But I Trust My Teen: Parents' Attitudes and Response to a Parental Monitoring Intervention
Table 2
Pearson correlations among study variables (intervention participants, ).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
(1) UMP
—
(2) EXP
−.042
—
(3) ATP
−.445**
.064
—
(4) Parent-reported open communication—baseline
.494**
−.271**
−.244**
—
(5) Parent-reported open communication—4 month
.306**
−.183**
−.117
.643**
—
(6) Parent-reported open communication—8 month
.291**
−.126
−.080
.477**
.534**
—
(7) Parent-reported open communication—12 month
.340**
−.228**
−.046
.565**
.632**
.589**
—
(8) Adolescent-reported direct monitoring—baseline
.091
−.046
−.090
.080
.029
−.005
.059
—
(9) Adolescent-reported direct monitoring—4 month
.028
.022
−.122
−.004
−.030
.005
−.138
.629**
—
(10) Adolescent-reported direct monitoring—8 month
.097
.027
−.169*
.075
.013
.022
−.033
.561**
.679**
—
(11) Adolescent-reported direct monitoring—12 month
.127
−.080
−.202**
.131
.075
.060
.055
.530**
.573**
.623**
* = ; **: ; UMP: parent attitudes about the usefulness of the monitoring process; EXP: parent attitudes about the impact of monitoring on adolescent risk behavior and experimentation; ATP: parent attitudes about monitoring and the importance of adolescent trust and privacy.
