Psychometrika, 34, 363-373.
Foxcroft, D.R., & Lowe, G. (1991). Adolescents’ drinking behaviour
and family socialization factors: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Adolescents 14, 255-273.
Garside, R.B., & Klimes-Dougan, B. (2002). Socialization of
discrete negative emotions: Gender differences and links with
psychological distress. Sex Roles, 47, 115-128.
Holden, G., & Edwards, L. (1989). Parental attitudes toward child
rearing: Instruments, issues, and implications. Psychological
Bulletin, 106, 29-58.
International Test Commission (2001). International guidelines
for test use. International Journal of Testing, 1, 93-114.
Jacobson, K.C., & Crockett, L.J. (2000). Parental monitoring and
adolescent adjustment: An ecological perspective. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 10, 65-97.
Klimes-Dougan, B., Brand, A.E., Zahn-Waxler, C., Usher, B.,
Hastings, P.D., Kendziora, K., & Garside, R.B. (2007).
Parental emotion socialization in adolescence: Differences
in sex, age and problem status. Social Development, 16, 326-
342.
 ADAPTATION OF THE ESPA29 TO THE BASQUE LANGUAGE
Lamborn, S.D., Mounts, N.S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S.M.
(1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment from
authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent and neglectful families.
Child Development, 62, 1049-1065.
Levine, M.S. (1977). Canonical correlation analysis and factor
comparison techniques. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lin, C.C., & Fu, V.R. (1990). A comparison of child-rearing
practices among Chinese, immigrant Chinese, and Caucasian
American parents. Child Development, 61, 429-433.
Linver; M.S., & Silverberg, S.B. (1997). Maternal predictors of
early adolescent achievement-related outcomes: Adolescent gender
as moderator. Journal of Early Adolescence, 17, 294-318.
Locke L.M., & Prinz, R.J. (2002). Measurement of parental
discipline and nurturance, Clinical Psychology Review, 22,
895-930.
Maccoby, E.E., & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in the context
of the family: Parent-child interactions. In E.M. Heterington
& P.H. Mussen (Eds.), Handbook of child Psychology (Vol.
4, pp. 1-102). New York: Wiley.
Martínez, I., & García, J.F. (2007). Impact of parenting styles
on adolescents’ self-esteem and internalization of values in
Spain. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 338-348.
Martínez, I., García, J.F., & Yubero, S. (2007). Parenting styles
and adolescents’ self-esteem in Brazil. Psychological Reports,
100, 731-745.
Martínez I., & García, J.F. (2008). Internalization of values and
self-esteem among Brazilian teenagers from authoritative,
indulgent, authoritarian, and neglectful homes. Adolescence,
43, 13-29.
Moore, S.M., & Rosenthal, D.A. (1993). Venturesomeness,
impulsiveness, and risky behaviour among older adolescents,
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 98.
Musitu, G., & Allat, P. (1994). Psicosociología de la familia.
Valencia: Albatros.
Musitu, G., & García, F. (2001). ESPA29. Escala de Estilos de
Socialización Parental en la Adolescencia. Madrid: TEA
Ediciones.
Musitu, G., & García, J.F. (2004). Consecuencias de la socialización
familiar en la cultura española. Psicothema, 16, 288-293.
Oliva, A., Parra, A., & Sánchez-Quejía, I. (2002). Relaciones con
padres e iguales como predictoras del ajuste emocional y
conductual durante la adolescencia. Apuntes de Psicología,
20, 3-6
Parish, T.S., & McCluskey, J.J. (1992). The relationship between
parenting styles and young adults’ self-concepts and evaluations
of parents, Adolescence, 27, 915-918.
Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L.B. (1979). A parental bonding
instrument. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 52, 1-10.
Parker, G., Roussos, J., Hadzi-Pavlovic, D., Mitchell, P., Wilhelm,
K., & Austin, M.P. (1997). The development of a refined
745
measure of dysfunctional parenting and assessment of its
relevance in patients with affective disorders. Psychological
Medicine 27, 1193-1203.
Paulson, S.E., & Sputa, C.L. (1996). Patterns of parenting during
adolescence: Perceptions of adolescents and parents.
Adolescence, 31, 369-381.
Perris, C., Jacobsson, L., Lindstromm H., Von Knorring, L., &
Perris, H. (1980). Development of a new inventory for assessing
memories of parental rearing behaviour. Acta Psychiatrica
Scandinavica, 61, 265-274.
Scarr, S. (1993). Biological and cultural diversity: The legacy of
Darwin for development. Child Development, 64, 1333-1353.
Shucksmith, J., Hendry, L.B., & Glendinning, A. (1995). Models
of parenting: Implications for adolescent well-being within
different types of family contexts. Journal of Adolescence,
18, 253-270.
Smetana, J.G. (1995). Parenting styles and conceptions of parental
authority during adolescence. Child Development, 66, 299-
316.
Steinberg, L., Darling, N., & Fletcher, A.C. (1995). Authoritative
parenting and adolescent adjustment: An ecological journey.
In P. Moen, G.H. Elder, Jr., & K. Luscher (Eds.), Examining
lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human
development (pp. 423-466). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S.D., & Brown, B.B. (1992). Ethnic
differences in adolescent achievement. An ecological
perspective. American Psychologist, 47, 723-729.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S.D., Darling, N. Mounts, N.S., &
Dornbusch, S.M. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment
and competence among adolescents from authoritative,
authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child
Development, 65, 754-770.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn S.D., Dornbusch, S.M., & Darling, N.
(1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent
achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and
encouragement to succeed, Child Development, 65, 1266-1281.
Villalobos, J.A., Cruz, A.V., & Sánchez, P.R. (2004). Estilos
parentales y desarrollo psicosocial en estudiantes de
Bachillerato. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 21, 119-129.
Tucker, L.R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis
studies. Personnel Research Sections. Report 984. Washington,
DC: Department of the Army.
Zern, D.S. (1984). Relationships among selected child-rating
variables in a cross-cultural sample of 110 societies.
Developmental Psychology, 20, 683-690.
Received: February 2, 2008
Revision received: November 28, 2008
Accepted: January 19, 2009