Brothers and sisters - "More” is better? Effects on school, violence and health

World Journal of Educational Research ISSN 2375-9771 (Print) ISSN 2333-5998 (Online) Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer 313 Brothers and Sisters—“More” is Better? Effects on School, Violence and Health Inês Camacho1, Margarida Gaspar de Matos1,2,3, Gina Tomé1,2, Marta Reis1, 2, Antonia Jiménez-Iglesias4, Mari Carmen Moreno4 & Diana Galvão1 1 Equipa Aventura Social/Faculdade de Motricidade Humana da Universidade de Lisboa, Cruz Quebrada, Portugal 2 ISAMB/Universidade de Lisboa, Cruz Quebrada, Portugal 3 WJCR/ISPA-Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Cruz Quebrada, Portugal 4 Departamento de Psicología Evolutiva y de la Educación, Universidad de Sevilla, Cruz Quebrada, Portugal * Inês Camacho, E-mail: [email protected] Received: January 1, 2017 Accepted: February 16, 2017 Online Published: May 18, 2017 doi:10.22158/wjer.v4n2p313 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/wjer.v4n2p313 Abstract Aims: The aim of this study was to understand the differences between adolescents with and without brothers and sisters, in what concerns to risk behaviours, health and the relationship with their peers and family. Sample: The Portuguese HBSC (Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children) survey included a total of 6026 students where 47.7% were boys. Results: Male adolescents with three or more brothers drink and smoke more, feel sadder, are more nervous and angrier, have more worries, and more frequently act as bullies. Boys who are only child are more satisfied with life and report more frequently that they like school. Boys with more than three sisters practice more physical activity. Girls with one brother are less victimized and have better relationships with their friends. Keywords siblings, risk behaviours, adolescence, school 1. Introduction Brothers and sisters—more is better? Effects on school, violence and health Sibling relationships influence development and adjustment across the lifespan, in spheres ranging from peer and romantic relationships to health and risk behaviours and also to pro-social versus anti-social life course trajectories. Strengthening sibling relationships is a potential approach for promoting healthy family www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 314 Published by SCHOLINK INC. functioning, fostering youths’ psychological health and social competence, as well as preventing health risk behaviours (Gass, Jenkins, & Dunn, 2007), such as substance use (Bank, Kothari, Snyder, Wilson, & Feingold, 2011; Kothari, Srenson, Bank, & Snyder, 2014; Low, Shortt, & Snyder, 2012). The magnitude of sibling influences on adolescents’ substance use is often greater than parental influences (Kokkevi et al., 2007; Kothari et al., 2014). Research indicates that siblings’ substance use behaviours are stronger when they share the same gender (Trim, Leuthe, & Chassin, 2006) and are close in age (Kokkevi et al., 2007; Samek, Mcgue, Keyes, & Iacono, 2014; Scholte et al., 2008). Also, younger siblings drinking was associated with older sibling’s excessive alcohol use and low parental monitoring (Gossrau-Breen, Kuntsche, & Gmel, 2010). The relationships between siblings have been linked to a range of child and adolescent outcomes, including depression, identity and self-esteem, aggression, delinquency, school adjustment and achievement, peer and romantic relationships, substance use and other health risk behaviours (Kim, McHale, Crouter, & Osgood, 2007; Rende, Slomkowski, Lloyd-Richardson, & Niaura, 2005). Siblings play a key role in one another’s adjustment. Research on children and adolescents reveals concordance between sibling relationship qualities (e.g., warm) and adjustments in several domains, including externalizing and internalizing problems, school, peer relationships, parental characteristics and other family factors like parental adjustment (Kim et al., 2007). Siblings can influence each other indirectly by providing behaviour models (Whiteman, Jensen, & Maggs, 2013; Whiteman, Zeiders, Killoren, Rodriguez, & Updegraff, 2014). Secure attachment relationships with siblings can enhance a child’s sense of security, acting as a protective factor against mal adjustment, while children with negative sibling attachment experiences may be more prone to view themselves as unworthy of love, exposed to anxiety and depression, viewing the social world as negative and untrust worthy, resulting in delinquency, substance abuse and aggressive behaviours. Studies have shown a negative effect of sibling warmth on problematic behaviour (Noller, 2005; Pike, Coldwell, & Dunn, 2005). The lack of warmth in the sibling relationship has been associated with externalizing problems (Dunn, 2005; McElwain & Volling, 2005) while children with warm sibling relationships develop less internalizing problems (Kim et al., 2007), and when the sibling relationship is supportive, they report less depressive symptoms after stressful life events when compared with children with unsupportive sibling relationship (Gass, Jenkins, & Dunn, 2007). A positive sibling relationship has been associated with healthy emotional regulation (Kennedy & Kramer, 2008) and prosocial behaviour (Pike et al., 2005). Whiteman and Christiansen (2008) showed that two-thirds of second—born children were influenced by their sibling in various domains of development, such as depression, risky behaviour and peer competence. Despite the importance of sibling relationships, and particularly the potential implications of growing up with fewer siblings, the impact of the number of siblings on personality traits has received little attention so far; still, sibling relationships are considered fundamental, with a long-term impact on an www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 315 Published by SCHOLINK INC. individual’s character and on their future relationships success. Wang (2007) compared children with and without siblings. The results suggest that while there were significant but modest differences in the siblings’ behavioural patterns, these differences decreased as children got older, and there was no significant difference in personality development in the last wave of data when the children reached young adulthood. The potential implications of growing up with fewer siblings has been studied. One study showed that children who grow up with few siblings have greater educational success than those with many siblings because they must compete for parental resources (Steelman, Powell, Werum, & Carter, 2002). Downey and Condron (2004) suggested that one sibling may provide all the necessary interaction required to develop social skills: further siblings may increase the number of interactions but do not necessarily promote social skills as the necessary sibling interaction has been met with a single brother or sister. Yucel (2014) found that children who have four or more siblings show more serious problem internalizing, risk behaviours, lower self-concept, and an inferior locus of control when compared to only children. The analysis of the benefits of having either sisters or brothers, showed little evidence of the value of having sisters compared to having brothers. Also, compared to having older siblings, having younger siblings appears more beneficial for personality traits, particularly in predicting self-concept and locus of control. Sibling and peer relationships are highly important in children’s and adolescents’ daily experiences, being significant contexts of individual development. A substantial body of research has documented the extent of peer victimization and its potential effects on children and adolescent’s mental health. This effect is significant when victim and bully are siblings. Some studies found that victimization by a sibling was predictive of peer victimization. In accordance, children and adolescents victimized by both a sibling and a peer reported the greatest mental distress (Tucker, Finkelhor, Turner, & Shattuck, 2014). The present study in addition to studying the influence of the number of siblings in school, violence and health also studies the differences between siblings of different genders or not. Although there are already several studies around this topic, very few study all the variables of this study. The aim of this study was to understand the differences between adolescents with and without brothers or sisters, in what concern storisk behaviours, health and relationship with peers and family. 2. Method 2.1 Procedures This survey is part of the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study (Currie et al., 2004; Currie et al., 2012; Matos et al., 2006; Matos et al., 2012). An online questionnaire with open-ended and closed-ended questions was administered in classroom context, with the assistance of the IT teacher, and took an average of 50 minutes (a regular class length) be completed. Researchers were available to answer any student’s questions. This study followed all www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 316 Published by SCHOLINK INC. ethic recommendations regarding research on humans and got the approval of the ethical committee. This study had the approval of a scientific committee, the national ethical committee and the national commission for data protection and strictly followed all the guidelines for the protection of human rights; adolescents’ participation in the survey and completion of the questionnaires was voluntary and completely anonymous. 2.2 Participants The Portuguese HBSC survey included 6026 students (47.7% boys), from the 6th Grade (35.8% boys), 8th Grade (39.1% boys) and 10th Grade (25.1% boys), with an average age of 13.8 years (SD = 1.68). They students were randomly selected from 36 national vertical clusters of schools, a total of 473 classes, geographically stratified by Regional Education Divisions in Portugal. The overall procedure has been described elsewhere (Currie et al., 2004; Matos et al., 2012). The sample is nationally representative of the respective grade levels. The response rate was 79%. 2.3 Measures Adolescents responded to an extensive questionnaire, including questions on demographics (gender, school grade and socio-economic status). Several other aspects were asked, namely, drinking experiences, use of tobacco, being a provoker and/or bullied in school; feeling sad, nervous and angry; frequency of worries and concerns; liking school; life satisfaction; physical activity; general health; satisfaction with friends and family relationships; communication with parents; communication with brothers/sisters; easiness in making friends; and number of siblings (See Table 1). Table 1. Items of the Questionnaire Items Responses Drunkenness Have you ever been drunk? 1. No, never 2. Yes, 1-3 times 3. Yes, more than 4 times Frequency of tobacco use How often do you smoke tobacco at the present? 1. Don’ t smoke 2. Less than once per week 3. At least once a week 4. Every day Subjective health complaints In the last 6 months: how often have you had the following. a) Feeling low (sad, depressed) b) Irritability or bad temper c) Feeling nervous 1. Rarely or never 2. More than once a week 3. Almost every day Health How do you feel? 1. Excellent www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 317 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 2. Good 3. Reasonable 4. Bad Worries How often gets worries? 1. Rarely or never 2. Almost every month 3. Almost every week 4. More than once a week 5. Almost every day Was bullied in school How many times have you been bullied in school over the past two months? 1. I wasn’t bullied in school in the past two months 2. once a week 3. Several times a week Bullier in school How many times did you bully someone in the last two months? 1. I haven’t bullied anyone in school in the past two months 2. Unless once a week 3. Several times a week School Do you like school? 1. Yes, I Like School 2. No, I’ Don’t like school Physical Activity How often do you practice physical Activity? 1. Every Day 2. More than twice a week 3. Once a week 4. At least once a week 5. Never Family communication Siblings communication How easy is it for you to talk with your mother? How easy is it for you to talk with your father? How easy is it for you to talk with your sister/brother? 1. Easy 2. Difficult 3. Not have or do not see Easiness in making friends Is it easy or difficult for you to make friends? 1. Very Easy 2. Easy 3. Difficult 4. Very Difficult Number of siblings How many brothers and/or sisters do you have? Life Satisfaction “10” is the best possible life for 10 – best possible life www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 318 Published by SCHOLINK INC. you and “0” is the worst possible life for you. In general, where on the ladder do you feel standing at the moment? 0 – worst possible life Family Relationship “10” is the best relationship with your family and “0” is the worst possible for you. In general, where on the ladder do you feel standing at the moment? 10 – best relationship 0 – worst relationship Friends Relationship “10” is the best relationship with your friends and “0” is the worst possible for you. In general, where on the ladder do you feel standing at the moment? 10 – best relationship 0 – worst relationship 2.4 Data Analysis IBM SPSS Statistics 22 program was used for the statistical analyses, ad-hoc analysis, hypothesis testing, and predictive analytics. To analyse the differences between adolescents with or without siblings (sisters and/or brothers) Chi-Square analysis (2) was used, as well as a One Way ANOVA (life satisfaction; satisfaction with friends relationship; satisfaction with family relationship). The statistical analysis was performed separately for boys and girls, in order to understand the effects of having or not siblings (sisters and/or brothers), as well as if there are differences between boys and girls considering the number and gender of their siblings. 3. Results As mentioned, the main objective and purpose of this study was to understand, in depth, the differences between adolescents with and without siblings (sisters and/or brothers) on risk behaviours, health and relationships with peers and family, and specifically on drunkenness, use of tobacco, being a bully and being bullied in school, being sad, nervous and angry, frequency of worries, liking school, life satisfaction, relationships satisfaction (friends and family), physical activity and general health, communication with parents and siblings and easiness in making friends. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 319 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 3.1 Boys Regarding the use of tobacco and drunkenness experiences (see Table 2) the adolescents who don’t have brothers report that they have never been drunk. Teenage boys with three or more brothers have been drunk more frequently (χ2 (6) = 44.11; p< 0.001) and more frequently report smoking every day (χ2 (6) = 29.25; p< 0.001). Regarding having or not sisters, when asked about drunkenness and consume of tobacco (see Table 3), teenage boys who have three or more sisters smoke more frequently. There were no differences found for drunkenness. Teenage boys with three or more brothers feel sad (χ2 (6) = 58.54, p< 0.001), nervous (χ2 (6) = 34.02, p< 0.001) and angry (χ2 (6) = 50.36, p< 0.001) (see Table 2). Teenage boys with three or more sisters are sad almost every day (χ2 (6) = 44.20, p< 0.001). Adolescents who don’t have sisters are nervous almost every day (χ2 (6) = 44.20, p< 0.001) (see Table 3). Boys with three or more brothers (χ2 (9) = 3373, p< 0.01) or sisters (χ2 (9) = 21.63, p< 0.01) report that their health isbad. Adolescents with three or more brothers (χ2 (12) = 36.74, p< 0.001) orsisters (χ2 (6) = 22.76, p< 0.05) indicate being worried almost every day (See Tables 2 and 3). When analysing violence, boys with three or more brothers (χ2 (6) = 34.12, p< 0.001) or sisters (χ2 (6) = 19.07, p< 0.01) provoke others more often (See Tables 2 and 3). As shown in Tables 2 and 3, single child boys (without brothers χ2 (3) = 11.66, p< 0.01, or sisters (χ2 (3) = 15.12, p< 0.01) report more often that they like school; boys with three or more sisters practice physical activity every day (χ2 (3) = 23.10, p < 0.05). Boys without sisters report that is easier to communicate with their mother (χ2 (6) = 12.75, p< 0.01) (See Table 3). Table 2. Drunkenness Experiences and Tobacco Use for Boys/Number of Brothers Without brothers One brother Two Brothers Three or more Brothers Total 2 df N % N % N % N % Drunkenness Never 1188 89.7 816 86.1 171 88.1 56 70.9 2231 44.11*** 6 1-3 times 90 6.8 88 9.3 16 8.2 9 11.4 203 More than 4 times 46 3.5 44 4.6 7 3.6 14 17.7 111 Tobacco Don’t smoke 1236 93.5 885 93.5 179 92.7 63 79.7 2363 29.25*** 9 Less than once per 23 1.7 20 2.1 1 0.5 3 3.8 47 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 320 Published by SCHOLINK INC. week At least once a week 32 2.4 21 2.2 6 3.1 5 6.3 64 Every day 31 2.3 21 2.2 7 3.6 8 10.1 67 ***p≤.001; Values in bold refer to adjusted residuals higher than 1.9. Table 3. Drunkenness and Tobacco Use for Boys/Number of Sisters Without sisters One sister Two Sisters Three or more sisters Total 2 df N % N % N % N % Drunkenness Never 1217 89.0 832 86.2 127 89.4 53 77.9 2229 12.27ns 6 1-3 times 96 7.0 89 9.2 10 7.0 8 11.8 203 More than 4 times 55 4.0 44 4.6 5 3.5 7 10.3 111 Tobacco Don’t smoke 1281 93.9 896 92.8 131 92.3 53 77.9 2361 53.65*** 9 Less than once per week 25 1.8 17 1.8 3 2.1 2 2.9 47 At least once a week 33 2.4 26 2.7 3 2.1 2 2.9 64 Every day 25 1.8 26 2.7 5 3.5 11 16.2 67 ***p≤.001; Values in bold refer to adjusted residuals higher than 1.9 In order to examine the average differences in the variable life satisfaction (min-0; higher level-10) ANOVA was used. Differences were found among groups [(F(3, 2545) = 0.541, p < 0.05)]. Post hoc comparisons with the Tukey HSD test indicated that boys without brothers are more satisfied with life (M = 7.60; SD = 1.87) similarly to having or not sisters [(F(3, 2540) = 0.960, p< 0.05)]. Post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that boys that don’t have sisters (M = 7.57; SD = 1.80) or have one sister (M = 7.57; SD = 1.92) are more satisfied with life. In order to examine the mean differences in the variable satisfaction with family relationships (min-0; higher level-10) ANOVA was used. There were no differences among groups, irrespectively of having or not brothers or sisters. The same result was found concerning satisfaction with friend’s relationships. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 4, No. 2, 2017 321 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 3.2 Girls The variables already presented for boys were also analysed for girls. Only the most relevant results will be presented. Regarding violence (see Tables 4 and 5), girls with a brother report that they haven’t been bullied (χ2 (6) = 14.68, p< 0.05). Girls with three or more sisters have been bullied less than once a week (χ2 (6) = 17.14, p < 0.01) while those that do not have sisters report more frequently that they haven’t been bullied. Regarding communication with parents and making friends (see Table 5), girls with three or more brothers report that it is easy to make friends (χ2 (9) = 27.87, p < 0.001). Table 4. Feeling Sad, Nervous and Angry for Boys/Number of Brothers Without brothers One brother Two Brothers Three or more brothers Total 2 df N % N % N % N % Sad Rarely or never 1052 79.5 742 78.2 152 78.4 49 62.0 1995 58.54*** 6 More than once a week 241 18.2 178 18.8 34 17.5 16 20.3 469 Almost every day 31 2.3 29 3.1 8 4.1 14 17.7 82 Nervous Rarely or never 754 56.9 552 58.2 115 59.3 36 45.6 2411 34.02*** 6 More than once a week 508 38.4 362 38.1 66 34.0 29 36.7 2341 Almost every day 62 4.7 35 3.7 13 6.7 14 17.7 427 Angry Rarely or never 841 63.5 618 65.1 118 60.8 40 50.6 2814 50.36*** 6 More than once a week 444 33.5 299 31.5 63 32.5 25 31.6 2054 Almost every day 39 2.9 32 3.4 13 6.7 14 17.7 311 ***p≤.001; Values in bold refer to adjusted residuals higher than 1.9.