Journal of Family Studies

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/rjfs20

Discrepancies in parents’ perceptions of adult

children’s well-being: evidence from mother–
father–child triads

Matthijs Kalmijn

To cite this article: Matthijs Kalmijn (2024) Discrepancies in parents’ perceptions of adult
children’s well-being: evidence from mother–father–child triads, Journal of Family Studies, 30:5,
838-860, DOI: 10.1080/13229400.2024.2335493

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2024.2335493

© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 08 May 2024.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 658

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjfs20
JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES
2024, VOL. 30, NO. 5, 838–860
https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2024.2335493

Discrepancies in parents’ perceptions of adult children’s

well-being: evidence from mother–father–child triads
Matthijs Kalmijn
Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI)-KNAW/University of Groningen, The Hague,
Netherlands

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Most studies of discrepancies in parents’ reports about children’s Received 26 June 2023
psychological problems address younger children and Accepted 16 March 2024
psychological problems. The current contribution shifts the focus
KEYWORDS
to adult children and to well-being. In adult intergenerational Informant discrepancies;
relationships, knowledge of children’s well-being is more intergenerational relations;
uncertain and there is more room for disagreements to arise, divorce; child well-being
especially in the context of divorce. We analyzed Dutch multi-
actor survey data, using a sample of triads of adult children,
fathers, and mothers (N = 1,440). Two hypotheses were tested
about the origins of discrepancies using structural equation
models in which child well-being reports were included of
parents and self-reports of children. The analyses supported the
notion of relational specificity: when parents have a closer and
more harmonious relationship with the child, they evaluate the
child more positively than the other parent, after controlling for
adult children’s self-reports of well-being. Qualified support was
obtained for the depression-distortion hypothesis, with mothers
who have higher well-being themselves being more positive
about the child. Discrepancies were larger among separated
parents than among married parents and parent-stepparent
combinations. The conclusion is that parents do not always have
similar views of adult children’s well-being and that
disagreements are systematic, with bias stemming from the
informant and the relationship.

Introduction
Many studies have examined to what extent parents agree on their children’s well-being
and psychological problems (Duhig et al., 2000). Most of this research applies to young
children and examines psychological problems as measured by scales for depression,
anxiety, and internalizing and externalizing problems. The research is mainly clinical
and motivated by the goal to improve the quality of the psychological assessment of chil-
dren for researchers and clinicians. The current contribution shifts the focus from young
children to adult children, a case for which parental discrepancies have been studied

CONTACT Matthijs Kalmijn [email protected] Lange Houtstraat 19, 2511 CV The Hague, Netherlands
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. The terms on which
this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 839

much less often (Achenbach et al., 2005). Comparing reports of mothers and fathers of
the same adult child does not have immediate clinical relevance but is important for
several substantive reasons.
First, when children are adults and live independently, they are free to decide how
much information they share with their parents and they do not always have incentives
to disclose their feelings. Moreover, due to the absence of day-to-day contact, it is more
difficult for parents to obtain accurate knowledge of their children than when children
live at home. Knowledge of one’s adult child depends on communication with the
child and this varies with the amount of contact and the strength of parents’ relationships
with adult children (Dykstra et al., 2006). Moreover, uncertainty on the part of parents
has increased as a result of the rise in separation and repartnering. These trends imply
that parents’ experiences are often heterogeneous within families, with sharp differences
in contact, closeness, and support exchange between mothers and fathers (Seltzer &
Bianchi, 2013). As a result, there is more room for discrepancies in separated families
(Brocker et al., 2023; Pelton & Forehand, 2001) and there is a wider variety of parent
types per adult child, with stepparents potentially knowing less about their children
than biological parents (Ganong & Coleman, 2017; Thomson, 2014).
Second, parents’ perceptions of adult children’s well-being can have consequences.
Accurate perceptions are important in that they are conditions for the degree to which
parents provide practical, emotional, and financial support to adult children (Finger-
man et al., 2015; Henretta et al., 2018). When parents are aware of the problems of
their adult children and in agreement with each other about their evaluations, it is
more likely that they will provide the necessary support to them. Both too much
and too little support to a child may be perceived as problematic in the relationship
(Silverstein et al., 1996). Discrepancies in parents’ evaluations may also have impli-
cations for the parents’ own relationship. Many studies have focused on differences
between partners in their evaluations of their relationship and have pointed to the
negative effects of such differences on communication and marital satisfaction
(Kenny & Acitelli, 2001). Similar effects may occur when parents disagree about
their children. Different perceptions of parents regarding their children’s well-being
may lead to confusion and miscommunication in the relationship. Concerns about
children’s emotional problems are a source of stress in the parents’ relationship and
under such conditions, discrepancies between parents’ perceptions can be an
additional strain (Zemp et al., 2017).
Disagreements between informants have been linked to various processes and charac-
teristics, including informants’ own well-being, their social and psychological character-
istics, and the context in which they observe others (Berg-Nielsen et al., 2012; Brocker
et al., 2023; De Los Reyes et al., 2008; De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005; Lohaus et al.,
2020). The current study applies existing hypotheses to the case of parents and adult chil-
dren and tests hypotheses by analyzing unique register-based survey data in which mul-
tiple parents and their adult children aged 25–45 participated. In studying the sources of
parental discrepancies, structural equation models are developed in which characteristics
of mothers, fathers, and adult children are combined to assess differences in parents’ per-
ceptions of the adult child. The data contain an oversample of separated parents and step-
parents, thereby also allowing us to explore how family complexity and parental
discrepancies are related, a topic about which little is known yet.
840 M. KALMIJN

Background and hypotheses

Research on reporting discrepancies has been concerned with two different types of
problems. One problem lies in discrepancies between self-reports and proxy reports,
i.e. what children report about themselves and how other people – fathers, mothers, tea-
chers – see this (Achenbach, 2006; Briggs-Gowan et al., 1996; van der Toorn et al., 2010).
Another problem studied in the literature – and the topic of this paper – lies in discre-
pancies among people rating the same child (Dave et al., 2008; Duhig et al., 2000). In this
latter set of studies, several types of raters have been compared, including fathers versus
mothers (Duhig et al., 2000), parents versus teachers (Rescorla et al., 2014), and parents
versus therapists (Muller et al., 2011).
In many studies, a distinction is made between mean differences on the one hand
(directional differences) and correspondence on the other (non-directional differences)
(Duhig et al., 2000). Correspondence refers to the degree of correlation between
parents’ assessments of the child. Directional differences refer to whether one parent
has a more positive or negative assessment of the child than the other parent and to
what extent this depends on the characteristics of that parent. The two phenomena do
not always coincide. For example, if mothers rate children in a more positive light
than fathers (a directional difference), the ratings of mothers and fathers can still be
highly correlated in a relative sense.
Differences in parents’ assessments may not only stem from bias but also from incom-
plete knowledge. Bias is best assessed via directional differences by analyzing which
parent is ‘too’ positive or negative about the child. Incomplete knowledge is best assessed
via correlations. Incomplete knowledge is a source of measurement error that will reduce
the correlation between parents’ assessments. The current study is concerned with bias
and studies directional differences between two (or more) (step)parents of the same
adult child. For this reason, the hypotheses focus on the possible effects of parents’ indi-
vidual and relational characteristics on differences in their reports about children’s well-
being. Well-being is conceptualized broadly, focusing on adult children’s satisfaction in
key life domains.
Theoretically, an important contrast in understanding informant discrepancies lies in
whether bias stems from the informant or the relationship. The first and most commonly
examined hypothesis argues that parents’ perceptions of their children depend on their
psychological well-being. More specifically, it is believed that parents who are more
depressed report more negative psychological well-being of children than parents who
are less depressed. This hypothesis is directional in that it implies that the more depressed
parent of the two is also the most negative about the child. Framed initially as the
‘depression distortion hypothesis’ (Richters, 1992; Richters & Pellegrini, 1989), the
hypothesis was later generalized to other aspects of well-being. Several mechanisms
have been suggested to explain the hypothesis. The prime reason is believed to be that
a negative mood works as a filter in observing the world, leading people to focus more
on negative characteristics, not only of other people but also of events and conditions
(De Los Reyes et al., 2008).
The hypothesis has been tested often for parent–child discrepancies (for a review, see
De Los Reyes et al., 2008), also in the context of separated families (Brocker et al., 2023).
For interparental discrepancies, evidence is less widespread and applies only to young
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 841

children. In a sample of first graders, Mulvaney et al. (2007) showed that a parent’s level
of anxiety was negatively associated with that parent’s rating of the child after taking into
account the ratings of the other parent and a teacher. In a sample of parents with alcohol
problems, Kelley et al. (2017) showed that parent ratings of children’s internalizing pro-
blems, after controlling for the other parent’s ratings, were associated with that parent’s
depressive symptoms. Similar findings for parental differences were obtained when ana-
lyzing teenage children that allowed for including ratings by the child to assess discrepan-
cies (Gartstein et al., 2009; Treutler & Epkins, 2003). Effects were more evident for
mothers’ than fathers’ psychological symptoms (Treutler & Epkins, 2003). Most tests
of the hypothesis have focused on children living at home, not on adult children.
A competing hypothesis is that bias stems not so much from the informant but from
the relationship the informant has with the child. This notion is derived from more
general ideas about situational specificity in informant discrepancies (Achenbach et al.,
1987). For example, studies of teachers and parents have argued that children behave
differently in school than at home and that this is partly responsible for the fact that tea-
chers are more critical than parents about children’s internalizing and externalizing pro-
blems (Berg-Nielsen et al., 2012). Applying this idea to two parents of the same child, one
can argue that parents differ in the relationship they have with their adult children. One
parent may feel closer to a child than the other or have more frequent and pleasant
contact. Especially in separated families, studies have shown that parents differ, with
the father often having a more negative relationship with the child than the mother
(Albertini & Garriga, 2011; Becker & Hank, 2022; King et al., 2004). Moreover, there
is evidence that a separation increases interparental differences in contact and closeness
compared to married parents (Kalmijn, 2016).
A closer and more harmonious relationship with a child may lead to a more positive
view of the child’s well-being for two reasons (De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2006; Lohaus
et al., 2020). First, a good relationship may cause the parent to be more satisfied with
the child, which may be projected into a more positive feeling about the child’s well-
being. Conversely, a poor relationship with the child may be erroneously attributed to
the child’s individual problems. Second, in a good relationship, the more positive
aspects of the child’s life may become more salient, leading to a more positive view of
the child’s well-being.
Evidence for the hypothesis of relational specificity has come mainly from how parents
evaluate younger children and is limited to parent–child differences in reports about
well-being (De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2006; Lohaus et al., 2020). In this design, only
one relationship can be used to test the hypothesis (i.e. the parent–child relationship).
Comparing informants of the same child yields a stronger design since two relationships
are involved (i.e. the mother–child relationship and the father–child relationship). It can
then be assessed if there is an association between differences between informants in their
relationship with the same child and differences in their perceptions of the child’s well-
being. A study of four-year-olds showed that teachers reported more problem behaviours
of the child than the parent when the teacher experienced conflict with the child (Berg-
Nielsen et al., 2012). In an analysis of children 10–12 years of age, Treutler and Epkins
(2003) found that mothers reported fewer internalizing problems than fathers when
mothers spent more time with the child.
842 M. KALMIJN

For the two hypotheses, the causal direction is to some extent ambiguous. For
example, there is evidence that parents’ well-being is affected by the problems children
experience in their lives and the corresponding degree of well-being of the child (Greenfi-
eld & Marks, 2006; Kalmijn & De Graaf, 2012; Offer, 2020). These ‘linked lives’ effects on
well-being have been found for both younger and adult children. A similar problem
emerges for the effects of the parent–child relationship. Studies have found that
emotional problems in children negatively affect the parent–child relationship, especially
in separated families (Hawkins et al., 2007). These reverse causal effects may lead to spur-
ious effects of parent well-being and relationship quality on their perceptions of chil-
dren’s well-being. After all, in this scenario, child well-being is a common cause: it
affects parents’ well-being/relationships as well as parents’ perceptions of child well-
being.
To minimize the risk such confounding effects, it is important to measure bias
as directly as possible. Direct measures of bias are often not available but there are pos-
sibilities to use reference points external to the informant. By focusing on adult children,
as done in this contribution, children’s own assessments of their well-being can serve
as reliable reference point to measure bias. When there is an association between
parents’ well-being and their perceptions of children’s well-being, holding constant chil-
dren’s self-reported well-being, this can be seen as stronger, albeit not conclusive, evi-
dence for a distortion effect. A similar reasoning applies to the hypothesis of relational
specificity.

Data and method

Data were used from the survey Parents and Children in the Netherlands (Ouders en Kin-
deren in Nederland; OKiN). The OKiN was based on a probability sample from the
national register of people aged 25–45 who lived in the Netherlands in 2017 (Kalmijn
et al., 2018). The sample included a systematic oversample of children with separated
parents (Kalmijn et al., 2017). Using the registers, the biological parents of the respon-
dents and the new partners of these parents (if present) were approached with a question-
naire. The children were called ‘anchors’ in the study; the parents were called ‘alters’.
Alters were approached directly using the register address, not via the anchor. The
total number of participating anchors was 6,485 (response rate of 62%), and the total
number of alters was 9,325 (response rate of 38%).
The main reason for the lower response rate of alters was that alters were only
approached using CAWI (web interviews). In contrast, anchors were approached
using CAWI first and CAPI (personal interviews) in the case of an initial nonresponse.
For anchors, we checked mode effects with respect to well-being. CAWI and CAPI
respondents did not differ in terms of life satisfaction (t = 0.93), depression (t = 1.56),
and self-rated health (t = 0.84). CAWI respondents were significantly more lonely (t =
2.15) but the effect size was small (Cohen’s d = 0.13).

Design
Anchors and alters were approached independently so that there are anchors without
alters in the data and alters without anchors. Moreover, the anchor was not always
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 843

identified in the alter questionnaire since the data collections were not linked; parents
reported about a (randomly chosen) subset of their (step)children. Finally, not all
anchors have more than one parent in the data and the design requires at least one
pair of them. To construct the data, we selected anchors for whom two
connected parents of the opposite sex participated. Subsequently, we constructed, for
each anchor, pairs of alters who reported about the anchor: (a) the biological mother
and father (married or separated), (b) the biological mother and the stepfather, and
(c) the biological father and the stepmother. After these selections, we have data on
1,440 alter (parent) pairs and these reported about 1,239 unique (adult child) anchors.
Note that an anchor can appear in two or even three parent pairs in the case of separation
and stepfamily formation. This is corrected by using robust standard errors.
Using the 1,440 mother-father–child triads, we estimated structural equation models
to compare parents while adding self-reported information from children. The self-
reported measures of anchor children’s well-being were more elaborate than the proxy
reports of parents. Self-reports of adult children are assumed to be more accurate than
parent reports and therefore conceptualized as causally prior to parents’ reports of chil-
dren’s well-being. Moreover, we assume that parents influence each other’s perceptions
of the child, for example, via communication and discussions about their child. These
considerations lead to a non-recursive causal model, as presented in Figure 1.
We modelled maternal reports of adult child well-being as a function of child well-
being and child traits (parameters Bm), the paternal reports of child well-being (par-
ameters Cm), the mother’s relationship with the child (parameters Dm), and the

Figure 1. Structural equation model for parents’ perceptions of adult children’s well-being and adult
children’s self-reported well-being.
844 M. KALMIJN

mother’s own well-being (Em). A similar model was estimated for paternal reports of
child well-being (parameters Bf, Cf, Df, and Ef). The model was able to identify the reci-
procal effects of parents’ reports since each parent’s report depended exclusively on the
parent’s own characteristics (i.e. the relationship with the child and a set of individual
parent control variables). We also estimated a ‘crossing effects’ model where effects of
mother’s well-being and mother’s relationship with the child on father’s perceptions
were added, as well as the opposite effects (i.e. of father’s well-being and father’s relation-
ship with the child on mother’s perceptions).
The paths from maternal to paternal perceptions and vice versa were constrained to be
equal and reflected the influence of parents on each other’s perceptions (Cf = Cm).
Including the bidirectional effect in the model is important since it prevents the effect
of one parent’s perception on the other’s from being overestimated, as it would have
been in separate regression models. In other words, the estimated model corrects for
simultaneity bias (Wooldridge, 2020).
Substantively, the model assessed to what extent a parent’s perception was more posi-
tive or negative than expected based on how the other parent saw the child and how the
children reported about themselves. This setup provides a robust test of the hypotheses
since it captures parental differences while holding constant how adult children actually
felt. In the crossing effects model, the interpretation is that differences in parents’
relationships with the child are associated with differences in parents’ perceptions of
the child, again controlling for the child’s own well-being reports.

Measures - parent data

Given the age range of the children, it was decided not to use conventional mental health
measures used in previous studies of reporting differences. Instead, we approached well-
being by first defining life domains, following studies on life satisfaction (Weber &
Huebner, 2015). Four domains were defined: work/school, partner/family/children,
health/well-being, and social ties. For each domain, we asked parents to rate how well
the child was doing on a five-point scale: (1) poor, (2) mediocre, (3) not good/not
bad, (4) well, (5) very well. If a domain was not applicable, parents could indicate so.
The four items were averaged into a scale (α = .83). We also explored domain-specific
results but these were broadly similar to the results for the overall scale. Partial missings
were addressed using a sequence of regression imputations where other items were used
to predict values on items with missing values. Methodological studies have demon-
strated that regression imputation without random components performs just as well
for item-level missing data compared to more complex multiple imputation methods
(Shrive et al., 2006).
The means and standard deviations of the variables are presented in Table 1. Corre-
lations for a subset of parent and child variables are presented in Appendix 1.
The type of parent couple was distinguished into three groups: (a) biological parents of
the child who were still married or cohabiting (called married for short; n = 438 pairs, 876
parents), (b) biological parents of the child who were divorced or separated (called sep-
arated for short; n = 284 pairs, 568 parents), and (c) a biological parent and the current
new partner of this parent (called stepparent; n = 718 pairs, 1,436 parents). Keep in mind
that not all children lived with the stepparent during youth.
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 845

Table 1. Descriptive information about the variables in the analyses.

Variable N Mean SD Min Max
Anchor data
Child age 1440 33.2 5.4 25 46
Daughter versus son 1440 .527 .499 0 1
Child life satisfaction 1440 4.016 .688 1 5
Child depressive symptoms 1440 1.539 .496 1 4
Child loneliness 1440 1.131 1.556 0 6
Child self-rated health 1440 4.224 .683 1 5
Child income 1434 3.513 1.284 1 5
Child employed 1440 .906 .293 0 1
Child number of sports 1440 1.423 1.15 0 7
Child cultural activities 1440 2.657 1.314 0 5
Child has partner 1440 .787 .409 0 1
Child ever separated 1440 .682 .466 0 1
Child has children 1440 .501 .5 0 1
Child home owner 1440 .653 .476 0 1
Alter data
Mother perception child wellbeing 1439 −.005 1.026 −4.473 1.18
Mother-child closeness 1440 .522 .274 .004 .827
Mother-child conflict 1440 .505 .246 .307 .998
Mother-child symmetry 1440 .489 .245 .051 .67
Mother life satisfaction 1435 −.002 .898 −3.593 1.465
Age mother 1440 60.5 6.2 39 78
Education mother 1434 .345 .476 0 1
Migrant background mother 1440 .084 .278 0 1
Separated mother 1440 .432 .496 0 1
Stepmother 1440 .214 .41 0 1
Alter data
Father perception child wellbeing 1437 .005 .974 −4.76 1.18
Father-child closeness 1440 .478 .265 .004 .827
Father-child conflict 1440 .495 .243 .307 .998
Father-child symmetry 1440 .511 .237 .051 .67
Father life satisfaction 1435 −.002 .898 −3.593 1.465
Age father 1440 63.3 6.3 42 86
Education father 1438 .424 .494 0 1
Migrant background father 1440 .072 .258 0 1
Separated father 1440 .378 .485 0 1
Stepfather 1440 .285 .451 0 1
Note: Adult child-father-mother triads from OKiN 2017.

Parent well-being was measured using three items from the Satisfaction with Life Scale
of Diener and colleagues (Diener et al., 1985). Response options ranged from 1 = com-
pletely agree to 5 = completely disagree. The scale was created based on the mean of
the three items. The scale’s reliability was α = .86. The parent–child relationship was
assessed based on research on intergenerational solidarity and adult parent–child
relations (Dykstra et al., 2006; King, 2006; Roberts & Bengtson, 1990; Silverstein et al.,
2010). Contact was measured by asking about the frequency of face-to-face and telephone
contact with the child, using seven categories. Closeness was measured by asking the
parent how close they felt to the child, using five categories ranging from 1 = not close
at all, to 5 = very close. Conflict was assessed by parents’ reports about the frequency
of conflict and tension in the relationship (using four categories). Contact, closeness,
and conflict were coded into percentile scores and included as linear variables. We
added a single-item measure of the extent of symmetry in the relationship. Parents
were asked to describe the balance in their relationship to the child using five categories:
(1) parent gives more, (2) parent gives a little bit more, (3) equal, (4) child gives a little bit
846 M. KALMIJN

more, and (5) child gives more. The variable was coded as 1 = parent gives more, 2 =
parent gives a little bit more, 3 = symmetry or child gives more. Theoretically, the situ-
ation in which the parent perceives to give more was believed to be the most relevant.
Moreover, only a few parents reported that the child gave more in the relationship
(1.3%).

Measures - child data

Two types of measures for anchors (children) were used. First, a set of direct measures of
well-being were included. We included the Satisfaction with Life Scale, which was also
measured for parents (α = .85). Loneliness was measured using the loneliness scale of
De Jong Gierveld and van Tilburg (De Jong Gierveld & Van Tilburg, 2006). Respondents
were presented with six items and were asked about the extent to which they applied to
their situation (1 = yes, 2 = more or less, and 3 = no). In creating the scale, we took the
average across standardized items. The scale’s reliability was α = .82. Self-rated health
was measured with the standard question on overall health and was left as a linear vari-
able, coded from 1 = poor to 5 = very good (Miilunpalo et al., 1997). The first three
measures were identical to the ones used for parents. Depression was an extra variable
and was measured using the 8-item version of the Centre of Epidemiological Studies-
Depression Scale. The anchors were asked to rate how well the eight statements described
how they felt during the past week on a scale from 1 = rarely or never to 4 = most of the
time or always. The scale was calculated by taking the mean of the eight items. The scale’s
reliability was α = .86.
Second, a set of indirect measures were included, defined as objective characteristics
that are known to affect people’s well-being and that could be used by parents as
signals of the child’s well-being in the case of uncertainty or limited communication.
The following child characteristics were used: (a) partner status (1 = having a partner,
0 = no partner, regardless of the living situation), (b) married (1 = married, 0 = not
married), (c) divorce/separation (1 = ever separated, 0 = never separated), (d) children
(1 = child has children, 0 = no children), (e) standardized household income (coded in
percentiles, obtained from the population register), (f) employment (1 = child employed,
0 = not employed, obtained from the population register), (g) home ownership (1 = yes,
0 = no), (h) sports participation (the number of sports the child participated in during the
past 12 months), (i) cultural activities (a count of five cultural activities the child engaged
in during the past 12 months, i.e. attending a classical music concert, attending a popular
music concert, reading books, visiting a museum, playing a musical instrument).

Findings
Before analyzing directional differences between parents, we document the level of cor-
respondence between them, using all parent pairs in the data. Correlations between
parents’ perceptions of the child’s well-being were r = 0.65 for married parents,
r = 0.42 for separated parents, and r = 0.64 for parent-stepparent combinations. These
correlations are substantial – except for separated parents – but also leave room for ana-
lyzing discrepancies. In Figure 2, the absolute differences between parents are presented,
showing that despite agreement for a substantial number of parents, there were also clear
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 847

Figure 2. Differences between parents’ perceptions of adult children’s wellbeing.

differences. Again, there were greater differences between separated parents than
between married parents. Interestingly, no overall gender difference was found. The
difference in the average well-being ratings between (step)fathers and (step)mothers
(‘within children’) was not significant (t = −.38, p = .65).

Tests of the main hypotheses

Before discussing the SEM models, we discuss linear regression models for fathers’ and
mothers’ perceptions in which only anchor child variables were included. These models
address a simple question: to what extent do the perceptions of parents correspond to
what children feel and do? The results are presented in Table 2. Children’s self-reported
well-being had the expected effects on parents’ perceptions of children’s well-being.
Effects were found for depressive symptoms, self-rated health, and life satisfaction. No
effects were found of children’s loneliness. On top of the effects of these direct measures
of child well-being, several anchor behaviours were also associated with parents’ percep-
tions. Children who were employed and had a partner were ‘rated’ as having a higher
level of well-being than children without work and without a partner. Minor positive
effects were observed of the child’s cultural activities, sports participation, and home
ownership on parents’ perceptions of children’s well-being. The explained variance in
parents’ perceptions was 32% for mothers and 30% for fathers. This implies a multiple
correlation between all direct and indirect child variables combined, and parents’
reports of child well-being of .56 and .54 respectively. Hence, there was a reasonably
good match between parents and children and no difference in this respect between
fathers and mothers.
We now turn to the SEM models. The models for mothers’ perceptions are presented
in the left-hand panel of Table 3; the models for fathers’ perceptions are presented in the
right-hand panel. These models were estimated simultaneously to correctly estimate the
848 M. KALMIJN

Table 2. OLS regression of parents’ perceptions on anchor child variables.

Anchor child variables Mothers’ perceptions Father’s perceptions
Child age −.010∼ −.010*
(−1.96) (−2.05)
Daughter versus son .024 −.029
(.51) (−.63)
Child life satisfaction .230** .175**
(5.50) (4.34)
Child depressive symptoms −.361** −.336**
(−5.69) (−5.49)
Child loneliness −.017 −.017
(−.92) (−.93)
Child self-rated health .261** .219**
(7.06) (6.14)
Child income .033 .049*
(1.56) (2.37)
Child employed .495** .328**
(5.93) (4.07)
Child number of sports .043* .042*
(2.06) (2.12)
Child cultural activities .026 .053**
(1.40) (3.00)
Child has partner .382** .511**
(6.26) (8.66)
Child ever separated −.039 −.030
(−.79) (−.64)
Child has children −.002 −.015
(−.04) (−.27)
Child home owner .199** .106∼
(3.33) (1.83)
Constant −2.245** −1.861**
(−7.07) (−6.07)
Observations 1433 1431
Adjusted R 2 .318 .296
Note: OKiN 2017 merged anchor-alter data.
∼
p < 0.10, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01

mutual effects of parents’ perceptions on each other. We first address the depression dis-
tortion hypothesis (hypothesis 1). There were positive effects of parents’ life satisfaction
on how they rated their adult children after controlling for the other parent’s rating and
the child variables. The effect was significant for mothers and smaller and insignificant
for fathers. The BIC for a gender-constrained model was 76025 and this was only slightly
worse than the original model with a BIC of 76023 (i.e., a higher BIC indicates a poorer
fit). Nonetheless, there was a substantial difference in the magnitude of the two effects:
the effect of life satisfaction for fathers was less than half of that of mothers. In the
bottom panel of the table, we present the results of the crossing effects model. In this
model the effect of mother’s life satisfaction was still statistically significant. The effect
of father’s life satisfaction was slightly stronger and now statistically significant, although
again considerably weaker than it was for mothers. We conclude that there is confir-
mation for hypothesis 1, but primarily for mothers.
To test the relational specificity hypothesis (hypothesis 2), we looked at the
relationship traits of the parents. In line with the hypothesis, we found significant
effects of closeness, conflict, and symmetry. Parents were more positive about the
child’s well-being compared to the other parent when they felt closer to the child,
had less conflict, and regarded the relationship as more symmetrical. These effects
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 849

Table 3. Structural equation models for parents’ perceptions of anchor children’s well-being.
Main model
Mothers’ perception child wellbeing Fathers’ perception child wellbeing
Stepmother1 −.003 Stepfather1 .041
(−.05) (.81)
Separated mother 1
.089∼ Separated father 1
.112*
(1.86) (2.38)
Father perception child wellbeing .210** Mother perception child wellbeing .210**
(14.56) (14.56)
Mother life satisfaction .088** Father life satisfaction .040
(3.25) (1.58)
Mother-child closeness .804** Father-child closeness .874**
(8.18) (10.67)
Mother-child conflict −.334** Father-child conflict −.146∼
(−3.62) (−1.71)
Mother-child symmetry .252** Father-child symmetry .276**
(2.62) (2.96)
Age mother −.000 Age father .005
(−.05) (1.05)
Education mother −.096* Education father −.057
(−2.05) (−1.33)
Migrant background mother .215** Migrant background father −.019
(3.13) (−.25)
Anchor variables included Anchor variables included
Observations 1440
BIC 76023
Chi-2 (versus saturated) 26.0 p = .099
Chi-2 (versus baseline) 1803.2 p < .001

Crossing model
Mothers’ perception child wellbeing Fathers’ perception child wellbeing
Stepmother1 −.001 Stepfather1 .046
(−.02) (.90)
1 ∼ 1
Separated mother .084 Separated father .095*
(1.73) (1.98)
Father perception child wellbeing .210** Mother perception child wellbeing .210**
(14.29) (14.29)
Mother life satisfaction .090** Father life satisfaction .054*
(3.20) (2.00)
Mother-child closeness .815** Father-child closeness .895**
(7.95) (10.50)
Mother-child conflict −.325** Father-child conflict −.071
(−3.21) (−.80)
Mother-child symmetry .222* Father-child symmetry .252**
(2.23) (2.62)
Age mother −.000 Age father .004
(−.05) (.90)
Education mother −.096* Education father −.051
(−2.04) (−1.18)
Migrant background mother .216** Migrant background father −.019
(3.17) (−.25)
Anchor variables included Anchor variables included
Observations 1440
BIC 76074
Chi-2 (versus saturated) 12.2 p = .275
Chi-2 (versus baseline) 1803.2 p < .001
Note: OKiN 2017 merged anchor-alter data. Anchor child characteristics from Table 2 included. FIML used for missing
values. Coefficients and t-values. See text for explanation of crossing model.
1
Reference is married parent.
∼
p < 0.10, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
850 M. KALMIJN

were controlled for the effects of the other parent and the child. Although the effects
were somewhat different for mothers and fathers, overall, there was little evidence for
gender differences. Constraining the effects of the relationship variables to be equal
across the models for mothers and fathers improved the fit (the BIC declined from
76023 to 76011), showing that the evidence applied to both genders. The crossing
effects model, presented in the bottom of Table 3, yielded roughly the same confir-
mation of hypothesis 2.
We also observed a strong and significant effect of the parents’ perceptions on each
other (b = .210). Important to note is that these effects are net of the effects of the
child variables. Without the child variables, the mutual effect of parents’ perceptions
was b = .315. Hence, about a third of the association between parents was due to
common and underlying characteristics of the child. That there was a remaining effect
suggests that there was a tendency of parents to align their evaluations of the child.
We explored whether these mutual effects differed depending on the direction of the
effect. When allowing the effects to differ between mothers and fathers, we found an
effect of .206 from the father’s on the mother’s perception and .213 from the mother’s
on the father’s perceptions, a trivial difference. The model’s fit was also poorer (BIC =
76037 versus 76023) when allowing the effects to differ, providing support for the equal-
ity constraint.

Evidence for married, separated, and stepparents

In our last set of analyses, we estimated the model separately for different types of parent
pairs. We begin with individual models, as in Table 2, where the focus is solely on how
well anchor child variables predict parents’ perceptions of the child. Considering the
explained variance, we see broadly similar levels of accuracy across types of parents
(Table 4). Separated fathers and stepfathers were slightly worse in predicting. For
example, the explained variance in perceptions was 27% for separated fathers compared
to 33% for separated mothers. For stepfathers the explained variance was 27% compared
to 30% for stepmothers. There were some differences in how specific anchor traits pre-
dicted perceptions but the differences were small and not systematic.
The SEM models are estimated for four types of couples and the results are presented
for the two parents in each type of couple next to each other in Table 5: (a) biological
mothers and fathers in married families, (b) biological mothers and fathers in separated
families, (c) biological mothers and stepfathers in stepfamilies, and (d) biological fathers
and stepmothers in stepfamilies. We test two contrasts, between married and separated
parents and between married and stepparents. Tests are conducted separately for
mothers and fathers and obtained from subgroup analyses in SEM (bottom of Table 5).
In line with the correlational findings, separated parents had a smaller influence on
each other’s perceptions than married parents. The difference between the two coeffi-
cients was substantial (b = .114 versus .222). The mutual effect was 49% weaker when
parents were separated than when parents were married. No difference was noticeable
between married parents and parent-stepparent pairs. Clearly, there was much less align-
ment of perceptions in separated couples.
The depression distortion hypothesis was confirmed for mothers in all types of
couples. Even though the effect of mother’s life satisfaction was not always significant,
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 851

Table 4. OLS regression for anchor child effects on parents’ perceptions by type of parent couple.
Married Married Separated Separated
mothers fathers mothers fathers Stepmothers Stepfathers
Child age −.011 −.010 −.009 −.013 .004 −.009
(−1.52) (−1.27) (−1.13) (−1.62) (.29) (−.90)
Daughter versus son −.025 −.046 .113 −.111 −.060 .089
(−.34) (−.60) (1.58) (−1.54) (−.55) (.97)
Child life satisfaction .350** .279** .229** .040 .071 .205*
(5.45) (4.16) (3.50) (.61) (.70) (2.47)
Child depressive −.142 −.308** −.463** −.396** −.417** −.298*
symptoms
(−1.32) (−2.90) (−4.75) (−4.23) (−3.04) (−2.29)
Child loneliness −.054∼ −.033 −.004 −.010 .010 −.000
(−1.84) (−1.09) (−.15) (−.35) (.23) (−.01)
Child self-rated .291** .151* .237** .208** .297** .292**
health
(5.05) (2.54) (4.23) (3.59) (3.22) (3.99)
Child income .009 .049 .046 .042 .036 .059
(.26) (1.35) (1.45) (1.33) (.73) (1.41)
Child employed .448** .288* .382** .387** .662** .338*
(3.07) (1.97) (3.02) (3.18) (3.72) (2.04)
Child number of .035 .056 .065* .030 −.011 .041
sports
(1.06) (1.64) (2.02) (.94) (−.24) (1.03)
Child cultural .016 .054∼ .046 .069* .027 .038
activities
(.57) (1.82) (1.60) (2.49) (.64) (1.04)
Child has partner .235* .561** .382** .499** .527** .473**
(2.35) (5.34) (4.10) (5.82) (3.86) (3.65)
Child ever separated .039 −.070 −.117 −.003 .019 −.005
(.53) (−.92) (−1.49) (−.04) (.16) (−.05)
Child has children .079 .032 −.066 .010 −.064 −.075
(.87) (.33) (−.74) (.11) (−.47) (−.66)
Child home owner .177∼ .135 .214* .070 .211 .127
(1.80) (1.34) (2.38) (.79) (1.52) (1.04)
Constant −2.835** −2.058** −1.926** −1.084* −2.551** −2.476**
(−5.65) (−4.01) (−3.93) (−2.14) (−3.33) (−3.97)
Observations 507 482 620 541 306 408
Adjusted R 2 .313 .332 .334 .267 .302 .271
Note: OKiN 2017 merged anchor-alter data.
∼
p < 0.10, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01

the differences were small in magnitude. The effects were b = .095 for married mothers, b
= .070 for separated mothers, b = .102 for mothers in stepfather families, and b = .116 for
stepmothers. The tests reveal no significant differences in the life satisfaction effects
between types of mothers. For fathers, the effect of life satisfaction was not significant
in any type of couple, confirming that the evidence for the hypothesis was weak for
fathers. The tests were insignificant for the differences between types of fathers in the
effect of life satisfaction.
The hypothesis of relational specificity was confirmed again in the subgroup analysis.
For the perceptions of mothers, there were a few differences, with closeness to the child
being less important for separated mothers than for married mothers. This difference was
statistically significant. For the effects of the other relationship characteristics, there were
small differences in magnitude and tests for differences were insignificant. For fathers,
there were more differences. Conflict was important for married fathers and not for sep-
arated fathers and this difference was significant. Closeness, on the other hand, was
important for fathers in all types of couples. Interestingly, symmetry was only important
 852
Table 5. Structural equation models for parents’ perceptions of children’s well-being by type of parent couple.

M. KALMIJN
Parents’ perception child wellbeing (Y) (a) Married families (b) Separated families (c) Stepfather families (d) Stepmother families
Married Married Separated Separated Biological Biological
mothers fathers mothers fathers mother Stepfather father Stepmother
Other parent perception .222** .222** .114** .114** .231** .231** .254** .254**
(8.10) (8.10) (4.26) (4.26) (8.63) (8.63) (9.53) (9.53)
Parent life satisfaction .095* .063 .070 .020 .102* −.009 .080 .116∼
(2.35) (1.54) (1.36) (.39) (2.21) (−.18) (1.52) (1.95)
Parent-child closeness .917** .933** .368∼ 1.058** .751** .852** .634** 1.103**
(6.05) (6.02) (1.72) (6.54) (4.19) (5.47) (4.24) (6.50)
Parent-child conflict −.318* −.302* −.234 .168 −.377* −.174 −.091 −.466*
(−2.28) (−2.12) (−1.22) (.90) (−2.20) (−1.01) (−.57) (−2.16)
Parent-child symmetry .281∼ .163 .319 .588** .233 .229 .196 .126
(1.92) (1.02) (1.61) (3.19) (1.43) (1.23) (1.14) (.57)
Age parent −.007 .002 .015 .000 −.008 .010 −.010 .005
(−.75) (.23) (1.00) (.04) (−.71) (1.63) (−1.18) (.86)
Education parent −.062 .008 −.198* −.136 −.160∼ −.085 −.054 .068
(−.78) (.11) (−2.11) (−1.63) (−1.69) (−1.06) (−.66) (.74)
Migrant background parent .195∼ −.132 .391* −.151 .259* .310* −.099 .175
(1.77) (−.95) (2.17) (−1.02) (2.27) (2.33) (−.70) (1.26)
Observations (pairs) 438 284 410 308
Chi-2 (versus saturated) 24.6 p = .04 14.7 p = .40 16.8 p = .27 13.9 p = .45
Chi-2 (versus baseline) 660.4 p < .01 306.8 p < .01 536.4 p < .01 442.4 p < .01
BIC 21235 15436 21717 16616
Wald Chi-2 tests for differences in effects between
types Married versus separated Married versus stepparent
Mothers Fathers Mothers Fathers
Parent life satisfaction 0.15 0.44 0.08 1.29
Parent-child closeness 4.40* 0.32 0.67 0.13
Parent-child conflict 0.13 4.01* 0.34 0.33
Parent-child symmetry 0.02 3.04∼ 0.34 0.07
Note: OKiN 2017 merged anchor-alter data. Anchor children’s characteristics from Table 2 included. FIML used for missing values.
∼
p < 0.10, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 853

for separated fathers and this was significant when compared to married fathers. Since
separated fathers often have less contact with their children than they prefer (Kalmijn,
2022), the issue of (a)symmetry is likely to be more salient in this group. Despite these
differences, in all groups of parents there were significant effects of relationship charac-
teristics, in line with the hypothesis.

Discussion and conclusion

Parents agree to a large extent about the well-being of their adult children. Still, there are
discrepancies between them, and these are systematic in nature. Using a large national
sample of mothers, fathers, and adult children, we showed that mothers – but not
fathers – with lower levels of well-being had a more negative perception of their chil-
dren’s well-being. Poor well-being distorts the views mothers have of their children.
Theoretically, this can be explained by various cognitive processes, such as more focus
on negative signals when well-being is low and more sensitivity to the negative experi-
ences and expressions of others. This finding is in line with psychological studies of
young children. Our evidence generalizes the evidence to adult children, in which case
there can be more uncertainty about, and heterogeneity in how parents see their children.
Moreover, the evidence applies to general well-being and shows that depression distor-
tion does not apply exclusively to more clinical problems of children.
We found considerable evidence that the evaluation of a child depends on the relation-
ship in which the parent observes the child. These effects are in line with the hypothesis of
situational specificity, in this case, applied to the relationship instead of the broader
context of observation, such as the parental home or the classroom. When the parent
has a closer, more harmonious, and symmetric relationship with the child, there will
be more focus on the positive sides of the child’s life, and the child may reveal more
of their positive side. This change in focus can lead to a more positive perception of
the child’s well-being. Moreover, when a parent has a negative relationship with the
child, this may be attributed to the child, leading to a more critical view of how the
child is doing.
An important caveat is that parent–child relationship quality and parent well-being
may also be the consequence of child well-being. Emotional problems on the part of chil-
dren may put a strain on the parent and the relationship (Greenfield & Marks, 2006;
Kalmijn & De Graaf, 2012; Offer, 2020). The observed effects may therefore in part be
spurious. Child well-being may affect both parent well-being and parents’ perceptions,
creating a spurious correlation between parents’ well-being and their perceptions of
the child. Similarly, child well-being may simultaneously affect the relationship and
parents’ perceptions of children’s well-being, again creating a spurious relationship.
The claim in this paper is not about effects at the individual level, however, but about
effects at the family level: differences in parent–child relationship quality are associated
with differences in perceptions of child well-being, even after controlling for adult chil-
dren’s own report about their well-being. Assuming that children’s reports about their
well-being are the most accurate, our design provides a more direct measure of parental
bias. In a sense, the outcome in our model is the degree to which the perception of the
parent deviates from the children’s actual well-being. We find that this deviation is
affected by parents’ individual and relational characteristics. Although a triadic approach
854 M. KALMIJN

is a step forward to eliminating spurious effects, longitudinal data are still needed to esti-
mate true causal effects.
A shift was made in this paper from childhood, which most research is concerned
about, to adulthood, which has been studied more rarely. The case of adult children is
important for several reasons. A substantive reason is that there is more uncertainty
about children’s well-being when they are adults and live independently. Parents
remain concerned about their children’s well-being long after they leave home (Milkie
et al., 2008), so this uncertainty is an important issue in families. Moreover, making
good inferences about well-being in adulthood is important for providing children
with the right amount of emotional, social, and practical support. Especially in the
case of separation and repartnering, there is considerable variation in what parents
know about their children. A methodological advantage is that in adulthood, reports
of children about their own well-being may be a more mature and more valid reference
point for comparisons than reports of younger children (Richters, 1992; van der Toorn
et al., 2010). This allowed us to estimate models in which elaborate (direct and indirect)
measures of children’s well-being predicted parents’ perceptions.
The present study made a number of additional contributions to past research. Many
previous studies on discrepancies were based on young children and on small, often
select samples. The current paper analyzed a large probability sample with data from
three independent sources, thereby strengthening the evidence, both in terms of the
amount of agreement (descriptive evidence) and hypotheses about the origins of dis-
agreement (explanatory evidence). A second contribution is that only a few studies
have so far tested the role of the relationship with the child for bias in parents’ percep-
tions (Lohaus et al., 2020). Moreover, these earlier studies primarily measured aspects of
communication, acceptance, and time spent with the child and did not compare relation-
ships across parents (e.g. Treutler & Epkins, 2003). Our evidence strengthens the con-
clusions from these earlier studies using a broader set of relationship traits in a triadic
design where parents’ relationships with their children are compared.
The study used a large oversample of separated parents, thereby enabling an analysis
of how parents differ in their perceptions of the child when they are no longer together.
The degree of correspondence of parents was shown to be substantially smaller in separ-
ated couples than in married couples, and the mutual influence parents have on each
other’s perceptions, after controlling for children’s characteristics, was smaller. These
findings point to another yet undocumented effect of separation on families. Not only
does parental separation lead to changes in well-being and heterogeneity in parent–
child relationships, but parental separation also changes the way family members per-
ceive the same ‘others’. This finding echoes psychological research on divorce which
has suggested that there are substantial discrepancies in separated parents’ perceptions
of the causes and consequences of their divorce (Gray & Cohen Siver, 1990; Mikelson,
2008). Or to put it differently, the family provides a context in which perceptions are
aligned. Without that context, or with that context broken, people’s perceptions of the
same stimuli may begin to diverge.
Gender differences appeared to be small. Mothers and fathers did not differ in their
mean ratings of the child and the determinants of their ratings were broadly similar.
However, some evidence was present for stronger effects of well-being for mothers,
especially in separated families. One previous study also found a gender difference
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 855

among married parents, with stronger evidence for depression distortion for mothers’
than fathers’ psychological symptoms in the case of younger children (Treutler &
Epkins, 2003). Still. the total correlation between all child-reported traits and parents’
perceptions of well-being was the same for mothers and fathers, showing that there
was no gender difference in how well parents can ‘predict’ how their children are doing.
We close with a number of limitations of the study and prospects for further study.
First, the study was done in one country and one historical context. The Netherlands
is a relatively normal example of a European country that has experienced the Second
Demographic Transition (Lesthaeghe, 2014). Adult intergenerational relations are rela-
tively strong but in a normative sense, the country can be situated at the individualized
pole of the individualism-familialism continuum (Hank, 2007; Reher, 1998). It remains
to be seen to what extent the current findings also apply to other, more familialistic con-
texts or to countries with higher levels of divorce such as the US and Australia. Second,
our study was cross-sectional, reducing opportunities to examine changes in well-being,
relationships, and perceptions. Obviously, such a design would lead to stronger causal
inferences but it is difficult to collect panel data among complete triads, let alone data
on triads over longer periods of time where there is sufficient change in well-being.
Third, our main outcome variables referred to general levels of well-being and not to psy-
chopathology. Measures such as depression, anxiety, and other more serious mental
health issues were not present, at least not from a parents’ perspective. Studies on
younger children often include such measures and it would be important to also study
these for adult children.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Funding
The survey was conducted as part of a larger project on Family Complexity funded by the Euro-
pean Research Council under the Horizon 2020 program [grant no 669334]. The OKiN was devel-
oped, designed and executed by a collaborative team of researchers from the University of
Amsterdam (UvA) and Statistics Netherlands (CBS). The data are available at DANS-KNAW ,
the national data archive of the Netherlands.

Ethical clearance
Ethical clearance was provided by the Ethical Advisory Board of the University of
Amsterdam and the European Research Council. The ERC provided the funding for col-
lecting the data. The data can be used for free and are available in the public domain at
the Dutch scientific data archive DANS-EASY (https://easy.dans.knaw.nl/ui/home).

References
Achenbach, T. M. (2006). As others see us - Clinical and research implications of cross-informant
correlations for psychopathology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(2), 94–98.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2006.00414.x
856 M. KALMIJN

Achenbach, T. M., Krukowski, R. A., Dumenci, L., & Ivanova, M. Y. (2005). Assessment of adult
psychopathology: Meta-analyses and implications of cross-informant correlations. Psychological
Bulletin, 131(3), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.3.361
Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, C. T. (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and
emotional problems: Implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity.
Psychological Bulletin, 101(2), 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.213
Albertini, M., & Garriga, A. (2011). The effect of divorce on parent-child contacts: Evidence on two
declining effect hypotheses. European Societies, 13(2), 257–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14616696.2010.483002
Becker, O. A., & Hank, K. (2022). Adult children’s estrangement from parents in Germany. Journal
of Marriage and Family, 84(1), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12796
Berg-Nielsen, T. S., Solheim, E., Belsky, J., & Wichstrom, L. (2012). Preschoolers’ psychosocial pro-
blems: In the eyes of the beholder? Adding teacher characteristics as determinants of discrepant
parent-teacher reports. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 43(3), 393–413. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10578-011-0271-0
Briggs-Gowan, M. J., Carter, A. S., & SchwabStone, M. (1996). Discrepancies among mother, child,
and teacher reports: Examining the contributions of maternal depression and anxiety. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 24(6), 749–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01664738
Brocker, S. A., Steinbach, A., & Augustijn, L. (2023). Parent-child discrepancies in reporting chil-
dren’s mental health: Do physical custody arrangements in post-separation families matter?
Child Indicators Research, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-023-10083-5
Dave, S., Nazareth, I., Senior, R., & Sherr, L. (2008). A comparison of father and mother report of
child behaviour on the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Child Psychiatry and Human
Development, 39(4), 399–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-008-0097-6
De Jong Gierveld, J., & Van Tilburg, T. G. (2006). A 6-item scale for overall, emotional, and social
loneliness: Confirmatory tests on survey data. Research on Aging, 28(5), 582–598. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0164027506289723
De Los Reyes, A., Goodman, K. L., Kliewer, W., & Reid-Quinones, K. (2008). Whose depression
relates to discrepancies? Testing relations between informant characteristics and informant dis-
crepancies from both informants’ perspectives. Psychological Assessment, 20(2), 139–149.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.20.2.139
De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2005). Informant discrepancies in the assessment of childhood
psychopathology: A critical review, theoretical framework, and recommendations for further
study. Psychological Bulletin, 131(4), 483–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.4.483
De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2006). Informant discrepancies in assessing child dysfunction
relate to dysfunction: Within mother-child interactions. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 15,
645–663.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal
of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Duhig, A. M., Renk, K., Epstein, M. K., & Phares, V. (2000). Interparental agreement on interna-
lizing, externalizing, and total behavior problems: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology: Science
and Practice, 7(4), 435–453. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.7.4.435
Dykstra, P. A., Kalmijn, M., Knijn, T. C. M., Komter, A. E., Liefbroer, A. C., & Mulder, C. H.
(2006). Family solidarity in The Netherlands. Dutch University Press.
Fingerman, K. L., Kim, K., Davis, E. M., Furstenberg, F. F., Birditt, K. S., & Zarit, S. H. (2015). “I’ll
give You the world”: Socioeconomic differences in parental support of adult children. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 77(4), 844–865. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12204
Ganong, L., & Coleman, M. (2017). Stepfamily relationships: Development, dynamics, and interven-
tions. Springer.
Gartstein, M. A., Bridgett, D. J., Dishion, T. J., & Kaufman, N. K. (2009). Depressed mood and
maternal report of child behavior problems: Another look at the depression-distortion hypoth-
esis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(2), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
appdev.2008.12.001
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 857

Gray, J. D., & Cohen Siver, R. (1990). Opposite sides of the same coin: Former spouses’ divergent
perspectives in coping with their divorce. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6),
1180–1191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1180
Greenfield, E. A., & Marks, N. F. (2006). Linked lives: Adult children’s problems and their parents’
psychological and relational well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(2), 442–454. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00263.x
Hank, K. (2007). Proximity and contacts between older parents and their children: A European
comparison. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(1), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
3737.2006.00351.x
Hawkins, D. N., Amato, P. R., & King, V. (2007). Nonresident father involvement and adolescent
well-being: Father effects or child effects? American Sociological Review, 72(6), 990–1010.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200607
Henretta, J. C., Van Voorhis, M. F., & Soldo, B. J. (2018). Cohort differences in parental financial
help to adult children. Demography, 55(4), 1567–1582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-018-
0687-2
Kalmijn, M. (2016). Children’s divorce and parent-child contact: A within-family analysis of older
European parents. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social
Sciences, 71(2), 332–343. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbu141
Kalmijn, M. (2022). Broken ties between divorced fathers and their adult children: A view from
both sides of the relationship. Mens & Maatschappij, 97(1), 40–64. https://doi.org/10.5117/
MEM2022.1.003.KALM
Kalmijn, M., & De Graaf, P. M. (2012). Life course changes of children and well-being of parents.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(2), 269–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.
00961.x
Kalmijn, M., Ivanova, K., Van Gaalen, R., De Leeuw, S., Van Houdt, K., & Van Spijker, F. (2017). A
multi-actor survey of adult children in the Netherlands [Codebook Release 1.0]. University of
Amsterdam/Statistics Netherlands.
Kalmijn, M., Ivanova, K., van Gaalen, R., de Leeuw, S. G., van Houdt, K., van Spijker, F., &
Hornstra, M. (2018). A multi-actor study of adult children and their parents in complex
families: Design and content of the OKiN survey. European Sociological Review, 34(4), 452–
470. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcy016
Kelley, M. L., Bravo, A. J., Hamrick, H. C., Braitman, A. L., White, T. D., & Jenkins, J. (2017).
Parents’ reports of children’s internalizing symptoms: Associations with parents’ mental
health symptoms and substance Use disorder. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(6),
1646–1654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0677-9
Kenny, D. A., & Acitelli, L. K. (2001). Accuracy and bias in the perception of the partner in a close
relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 439–448. https://doi.org/10.
1037/0022-3514.80.3.439
King, V. (2006). The antecedents and consequences of adolescents’ relationships With stepfathers
and nonresident fathers. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(4), 910–928. https://doi.org/10.
1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00304.x
King, V., Harris, K. M., & Heard, H. E. (2004). Racial and ethnic diversity in nonresident father
involvement. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1–21.
Lesthaeghe, R. (2014). The second demographic transition: A concise overview of its development.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(51), 18112–18115. https://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.1420441111
Lohaus, A., Rueth, J. E., & Vierhaus, M. (2020). Cross-Informant discrepancies and their associ-
ation with maternal depression, maternal parenting stress, and mother-child relationship.
Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29(3), 867–879. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-
01625-z
Miilunpalo, S., Vuori, I., Oja, P., Pasanen, M., & Urponen, H. (1997). Self-rated health status as a
health measure: The predictive value of self-reported health status on the use of physician ser-
vices and on mortality in the working-age population. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50(5),
517–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00045-0
858 M. KALMIJN

Mikelson, K. S. (2008). He said, she said: Comparing mother and father reports of father involve-
ment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(3), 613–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.
2008.00509.x
Milkie, M. A., Bierman, A., & Schieman, S. (2008). How adult children influence older parents’
mental health: Integrating stress-process and life-course perspectives. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 71(1), 86–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250807100109
Muller, J. M., Achtergarde, S., & Furniss, T. (2011). The influence of maternal psychopathology on
ratings of child psychiatric symptoms: An SEM analysis on cross-informant agreement.
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 20(5), 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-011-
0168-2
Mulvaney, M. K., Mebert, C. J., & Flint, J. (2007). Parental affect and childrearing beliefs uniquely
predict mothers’ and fathers’ ratings of children’s behavior problems. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 28(5-6), 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2007.06.001
Offer, S. (2020). They drive Me crazy: Difficult social ties and subjective well-being. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior, 61(4), 418–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146520952767
Pelton, J., & Forehand, R. (2001). Discrepancy between mother and child perceptions of their
relationship: I. Consequences for adolescents considered within the context of parental
divorce. Journal of Family Violence, 16(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026527008239
Reher, D. S. (1998). Family ties in Western Europe: Persistent contrasts. Population and
Development Review, 24(2), 203–234. https://doi.org/10.2307/2807972
Rescorla, L. A., Bochicchio, L., Achenbach, T. M., Ivanova, M. Y., Almqvist, F., Begovac, I.,
Bilenberg, N., Bird, H., Dobrean, A., Erol, N., & Fombonne, E. (2014). Parent-Teacher agree-
ment on children’s problems in 21 societies. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent
Psychology, 43(4), 627–642. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2014.900719
Richters, J., & Pellegrini, D. (1989). Depressed mothers’ judgments about their children: An exam-
ination of the depression-distortion hypothesis. Child Development, 60(5), 1068–1075. https://
doi.org/10.2307/1130780
Richters, J. E. (1992). Depressed mothers as informants about their children: A critical review of
the evidence for distortion. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0033-2909.112.3.485
Roberts, E. L., & Bengtson, V. L. (1990). Is intergenerational solidarity a unidimensional construct?
A second test of a formal model. Journal of Gerontology, 45(1), S12–S20. https://doi.org/10.
1093/geronj/45.1.S12
Seltzer, J. A., & Bianchi, S. M. (2013). Demographic change and parent-child relationships in
adulthood. Annual Review of Sociology, 39(1), 275–290. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-
071312-145602
Shrive, F. M., Stuart, H., Quan, H., & Ghali, W. A. (2006). Dealing with missing data in a multi-
question depression scale: A comparison of imputation methods. BMC Medical Research
Methodology, 6(1), 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-57
Silverstein, M., Chen, X., & Heller, K. (1996). Too much of a good thing? Intergenerational social
support and the psychological well-being of older parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
58(4), 970–982. https://doi.org/10.2307/353984
Silverstein, M., Gans, D., Lowenstein, A., Giarrusso, R., & Bengtson, V. L. (2010). Older parent–
child relationships in Six developed nations: Comparisons at the intersection of affection and
conflict. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(4), 1006–1021. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
3737.2010.00745.x
Thomson, E. (2014). Family complexity in europe. The ANNALS of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, 654(1), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716214531384
Treutler, C. M., & Epkins, C. C. (2003). Are discrepancies among child, mother, and father reports
on children’s behavior related to parents’ psychological symptoms and aspects of parent-child
relationships? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 31(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1023/
A:1021765114434
van der Toorn, S. L. M., Huizink, A. C., Utens, E., Verhulst, F. C., Ormel, J., & Ferdinand, R. F.
(2010). Maternal depressive symptoms, and not anxiety symptoms, are associated with positive
 JOURNAL OF FAMILY STUDIES 859

mother-child reporting discrepancies of internalizing problems in children: A report on the

TRAILS Study. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 19(4), 379–388. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s00787-009-0062-3
Weber, M., & Huebner, E. S. (2015). Early adolescents’ personality and life satisfaction: A closer
look at global vs. domain-specific satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 31–
36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.042
Wooldridge, J. M. (2020). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach. Cencage.
Zemp, M., Nussbeck, F. W., Cummings, E. M., & Bodenmann, G. (2017). The spillover of child-
related stress into parents’ relationship mediated by couple communication. Family Relations,
66(2), 317–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12244
Appendix 1. Correlation matrix of all variables except social-demographic traits

860
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)
1. Life satisfaction (K) 1.000

M. KALMIJN
2. CESD (K) −0.548 1.000
3. Loneliness (K) −0.432 0.587 1.000
4. Self-rated health (K) 0.354 −0.355 −0.174 1.000
5. Perceived well-being (M) 0.422 −0.407 −0.309 0.345 1.000
6. Closeness (M) 0.068 −0.051 −0.098 −0.033 0.300 1.000
7. Conflict (M) −0.166 0.130 0.163 −0.097 −0.259 −0.145 1.000
8. Symmetry (M) 0.150 −0.136 −0.083 0.063 0.217 0.163 −0.297 1.000
9. Life satisfaction (M) 0.105 −0.049 −0.075 0.073 0.145 0.063 −0.122 0.028 1.000
10. Perceived well-being (F) 0.390 −0.383 −0.295 0.320 0.606 0.139 −0.217 0.179 0.056 1.000
11. Closeness (F) 0.110 −0.087 −0.111 −0.020 0.175 0.287 −0.080 0.149 0.087 0.326 1.000
12. Conflict (F) −0.152 0.104 0.112 −0.057 −0.166 −0.075 0.377 −0.139 −0.062 −0.193 −0.200 1.000
13. Symmetry (F) 0.126 −0.108 −0.066 0.022 0.159 0.103 −0.139 0.306 −0.020 0.183 0.145 −0.207 1.000
14. Life satisfaction (F) 0.105 −0.049 −0.075 0.073 0.145 0.063 −0.122 0.028 1.000 0.056 0.087 −0.062 −0.020 1.000
Note: K is anchor child, M is alter (step)mother, F is alter (step)father. N = 1,440.