Early Adolescence Talking Points: Questions that Middle School
Students Want To Ask Their Parents*
Rhonda A. Richardson**
In early adolescence, young people need caring parents to guide them through numerous changes and decisions. Little is known
about what particular issues middle school students want to discuss with their parents. This study provides a basis for promoting
parent–child communication by identifying topics that young adolescents would like to talk about with parents, using responses
from 1,124 students age 10 to 15. Findings were that the largest percentage of questions pertained to family issues, whereas
only 1 in 4 dealt with sensitive subjects such as drugs and sex. Implications for practice are included.
C
urrent U.S. culture is characterized by an apparent
disconnect between adults and young adolescents in
many contexts, including the family (Hersch, 1998).
Data from the Search Institute (Benson, Galbraith, & Espeland,
1998) drawn from surveys of over 100,000 adolescents nationwide indicate that only 1 out of 4 (26%) adolescents reported
that their parents are approachable and available to talk. Recognizing this lack of parent–child communication in many families,
numerous professional organizations specializing in adolescent
development have identified re-engaging families with their
children in early adolescence as a necessary priority (Carnegie
Council on Adolescent Development, 1989; National Middle
School Association, 1995; Benson et al.). One step in that direction is to build opportunities for meaningful dialogue between
middle school students and their parents. Guided by a developmental contextual perspective and constructivist approach, the
purpose of the present study was to provide a basis for promoting
parent–child communication during early adolescence by identifying the topics that young adolescents are most interested in
discussing with their parents.
Developmental Contextual Perspective
A developmental contextual perspective views the process
of human development as being composed of dynamic interactions between individuals and the multiple contexts within
which they live (Lerner, 1995). Although the individual, with
its biological–genetic predisposition, is embedded in a sociocultural context, these organismic and contextual components
of development bear a mutual, reciprocal relationship to one
another (Lerner). Drawing upon ecological systems theory
(Bronfenbrenner, 1989), this perspective identifies multiple
levels of contextual influences ranging from the most proximal
microsystems (e.g., family, friends) to the more distal macrosystem (e.g., culture, society). Optimal development depends upon
the goodness-of-fit between an individual’s personal characteristics and the corresponding characteristics of those who
constitute the social context within which behavior takes place
(Lerner).
*An earlier version of this paper was presented at the annual meeting of the National
Council on Family Relations annual meeting, November 2000.
**Address correspondence to Dr. Rhonda Richardson, School of Family and Consumer
Studies, Kent State University, P.O. Box 5190, Kent, OH 44242 ([email protected]).
Key Words: adolescence, communication, parent education, parenting.
(Family Relations, 2004, 53, 87–94)
2004, Vol. 53, No. 1
Viewed from this developmental contextual perspective, the
years from age 10 through age 14 (early adolescence) represent a
critical transitional period in human development (Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989). During this period of
development, an individual experiences multiple physical, cognitive, and social transitions (Hill, 1983). Physical changes include
both the hormonal processes and somatic changes that comprise
puberty (Marshall, 1978); cognitive changes include the emergence of abstract thinking abilities such as hypothetical reasoning
and metacognition (Keating, 1990); and social changes entail new
social expectations and social role definitions (Hill). Simultaneous
with these multiple interconnected changes, youngsters navigate
within the contexts of family, school, peer groups, and community
(Hill). Achieving a goodness-of-fit between the young adolescent
and his or her social contexts requires that the latter be developmentally responsive (Eccles et al., 1993).
In identifying what youth need to succeed, vitally important
are caring adults (e.g., parents, teachers, youth workers) to
support and guide young adolescents through the changes and
decisions they face (Benson et al., 1998). An adult’s ability to be
receptive to the questions and concerns of young adolescents
may be dependent upon the extent to which he or she
understands the multiple characteristics and processes of this
developmental period. Thus, a developmentally responsive
environment for young adolescents is one in which adults are
in tune to the nature of early adolescence in general and to the
joys and concerns of those particular youth with whom they
interact.
Family as a Developmentally Responsive Context
For most 10- to 14-year-olds, the family remains the primary microsystem or proximal context of development in spite
of the increased salience of schools, peers, and communities
(Muuss, 1996). Within this family context, most young adolescents need and want a warm, close relationship with their parents. They want to feel accepted by their parents and to be able
to talk with them about problems and issues in their lives
(Noller, 1994). Yet at the same time, research indicates that in
early adolescence, parents and children begin to spend less time
together and exhibit less physical affection toward one another
(Stemmler & Petersen, 1999). Thus, this period may be a time
when parents and children have more difficulty communicating
with one another. Trujillo (2000) provided this example:
Sometimes I feel like my parents don’t want me to talk to them
… If they only knew that they are the only people that I can
really trust with my thoughts and feelings … I need them to
listen to me, to just be glad to talk to me … Jeff, age14.
(p. 120)
87
Parent–Adolescent Communication
Much of the published research on communication between
parents and adolescents focuses on the general quality of communication (e.g., open versus problem communication, communication satisfaction) in relation to a variety of developmental
outcomes for youth. For example, open communication between
young adolescents and their parents has been shown to increase
adolescents’ perceptions of family cohesion, family satisfaction,
and intimacy (Henry, 1994; Jackson et al., 1998). Adolescents’
views of their communication with their parents also are linked
to personal development. That is, open versus problem communication is associated with higher self-esteem, greater wellbeing, and more positive coping strategies (Henry; Jackson
et al.). Conversely, an absence of positive communication is
identified as a risk factor associated with unstable and low selfesteem (Kernis, Brown, & Brody, 2000) and adolescent problem
behaviors such as substance use (Barnes, Farrell, & Banerjee,
1994; Kilpatrick et al., 2000), delinquency (Coughlin & Vuchinich,
1996), and self-harm (Tulloch, Blizzard, & Pinkus, 1997). Adolescents’ perceptions of levels of communication with parents also are
associated with the abstinence from or initiation of sexual intercourse (Karofsky, Zeng, & Kosorok, 2000).
Other research in the area of parent–adolescent communication has focused on specific processes of communication, such as
conversational styles, internal processes, and reciprocity. For
example, findings show that young adolescents use a highinvolvement conversational style when communicating with
their mothers, including frequent overlaps and simultaneous speech,
and both boys and girls tend to interrupt their mothers more
than vice versa (Beaumont, 1995; Beaumont, Vasconcelos, &
Ruggeri, 2001). In addition, there is evidence of developmental
changes in parent–child communication processes during early
adolescence, including the emergence of joint actions, such as
negotiating and struggling in conversations about health (Young
et al., 2001) and decreases in positivity of mothers’ communication
in triadic interactions (Smetana, Abernethy, & Harris, 2000). Such
findings suggest that communication between parents and children
is a significant domain of family change as children move into
adolescence.
Based on this literature, I argue that a developmentally
responsive family context for early adolescent development is
one in which parents are willing to engage in meaningful, open
communication with their children and adjust specific processes
of communication in accordance with developmental needs.
Family life educators, parents, and young adolescents themselves
all may play a role in initiating such communication.
In contrast to the considerable amount of published research
on the developmental importance and specific processes of
parent–adolescent communication, there is much less information available on the actual topics of conversation between
young adolescents and their parents. An exhaustive search of
research literature on parent–child communication in early adolescence yielded little published data on what topics parents and
young adolescents spend time discussing or would like to discuss. High school students do discuss life plans with parents
(Tucker, Barber, & Eccles, 2001), and college students discuss
problems, plans, and interests (Noller, 1994), but whether similar
topics are discussed by middle school students has not been
studied. Adams and Laursen (2001) found that topics of conflict
with parents generally are daily hassles such as chores and rules,
with adolescents preferring to discuss issues of autonomy and
88
interpersonal relationships with friends. Interestingly, most
research on the topics of parent–adolescent communication has
used a topic-specific approach in which the researcher identifies
a particular topic as important for parent–adolescent discussion
and collects data pertaining to the prevalence or frequency of
communication about this topic (e.g., Ennett, Bauman, Foshee,
Pemberton, & Hicks, 2001; Jaccard, Dittus, & Gordon, 2000).
Primarily, such studies focus on parent–adolescent communication about selected health-related subjects such as sexual activity
or tobacco and alcohol use. For example, Carlson et al. (2000)
found that in their sample of 650 parents of sixth-graders, over
80% of parents reported that they had talked with their child
within the past 30 days about avoiding use of alcohol.
Recent data suggest that parents tend to focus their communication about health-related subjects around three facets of use:
family rules about use, consequences of use, and media messages about use (Ennett et al., 2001). Actual sit-down conversations between a parent and adolescent may occur less frequently
than communication of intermittent messages mentioned by parents to children in the course of day-to-day interaction (MillerDay, 2002). This latter finding may account for the fact that most
adolescents report that they have not engaged in conversations
about drugs with their parents (Miller-Day).
With regard to the subject of sexual activity, research has
examined parents’ and adolescents’ reports of whether discussions
about sex have occurred. Such studies conclude that the large
majority of mothers have talked with their children about sex
(Miller, 1998), although adolescents themselves are less likely to
acknowledge that these discussions have occurred (Jaccard et al.,
2000). Conversations about sex often are initiated by mothers in
response to their observations of physical changes (i.e., puberty) or
social changes (i.e., interest in the opposite sex) in their early
adolescents (O’Sullivan, Meyer-Bahlburg, & Watkins, 2001). In
terms of what specific topics are discussed, Whitaker and Miller
(2000) found that over half of parents in their sample had discussed
the initiation of sexual activity and the use of condoms with their
14 to 16-year-old children. Similarly, O’Sullivan et al. found that
parents usually focus their conversations about sex on biological
factors, with little if any discussion of romantic, interpersonal, and
arousal issues. Parents typically are reluctant to discuss these more
personal dimensions of sexual activity (Somers & Paulson, 2000),
often out of concern about embarrassing their adolescent or leading
the adolescent to think they are prying (Jaccard et al.).
Reluctance to discuss particular topics may be evident
among youth as well as their parents (Jaccard et al., 2000;
O’Sullivan et al., 2001). Adolescence is a time when youth
may have difficulty discussing emotionally laden issues with
their parents (Tucker et al., 2001). Particular topics may be too
embarrassing, or young adolescents may believe that their parent
simply would not understand (Brackis-Cott, Mellins, & Block,
2003; Jaccard et al.). Thus, in order to be meaningful, communication between parents and young adolescents must address
topics of interest to the youth, and parents should not impose
their views about the need for communication on their sons and
daughters (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). This requires knowledge of what topics young adolescents are most interested in
discussing; yet, the existing literature is of little help in this
regard. As stated earlier, there has been only limited research
investigating the actual topics of conversation between young
adolescents and their parents, and there has been even less on
desired topics of discussion. In one focus group study involving
early adolescent boys and girls and their mothers from lowFamily Relations
income minority families, young adolescents mentioned sexual
behaviors, safety, violence, and drugs as their most urgent concerns and reported that they spoke with their mothers about these
matters (Brackis-Cott et al., 2003). However, they also reported a
desire to discuss other topics, such as peer pressure, the future,
relationships with their mothers, and school (Brackis-Cott et al.).
In summary, the available research literature indicates that
parent–child communication is important during early adolescence. It also provides information about specific conversational
processes of parents and early adolescents, and parental attempts
to communicate with their young adolescents about particular
health-related topics. However, the existing literature on parentchild communication in early adolescence provides little information about what topics young adolescents are most interested
in discussing with their parents. In order to assist families in
becoming developmentally responsive contexts for early adolescents, it is necessary to know what topics of conversation can
provide a starting point for parent–child communication during
this important developmental period. The present study
addressed this void by identifying the topics that young adolescents would like to discuss with their parents.
Method
Sample
The sample consisted of 1,124 middle school students, 520
males and 604 females, ranging in age from 10 to 15 years of age.
Specifically, 78 (7%) were 10 years old, 321 (29%) were 11, 340
(30%) were 12, 208 (18%) were 13, 139 (12%) were 14, and 38
(3%) were 15. Students attended public schools in 1 of 14 different
school districts located in a single Midwest state. Due to the age of
the respondents and subsequent Institutional Review Board considerations, information about family income and ethnicity was not
collected. Aggregate information about the economic and ethnic
composition of the sample was approximated using school district
demographic information published by the state Department of
Education (Ohio Department of Education, 2001). Based on this
information, 17% of the sample attended districts with a minority
enrollment greater than 45%, whereas 25% of respondents attended
school in districts with 5–20% minority enrollment. The remaining
68% attended schools with a predominantly White enrollment.
To estimate the socioeconomic status (SES) of the sample,
school districts were categorized as low, middle, or high SES. Of
the students, 192 (17%) were enrolled in low SES school districts,
which are urban school districts with an average annual income
below $29,000 with more than 10% of students receiving ADC;
664 of the participants were from middle SES school districts.
Specifically, 263 (23%) participants attended middle school in
small city school districts (population 5,000–42,000), and 401
(36%) were in rural school districts (population < 5,000). All of
these school districts represent middle SES communities with an
average annual income of $29,000–$37,000, with 3–10% of students receiving ADC. Of the 268 (24%) respondents identified as
attending middle school in high SES school districts, these were
suburban school districts with an average annual income greater
than $37,000, and less than 3% of students receiving ADC.
Procedure
Twenty-five middle school teachers in 19 school districts
were sent a letter inviting them to assist with data collection for
2004, Vol. 53, No. 1
the study. Of those contacted, 26% were unable to assist, either
due to lack of time or interest or due to lack of administrative
approval to participate. The 18 participating teachers represented
14 school districts.
Each participating teacher distributed to the students in his
or her classes a slip of paper stating, ‘‘If you could ask your mom
or dad any question and know you would get an honest answer,
what question would you ask?’’ Teachers read a scripted explanation of the study to their classes that included a statement of
voluntary consent and anonymity. Students choosing to participate wrote their questions anonymously on the paper, answered
questions about their gender and age, and placed their papers in a
large collection envelope. Teachers sealed the envelope and
mailed it to the researcher.
Questions were sorted into categories based on the emergent
themes. The first sort of the data yielded 42 question categories.
All 1,124 questions were read a second time, with questions in
closely related categories combined to form broader categories.
This second sorting of the data resulted in 23 distinct categories.
A final review of the questions resulted in further refinement and
resulted in 18 categories.
Two master’s-degreed professionals who work with young
adolescents independently coded a subset of 20% (225) of the
questions. Each was provided with the same randomly selected
set of questions and a list of the 18 categories with a onesentence description of each category. They were instructed to
assign one category code to each question. Cohen’s Kappa
statistic for intercoder reliability was computed and averaged
.79 across the three coders (the two independent raters and the
researcher).
Analysis of the data entailed computing frequencies for each
of the 18 categories. Consistent with the developmental contextual perspective guiding this research, gender and SES were
examined as elements of context that might influence early
adolescent life concerns. Therefore, a series of chi-square analyses were conducted for each question category to examine
whether the frequency with which particular topics were raised
differed by respondent gender (male or female) or school district
SES level (low, middle, or high).
Results
For ease of presentation, question categories were combined
into seven groups: family, sensitive subjects, material wants,
self, peers, school, and no response. The categories of questions
with corresponding frequencies are listed in Table 1. As
reported, 44% of respondents submitted questions in the family
category, 15% indicated questions about a sensitive subject, 13%
wanted to ask for material things, and 11% pertained to the self.
Questions about school were submitted by 7% of respondents,
5% wanted to ask about peers, and 5% did not submit a response.
Family Questions
The largest percentage of respondents submitted questions
pertaining to family. As indicated in Table 1, the most frequently
asked questions were those having to do with the parent–child
relationship (15.6%). Further examination in this category indicated four parent–child relationship issues of concern: autonomy
and privileges, love, support, conflict, and trust. Autonomy and
privilege questions pertained to the rules, responsibilities, and
privileges imposed by parents, such as ‘‘Are you always going to
89
Table 1
Categories of Questions that Middle School Students Want To Ask Parents in
Frequency and Percent (N = 1,124)
Question Category
N
%
Family
Parent–child relationship
Getting to know my parent
Parents’ relationship
Family history
Siblings
Want to move
490
175
149
94
27
26
19
43.6
15.6
13.3
8.7
2.4
2.4
1.7
Sensitive Subjects
Drugs and alcohol
Sex and pregnancy
167
98
69
14.9
8.7
6.1
Material Wants
142
12.6
Self
Getting to know myself
State of things/nature of people
Adulthood
Puberty
127
52
32
29
14
11.3
4.6
2.8
2.6
1.2
School
Future education and work
School
82
47
35
7.3
4.2
3.1
Peers
Dating and relationships
Friends and peer group
No Response
59
43
16
57
5.2
3.8
1.4
5.1
were curious about their family history, posing questions such
as: ‘‘Am I related to a famous person?’’ ‘‘How did we get our
last name?’’ ‘‘What were my great-grandparents like?’’ A similar
number of respondents had questions about their siblings: ‘‘Why
did you have to have my older sister?’’ ‘‘Why don’t you do
something about my younger brother’s attitude?’’ and wanting
the family to move to a new location (e.g., ‘‘Can we move to
California?’’ ‘‘Can we move in with Aunt Denise?’’).
Sensitive Subjects Questions
The second largest group of questions (15%) pertained to
issues typically regarded as difficult but important topics to
discuss with adolescents. Specifically, two categories of sensitive
subjects questions emerged: drugs and alcohol, and sex and
pregnancy. As reported in Table 1, 98 students (8.7%) indicated
that they would like to ask their parents about drugs and alcohol.
Sample questions from this category were: ‘‘Have you ever done
drugs?’’ ‘‘How old were you when you first drank alcohol?’’
‘‘What do you think of drugs, and how would you react if I told
you I did them?’’ Other students (n = 69, 6.1%) posed questions
about sex and pregnancy that included ‘‘What is the right age to
have sex?’’ ‘‘Does it hurt when you have sex?’’ ‘‘If I got
pregnant what would you do and how would you act about the
decision I made?’’
Material Wants Questions
tell me what to do?’’ ‘‘Are some of your rules really necessary?’’
‘‘Can I do more with my friends?’’ Love questions were those
in which respondents seemed to be asking for some indication
of how their parents felt about them, such as ‘‘Do you really
love me?’’ ‘‘If someone told you they would give you
$100,000,000,000,000,000 for me, would you give me up to
them?’’ ‘‘Do you think I’m important?’’ Some questions pertained to desired support from parents, such as ‘‘Why don’t you
have any time for me?’’ ‘‘Could I go places with you or do
something with you?’’ ‘‘Can I fall back to you if I have a
problem?’’ The theme of trust and conflict was evident in questions like: ‘‘Have you ever gone through my belongings?’’ ‘‘Why
do you break me down inside and hurt me outside all the time?’’
‘‘Why do you blame me for everything?’’
In addition to questions pertaining to the parent–child relationship, there were several other categories of family questions.
Results showed that 13% of respondents asked questions directed toward learning more about their parent. In some cases, the
interest was in learning about their parent’s past, such as: ‘‘What
was it like when you were little and what was your goal?’’
‘‘What was your worst experience growing up?’’ ‘‘When you
were little did your parents treat you like you treat me?’’ In other
cases, the interest was in learning about their parent in the
present, such as: ‘‘How old are you?’’ ‘‘What is the most important thing to you?’’ ‘‘What are your favorite moments?’’ Fifteen
respondents wanted to know about an absent parent: ‘‘Why
didn’t you tell me my dad isn’t my real dad?’’ ‘‘Will I ever see
my mom again?’’ ‘‘When am I going to see my dad?’’
Also within the family group were questions about parents’
relationships with one another. For example, as indicated in
Table 1, 94 (8.7%) respondents asked questions such as: ‘‘How
did you know you were in love with each other?’’ ‘‘Why do you
guys fight sometimes?’’ ‘‘Why did you and dad split up when I
was so little?’’ Twenty-seven (2%) of the young adolescents
90
Of the respondents, 142 (12.6%) asked about getting things
they want. Examples in this category included: ‘‘Can I have
$200?’’ ‘‘Can I have a puppy?’’ ‘‘Can I have a dirt bike?’’
Self Questions
Eleven percent of respondents had questions pertaining to
learning more about oneself and one’s place in the world.
Specifically, 52 (4.6%) students submitted questions about
getting to know oneself, such as ‘‘Am I adopted?’’ ‘‘What
was I like when I was little?’’ ‘‘How happy were you when I
was born?’’ Others (n = 32, 2.8%) expressed an interest in
knowing about the state of things and the nature of people:
‘‘Why are we on earth?’’ ‘‘Why are people so rude and
inconsiderate?’’ ‘‘Why do people have to die?’’ A similar
number of students indicated that they would want to ask
their parents about adulthood, such as ‘‘What is it like in the
grownup world?’’ ‘‘What is it like to be a parent?’’ ‘‘Do you
think I’ll succeed in life?’’ Finally, within the group of self
questions were a few (n = 14, 1%) about puberty, such as:
‘‘How do you tell if you have started your period?’’ ‘‘How do
you use a tampon?’’ ‘‘Dad, when did you start your growth
spurt?’’
School Questions
As reported in Table 1, 82 respondents (7.3%) indicated that
the questions they would ask their parents have to do with
school. Some of these pertained to future education and work
(n = 47, 4.2%), whereas others were concerned with present
school experiences (n = 35, 3.1%). Examples of students’ questions about future education and work include: ‘‘Is there a
possible way I can to go college?’’ ‘‘What are good jobs?’’
‘‘Would you hate me if I joined the military?’’ Sample questions
about present school experiences were: ‘‘Why is it so important
to you that I get good grades, stay in school, and don’t do
Family Relations
drugs?’’ ‘‘Will you help me with my homework?’’ ‘‘What kinds
of grades did you get when you were in school?’’
Peers Questions
The smallest group of questions submitted by respondents
pertained to relationships with peers, as 59 (5.2%) students
indicated a desire to discuss such topics with their parents.
Specifically, 43 (3.8%) posed questions about dating and relationships, such as: ‘‘When was your first kiss?’’ ‘‘Why can’t I
have a boyfriend?’’ ‘‘When you like a boy, should you tell him
or not?’’ Sixteen students (1.4%) submitted questions about
getting along with friends, like: ‘‘Why are my friends always
so mean to me?’’ ‘‘How do you fit in with a group?’’ ‘‘What
would you do if someone is bothering you?’’
Nonresponse Questions
Of those categorized as nonresponses, 43 did not have a
specific question to ask, responding simply, ‘‘I’m not sure what I
would ask.’’ Another 14 indicated that they had no need to ask a
question, because they already talk about anything with their
parents.
Gender and SES Differences
Chi-square analyses examined gender and school district
SES differences in the types of questions asked. Results for
gender are reported in Table 2 and indicate that only 6 of the
18 categories differed by gender. Specifically, significantly more
boys than girls wanted to ask questions about drugs and alcohol,
future education and work, and wanting material things. Conversely, significantly more girls than boys wanted to ask about
dating and relationships, adulthood, and puberty. In terms of
socioeconomic background, only 5 of the 18 categories differed
by the SES of the school districts (see Table 3). Students attending schools in lower SES school districts were more likely to
have questions about getting to know themselves and their relationships with parents, whereas those in higher SES school
districts more frequently identified questions in the drugs/alcohol
and sex/pregnancy categories and were less likely to ask for
material things. As interesting as these gender and SES differences are, no such differences existed for most categories of
questions—that is, the majority of the questions appear to represent fairly common concerns among this sample of middle
school students.
Discussion
In drawing conclusions and implications from this study, it is
important to note several potential limitations imposed by the
methodology used. First, the data were collected from a geographically restricted area in one Midwest state. Although the participants were drawn from a range of different school districts
representing low, middle, and high socioeconomic status in
urban, suburban, and rural settings, it cannot be determined from
the present data whether results would be similar for middle
school students in other regions of the United States. This limits
the generalizability of the findings.
A second potential limitation arises from the fact that participation was voluntary. Although teachers distributed the study
question to all students in their classes, it is likely that not all
students placed a response in the collection envelope. The
2004, Vol. 53, No. 1
researcher was able to track this to some extent by comparing
the number of questions returned by each teacher to the number of
question slips that were distributed to him or her (each teacher had
indicated how many students he or she had). Analysis of this
return rate data indicated that rate of return ranged from 73–
96%, with most in the 87– 93% range. Thus, it appears that the
majority of students chose to participate.
Another limitation derives from the issue of social desirability. It is possible that, given the age of the sample, there was
a tendency to respond (or to choose not to respond) according to
perceived peer group expectations. Early adolescence is a time
when conformity to the peer group increases, and if discussion of
the research task occurred among students, it is possible that
some students chose to submit the same question as their friends
regardless of whether it reflected their actual preferred responses.
To assess this issue, the data were examined to determine for
each category of questions the number of different schools
represented. For each of the 18 question categories, students
from at least 6 different schools submitted questions; in fact,
for 12 of the 18 categories, questions were submitted by students
from 10 or more different schools. Conversely, for each of the 14
school districts represented in the sample, questions representing
at least 9 different topics were submitted. Thus, peer pressure to
respond in a socially desirable way does not appear to have
skewed the results.
In spite of these potential limitations, the findings of the
present research indicate that when given the opportunity, most
young adolescents are willing and able to identify questions they
would like to ask a parent. It appears that middle school students
have a broad range of questions on their minds, many of which
go beyond stereotypic adolescent concerns. It is notable that
when looking at the 18 categories of questions, only 1 out of 4
(23%) of those submitted pertain to topics one might traditionally expect middle school students to be curious about (dating,
drugs, puberty, 6 school). When questions about traditional adolescent concerns emerged, they appeared to be less universal among respondents—that is, most of the statistically
significant gender or school district SES differences involved
these topics.
As discussed earlier, most of the available literature on
topics of communication between parents and adolescents examined topics of drugs and sex and concluded that the majority of
parents report talking about these subjects with their adolescents.
Yet when identifying what topics they want to ask a parent
about, the young adolescents in this study were most likely to
not cite these traditional sensitive subjects of adolescence, but
rather to identify issues related to knowing self and family.
Perhaps conversations about sensitive subjects have already
occurred, or perhaps these young adolescents find those subjects
too embarrassing to ask their parents about. Regardless of the
reason, the fact remains that the largest percentage (44%) of
respondents listed questions pertaining to their families. In particular, making sense of their relationships with their parents was
the most salient issue for many youngsters. Because parent–child
relationships are in a state of flux during early adolescence
(Grotevant, 1997; Holmbeck, 1996; Larson, Richards, Moneta,
Holmbeck, & Duckett, 1996), the questions that young adolescents posed with regard to families suggest that they recognize
and are trying to make sense of the shifts in their relationships
with their parents. The specific content of their questions suggests that some young adolescents are unhappy with conflict,
desire more closeness, and struggle with autonomy.
91
Table 2
Gender Differences in Specific Categories of Questions that Middle School Students Want To Ask Parents
Boys
(n = 520)
Girls
(n = 604)
Question Category
N
%
N
%
Chi-square
Adulthood
Dating and relationships
Drugs and alcohol
Family history
Friends and peer group
Future education and work
Getting to know my parent
Getting to know myself
Material wants
No response
Parent–child relationship
Parents’ relationship
Puberty
School
Sex and pregnancy
Siblings
State of things/nature of people
Want to move
6
7
58
12
4
33
71
26
82
30
72
38
1
17
26
13
14
10
1.1
1.1
11.1
2.3
0.8
6.3
13.7
5.0
15.8
5.8
13.8
7.3
0.2
3.3
5.0
2.5
2.7
1.9
23
36
40
15
12
14
78
26
60
27
103
56
13
18
43
13
18
9
3.8
6.0
6.6
2.5
2.0
2.3
12.9
4.3
9.9
4.5
17.1
9.3
2.1
3.0
7.1
2.2
3.0
1.5
7.83**
16.20**
7.21**
.04
2.95
11.32***
.13
.31
8.62**
.98
2.19
1.41
8.73**
.08
2.18
.15
.08
.31
**p < .01, ***p < .001.
Other research has found that adolescents typically do not
discuss issues of autonomy with their parents (Adams & Laursen,
2001). The present findings indicate that some young adolescents
prefer that such discussion would occur, either through direct
conversation about wanting more privileges and fewer restrictions
or through conversation about autonomy-related topics. For example, one key component of developing autonomy is individuation
from parents, a process that entails de-idealizing one’s parents and
viewing them as separate individuals with their own unique histories and qualities (Steinberg & Silverberg, 1986). In this
research, respondents’ questions that focused on getting to know
one’s parent may reflect the beginning of this individuation process. Moreover, the numerous questions pertaining to understanding oneself, one’s place in the world, and the nature of adulthood
also may indicate a desire to begin establishing a sense of identity
independent from one’s parents and to draw upon parental support
Table 3
SES Differences in Specific Categories of Questions that Middle School Students Want To Ask Parents
School District SESa
Low
(n = 192)
Middle
(n = 664)
High
(n = 268)
Question Category
N
%
N
%
N
%
Chi-square
Adulthood
Dating and relationships
Drugs and alcohol
Family history
Friends and peer group
Future education and work
Getting to know my parent
Getting to know myself
Material wants
No response
Parent–child relationship
Parents’ relationship
Puberty
School
Sex and pregnancy
Siblings
State of things/nature of people
Want to move
3
6
5
1
3
12
16
16
31
7
43
18
4
8
7
4
6
2
1.6
3.1
2.6
0.5
1.6
6.3
8.3
8.3
16.1
3.6
22.4
9.4
2.1
4.2
3.6
2.1
3.1
1.0
18
23
43
22
12
25
95
32
110
30
89
57
10
19
28
18
17
16
2.7
3.5
6.5
3.3
1.8
3.8
14.3
4.8
16.6
4.5
13.4
8.6
1.5
2.9
4.2
2.7
2.6
2.4
8
14
50
4
1
10
38
4
1
20
43
19
0
8
34
4
9
1
3.0
5.2
18.7
1.5
0.4
3.7
14.2
1.5
0.4
7.5
16.0
7.1
0.0
3.0
12.7
1.5
3.4
0.4
1.01
1.92
46.47***
6.20*
2.83
2.47
4.88
12.00**
47.95***
4.42
9.20**
.87
4.84
.86
26.27***
1.31
.50
5.35
a
Low = average annual income < $29,000; > 10% of students receive ADC. Middle = average annual income of $29,000–$37,000; 3–10% of students receive ADC.
High = average annual income > $37,000; < 3% of students receive ADC.
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
92
Family Relations
in this process. Discussing life plans with parents may assist
young adolescents in setting and negotiating educational and
personal future goals (Tucker et al., 2001).
Directions for Future Research
This study fills a void in the literature by identifying the
topics that young adolescents would like to discuss with their
parents by asking them. These topics encompass a much wider
range of issues than the health-related sensitive subjects that
have been the focus of the research on parent–adolescent communication. Yet, a number of important questions about communication between parents and young adolescents require further
research. For example, having questions and being willing to
actually ask those questions may be two different things. Future
research might query adolescents about which topics identified
here they are likely to raise with a parent and under what
circumstances they would be willing to do so. Other research on
parent–adolescent communication indicates that the nature of
family talk may be different for mothers and fathers, in that
fathers talk about fewer topics and spend little time in one-onone conversation with their children during adolescence (Socha &
Stamp, 1995). Future research should explore both gender of
parent and gender of child as influential to the process.
Although there is considerable literature on parent–adolescent
communication about health-related topics, specifically drug and
alcohol use and sexuality, no published literature examines communication about family relationships. Questions about autonomy
and conflict in the parent–child relationship emerged in these
results. We know that typical topics of conflict between parents
and adolescents are about daily hassles (Adams & Laursen, 2001),
but little is known about the extent to which parents and children
actually discuss the process of conflict between them. Such issues
of relationship maintenance in the parent–adolescent relationship
are worthy of future attention.
Because other research suggests that parental perceptions of
family communication may be different from those of their
children (Noller, 1994; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999), future
research could address parents’ assessments of what topics they
would like to discuss with their young adolescents. In addition,
determining whether and to what extent there is consistency
between parents’ and adolescents’ assessments may provide
additional information.
Implications for Practice
According to a developmental contextual perspective, a
developmentally responsive family environment for young adolescents is one in which parents are aware of the joys and
concerns of their young adolescents and are willing to engage
in meaningful, open communication about those issues. The
results of this study have several implications for how practitioners might facilitate the development of such developmentally
responsive families for young adolescents. Determining the
agendas for parent education is one way to do so. For instance,
although there are numerous publications designed to assist
parents in communicating with their youngsters (e.g., How to
talk so kids will listen and listen so kids will talk [Faber &
Mazlish, 1980]; How to talk to teens about really important
things [Schaefer & DiGeronimo, 1999]), typically these are
developed by adults and based on adults’ assumptions about
what parents should talk about with their children. For example,
the ‘‘important things’’ identified by Schaefer and DiGeronimo
2004, Vol. 53, No. 1
are major crises such as divorce, death and rape; risky behaviors
such as alcohol, drinking and driving; HIV/AIDS and tattoos and
body piercing; and concerns such as pornography, prejudice,
gangs, and homosexuality. Whereas all certainly represent
important topics for young adolescents to know about, they are
not representative of the types of questions the participants in
this study wanted to ask a parent about. Rosenthal and Feldman
(1999) argued that to be effective communicators, parents need
to be attuned to what the adolescent believes is appropriate for
them to discuss. Thus, young adolescents are a valuable source
of information about important topics of conversation with parents, and authors might do well to include this perspective.
Young adolescents are able to identify topics of concern to
themselves, and their preferences should be considered when
setting agendas for parent–adolescent communication. Likewise,
encouraging parents to allow their young adolescents to define
the topics for their conversations may lead to more successful
attempts at communicating with their youngsters. Faber and
Mazlish’s (1980) approach may be useful in helping parents
learn how to remain open to listening to the concerns of their
young adolescents without imposing their own agendas for discussion.
A second implication from the findings is that of defining the
specific content of agendas for parent education. Educators’
assumptions often may include helping parents to work through
the sensitive subjects associated with parenting adolescents (i.e.,
drug prevention, sexuality education, promoting academic
achievement). These are important and relevant parenting issues.
However, from a young adolescent’s point of view, they may not
be the most important topics for parents to discuss. Less than 1
out of 7 respondents listed questions about drugs and alcohol or
sex and pregnancy. Indeed, other research on parent–adolescent
communication about sexuality suggests that for most sexuality
topics, only a minority of adolescents believe parental communication is important; parents are not the preferred sources of
information or influence regarding sexuality (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999).
Alternatively, an expanded agenda based on the topics of
interest to young adolescents is suggested. This expanded
agenda would include less focus on adolescent problem prevention and more focus on relationship enhancement and selfdiscovery. Specific topics might include such things as understanding and handling conflict between parent and adolescent;
expression of support and love; building and maintaining
trust; discovering and appreciating our individual qualities;
comparing our similarities and differences; learning about
the parent’s past; anticipating the adolescent’s future; and
sharing views of current events and how the world works.
Heyman’s (2001) How to say it to teens: Talking about the
most important topics of their lives provides helpful guidelines for talking to adolescents about many such topics. This
resource covers 88 different issues, including attitude,
choices, college, dating, feelings, love, needs and wants, punishment, rules, success, and trust.
When establishing agendas for working with parents and
middle school students, it may be helpful to consider the gender
and socioeconomic backgrounds of the young adolescents.
Although the topics identified can be expected to have universal
appeal, the appropriateness of other topics may vary. For
instance, based on the results, topics such as drugs and alcohol
or planning for future education and the adult work force may be
of greater interest to sons than to daughters, whereas discussion
93
about getting along with members of the opposite sex or what it
is like in the grown-up world may be more appealing to daughters than to sons. The socioeconomic level of the community
also deserves consideration. Family life educators whose target
audience is primarily upper, middle-class suburban families may
want to incorporate more of the traditional sensitive subjects
(drugs and alcohol, sex and pregnancy) into their agendas,
because middle school students in these communities are more
likely to have questions about such matters. Students from rural
and urban lower income school districts may want to talk about
their childhoods or about acquiring the material things they
want. Although the specific concerns may vary from one group
of middle school students to another, the findings imply that an
important step in creating developmentally responsive families
for young adolescents is to build parent education initiatives that
also reflect the perspectives of youth.
References
Adams, R., & Laursen, B. (2001). The organization and dynamics of adolescent
conflict with parents and friends. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 97–110.
Barnes, G., Farrell, M., & Banerjee, S. (1994). Family influences on alcohol
abuse and other problem behaviors among black and white adolescents in
a general population sample. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4,
183–201.
Beaumont, S. L. (1995). Adolescent girls’ conversations with mothers and
friends: A matter of style. Discourse Processes, 20, 109–132.
Beaumont, S. L., Vasconcelos, V. C. B., & Ruggeri, M. (2001). Similarities and
differences in mother-daughter and mother-son conversations during preadolescence and adolescence. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,
20, 419–444.
Benson, P. L., Galbraith, J., & Espeland, P. (1998). What kids need to succeed.
Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.
Brackis-Cott, E., Mellins, C. A., & Block, M. (2003). Current life concerns of
early adolescents and their mothers: Influence of maternal HIV. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 23, 51–77.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Six
theories of child development. Annals of child development (Vol. 6,
pp. 187–249). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Carlson, J. M., Moore, M. J., Pappas, D. M., Werch, C. E., Watts, G. F., &
Edgemon, P. A. (2000). A pilot intervention to increase parent-child communication about alcohol avoidance. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 45,
59–70.
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Great transitions: Preparing America’s youth for the 21st century. New York: Carnegie Corporation.
Coughlin, C., & Vuchinich, S. (1996). Family experience in preadolescence and
the development of male delinquency. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58,
491–501.
Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D.,
Flanagan, C., & Midgley, D. (1993). Development during adolescence: The
impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools
and families. American Psychologist, 48, 90–101.
Ennett, S. T., Bauman, K. E., Foshee, V. A., Pemberton, M., & Hicks, K. A.
(2001). Parent-child communication about adolescent tobacco and alcohol use:
What do parents say and does it affect youth behavior? Journal of Marriage
and Family, 63, 48–62.
Faber, A., & Mazlish, E. (1980). How to talk so kids will listen and listen so kids
will talk. New York: Avon Books.
Grotevant, H. (1997). Adolescent development in family contexts. In N. Eisenberg
(Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality
development (5th ed., pp. 1097–1149). New York: Wiley.
Henry, C. S. (1994). Family system characteristics, parental behaviors, and
adolescent family life satisfaction. Family Relations, 43, 447–455.
Hersch, P. (1998). A tribe apart: A journey into the heart of American adolescence. New York: Ballantine Publishing.
Heyman, R. (2001). How to say it to teens: Talking about the most important
topics of their lives. Paramus, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hill, J. P. (1983). Early adolescence: A framework. Journal of Early Adolescence, 3, 1–21.
Holmbeck, G. (1996). A model of family relational transformations during the
transition to adolescence: Parent-adolescent conflict and adaptation. In J. Graber,
94
J. Brooks-Gunn, & A. Petersen (Eds.), Transitions through adolescence: Interpersonal domains and context (pp. 167–199). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Jaccard, J., Dittus, P. J., & Gordon, V. V. (2000). Parent-teen communication
about premarital sex: Factors associated with extent of communication. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15, 187–208.
Jackson, S., Bijstra, J., Oostra, L., & Bosma, H. (1998). Adolescents’ perceptions
of communication with parents relative to specific aspects of relationships with
parents and personal development. Journal of Adolescence, 21, 305–322.
Karofsky, P. S., Zeng, L., & Kosorok, M. R. (2000). Relationship between
adolescent-parental communication and initiation of first intercourse in adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 28, 41–45.
Keating, D. (1990). Adolescent thinking. In S. Feldman, & G. Elliott (Eds.), At
the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 54–89). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kernis, M. H., Brown, A. C., & Brody, G. H. (2000). Fragile self-esteem in
children and its associations with perceived patterns of parent-child communication. Journal of Personality, 68, 225–252.
Kilpatrick, D., Acierno, R., Saunders, B., Resnick, H., Best, C., & Schnurr, P.
(2000). Risk factors for adolescent substance abuse and dependence: Data from
a national sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 19–30.
Larson, R., Richards, M., Moneta, G., Holmbeck, G., & Duckett, E. (1996).
Changes in adolescents’ daily interactions with their families from ages 10 to
18: Disengagement and transformation. Developmental Psychology, 32, 744–754.
Lerner, R. M. (1995). America’s youth in crisis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Marshall, W. (1978). Puberty. In F. Falkner, & J. Tanner (Eds.), Human growth
(Vol. 2). New York: Plenum.
Miller, B. (1998). Families matter: A research synthesis of family influences on
adolescent pregnancy. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen
Pregnancy.
Miller-Day, M. A. (2002). Parent-adolescent communication about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17, 604–616.
Muuss, R. E. (1996). Theories of adolescence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
National Middle School Association. (1995). This we believe: Developmentally
responsive middle schools. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
Noller, P. (1994). Relationships with parents in adolescence: Process and Outcome. In R. Montemayor, G. R. Adams, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Personal
relationships during adolescence (pp. 37–77). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ohio Department of Education. (2001). Vital statistics for Ohio’s school districts.
[Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/data/vital_stats_1yr.asp.
O’Sullivan, L. F., Meyer-Bahlburg, H. F. L. & Watkins, B. X. (2001). Motherdaughter communication about sex among urban African American and Latino
families. Journal of Adolescent Research, 16, 269–292.
Richardson, R. A. (1999). Using developmental contextualism to understand
early adolescence. Ohio Middle School Journal, 25, 23–27.
Rosenthal, D. A., & Feldman, S. S. (1999). The importance of importance:
Adolescents’ perceptions of parental communication about sexuality. Journal
of Adolescence, 22, 835–851.
Schaefer, C. E., & DiGeronimo, T. F. (1999). How to talk to teens about really
important things. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Smetana, J. G., Abernethy, A., & Harris, A. (2000). Adolescent-parent interactions in middle-class African-American families: Longitudinal change and
contextual variations. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 458–474.
Socha, T. J., & Stamp, G. (1995). Parents, children and communication: Frontiers of theory and research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Somers, C. L., & Paulson, S. E. (2000). Students’ perceptions of parentadolescent closeness and communication about sexuality: Relations with sexual knowledge, attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 629–644.
Steinberg, L., & Silverberg, S. (1986). The vicissitudes of autonomy in early
adolescence. Child Development, 57, 841–851.
Stemmler, M., & Petersen, A. C. (1999). Reciprocity and change within the
affective family environment in early adolescence. International Journal of
Behavioral Development, 23, 185–198.
Trujillo, M. (2000). Can we talk?: What teens would share if parents would
listen. Deerfield Beach, FL: Health Communications.
Tucker, C. J., Barber, B. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2001). Advice about life plans from
mothers, fathers, and siblings in always-married and divorced families during
late adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 30, 729–747.
Tulloch, A. L., Blizzard, L., & Pinkus, Z. (1997). Adolescent-parent communication in self-harm. Journal of Adolescent Health, 21, 267–275.
Whitaker, D. J., & Miller, K. S. (2000). Parent-adolescent discussions about sex
and condoms: Impact on peer influences of sexual risk behavior. Journal of
Adolescent Research, 15, 251–273.
Young, R. A., Lyman, M. J.,Valach, L., Novak, H., Brierton, I., & Christopher, A.
(2001). Joint actions of parents and adolescents in health conversations.
Qualitative Health Research, 11, 40–57.
Family Relations