Integrating Parents' Views on Sibling Relationships to Tailor an Evidence‐based Parenting Intervention for Sibling Conflict

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12173
• Author: John A. Pickering,Matthew R. Sanders
• Date: 01 March 2017
• Published date: 01 March 2017

Integrating Parents’ Views on Sibling Relationships

to Tailor an Evidence-based Parenting Intervention

for Sibling Conflict

JOHN A. PICKERING

*

MATTHEW R. SANDERS

*

Parents play a crucial role in the development of their children’s relationships with their

siblings. Despite this, relatively few evidence-based parenting programs exis t that specifi-

cally offer parents the strategies and techniques they desire and require for managing their

children’s sibling relationships. One way of bridging this gap is to design a tailored parent-

ing intervention for sibling relationships that incorporates the parent voice in various

aspects of program design. The current study recruited a convenience sample of 409 Aus-

tralian parents to complete an online survey relating to their views on difficult sibling

behaviors and what, if any, help they desire in dealing with the issue. Th e majority of

respondents were Caucasian, middle- to upper-class mothers. Respondents predominantly

attributed the causes of sibling conflict to their child’s internal traits, but expressed strong

desire for assistance with managing behavioral problems, especially when sibling relation-

ships were marked by physical aggression. Respondents reported high levels of accept abil-

ity for positive, rather than punitive, parenting strategies and showed a clear preference

for parenting interventions delivered in easy-to-access formats. The findings are inter-

preted in the context of guiding the development of a tailored parenting intervention for

enhancing sibling relationships and reducing conflict.

Keywords: Sibling Conflict; Parenting; Consumer Engagement; Intervention

Fam Proc 56:105–125, 2017

Siblings are among the most important developmental influences one can have. Sibling s

impact each other’s acquisition of interpersonal skills (Downey & Condron, 2004), cog-

nitive development and sensitivity (Azmitia & Hesser, 1993; Prime, Pauker, Plamondon,

Perlman, & Jenkins, 2014), emotional development and adjustment (Campione-Barr,

*

Parenting and Family Support Centre, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to John A. Pickering, Parenting and

Family Support Centre, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia. E-mail:

j.pickering@uq.edu.au

The Triple P –Positive Parenting Program is owned by the University of Queensland. The University

through its main technology transfer company, UniQuest Pty Ltd, has licensed Triple P International Pty

Ltd to publish and disseminate the program worldwide. Royalties stemming from published Triple P

resources are distributed to the Parenting and Family Support Centre; School of Psychology; Faculty of

Health and Behavioural Sciences; and contributory authors. No author has any share or ownership in Tri-

ple P International Pty Ltd. John Pickering is not a program author. Matthew Sanders is the founder and

an author on various Triple P programs and a consultant to Triple P International. The authors acknowl-

edge the contribution of Jinny Hong and Kathryne Phillis with the preparation of the survey materials

and subsequent data files used in the current study. We also thank Karla Romero for her assistance with

the software used to upload the parent survey. The methodology used in the current study was cleared by

The University of Queensland ethics committee.

105

Family Process, Vol. 56, No. 1, 2017 ©2015 Family Process Institute

doi: 10.1111/famp.12173

Greer, & Kruse, 2013; Kramer, 2014), social understanding (Dunn, 2002), sharing and

prosocial skills (White, Ensor, Marks, Jacobs, & Hughes, 2014), socio-cognitive reasoning

skills (Slomkowski & Dunn, 1992), delinquent behavior (Bank, Patterson, & Reid, 1996;

Criss & Shaw, 2005; Patterson, 1986), behavior problems in adolescence (Dunn, Slom-

kowski, Beardsall, & Rende, 1994), development of mental health and behavioral prob-

lems (Buist, Dekovi

c, & Prinzie, 2013; Tucker, Finkelhor, Turner, & Shattuck, 2013), and

protection against the adverse effects of marital discord (Jenkins & Smith, 1990). Such is

the pervasiveness of the sibling relationship, the strongest predictor of well-being at age

65 among male Harvard alumni was found to be the quality of their sibling relationships

during college (Vaillant & Vaillant, 1990).

Sibling relationships vary in the frequency, intensity, and type of interactions as indi-

viduals grow through various development stages (Buist et al., 2013), within an unpre-

dictable sequence of genetic and environmental influences (Rende, Slomkowski, Stocker,

Fulker, & Plomin, 1992). Although the majority of sibling interactions are characterized

by positive, prosocial, and play-oriented behaviors (Abramovitch, Corter, Pepler, & Stan-

hope, 1986), conflict between siblings can be very harmful, with potentially lifelong conse-

quences (Skinner & Kowalski, 2013; Tucker et al., 2013). Patterson (1986; see also

Patterson, Dishion, & Bank, 1984) hypothesized that irritable, microsocial exchanges

within the family—especially sibling relationships—create a virtual “training ground” for

aggression. Arguments, fights, and disagreements among siblings lead to sibling relation-

ships defined by high levels of rivalry and conflict, which have potentially harmful effects

in both the short- and long-terms (Rinaldi & Howe, 1998).

The Significance of Sibling Conflict

Sibling conflict has been documented as the most prevalent form of family violence and

conflict among siblings is generally more frequent and more volatile tha n any other family

relationship (Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 2003). Siblings aged 2–4 years can experienc e

7.65 disputes per hour and conflicts between siblings aged 3–9 years occur at comparable

rates, with each lasting approximately 45 seconds (Kramer, Perozynski, & Chung, 1999;

Perlman & Ross, 2005). Sibling conflict can, and often does, rise to the level of a clinical

problem (Thomas & Roberts, 2009), with some experts suggesting sibling conflict be recog-

nized as a form of psychopathology (Carter & Volkman, 1992; Schroeder & Gordon, 1991),

or even the most common form of bullying (Skinner & Kowalski, 2013).

Conflict with siblings can be constructive and provide an invaluable opportunity for

children to develop essential life skills (Bedford, Volling, & Aviolo, 2000). Constructive

conflict occurs when children are taught to develop and deploy resolution skills and higher

order cognitive functioning that can generalize and produce benefits acros s situations.

These skills include negotiating, reasoning, tolerating, perspective taking, patience, and

acceptance (Foote & Holmes-Lonergan, 2003; Shantz, 1987). A review by Kramer (20 10)

highlighted that efforts geared toward eliminating all forms of sibling conflict run the risk

of creating further problems by unintentionally impeding children’s capacity to manag e

conflict, solve problems, and regulate emotions.

Destructive sibling conflict, on the other hand, is not useful. Aggression, agonism, coer-

cion, negativity, and violence are all hallmarks of destructive conflict, which is associated

with a range of problematic outcomes for children (Abuhatoum & Howe, 2013; Garcia,

Shaw, Winslow, & Yaggi, 2000). Research demonstrates the link between sibling conflict

and conduct problems in preschoolers (e.g., Garcia et al., 2000), and also shows how ado-

lescent adjustment can be predicted from reports of sibling conflict, taking into account

maternal and paternal hostility (Stocker, Burwell, & Briggs, 2002). Sibling conflict pat-

terns in adolescence have also been found to correlate with adult romantic relations hip

conflict (Shalash, Wood, & Parker, 2013). It is perhaps surprising, therefore, that siblings

www.FamilyProcess.org

106

/

FAMILY PROCESS